491–500 of 792 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a different world we would be living in if Bernie Sanders had won the US presidential elections.
I fear we'd just be in another JFK situation. We're only allowed so much representative government.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ultimately, right and wrong, good and evil are human judgments, sometimes acted upon by humans using human power. There’s nothing transcendent about it. The international rules-based order is safeguarded by powerful entities… because it’s in their best interest. One goes against that self-interest at one’s peril.
> right and wrong, good and evil are human judgments This is nonsense that opens up the possibility to justify pretty much any kind of abuse or atrocity. > The international rules-based order is safeguarded by powerful entities… because it’s in their best interest. If the international order was actually rules-based it would have been safeguarded by international institutions, not by a single capricious superpower. >…
Hilarious. Do you think there’s big judge in the sky that determines what’s good and bad? There is only human conscience, and powerful people who decide to enforce their conscience.
> If the international order was actually rules-based it would have been safeguarded by international institutions, not by a single capricious superpower.
If there’s an international institution that can enforce rules, then that institution is the capricious superpower, and woe betide those that mess with that institution.
This should be a sobering view of how the world really works. Above a certain threshold, every veneer of civilization vanishes no matter what the country (some have a higher threshold than others). At this level, only power matters. And the first rule of power is: Don't embarrass the powerful unless you can call on a lot of power to defend yourself. Laws can't protect you; they can be thwarted and bent, and the legal…
This is in micro scale, so perhaps this is why the power imbalance is so painfully clear. This is one guy against the whole might of the US. Of course events like this have been happening for centuries, recent decades included. The people in various countries caught up in wars had their lives ruined or lost. At best, this was despite all efforts to safeguard them and a price to pay for some greater good, at worst foo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a bit of a sad sacrifice, though. Nothing (significant) has changed about the US's imperialism as a result of his disclosures, it's just mildly more acknowledged.
You're forgetting he tried to reach asylum but was stopped midway, and while he was stuck in limbo, he applied for multiple asylums, all of which were rejected. Not really the mark of someone who wanted to be a martyr as opposed to someone like Navalny, for example. More an indication of someone who didn't really know what he's doing and became an accidental but very effective Russian agent who ended up being a major…
The framing of Assange as an innocent “journalist” being persecuted for just doing his job is, in my opinion, disingenuous. I do not necessarily agree with all the actions the US Government has taken with him, or their handling of some of the information that was leaked. However, I do not agree that a “journalist” should be able to enable espionage, let alone encourage/incite it. In case my point is unclear, I consid…
Assange is more of an editor / publisher. This is akin to the Washington Post publishing the Pentagon Papers. As a reminder, this is why the US wants to punish Assange: > Wikileaks reveals video showing US air crew shooting down Iraqi civilians > https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/apr/05/wikileaks-us-a...
His disclosures have shown a consistent bias to damage the Democrats, support the Republicans, Trump, and the Putin regime. He also endangered the lives of multiple assets by revealing their names and locations.
It's a lot more nuanced than you portray it.
The framing of Assange as an innocent “journalist” being persecuted for just doing his job is, in my opinion, disingenuous. I do not necessarily agree with all the actions the US Government has taken with him, or their handling of some of the information that was leaked. However, I do not agree that a “journalist” should be able to enable espionage, let alone encourage/incite it. In case my point is unclear, I consid…
Shouldn't you be pushing for the prosecution of the Guardian journalist that published the encryption keys then? Not Assange who actively worked to get both press and government help to ensure safe disclosure.
This should be a sobering view of how the world really works. Above a certain threshold, every veneer of civilization vanishes no matter what the country (some have a higher threshold than others). At this level, only power matters. And the first rule of power is: Don't embarrass the powerful unless you can call on a lot of power to defend yourself. Laws can't protect you; they can be thwarted and bent, and the legal…
Your entire post is opinion and contains no information, factual or otherwise.
This should be a sobering view of how the world really works. Above a certain threshold, every veneer of civilization vanishes no matter what the country (some have a higher threshold than others). At this level, only power matters. And the first rule of power is: Don't embarrass the powerful unless you can call on a lot of power to defend yourself. Laws can't protect you; they can be thwarted and bent, and the legal…
This is ridiculous. Assange is alleged to have cooperated with a member of the US forces to release gigabytes of diplomatic cables etc. - which is possibly a crime. In all but rare cases, you absolutely do not have the right to break into systems of national security and release arbitrary information under the guise of 'journalism'. His extradition is perfectly rational, legal and judicially legitimate. The Abu Garib…
These are two very different things. Is Assange suspected of doing the first? The second I wonder how it can be a crime if it is a non-US citizen doing it on non-US soil.
This should be a sobering view of how the world really works. Above a certain threshold, every veneer of civilization vanishes no matter what the country (some have a higher threshold than others). At this level, only power matters. And the first rule of power is: Don't embarrass the powerful unless you can call on a lot of power to defend yourself. Laws can't protect you; they can be thwarted and bent, and the legal…
Fabricate a narrative that allows your country to murder tens of thousands of people == fine and not illegal. Tell soldier how cryptographic maths work == double castration and the CIA tries to assassinate you. Don't forget that the Collateral Murder video showed not only Iraqi citizens but also Reuters journalists being machine-gunned from the sky. No person has ever been criminally charged for these murders.
As an American, I find it very hard to decide what to think about these issues. Our military certainly makes mistakes, and people should be held accountable, but on the other hand the U.S. upholds much stricter rules of engagement than any of its enemies (hell, even stricter than our cops). Should credit not be given for that?
In all honesty and at the very minimum, being criticized openly and fairly for atrocities is the cost of being seen as capable of virtuous military action.
The older I get though, the less objective distinction I see. I'm sure that's how the dead felt in their last moment as well. Just look at the last US bombing in Afghanistan where they hit the car full of water and children. We like to act like there's a higher standard, but who will ever be held accountable for that mistake? Nobody.