I suppose the alternative is to take the government at its word that we’re succeeding in Afghanistan. Is that it?
No, the alternative to saying “don’t worry about it, nothing damaging was leaked” is not saying that.
I never said anything close to that. I said I don’t think anything that had been leaked would comparable to Sam Stone’s examples in terms of the damage it could cause. His examples included the landing plans for Normandy or the cracking of the Enigma codes. I did not say these would not cause any damage. I already pointed out that the names of informants were disclosed and I didn’t see any particular reason that needed to be made public. It definitely puts those people in danger and it could get those people killed. So far that’s the only part of this that gives me pause. Saying there couldn’t be any damage would be naive.
I’m a member of the press. And no, I’m not saying everybody lets a story go if one of their sources doesn’t like it. I’m saying the issue is a real one in the press, and I think it’s particularly a real issue when you get to the top level where inside (often anonymous) sources are so important.
Well…has something damaging been leaked? I don’t expect you to answer that right this second, as I imagine there may be some isolated piece of information that may conceivably be damaging, but I fail to see how dissemination of information that provides an unvarnished account of our efforts in Afghanistan “harms the troops.”
I have made no assertion that the wool has been, or is being, pulled over our collective eyes. You have made an assertion, and I would like to see you back that up:
(bolding mine)
How do you know that what we are being told is accurate? Where are you getting your information, and where are you getting confirmation that this information is truthful and complete?
And as a follow up, how do you know that “No attempt is being made to pull the wool over the public’s eyes and tell them that we are winning while we are really losing”?
What’s your evidence for that proposition?
This is how the NYT summarized the documents:
IOW, how do I KNOW that there isn’t a tooth fairy, or that a space ship didn’t crash in Roswell, or that a government cabal didn’t REALLY bring down the twin towers, right? I ‘know’ it because I’ve seen no evidence to the contrary. If you HAVE such evidence then feel free to present it…otherwise, I’ll continue to ‘know’ it until proven differently.
Presumably the same place you do, chief. When I see some hard evidence to the contrary then I’ll re-assess my stance on it. How about you?
I don’t, obviously. I don’t know that Santa Clause doesn’t hop on down the bunny trail either. However, in both cases I’ve seen no solid evidence to disuade me from my belief. There are ‘92,000’ documents and literally millions looking at them across the internets, but thus far I’ve seen nothing solid. The Dems are in control of both houses and the presidency, so I’m doubting Republican conspiracy to pull said wool. On the other side, the Republicans are unlikely (just my ‘guess’, mind) to go along with obviously false white washing from said Dems.The civilian branch oversees the military, so I’m guessing that they aren’t going to go along with a cover up either, etc etc etc (that whole ‘checks and balances’ thingy, ehe?).
So…I don’t ‘know’. It’s just a premise. I can’t ‘prove’ a negative, even if that’s what you are actually after. On the other side, however, you COULD prove that we have been wool pulled…you have ‘92000’ recently released confidential documents. Best get crackin…
-XT
Xtisme, can you summarize, in your own words, what you believe our mission is in Afghanistan and where we stand on achieving it?
These days? Gods know. I suppose the original mission was to prevent AQ from having a nation states resources and shelter for their training and C&C/planning. We pretty much achieved that, to be sure. I’d say we could pull the fuck out now and simply bomb the shit out of any attempt for AQ to go back in and set up shop. So, the ‘mission’ today is more a political goal (presumably to create some sort of ‘stable’ construct that could, eventually and in theory stand on it’s own…or something) than a military one.
Why? And what does that have to do with the released documents and the presumption that they are actually telling us something we all really need to know that’s worth the additional risk to our troops still stuck in that nasty place?
-XT
Well, color me surprised. How does the NYT feel about extending the Bush tax cuts?
The whole point is to tell the people. We do vote ,you know. If the war is a farce, and almost all wars are, we need to know. Voting out those who lie about the war, would be a positive for the country.
Why is it a good idea to tell the representatives ,while lying to the people? The public absolutely has a need to know. We are expected to make intelligent decisions about those we elect.
Well, that’s no good, is it?
Essentially my understanding of why we remain there.
Were you aware that elements of Pakistan’s government (and not “Pakistan” generically) seems to be actively thwarting our efforts? Were you aware that Predator drone failures have necessitated sending forces to recover the drones, at great personal danger to the men? Are you aware of the number of civilians we have killed (and not just US forces, I’m talking NATO forces in general)? Did you know that the CIA has taken a hand in funding and directing paramilitary operations?
The point of all this isn’t to wag our fingers at the government or the military for not executing the war perfectly. But here we are, nearly 10 years and $300 billion later, and not only are the Taliban stronger than ever, but the small number of Al Qaeda operatives remaining are probably in Pakistan. The government doesn’t seem to want to give us the opportunity to question the conduct of the war, the performance of those conducting it, and the wisdom of remaining there; their only interest is in appeasing us long enough to string us out to some other deadline (“wait till after the surge”). Meanwhile, our soldiers get killed and maimed, innocent civilians get murdered at checkpoints and in commando raids, billions upon billions of dollars get spent, and no progress seems to be happening. Are we supposed to idly accept this indefinitely?
Thanks for this complete non sequitur.
Even if it gets more of our soldiers killed and really serves no purpose? It’s one thing to expose obvious corruption, but this seems to be simple giving us more details (which we don’t need and which will probably aid the enemy) and variations on things WE ALREADY KNOW.
