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

181–190 of 266 posts

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

#181

Post by grandalf »

wan23 wrote: post #167
grandalf wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Definition: Terrorism is the creation of fear in a population intended to achieve a political end.

What does it take to create fear? Certainly not successful terrorist attacks. Failed ones would work perfectly well too, as evidenced by the underwear bomber, shoe bomber, etc.

Things as minor as prank phone calls, etc., will still strike fear into the hearts of the target population.

So unless you can tell me that it's possible to stop failed attacks and prank phone calls, you must agree that terrorism cannot ever be stopped.

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

#182

Post by aristus »

grandalf wrote: post #151
aristus wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would guess that the OP means realpolitik. Where there is power, there is corruption. Smuggling currency is a very (very) common hobby. Horse-trading (influence for money, trade deals for extradition, taking in inconvenient "no longer enemy combatants" in exchange for influence or money), etc, is a daily thing. To survive and thrive you need to think about practical considerations more than ideals or principles. Ta…

Isn't the realpolitik behind US tolerance of Pakistan simply that the US is not powerful enough to make war with Pakistan? Such a war would draw in lots of other powers and would be a massive drain on the US. All we're left able to do is make nice with the military strongman in charge in exchange for Pakistan looking the other way while we invade its border country.

I think it's a bit more deep, especially given our prior history with Afghanistan and General Zia, and the complicated role of AQ Khan in nuclear proliferation. stratfor is a good place to dig into those kinds of questions.

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

#183

Post by MichaelSalib »

hugh3 wrote: post #86
d2viant wrote: post #81

What surprises me most is that Julian Assange has lasted this long. This isn't OBL, where he's living in a cave somewhere -- this guy is known to travel between first world countries. I can understand those countries may not be willing to hand him over, but the US has lots of experience with rendition and I'm surprised some three-letter agency hasn't snatched him up yet.

And this actually proves an important point about the various three-letter agencies: they're not really the nefarious organizations that exist in the imaginations of people who have seen too many movies. Jason Bourne's CIA would has assassinated Julian Assange a long time ago. The real one just grumbles.

they're not really the nefarious organizations that exist in the imaginations of people who have seen too many movies.

You're assuming that they're not nefarious when another explanation explains the facts just as well: they might be nefarious but very incompetent. I mean, we know that CIA officers routinely sign into hotels and airlines using their real names so that they can collect frequent flier points. Any clandestine organization whose staff does that is...really stupid. It is an organization with an institutionalized culture of incompetence.

Jason Bourne's CIA would has assassinated Julian Assange a long time ago. The real one just grumbles.

Jason Bourne's CIA officers would not give their real names to everyone and their brother in order to collect a few measly reward points, so their relevance to the actual CIA is precisely zero.

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

#184

Post by adolph »

commandar wrote: post #109
jscore wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it surprising? America can't go against every one who doesn't agree with them. It needs to weigh its options carefully and intelligently. The mere reason that Hugo Chavez is still in power testifies to this fact. The world is not black and white where we might send CIA or Special Forces to neutralize someone who we don't like. It's definitely more complicated than it seems. There are other, more indirect ways…

>The mere reason that Hugo Chavez is still in power testifies to this fact. That and the fact that the last time they tried, he turned out the be more resilient than expected -- and the coupe leaders far more incompetent; the coupe failed at least in part because they left Chavez's own people guarding the presidential palace after they took it over. Oops -- and the whole thing ended up being a huge embarrassment and…

Just a style pointer:

Coupe: a hardtop two door car [1.]

Coup: an overthrow of a government by focused action against the central leadership [2.]

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coupé

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup

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

#185

Post by ars »

grandalf wrote: post #158
ars wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rumors were there, but this is concrete evidence that Arab nations actually want a strike on Iran, but are too scared to say it out loud. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/us-embassy-cable... http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/28/arab-states-scor... By making this public it could significantly change what happens next with Iran.

I think it will put in context the silly, local squabbles that are behind all this. Iran is a western-style Democracy that has a radical faction thanks to decades of US meddling.

Meddling? Sure.

But western style democracy?? Did you completely ignore what happened during the last "election" there?

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

#186

Post by grandalf »

ars wrote: post #185
grandalf wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it will put in context the silly, local squabbles that are behind all this. Iran is a western-style Democracy that has a radical faction thanks to decades of US meddling.

Meddling? Sure. But western style democracy?? Did you completely ignore what happened during the last "election" there?

Ahmadinejad came to power after several years of George W. Bush's anti-Iran rhetoric had galvanized a conservative coalition in Iran.

Look at Orkut and Twitter: Iran is a pluralistic, wonderful country. Things like the US dropping bombs next door will tend to radicalize a country's extremists. Iran had been working to topple Saddam for decades and would have made a natural ally for the US. But the US goal was not to remove Saddam, it was to take power in the region, and so Iran (the natural power in the region) had to be an adversary.

Since then, we've seen more and more power in Iran go to the conservative faction which was on its way out before George W. Bush.

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

#187

Post by sdcfvbnjkllkj »

zephyrfalcon wrote: post #116
jscore wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it surprising? America can't go against every one who doesn't agree with them. It needs to weigh its options carefully and intelligently. The mere reason that Hugo Chavez is still in power testifies to this fact. The world is not black and white where we might send CIA or Special Forces to neutralize someone who we don't like. It's definitely more complicated than it seems. There are other, more indirect ways…

"Why is it surprising? America can't go against every one who doesn't agree with them. It needs to weigh its options carefully and intelligently. The mere reason that Hugo Chavez is still in power testifies to this fact." In this post-cold war world, he might be less important, so I would expect there would be less of an effort to oust him. The US does have, shall we say, a bit of a track record of unseating governme…

Actually it has a track record of failing embarrassingly to oust governments it doesn't like, cuba, angola, france ...

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

#188

Post by adolph »

btmorex wrote: post #88
ajays wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish Wikileaks would just dump the contents, and leave the analysis to the rest of the world. By doing selective "analysis" and redaction, they're basically doing exactly what they claim to be fighting. Either release all the information, or withhold it. Don't play sides. 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; t…

Releasing the raw contents without any redactions would probably be a disaster. Remember that a lot of these documents name spies/confidential informants. This is also at the level where people are actually killed. I guess what I'm saying is a complete, unedited release would almost certainly put some blood on wikileaks "hands".

Well, hopefully Wikileaks has better document security than the US, otherwise whoever really wants to know the identity of the spies/informants probably already does.

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

#189

Post by anamax »

prodigal_erik wrote: post #178
dantheman wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 elimin…

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

You don't get to assume regulation that does "the right thing". Instead, you have to accept regulation as it works in practice.

When buying and selling are regulated, regulators are bought and sold.

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

#190

Post by tibbon »

cabalamat wrote: post #61
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…

> When you comment that these cables are mundane in nature, you are assuming that you yourself are indicative of the audience as a whole. I don't think they're mundane -- some are quite amusing, such as the Afghan vice president trousering $52 million. > If you do not believe that millions upon millions of people will read this, you are mistaken. I'm sure millions will read them. > And many, if not the vast majority,…

I'm curious- how does one actually carry $52mm on your person? In $100 bills I calculated that as roughly 170 feet deep of bills (at .1mm per $100).
Post reply on HN