Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

WikiLeaks Archive — Cables Uncloak U.S. Diplomacy

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 266 posts

Re: WikiLeaks Archive — Cables Uncloak U.S. Diplomacy

#161

Post by nir »

Zev wrote: post #160
nir wrote: post #120

As someone who grew in the Mideast and spent some time in the US/EU/Aus, I was often amazed how completely detached Westerners are from the way the rest of the world works. Left wingers or conservatives, so many guns & money have been sheltering the past 2-3 generations from reality that they genuinely believe most people share their values and goals, and that the world operates similarly to their own surroundings. I…

Left wingers or conservatives, so many guns & money have been sheltering the past 2-3 generations from reality that they genuinely believe most people share their values and goals, and that the world operates similarly to their own surroundings. Not quite, but, its an easy mistake to make. There's a saying over here, "Politics stops at the water's edge." It means that with domestic politics, politicians can be as bip…

I don't really have a particular beef with Americans. My statement is about people I know in Europe and other Western nations as well as the US - it's less about politics than people's (politicians included) basic premises.

Re: WikiLeaks Archive — Cables Uncloak U.S. Diplomacy

#162

Post by utku_karatas2 »

joshes wrote: post #45

When you comment that these cables are mundane in nature, you are assuming that you yourself are indicative of the audience as a whole. If you do not believe that millions upon millions of people will read this, you are mistaken. And many, if not the vast majority, of these readers will have previously been in the dark as to the information contained therein. So to them, this is not mundane; it's extraordinary. Furth…

Very true. Only a tiny fraction of the leaks are published as of writing this and yet the information leaked so far is enough to put my country - Turkey - in political turmoil for months.

Re: WikiLeaks Archive — Cables Uncloak U.S. Diplomacy

#163

Post by Alex3917 »

krschultz wrote: post #157
Alex3917 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I'd prefer to argue FOR equal rights on the basis of the that being the morally right position" This sounds like something that is true, but I'm not sure it actually is. The basic problem is that saying something is morally right is a statement, not an argument. If you read Jon Stewart Mill's essay On Liberty, he doesn't just say that free speech is morally right, but rather he proves it using practical examples. Fo…

I own On Liberty, and I've also read from the 150 years of subsequent books debating its merits. I have a lot of arguments for equal rights, but HN is not the place for them. I just think that threatening is not the way to do it.

This makes sense. For the record I didn't mean my comment as a threat, but rather as something I think will increasingly drive future behavior. It sounds like I'm probably not as well read as you on philosophy; most of my thinking is based on psychology and sociology.

Re: WikiLeaks Archive — Cables Uncloak U.S. Diplomacy

#164

Post by brown9-2 »

viraptor wrote: post #104
philwelch wrote: post #6

Earlier WikiLeaks releases seemed to expose atrocities and human rights abuses by the US military and government, which represents at least a partial justification. What end does this release serve?

These were crimes of governments which are supposed to be trusted and which should work for the people. What end does not releasing every single one of them serve? Why would anyone want to keep them secret?

Can you be specific about what the crimes are here?

Re: WikiLeaks Archive — Cables Uncloak U.S. Diplomacy

#165

Post by rhizome »

hugh3 wrote: post #94
alx wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a comment on reddit: Complete docs are not up yet ... The full schedule is as follows: The first batch of documents that will be in part released Sunday night and the rest Monday will include "lively commentaries" by American diplomats on, among others, Nelson Mandela, Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe, Af...ghan President Hamid Karzai, and Libya's Col. Muammar Gaddafi. On Tuesday, documents will be released relating to…

Thursday will be dedicated to Canadians and their "inferiority complex". If that's true, this release schedule can only be assigned to massive dickishness on the part of wikileaks.

Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.

Re: WikiLeaks Archive — Cables Uncloak U.S. Diplomacy

#166

Post by hugh3 »

colinplamondon wrote: post #156
dkl wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the other side, the anti-war side uses the "illegal war" argument, as if it has any meaning - the world isn't a modern nation with the UN as supreme court, determining the legality of various wars. The left used this argument because it was the handiest they had. I think your criticism of it is absurd. It's like you're saying the left was right for the wrong reason, as if there is one reason all on the left oppo…

They tried to assassinate an American President, for one. They also gassed their own people and had a history of developing WMDs- that economic sanctions had slowed that development didn't materially change the intent.

And don't forget that Saddam wasn't abiding by the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire, which ought to be an immediate justification for resuming fire, since that's how ceasefire agreements work.

Lack of legalistic justification was never lacking for the Iraq war. Whether it was morally the right thing to do, or whether it was a worthwhile thing to do from a US-interests standpoint, are genuine questions. (Which I don't feel like discussing today.)

Re: WikiLeaks Archive — Cables Uncloak U.S. Diplomacy

#167

Post by wan23 »

grandalf wrote: post #155
rottencupcakes wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As it should. Terrorists are an affront to freedom. Drugs are not.

Terrorism cannot be stopped (by definition). The affront to freedom is the response to terrorism.

What part of the definition says that it can't be stopped?

Re: WikiLeaks Archive — Cables Uncloak U.S. Diplomacy

#168

Post by dantheman »

sfphotoarts wrote: post #125
drusenko wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"how completely disconnected Westerners are from the way the world actually works" Would you like to explain that, or are you just going to throw a nebulous assertion out there and expect it to mean something?

If you read the rest of his comment, you will see his explanation for the opening (and inflammatory) sentence. A basic grounding in recent world history would also likely be useful. The point, if I may be allowed to interpret his intention, was to point out that having spent a couple hundred years marauding around the world toppling governments that didn't suit its ideology the USA has lost sight of other cultures, t…

I'd like to hear one coherent argument against capitalism -- I've never seen one.

Re: WikiLeaks Archive — Cables Uncloak U.S. Diplomacy

#169

Post by hugh3 »

bl4k wrote: post #123
rottencupcakes wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As it should. Terrorists are an affront to freedom. Drugs are not.

I am not agreeing or disagreeing, just pointing out the blatant hypocrisy.

It's not necessarily hypocritical to say that it's okay to grow opium in Afghanistan where it's legal but stop people from importing it into the US or UK.

Re: WikiLeaks Archive — Cables Uncloak U.S. Diplomacy

#170

Post by mahmud »

Estragon wrote: post #56
sausagefeet wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't the US take them?

As far as I can tell, primarily because of right-wing hysteria about what the terrorist mischief they would notionally perpetrate if set up for a quiet life in Podunk, USA.

As opposed to the quarter million or so, highly trained and combat experienced Laotian Hmongs in the midwest?
Post reply on HN