When do we execute Manning?

Discussion in 'Security & Defenses' started by Hate_bs, Feb 11, 2012.

  1. Jason Bourne

    Jason Bourne Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    11,372
    Likes Received:
    467
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    He'll be tried in a military courts martial, not a civilain court. The jury would consist of active duty military personnel. I'd seriously doubt that they'll have much sympathy for Manning's motives.
     
  2. Makedde

    Makedde New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    66,166
    Likes Received:
    349
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So he is basically screwed no matter what he does? That sucks. It sounds like he won't get a fair trial.

    I'll be back to talk more tomorrow, right now, Homeland is on, and its a must watch. :)
     
  3. Jason Bourne

    Jason Bourne Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    11,372
    Likes Received:
    467
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    He'll get a fair trial. And he'll suffer the consequences of his actions. I have no problem with that.

    Catch you later Make.
     
  4. RiseAgainst

    RiseAgainst Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    19,122
    Likes Received:
    3,191
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm going with this. I personally would rather see life imprisonment, however. But if he gets the death penalty I can't say I'd lose any sleep. People need to take responsibility for their actions.
     
  5. Hate_bs

    Hate_bs New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2011
    Messages:
    639
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Did you visit wiki leaks and actually look?

    Do you really think that Manning reviewed 391,832 reports to make sure that there was no sensitive information in them?
     
  6. Hate_bs

    Hate_bs New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2011
    Messages:
    639
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The war crimes are irrelevant. The only issue is if released classifed information. He did.
     
  7. Hate_bs

    Hate_bs New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2011
    Messages:
    639
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Read the orginal post in this thread. With more than 300,000 reports, I assure you the enemy learned how to kill troops.
     
  8. IgnoranceisBliss

    IgnoranceisBliss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    5,201
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    What did he reveal? Everyone acts like he revealed som secret conspiracy. You notice that you hear almost nothing about what was released....because the overwhleming majority of it wasn't sexy enough for the media to report on. He did apparently reveal some informants who were killed though. Tell me, what outrage has come from the release of the documents? Nothing from the U.N., the Hague, or any respectable international organization calling for charges.
     
  9. IgnoranceisBliss

    IgnoranceisBliss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    5,201
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Where did these so-called murders take place? You're likely talking about colllateral damage; Civilains that were killed by accident...aka NOT murder. Of course you probably can't make that distinction, having no understanding about the reality of war.
     
  10. IgnoranceisBliss

    IgnoranceisBliss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    5,201
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Because ITS WAR. It's not some media frenzy. People get blown up, gutted, and burned to death everyday in Afghanistan and formerly in Iraq. The military doesn't release every intimate detail. You'll notice that it doesn't show how most of its own soldiers are killed. It doesn't talk about the terrible war crimes committed everyday by the Taliban. It reports the deaths and moves on. The military has a job to do, its not suppossed to cater to CNN and the media. Can you imagine what WW2 woud have been like if it had even 1/100 of the media disclosure current wars have?

    Also, most of the people demanding transparency have no understanding over war. You yourself just referred to civilains being murdered, which was almost certainly just collateral damage ( I can't tell until you provide the evidence). You lack the expertise to break down the footage and put things into context, especially since you seem to have a clear alterior motive.
     
  11. IgnoranceisBliss

    IgnoranceisBliss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    5,201
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    You realize Homeland isn't even close to reality right? I pray you aren't getting your information about the conflicts from such TV shows. I think so many people in the world watch too much American TV can't make make the distinction.
     
  12. Herkdriver

    Herkdriver New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    Messages:
    21,346
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am not surprised the Leftists want to make a hero out of this bum.
     
  13. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,494
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Nope, he is active duty military. So he would not go to a civilian prison.

    He would do his time at the United States Disciplinary Barracks, at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Where he can spend time talking with Hasan Akbar.
     
  14. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,494
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, a great many people actually.

    http://registan.net/index.php/2010/07/30/taliban-use-wikileaks-to-hunt-murder-named-afghans/



    No, because that is not why he did it. If that was why he released documents, he still comitted Treason.

    If he did it because of a cover-up, then he should have turned them over to the appropariate authorites, and asked for protection under the Whistleblowers Act.

    And most of the documents have little to nothing to do with any such things. And many deal with other things that nobody ever seems to talk about, like the discovery of chemical weapons in Iraq.

    http://blog.heritage.org/2010/10/28/wikileaks’-inconvenient-truth-about-iraqi-chemical-weapons/

    I have always been struck by how one-sided the reports of these documents have been. Most of the news media went through these constantly, and then widely reported anything that made the US and it's military look bad. But never reported on anything else in the huge number of documents released.
     
  15. KSigMason

    KSigMason Banned at Members Request Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    11,505
    Likes Received:
    136
    Trophy Points:
    0
    He committed the crime and should be punished accordingly.

    IMO, he joined the military with a sinister intent to cause spillage.
     
