wikileaks ?

[Mr Spinkles]

Actually, these leaks are Bradley Manning's work, as well as the Afghan War Logs and the now-famous video of US troops murdering two journalists and attempting to murder a civilian family in a van (I think).

LOL you know Alceste I agree with you most of the time, but then you have a way of going overboard and saying things that I just can't bring myself to agree with. As you must remember, the video "Collateral Murder" clearly showed a group of Iraqi men with weapons, and the journalists who were with them were only identifiable when they aimed what looked like an RPG at a U.S. patrol. You're not going to win any followers to your cause when you say things like "those journalists were murdered", because people like kai and Kathryn can plainly see you're distorting the truth. Which is a shame, because then they aren't going to listen to you the rest of the time, when you are in fact bringing the truth into clearer focus.

 

[Alceste]

Murder is murder.

 

[Troublemane]

Actually, these leaks are Bradley Manning's work, ...

Are you sure this latest set of leaked documents are from the ones he sent originally, months ago? Or are these new ones from another source? And is there any way for us to know where they came from?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Murder is murder.

Come on. There's a difference between manslaughter and premeditated murder, and there's a difference between aggression and self-defense. Right?

 

[Alceste]

Come on. There's a difference between manslaughter and premeditated murder, and there's a difference between aggression and self-defense. Right?

Go out into the street tomorrow, find somebody who has a gun on their person, shoot them, whoever is with them and anyone who stops to help on purpose and let me know how you get on in court. Slaughtering people (armed or not) indiscriminately from helicopters is not a pastime for civilized people.

 

[LuisDantas]

I also fail to see any significant difference.

 

[kai]

Murder is murder.

I also fail to see any significant difference.

It must be really different to live in a world where everything is so black and white without the shades of grey we have to contend with complicating things.

 

[LuisDantas]

It must be really different to live in a world where everything is so black and white without the shades of grey we have to contend with complicating things.

Yes, it must be. But really, that is quite besides the point. War, particularly fabricated war, is no excuse for murder.

 

[darkendless]

The guy who's in trouble for it is an Aussie and there were huge protests over his release in Brisbane and Sydney today.

 

[LuisDantas]

I don't think Wikileaks is particularly unique. We all saw how much Twitter helped in making the evidence of repression during Iran's elections available to the world at large.

Wikileaks is only a slightly more organized and more sophisticated example of the Internet making repressed information available. Even if it is closed down, it is not a spying organization, only a relayer of information. It can be easily substituted, and it most certainly will.

Amen to that, btw. It is about time for that damn secrecy to begin to crumble on its feet. It is real people that are being destroyed.

 

[kai]

Come on. There's a difference between manslaughter and premeditated murder, and there's a difference between aggression and self-defense. Right?

I also fail to see any significant difference.

Yes, it must be. But really, that is quite besides the point. War, particularly fabricated war, is no excuse for murder.

whats beside the point? you intimated you didnt see a difference between manslaughter and premeditated murder, and between aggression and self-defense. prompting me to comment on seeing things in black and white.

 

[Alceste]

whats beside the point? you intimated you didnt see a difference between manslaughter and premeditated murder, and between aggression and self-defense. prompting me to comment on seeing things in black and white.

Shooting a person with intent to kill is not manslaughter - manslaughter is accidental. There is no aspect of the Iraq war that constitutes "self defense" on the part of the US/UK military - they are the aggressors. They threw the first punch, if you will, so the "self defense" argument is not available to them. Also, the soldiers were in a helicopter and were not in any danger.

Not sure if you are aware of this, but many Iraqis now carry guns. If that is a capital offense, those soldiers must be very busy "manslaughtering" their way through the population.

 

[Sunstone]

The guy who's in trouble for it is an Aussie and there were huge protests over his release in Brisbane and Sydney today.

Good to hear about the protests.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Go out into the street tomorrow, find somebody who has a gun on their person, shoot them, whoever is with them and anyone who stops to help on purpose and let me know how you get on in court. Slaughtering people (armed or not) indiscriminately from helicopters is not a pastime for civilized people.

I also fail to see any significant difference.

For this to be a fair comparison, I would have to go into the street tomorrow while the police just had a shootout with a militant group, I see some guys walking around with guns on a street not far from the police, no one else is around, I see a guy aim an RPG at the police, and then I shoot them. Of course any death is a tragedy, but it's utter nonsense and moral confusion not to acknowledge there is a difference between my hypothetical actions, and the actions of a psychopath who decided to mow down unarmed people one day, for absolutely no reason.

 

[Alceste]

For this to be a fair comparison, I would have to go into the street tomorrow while the police just had a shootout with a militant group, I see some guys walking around with guns on a street not far from the police, no one else is around, I see a guy aim an RPG at the police, and then I shoot them. Of course any death is a tragedy, but it's utter nonsense and moral confusion not to acknowledge there is a difference between my hypothetical actions, and the actions of a psychopath who decided to mow down unarmed people one day, for absolutely no reason.

Don't forget that the "police" are from another country (let's say China), the armed individuals in conflict with them are in their own home, minding their own business when the "police" arrive, and that after killing them and anybody near them you also shoot up a van containing a whole family that stops to help your bleeding victims.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Shooting a person with intent to kill is not manslaughter - manslaughter is accidental. There is no aspect of the Iraq war that constitutes "self defense" on the part of the US/UK military - they are the aggressors. They threw the first punch, if you will, so the "self defense" argument is not available to them. Also, the soldiers were in a helicopter and were not in any danger.

