US says Wikileaks could 'threaten national security'

Laundry said:
Maybe "win" in this case means successfully defeat all resistance in a foreign country.
Click to expand...

by that definition, probably none. These days it is almost certain that there will always be resistance of some kind, both armed and political, after the conflict is declared over. Israel especially falls into this basket.
 
Yeah, like I would say Israel "won" the 6 day war, but it was stopped short by political pressure etc. (and kind of starting to stalemate)

So what's the difference between then and now? Media coverage? The Geneva convention? Smaller military forces? Public sentiment? All of the above?
 
Last edited:
Perhaps. I think the difference is the type of enemy. Political/Land Grab is different then Religion/Culture. one is "winnable" via treaty. The other you can only win by infiltration, degradation (think the MTVification of some other culture), or extermination. You can't win it through modern warfare.
 
Last edited:
soundjester said:
Perhaps. I think the difference is the type of enemy. Political/Land Grab is different then Religion/Culture. one is "winnable" via treaty. The other you can only win by infiltration, degradation (think the MTVification of some other culture), or extermination. You can't win it through modern warfare.
Click to expand...

nicely put

broadly, and crudely speaking, the main difference between wars in the empire building days and the 'wars' that are waged now is that there are no longer any obscure primitive tribes armed with fruit to conquer anymore

instead of interrupting a holy ceremony being held by a few thousand members of the umbogo tribe, slaughtering them and taking over their shit (as we were compelled to do since it was the 'white mans' burden' to bring christian civilisation to the savages), we now have to contend with niggers armed with ak47s and a rap-based attitude

war just aint like it used to be
 
So if these documents are top secret and shit then why hasn't the US government shut down WikiLeaks temporarily?
 
Al'Muktar said:
still didnt work though did it

and they're not using 'state' legal pressure, they're using economic/corporate pressure
Click to expand...

I suppose not, though those running it were sentenced to a year in jail/fines (once the appeal is over).

I would say that US/state legal pressure is economic/corporate pressure. Mutual relationship.

Evidence: Anaconda Mining, United Fruit Company, Halliburton
 
Hudson said:
I wonder what will happen to the leak.
Click to expand...

He'll be aggressively prosecuted by the DoJ, probably under the National Security Act. At best he'll lose his job and his clearance, and be permanently barred from all federal jobs. At worst, he'll spend the rest of his life in a federal prison.

God help him if he's military... :scared:
 
If I was dictator, I would ask Sweden to take down wiki leaks. If they refuse I would shut it down via cruise missile.
 
Hudson said:
Kid did what he felt was right. I hope he doesn't serve that much of a sentence.
Click to expand...

I do too, but the right and wrong of it doesn't matter. The rules for handling classified information are very well defined and strictly adhered to. They're in place for a reason, whether that reason can be (is) abused by the government or not. The courts won't give two shits if this guy ultimately "did the right thing" or not. He willingly disclosed classified information, and that's enough to prosecute under the National Security Act.

There are other, more legal ways to blow the whistle in/on our government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top