  16. Someone

    Someone New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Messages:
    7,780
    Likes Received:
    84
    Trophy Points:
    0
    These two issues are linked, and form the core of the argument for executions higher up the chain. If the leak warrants death, then obviously it warrants death for the people who improperly released the information higher up the food chain.
     
  17. Someone

    Someone New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Messages:
    7,780
    Likes Received:
    84
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In a way, he did. He revealed a systematic effort by US authorities to conceal a number of important truths in the conflict in Afghanistan--for example, the concealment of Afghan civilian deaths, and the concealment of misconduct by American forces.

    However, he did know the consequences of this alleged act, and if he is responsible as alleged then he deserves the punishment for violating it. Julian Assange, however, does not--he was under no particular obligation to US authorities, nor had any particular reason to respect US domestic law or remain particularly loyal to the United States. The harassment of the wikileaks team is unjustified, even if punishment of Manning (if he is indeed responsible--a fact not yet proven) might not be.

    There are a number of ways to interpret the quiet reaction of the media. Indeed, the details are not particularly sexy or spectacular. That is part of the explanation, but the media has in the past reported on boring yet important news items, so that does not fully explain their lack of interest. I think they are probably afraid of retaliation by the Government. It does not help that the news cycle (as it relates to political or economic matters) is largely dictated by the government, and the government has a obvious reason to avoid commentary.

    There is no international basis for national secrecy, though there is an international basis for free speech rights and the protection of the press. What crime was committed outside of the US by the release of this information? Why would anyone expect foreign citizens to express any particular allegiance to the United States?
     
  18. IgnoranceisBliss

    IgnoranceisBliss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    5,201
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So implementing a possibly flawed intelligence network (which is still arguable) is the same basis for execution as someone who maliciously and intently released top secret information to foreign agents?

    The higher ups didn't "leak" anything. Manning was a highly trained and screened military intelligence Soldier with a top secret clearance who released the information on his own.
     
  19. IgnoranceisBliss

    IgnoranceisBliss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    5,201
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    What Afghan civilian deaths were concealed, and what atrocities were concealed? And here's the kicker, people from around the world with no understanding of military operations will declare something that's completely legal within the laws of war as an atrocity. The Apache video being the perfect example. You'll more than likely cite something that's an atrocity by your "standards" that is completely legal by the laws of war.

    Ironically, Wikileaks looked at all the leaked documents on civilian casualties in Iraq and found the official U.S. number to be extremely close. You and your like won't mention that though because it doesn't fit into your idea of evil secret conspiracies. How come no one is really talking about the leak anymore? It's only about Manning now. It's because very little was actually learned from hundreds of thousands of pages of documents.
     
  20. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,494
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I have long laughed at the very one-sided reporting of the information revealed by WikiLeaks.

    The MSM and Left Wing blogs will be yelling and screaming about the report of a soldier who kicks a dog, yet will totally ignore a report about chemical weapons, or the report of US medics rushing to the site of a suicide bomber to assist those who were wounded.

    But yes, most of what was in there was pretty dull. Lists of repair parts at this FOB, and a cluster of patrol logs for several weeks where nothing happened.

    Here is a list of things that WikiLeaks also revealed, that nobody talks about:

    Iran provided chemical weapons to Iraq
    Syria aimed chemical weapons at Israel
    Dozens of chemical stockpiles were found in Iraq
    Chinese companies provided chemical weapons equipment to Iran
    al-Qaeda was attempting to acquire chemical and nuclear weapons for strikes against Europe and the US.
    Over 550 tons of Yellowcake Uranium was found in one stockpile in Iraq

    I can go on and on and on, but it really does not matter. Because I have tried to show people who still believe the "No WMD" lie, and show them direct evidence in WikiLeaks. But somehow that is a lie, but everything else is real.
     
  21. IgnoranceisBliss

    IgnoranceisBliss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    5,201
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    You wouldn't happen to have links to this info, would you? I'd like to use it for when I do battle with ideologues in the future.
     
  22. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,494
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Most of it is easy to find. Just search for things like "WikiLeaks Yellowcake", "Wikileaks Chemical Weapons" and the like.

    And for those that are search impaired, here is an example of how you do it.

    http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=wikileaks+yellowcake

    :headbang:
     
  23. IgnoranceisBliss

    IgnoranceisBliss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    5,201
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I'm perfectly capable of using google. I was hoping you had one consolidated source or article for it.
     
  24. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,494
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh I am well aware of that. And notice, I said "for those", not "for you" :)

    I generally do not use "single source" locations, since most of them tend to have strong bias. I would rather look up each individual source of information on it's own, and judge it on it's own merits.
     
  25. Up On the Governor

    Up On the Governor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Messages:
    4,469
    Likes Received:
    164
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Does Wikileaks provide the source for information that everyone here apparently knows about the F-22? I would really like to know where people are getting the information they think is accurate. Thanks.
     

Share This Page