Our government is a piece of shit. I know this, you know this, most people know this. But, just because the government is a POS doesn't mean you disregard the people that serve the government.
What do the honest troops that are fighting for our country have to do with our shitty government? They take orders and they must follow those orders. If they don't, they're out of a job or worst case, thrown in jail.

This is the same as the German army. They WERE NOT the same as nazi's. A lot of people do not realize this. They were not the SS. They were just regular German soldiers caught up in a shit storm. And sure, some of the German soldiers and some of our allied soldiers are not the most ethical or moral humans, but I would like to think the majority of them are honest people just trying to protect our freedom.

Publish the stuff that leaks Obama (ie. government) going to a strip club or lying on his taxes or bribing this person or taking bribes.. that's fine. But, don't tell those effing terrorists where our safe houses are or how we conduct military warfare or our communications protocols.

Just think if your father was serving right now. Why the hell would you want to jeopardize his life?

This topic is a double edged sword. At the end of the day, I don't want my *insert family member or friend here* to die. So obviously i'm not going to support wikileaks. Just sensor the information that might kill our troops and leak everything else. I mean, why does anyone need to know the US communications protocols?

^lol "terrorists"
Posted via RS Mobile

While I agree with what you said, I totally do NOT think Assange or his staff are qualified to make these decisions.

Who do you think IS qualified?

There is a difference between government transparency and personal privacy you idiot.

If you support torture you have no moral high ground over those individuals that commit human rights violation.

It sounds as if you believe that Wikileaks has been dumping classified documents without redaction putting lives at risk. If that were true and they have put lives at risk then I'd agree that Wikileaks should be punished for that but as far as I know nothing has surfaced.

Interview with Julian Assange after he was released on bail.

I don't think they are releasing indiscriminately. If that were the case, there would be a drop of 20k documents at a time.

They are also providing the gov'ts the chance to redact what they feel is too sensitive for release-while at gun point that they ARE going to be released if they don't.

I think the main thing to consider is there has not been a bombshell announcement. There have been revelations about inner workings on events already covered, but no "new" info is out.

I'll tell you what...show me a document that says that the Stuxnet virus was an Israeli-American project-conclusively. Then we can actually put some lives at risk and then wikileaks will actually be in some hot water. Show me who is banking in Sweden. Show me that Bank of America caused the recession-conclusively. Shit, wow me a little bit with just telling me how BoA shuffles profits through offshore accounts to lower their tax rate.

All of this is stuff we know happens, but don't have proof.

Until then, its hype.

I would consider the clip that showed the US military indiscriminately shooting civilians from a helicopter a bombshell. It is just that no one cares.

and that they're prostituting children to make alliances with some scum
plus how troops are getting killed through training exercises or friendly fire but the taliban/etc get blamed for it
all the hidden civilian deaths etc etc etc


are quite the bombshell but the media has turned from reporting the news (covering these atrocities) to just pulling a smear campaign on the messenger

our gov't is a piece of shit...?

name one place with a better government than canada, GO!

i think a lot of RS'rs are confusing the American govt. with Canada i've noticed that lately its a bit disturbing

my bad, i didn't mean our govt. was a pos. it definitely is not.
i just meant that all governments are not perfect. obvs. i got a little carried away.

What I'm curious about is how many terrorists or "enemies" have been captured or killed. It seems like the only casualties in this "war on terror" are either allied troops or innocent civilians. I'd be glad if someone could point me to some information or statistics stating otherwise.

edit: figured i'd get failed for this, lol

Rally organized by the Pirate Party. Bunch of commies over there...

thats because the only place you get information is media like GlobalTV and CNN and the only stories they report are bad ones. the ones that say "another allied soldier died from a roadside IED."

you've gotta be fucking retarded to think 'the bad guys' arent dying. for fuck sakes, Saddam Hussein is dead.

watch something beyond mainstream media.

Agreed. Plenty of Al Qaeda guys for example are captured/killed regularly.

I'm just saying statistics would be nice.

I wasn't suggesting that I knew who should make those decisions, because I don't.

I don't know who is qualified. I definitely feel that one man or one organization that is unaffiliated with government is either.

regardless, if the numbers of "good guys" isn't bigger than the bad, the ratios are fucked. There was a report detailing the number of american soldiers who died simply from friendly fire and it's in the thousands - totally pathetic. The actual rates, i think are about 40% higher than they were in World War 2 - it makes no sense!

:whistle: That is what has been going on, government regulating itself.

ok since i guess its easier to just post on revscene instead of actually clicking google and typing "afghanistan enemy casualties", i guess you have to let someone else do it for you.

so i did. and one of the first links i came up with was this one

http://www.slate.com/id/2261911/

and in it it stats wikileaks as a source and claims up to december 09

"figures total to 3,994 civilians killed and 9,044 wounded, while 15,219 enemies were killed and 1,824 wounded."


while this site here

http://icasualties.org/oef/

claims, in the same time period as the enemy numpers i posted, coalition casualties were 1570


yep, way more good guys are dying than bad guys.



disclaimer: i am only going by the numbers posted on the first link i clicked on for each search.

and incase anyone starts thinking they are just numbers, heres the names of all 154 canadians killed in afghanistan.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/af...ties/list.html


if any of you want wikileaks to give out more sensitive information that could endanger more canadian soldiers and add more names of real people to that list, you should be sent over there too.

Except they haven't released any sensitive information that could endanger Canadian soldiers.

since it's also easier to assume rather than read what i wrote before quoting me for some reason, i will paste again exactly what i wrote:

so let's look at your link:
"bad guys" to "good guys" killed: 15219 : 3994 --> roughly 4:1
"bad guys" to "good guys" injured: 1824: 9044 --> roughly 1:5

therefore, for every 4 enemies killed, 1 innocent person is as well. For every 1 enemy injured, 5 innocents are injured.

But what I was really saying was that the amount of friendly fire u.s deaths right now is staggering, and way higher than in previous wars, despite better training and equipment - your numbers don't show this. Moreover, many of these deaths are covered up and denied - often miscategorized as an "enemy death" to improve the stats. this is a fact. Do one of your google searches for "US friendly fire casualties" and you'll see a stack of articles and blogs from various media outlets regarding the issue. For a concrete example, google the Pat Tillman story.