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

171–180 of 266 posts

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

#171

Post by LiveTheDream »

mbateman wrote: post #11
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?

I'm a WikiLeaks skeptic so I can't say I really support this. But I am also a diplomacy skeptic. I'm very suspicious of the effectiveness of our foreign policy and the honesty of our leaders in engaging in it. I'd even go so far as to say that the diplomatic aspect of our foreign policy is equally or more damaging and deserving of criticism than the military aspect. So I'll be interested to see what the more frank, n…

Can you explain further what you mean by "diplomacy skeptic"?

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

#172

Post by netcan »

nir wrote: post #141
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?

Sure (btw, reworded it a bit, hope it's less inflammatory). A good example is the Iraq war: the pro-war side just assumed that, given the option, Iraqis will be happy to adopt the Western liberal democracy model. On the other hand, 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. Anothe…

Nir,

I have a similar background to you.

Since you single out Americans, tell me where people have more realistic and worldview? Our home country?

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

#173

Post by aneth »

The most interesting thing about reading these cables is how the US comes out well - reasonable, rational, and analytical - not the nefarious evil satan that it is portrayed by our enemies and domestic extremists. This snapshot of the inner workings of American diplomacy actually make me feel much better about how things are being managed, and should undermine efforts to portray some nasty plot to dominate the world. I don't expect our government to act in international affairs with complete transparency or without ulterior motives, but I do expect that they try to act ultimately for good and that there be minimal self-enrichment. I so far see little evidence of serious breaches here.

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

#174

Post by nir »

netcan wrote: post #172
nir wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure (btw, reworded it a bit, hope it's less inflammatory). A good example is the Iraq war: the pro-war side just assumed that, given the option, Iraqis will be happy to adopt the Western liberal democracy model. On the other hand, 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. Anothe…

Nir, I have a similar background to you. Since you single out Americans, tell me where people have more realistic and worldview? Our home country?

I definitely don't single out Americans. In my experience it's just the same in Western Europe and other places.

People who live in places where they are forced to exist "closer to the metal", eg Middle East, Eastern Europe, Africa tend to be less naive. Not smarter or better in any way - just more aware of the forces that shape the world.

The morning of 9/11/01 I was in a hostel in Adelaide, Australia. An American girl was in the TV room in tears, crying, "why would anyone do such a thing?". I don't mean to belittle her sorrow one bit, but I remember how the way she perceived this as illogical seemed so otherworldly to me. I mean, we grew up thinking it's obvious someone would attack our homes, if they could (and sometimes they did).

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

#175

Post by netcan »

nir wrote: post #174
netcan wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nir, I have a similar background to you. Since you single out Americans, tell me where people have more realistic and worldview? Our home country?

I definitely don't single out Americans. In my experience it's just the same in Western Europe and other places. People who live in places where they are forced to exist "closer to the metal", eg Middle East, Eastern Europe, Africa tend to be less naive. Not smarter or better in any way - just more aware of the forces that shape the world. The morning of 9/11/01 I was in a hostel in Adelaide, Australia. An American g…

I have seen those same tears in Kfar Saba.

That said, I agree with you that the naive 19 year old in the US is more naive than her counterpart elsewhere. That doesn't say anything about Americans perception of Iraqi/Afgahni values. I don't think Americans are more naive about these than other people about similar things. Probably less.

Fallacies, naivety. These are pretty wide.

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

#176

Post by bl4k »

jmtulloss wrote: post #152
sudonim wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that _we_ are using a loophole to lock up people without a trial. Gitmo is that loophole and that's why we can't bring the prisoners to the united states.

That's not true. We can hold prisoners of war without trial in the US. It's just hard to find a state that wants them. It's a "not in my backyard" problem.

not a declared war hence not prisoners of war

besides prisoners of war have other rights (such as not being interrogated) under the Geneva Conventions - this all gets in the way of what we wanted from our prisoners at Gitmo

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

#177

Post by bl4k »

hugh3 wrote: post #169
bl4k wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

it isn't legal in Afghanistan

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

#178

Post by prodigal_erik »

dantheman wrote: post #168
sfphotoarts wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Pure capitalism is a rent-seeking company-town dystopian nightmare. It encourages exclusive ownership of strategic resources, even when they're openly used to destroy the competitive free market by preventing rivals from existing. Similarly, lack of access to capital is a self-perpetuating social stratification problem which has led to violent revolution.

IMHO these are reasons to regulate it carefully, not to eliminate it.

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

#179

Post by archgoon »

yters wrote: post #73
BCM43 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, and while you're at it, Wikileaks? I'd love to see leaks from Russia, China, UK, Japan etc. You've been picking on the US for far too long; these other countries are no angels either. Are you offering to leak this information? Remember, they do not break into US systems to get this information. They need someone to leak it to them.

Plus, a couple of those countries will wipe Assange and his organization off the face of the earth. Assange is only picking on the US because we're more civil. It's like how the anti-religioun crowd tends to pick on Christianity, instead of one of the actually vicious religions that will kill them. Really, Assange is merely perpetrating a sophisticated form of bullying.

> It's like how the anti-religioun crowd tends to pick on Christianity, instead of one of the actually vicious religions that will kill them.

This would perhaps be a reasonable argument if they _never_ picked on Islam (I assume that's what you were referring to). This would indicate some actual fear of reprisals. However, this isn't actually the case. Dawkins, Hitchens, Myers, and most other figures have all 'picked on' Islam at one time or another.

PZ Myers: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/11/allah_does_not_ex... http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/03/islam_hates_women...

Dawkins: http://vodpod.com/watch/1959627-richard-dawkins-apostasy-in-...

Hitchens: http://sacredcanons.com/islam-and-atheism/christopher-hitche...

The first comment on the Hitchen's link shows some of the issues inherent when you criticize a minority religion (with respect to audience), however. Namely, you get the nasty anti-(legal)-immigrant crowd thinking you support them, or at least provide ammunition for them (conveniently ignoring arguments against their own beliefs).

Granted, they haven't picked on the Aztecs to my knowledge. They might be afraid of them.

My apologies for going OT.

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

#180

Post by nir »

netcan wrote: post #175
nir wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely don't single out Americans. In my experience it's just the same in Western Europe and other places. People who live in places where they are forced to exist "closer to the metal", eg Middle East, Eastern Europe, Africa tend to be less naive. Not smarter or better in any way - just more aware of the forces that shape the world. The morning of 9/11/01 I was in a hostel in Adelaide, Australia. An American g…

I have seen those same tears in Kfar Saba. That said, I agree with you that the naive 19 year old in the US is more naive than her counterpart elsewhere. That doesn't say anything about Americans perception of Iraqi/Afgahni values. I don't think Americans are more naive about these than other people about similar things. Probably less. Fallacies, naivety. These are pretty wide.

It's not the tears. I could tear up as well. It's the disbelief that anyone would want to harm you, even though they never met you, just because you belong to a group (eg nation) they're opposed to.

It was strange to me, since I grew up knowing there are people who never met me who'd harm me given the chance. It was actually happening pretty close by, from time to time. I didn't realize, until then, that there are people who don't grow up with the same notion.

Again, I'm not singling out Americans at all. I actually seem to have a higher opinion of America & Americans than most of my fellow New Yorkers..

Post reply on HN