Wikileaks dumps 400,000 more files • Hacker News Board

Re: Wikileaks dumps 400,000 more files

#111

Post by varjag » Sat, Oct 23, 2010, 9:54 PM UTC

cma wrote: post #50

viggity wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and that includes disclosing names of civilians who are helping US Forces?

Wikileaks gave the military a virtual veto right over the afghanistan documents; the US chose not to allocate resources to looking over them. With the 15,000 or so Afghanistan documents that Wikileaks continues to hold back, they again offered to let the US review and make redactions. The US again declined to do so (publicly this time). The US claimed that doing so might legitimize Wikileaks. That shows where the US'…

The U.S. also does not negotiate with, or pays ransom to terrorists. Does it also show where their interests are? That it, say, is focused on money saving rather than saving their citizens in immediate danger?

Why I'm saying this: the DoD perhaps has an idea (true or not) that legitimizing the leaks channel would make things worse in long run than any short-term security gain for the people on the ground.

Re: Wikileaks dumps 400,000 more files

#112

Post by Adam503 » Sat, Oct 23, 2010, 9:59 PM UTC

spot wrote: post #95

rbanffy wrote: post #38

Just as a counterpoint, risking godwining this topic: What would you think if we were in mid-1944 and these documents detailed the operations of Nazi Germany and listed several people who helped German occupation forces? The morality of this war is at the core of this discussion. If you feel this war is immoral, then those who helped occupation forces to commit war crimes deserve no sympathy. If, however, you feel th…

> The truth, probably, lies somewhere in the middle. Ooh I hate it when people say that :) In particular, it is a hackneyed journalistic technique to list the positions of the Left and the Right, deride them both as extreme, and then settle on a reasonable compromise in the middle. A much better approach is to consider each idea on its merits. In fact the threat to informers was manufactured -- the last drop was uned…

Germany claimed Poland invaded them.

The invasion of Poland was supposedly a counter-offensive to protect German civilians from Polish border raiders, too.

Germany had pictures of the dead bodies of the Polish border raiders in Polish military uniforms and everything.

Re: Wikileaks dumps 400,000 more files

#113

Post by babeKnuth » Sat, Oct 23, 2010, 10:02 PM UTC

dannyb wrote: post #103

Assange is a real scumbag for risking people's lives. He claims his real purpose is to protect against threats against democracy. Isn't it interesting how he behaves when he gets a little bit of power - autocratic, capricious, and meglomaniacal? I wonder what sort of behavior that he could rationalize in the name of the greater good.

does this also apply (my simple sanity check test):

"The US gov't are real scumbags for risking people's lives. They claim their real purpose is to protect against threats against democracy. Isn't it interesting how they behave when they get a little bit of power - autocratic, capricious, and meglomaniacal? I wonder what sort of behavior that they could rationalize in the name of the greater good."

Re: Wikileaks dumps 400,000 more files

#114

Post by varjag » Sat, Oct 23, 2010, 10:04 PM UTC

Adam503 wrote: post #61

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I've read, Assange is into ego-gratification, not idealism.

Where did you read that, rushlimbaugh.com? Straight outta the Karl Rove playbook. Don't play defense, attack attack attack.

His ego shines through in all interviews. Even through his choice of his last name, you can see dude read too much Bond novels.

Re: Wikileaks dumps 400,000 more files

#115

Post by babeKnuth » Sat, Oct 23, 2010, 10:09 PM UTC

dannyb wrote: post #110

babeKnuth wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ummmm, you realize that's not what you said in your post?

Are you really that literal? My one sentence response contains a comma. The "No" is a response to your query. The rest of the sentence does not in any way contradict what I said before.

literal about what? your explanation was poorly phrased, how was i to interpolate what you really meant if you didn't clarify it fully? my parsing of your sentence is valid, as is yours.

and i didn't say or intend to imply there was any contradiction. just pointing out that you changed your "he's a scumbag because..." def'n. moving goalposts (no matter how small) in a conversation typically isn't cool.

"Assange is a real scumbag for risking people's lives."

"I think that Assange is a scumbag because he's a hypocrite."

Re: Wikileaks dumps 400,000 more files

#116

Post by babeKnuth » Sat, Oct 23, 2010, 10:10 PM UTC

dannyb wrote: post #107

babeKnuth wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so are all people that risk people's lives scumbags? what if the people he releases info about are ones that risk more people's lives than he does? part of war is about putting your life at risk in order to preserve the lives of many more. a small sacrifice for a larger one. if you don't like war, don't participate in it.

No, I think that Assange is a scumbag because he's a hypocrite.

again, same type of question:

are all hypocrites scumbags?

Re: Wikileaks dumps 400,000 more files

#117

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Oct 23, 2010, 10:11 PM UTC

rbanffy wrote: post #38

Just as a counterpoint, risking godwining this topic: What would you think if we were in mid-1944 and these documents detailed the operations of Nazi Germany and listed several people who helped German occupation forces? The morality of this war is at the core of this discussion. If you feel this war is immoral, then those who helped occupation forces to commit war crimes deserve no sympathy. If, however, you feel th…

[deleted]

Re: Wikileaks dumps 400,000 more files

#118

Post by Adam503 » Sat, Oct 23, 2010, 10:12 PM UTC

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #81

Adam503 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did you read that, rushlimbaugh.com? Straight outta the Karl Rove playbook. Don't play defense, attack attack attack.

Wow, I'm pretty bummed you'd assume that about my political leanings.

You can be as bummed as you want. I don't see where you have posted a source for your claim that's more reliable than a Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, or one of Glenn Beck's equally unreliable compatriots at Fox News.

ONLY thing linked NY Times article and aaronbrethorst claim share is founders name.

Re: Wikileaks dumps 400,000 more files

#119

Post by Adam503 » Sat, Oct 23, 2010, 10:14 PM UTC

varjag wrote: post #114

Adam503 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did you read that, rushlimbaugh.com? Straight outta the Karl Rove playbook. Don't play defense, attack attack attack.

His ego shines through in all interviews. Even through his choice of his last name, you can see dude read too much Bond novels.

Another Karl Rove student with no link to any evidence whatsoever that make those claims anything but meritless rants

Re: Wikileaks dumps 400,000 more files

#120

Post by aaronbrethorst » Sat, Oct 23, 2010, 10:15 PM UTC

Adam503 wrote: post #118

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, I'm pretty bummed you'd assume that about my political leanings.

You can be as bummed as you want. I don't see where you have posted a source for your claim that's more reliable than a Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, or one of Glenn Beck's equally unreliable compatriots at Fox News. ONLY thing linked NY Times article and aaronbrethorst claim share is founders name.

I think this story at the NYTimes corroborates what I was saying before: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/world/24assange.html