I knew vice was liberal and slightly anti-american, but this takes it to a whole new level of hate. There is nothing new about prosecuting a soldier for releasing classified information to the enemy (which is in effect what Manning did) the fact that he did it in the name of transparency doesn't absolve him of guilt. He swore to protect any secrets divulged to him and to protect his fellow country men, he failed on both counts.
I'm sorry that anyone thinks its okay to betray one's country and fellow people in such a way.
Can you actually, you know, read the article before commenting on it? It's not very long.
Here, I'll help by pasting one of the more important paragraphs right here:
At Quantico, Pfc. Manning treatment wasn’t by the book: the sleep depravation and stripping of clothes; the humiliation; the taunts and mockery; the nine months of putting Pfc. Manning in protected custody citing concerns over suicide—concerns that were rebuffed relentlessly by both Pfc. Manning himself and qualified psychiatrists. That’s why Coombs is looking to have the case against his client thrown out, and Manning’s own testimony this week only accentuated the living nightmare he was made to endure for nearly a year while only a half-hour drive from the capital of the nation. As testimonies from Quantico staff, health professionals, and the private himself continued late into the night all week, often for hours without intermissions, more unraveled about not just the torturous conditions imposed on Pfc. Manning but the blatant mismanagement in the same institution he is accused of blowing the whistle on.
Oh I saw that: Manning's crime wasn't quiet by the book either. Never in America's History has a natural born citizen released so much private government data for no other reason than to allow his country men to be embarrassed and slaughtered.
But the article completely ignores his crime, making him sound like a mistreated child, not a treasonous bastard
What is so bad about what he did? Someone had a video of a helicopter shooting children, and he gave that video to the media. Technically treason, but is it really that bad? Who is the victim of this crime?
Yup! I would shout it from the rooftops! I hate people who betray their friends family and fellow countrymen! Who break their word and pass off information that will definitely lead to their friend's death!
> There is nothing new about prosecuting a soldier
His prosecution has not yet begun. This article is about the months of torture he has endured while awaiting prosecution. Nor does the article make any claims about his guilt or innocence (apart from using the term "alleged", and thereby not pre-declaring his guilt before trial as you have done). Presuming that he is guilty: do the guilty deserve torture? This isn't a case of "information extraction", the excuse that is often used nowadays. This is punishment, nothing but vengeance. I don't care what he's done; his treatment does not sit well with me.
Joining the military may strip you of legal rights, but it doesn't strip you of any human rights. The article is about human rights violations, not whether or not the government has committed a crime in the US legal system.
(Consider more obvious human rights violations protected by law in certain jurisdictions: stoning people to death for adultery, killing someone's entire family for writing an anti-government blog post, the list goes on. The mistreatment of Manning is just another entry in this long list.)
I was married to a soldier for many years. They protect your right to get three square meals a day, to get your mail and to get something like four hours of sleep a day. They will make allowances for behaviors that would normally be termed "insubordination" if you have been awake excessively long (I can't recall the exact number of hours this applies to, possibly 24 hours). There isn't much else you can count on.
I am not saying that justifies torture. But your rights are substantially different in the military. You are officially AWOL if you are late to formation (i.e. Being late to work is a potentially serious crime if they want to make a big deal out of it). You cannot call in sick. You show up for formation and after formation you request sick call. If the doctor puts you on profile and bed rest, you might be excused from work for a few days.
The events in "Collateral Murder" had already been reported, in detail, almost scene-for-scene, because Reuters was shown the video shortly after the event.
Nope.
In WWII such things happened all the time. its not always clear who the enemy is, and it's far better to be alive and sorry than dead.
For more information on chaotic wars look no further than Orwell's account of the Spanish Civil War. There were more than three sides who would alternate alliances on an almost daily basis, Orwell himself would shoot anyone who held a gun and appeared to be a threat -- and he was supposed to be a non-partial reporter!
Also it's unclear what torture took place, the article fails to mention anything worse than what happens to child molesters in regular prisons, and Manning's crime is of the same caliber, whether you like the US's actions or not betraying your word and countrymen is a terrible crime.
This! nukes are not a serious weapon of war, their only use is deterrence because they completely rape any place where they're used so that that area is altogether off limits for the remaining life of humanity.
> "But it's not quite that bad. Both Hiroshima and Nagasaki seem alright now."
This is literally the most callous justification for nuking someone I have ever seen.
"It's not that bad guys. It's habitable now, 70 years later! If you didn't know better you would swear 80,000 didn't get instantly incinerated in nuclear fire, with over 125,000 more who died in slow agony over a few weeks of burns and radiation poisoning!"
I know Stalin said that a million deaths is just a statistic - but you weren't supposed to take Stalin to heart. Just sayin'.
I wasn't at all, but I was unclear. I was pointing out that nuclear weapons don't cause places to be uninhabitable for eternity. It is quite clearly incorrect. This is not a reason to use them however. The atomic raids ands the firebombing of Japan are most definitely up there as war crimes.
I didn't want the original (very long) URL which included the product name at that place (the technical term might be SEO-friendly URLs). So I first replaced it by an underscore to keep it short and then tried whether I can put something nicer in there. This wasn't generated by Amazon ☺
It's been working fine for years, though. I think part of it is being in Japan, and part of it is that the bikes just don't have much resale value. No point stealing creaky, cheap city bikes.