Not sure if you are aware of this, but many Iraqis now carry guns. If that is a capital offense, those soldiers must be very busy "manslaughtering" their way through the population.

Imagine we saw a different video. Imagine we saw a video where there was no patrol taking fire nearby, there was no group of men with guns aiming an RPG at the patrol. In this video, there are just some people sitting outside a cafe in a busy marketplace. The helicopter pilot says "Let's do some target practice!" and they open fire for no reason. You would have to be very, very ethically confused if your reaction to this hypothetical video was exactly the same as your reaction to the real video.

As you know, I was extremely critical of the soldiers' actions in the "Collatoral Murder" thread. I just don't see any point in distorting reality to fit our moral outrage, when the undistorted truth is sufficient to be outraged.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Don't forget that the "police" are from another country (let's say China), the armed individuals in conflict with them are in their own home, minding their own business when the "police" arrive, and that after killing them and anybody near them you also shoot up a van containing a whole family that stops to help your bleeding victims.

If I was on the China/U.S. interim government side and I shot some insurgents then that's war, not murder. War is a horrible tragedy, but it's not equivalent to murder and I concede as much to the insurgents who kill U.S. or Iraqi soldiers as well.

And as you must surely remember from the "Collateral Murder" thread, I totally agree the shooting of the van was a crime. You said the helicopter "murdered two journalists" and attempted to "murder a civilian family in a van", I'm not defending the video I'm just trying to respect the facts. From the evidence it's quite clear they did not deliberately murder journalists, and they didn't know a family was in the van. Nevertheless, what appears in the video is a tragedy and a crime, and it supports the moral outrage people like us feel towards the war in Iraq. All I'm saying is, what's the point of distorting these facts? I didn't try to falsely suggest in the "Collateral Murder" thread that they deliberately murdered journalists or that they deliberately murdered a family. I didn't do this because it was contrary to the evidence, and it was unnecessary to make a broader moral point. The undistorted facts are sufficient to be morally outraged, to oppose U.S. involvement in the war in Iraq, and to say what is captured in the video is a crime resulting in innocent deaths. Why go even further than this and distort the facts, and lose credibility with people like kai and Kathryn, whom we would like to persuade? More importantly, why take the easy way out and distort the facts, at all?

 

[dust1n]

"C'mon, pick up a gun, just pick up a gun."

 

[Alceste]

If I was on the China/U.S. interim government side and I shot some insurgents then that's war, not murder. War is a horrible tragedy, but it's not equivalent to murder and I concede as much to the insurgents who kill U.S. or Iraqi soldiers as well.

And as you must surely remember from the "Collateral Murder" thread, I totally agree the shooting of the van was a crime. You said the helicopter "murdered two journalists" and attempted to "murder a civilian family in a van", I'm not defending the video I'm just trying to respect the facts. From the evidence it's quite clear they did not deliberately murder journalists, and they didn't know a family was in the van. Nevertheless, what appears in the video is a tragedy and a crime, and it supports the moral outrage people like us feel towards the war in Iraq. All I'm saying is, what's the point of distorting these facts? I didn't try to falsely suggest in the "Collateral Murder" thread that they deliberately murdered journalists or that they deliberately murdered a family. I didn't do this because it was contrary to the evidence, and it was unnecessary to make a broader moral point. The undistorted facts are sufficient to be morally outraged, to oppose U.S. involvement in the war in Iraq, and to say what is captured in the video is a crime resulting in innocent deaths. Why go even further than this and distort the facts, and lose credibility with people like kai and Kathryn, whom we would like to persuade? More importantly, why take the easy way out and distort the facts, at all?

War is murder. There is no rational ethical basis I can think of that justifies morally distinguishing between the willful, unnecessary, premature destruction of a life because you want to do it for your own reasons or because somebody in authority wants you to do it for theirs. To hear some people talk, you'd think the difference was night and day.

Anyway, you and I both know that perfectly ordinary civilian men, women and children going about their business, not bothering anyone, have been slaughtered by the tens of thousands in these criminal invasions.

 

[kai]

Shooting a person with intent to kill is not manslaughter - manslaughter is accidental. There is no aspect of the Iraq war that constitutes "self defense" on the part of the US/UK military - they are the aggressors. They threw the first punch, if you will, so the "self defense" argument is not available to them. Also, the soldiers were in a helicopter and were not in any danger.

Not sure if you are aware of this, but many Iraqis now carry guns. If that is a capital offense, those soldiers must be very busy "manslaughtering" their way through the population.

Thanks for your opinion. I am not getting into a lengthy debate on that particular case as i have already done so in another thread.

Except to say not sure you are aware but Iraq is full of people murdering other people and its very dangerous to walk around in broad daylight with AK47s and RPGs or indeed accompany people doing so. on the periphery of a security operation you could get yourself killed.

you i am sure are also ware of voluntary manslaughter where the intention to kill was there, but there were mitigating circumstances? Interesting point about the helicopter ? do you consider artillery ,air strikes drone attacks ,missiles etc etc all murder because the operatives are not in any danger?