I find it more than slightly ironic that these are the same folks who brought us the ‘scandal’ that culminated in Weathergate. The irony is that this seems much the same type of stuff…except this time it may and probably will get some folks killed.
Really? And, those folks we vote for…what’s their job again?
We ALREADY know that, man. This stuff, afaict, gives us NO new information about whether the war is or isn’t a ‘farce’. It really tells us no more than we already knew about the big picture. Obama et al are not hiding some deep dark secret about how we are on our last legs in Afghanistan or on the verge of being tossed out while they blow sunshine up our collective skirts. We already knew that things aren’t going well in Afghanistan, that the Taliban are and have been growing stronger, and that the current government in Afghanistan is weak and corrupt and would break like a rotten twig if we pulled up stakes and bolted for home.
Well duh…tell me something I didn’t know. You don’t seem to be grasping the essential nature of the discussion here. Mind, I’m militantly unsurprised…
Um…because obviously straw is on sale in your neck of the woods? Or, to put it differently, you are presuming that there is some sort of conspiracy, and you seemingly don’t grasp what ‘the representatives’ jobs actually are…nor, again seemingly, the nature of our government or how it works?
No…we don’t. We don’t need to know confidential or sensitive material. That’s what we pay the freaking politicians their lordly salaries for. The stuff we NEED to know we ALREADY know…plus, IMHO, a whole lot more, since our government leaks information like a barrel with no bottom.
Dude…seriously. Do you live on some other world? Or in some totalitarian hell hole of a country? We HAVE access to all that information. If you can’t be bothered to, you know, go out and read it, that’s your look out.
-XT
Nope…not too good at all.
Only for, oh, say 2-3 years (ok…probably significantly more). I seem to recall reading an article about it while Bush was still in office. Hell, I remember watching a show about trying to kill Bin Laden when CLINTON was in office and they were talking about elements of the Pakistani government actively helping AQ or at least thwarting, as you put it, our efforts to whack him.
It’s been common knowledge that ObL, assuming the old bastard is still with us, and much of AQ has been in Pakistan for years now…and that they have been receiving at least nominal aid from elements in the Pakistani government. Again, this isn’t news or even surprising.
Why, no…I think we should get the fuck out as if our ass was on fire. However, I don’t see the need to endanger our troops as long as they are going to be there with information that aids the enemy while really telling us nothing we didn’t already know, save the details that we DON’T need to know. As with Iraq, I’ve become something of a fervent anti-war guy…if you want to howl at the government and scream to bring our troops home, I’m all for it. Let’s howl at the moon…
-XT
I’m not sure why any self-respecting Doper would go trawling through ninety-two thousand documents when several solid news organizations have already done the busy-work for us.
Different page, summary:
This is exactly the sort of information that the electorate has a right to know, that does not need to be classified. The military does not have some overwhelming right in America to hide embarrassing information by classifying it —nor do America’s elected officials have any business trying to keep the costs of their decisions from the public. After all, how can we judge the trustworthiness of our leadership, civilian or military, without knowing whether the things they say are true?
There have been other examples of such relevant information earlier in this thread: the possession by the Taliban of heat-seeking missiles; the growth of the Taliban; etc.
You can’t just blithely conclude that this information endangers the troops without explaining how. “_____ the troops” has become a cudgel to beat any dissenters over the head with.
Nothing you quoted is particularly surprising, however. Civilians have been killed by US troops? Well, color me shocked. From your own cite:
While I concede that some a lot was white washed during the previous administration, nothing I’ve seen in the Guardian or NYT articles is particularly surprising from a big picture perspective…and a lot of it looks to me to detail a LOT about our tactics, patterns and other sensitive information.
You think that the electorate has the ‘right’ to know details about how our troops move, what they do, and what tactics the enemy has employed that have or haven’t been particularly effective, ehe?
Nope, they don’t. Which is why we have civilian oversight on the military. Even during the Bush administration we found out all sorts of embarrassing information that was used to expose problems in the military and take corrective actions.
But, ok…since the civilian government does indeed have oversight, what you are REALLY saying is that Obama and the Dems are now covering up for the military, correct? That in fact they are white washing the information and painting a false picture, and that this new information proves this…correct? Well, the answer is to vote the bastards out and get those nice gentlemen in the GOP back in office, ehe? 
Not that I think the public needs to know what weapons the Taliban have or don’t have, but, gain, this isn’t particularly surprising either. The Taliban is growing? Really? I never would have known if they hadn’t leaked these sensitive documents! Well, maybe I would have, if I even watched the Military Channel once a week, since there have been plenty of shows discussing that very thing (and without releasing sensitive info!). I admit I hadn’t seen anything about the Taliban using heat seekers, but again, that’s not exactly a surprising turn of events, nor something that I particularly needed to know to realize things have been going south in Afghanistan for quite some time now.
Seems obvious to me, and since others have already explained why I’m thinking I’ll just let you scroll up. If you are still unconvinced, all I can say is go back, re-read the Guardian or NYT article and consider what such logs would tell someone who is after some additional detail about the tactics or patterns being used by our soldiers, or how those heat seekers are working out…
-XT
Where does it say anything about the tactics of our soldiers? Unless you’re counting “blowing away civilians at a checkpoint” as tactics…
How does knowledge that the Taliban possess heat-seeking missiles that they’re using against our choppers harm the troops? How is that in any way a secret?