Daylife/Getty Images used by permission
|
A whistle-blower website has published what it says are more than 90,000 United States military and diplomatic reports about Afghanistan filed between 2004 and January of this year.
The first-hand accounts are the military’s own raw data on the war, including numbers killed, casualties, threat reports and the like, according to Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks.org, which published the material Sunday.
Here’s the link. When I prepared this post, last night, their servers were pretty much swamped.
“It is the total history of the Afghan war from 2004 to 2010, with some important exceptions — U.S. Special Forces, CIA activity and most of the activity of other non-U.S. groups,” Assange said…
The significance lies in “all of these people being killed in the small events that we haven’t heard about that numerically eclipse the big casualty events. It’s the boy killed by a shell that missed a target,” he told CNN.
“What we haven’t seen previously is all those individual deaths,” he said. “We’ve seen just the number and like Stalin said, ‘One man’s death is a tragedy, a million dead is a statistic.’ So, we’ve seen the statistic.”
The website held back about 15,000 documents from Afghanistan to protect individuals who informed on the Taliban, he said.
The easier it becomes to collect data, the easier it is to lose control of it.
Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free. Suck it fascists.
Suck it Military Indu$trial Complex.
WikiLeaks 2:0 Pentagon
The history buff in me is appalled by this breach of military security. Heads should roll.
But the parent of soldier-aged kids thinks this could force us to get our asses out of there sooner.
Obama is really botching this war. It’s his Vietnam and he is going to be LBJ.
#3
Are you going to feel that way when the release of this info causes the death of some of those soldier-aged kids?
Obama and his handlers cause the death of some of those soldier-aged kids everyday and you don’t get upset.
#5, that’s why I’m appalled. It pisses me off that this was leaked. I really can’t believe this happened.
It’s done, can’t put the genie back in the bottle. What if it does shorten the engagement? That’s less casualties.
Yes, I’m conflicted.
Look at all the red…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/datablog/interactive/2010/jul/25/afghanistan-war-logs-events
#8 Personality said, “Look at all the red…”
You mean they have civilian casualties in war?
That’s quite a surprise.
#7–Olo==why are you conflicted? forget the fact you are a parent. As a history buff why have you not long ago, ie before the invasion as a matter of fact, concluded this foreign misadventure had FAILURE written large all over it? Emotions often conflict with reality, the necessities of real politic. But here, it is your intellect that fails.
Anyone that is not an idiot should know/remember certain base line truths of History: “WAR, what is it good for? Absolutely Nothing.”
And yet rational people such as yourself are “conflicted.”
Silly Hoomans.
“Anyone who clings to the historically untrue – and thoroughly immoral – doctrine ‘that violence never settles anything’ I would advise to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and of the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of Hitler could referee, and the jury might well be the Dodo, the Great Auk and the Passenger Pigeon. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedom.”
-Robert Heinlein (Starship Troopers)
I am personally convinced Wikileak is allowed to continue to do this. Which makes me more suspicious. File sharing web sites are being shut down without trouble, thinking of Piratebay and Limewire. But Wikileaks servers are still running. It is very odd.
ha, ha. McGuyver==well done. Totally WRONG, and it will confuse many people, but shows the power of words and ideas, for good or ill.
Yes, WAR is totally effective at solving military conflicts.
YOU tell me, how is the war on drugs going? the war on illegal immigration? the war on poverty? the war on terrorism?
Now, I hope and do half assume you know this as well as I do and are just “trying” to throw a turd in the punchbowl, but of course, thinking someone stupid and misdirected is the default position of a humanist who hates to admit his species can be so easily led.
I’m sure you will prove me wrong.
You have a reason to be suspicious. The intel / military community works in mysterious ways. They often benefit from liberal “intellectuals” who laugh at what they see as bumbling on the military’s / intelligence community’s “incompetence”.
McGuyver: define “benefit?” The military is a “tool” of international diplomacy. It should make EVERYBODY laugh to interview these military tools. Put them in any situation and their kneejerk opinion regardless of reality is on par with “Baghdad Bob”: “We are winning!”
Ha, Ha. I’ve never heard a military leader who wasn’t a dope when not talking about how easy it was to send young idiots to death.
Look at the current crew in the Middle East. Any general who doesn’t say we are winning is cashiered. Thats a winnowing process that results in generals who actually believe that drivel. War by definition is diplomacy that has failed.
Silly Hoomans.
“Some people just can’t handle the truth. The military should not have the time nor the inclination to explain thermselves to someone who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom and prosperity the armed forces provide, then questions the manner in which it is provided. Civilians should just give them thanks and go on with their lives.” ( paraphrased monologue from a certain movie )
However, the citizenry does have a right to know what actions – good or bad – are being perpetrated in their name, especially when the repercussions will be felt in a few years down the line. Examples of blowback include 9/11 , Iranian Islamic Revolution, etc.
MRN–just include the bankruptcy of our once great nation just as foreign wars have always done to those too stupid to avoid them.
Ok, I just figured this out.
Is it any coincidence that these leaks were published to coincide nicely with McChrystal’s resignation and Petraeus’s new war strategy?
Let’s face it. Our military guys are not stupid. Probably a whole lot smarter than most in the Government.
We have always wondered why McChrystal would let a Rolling Stone reporter so close to his people, and let his people say what they did.
So McChrystal is out (with 4 stars) and Petraeus is in. Petraeus wants to do things differently.
Now this comes out, showing business as usual won’t work.
Coincidence? Yea, right.
Ah Yea–yes coincidence. Take any action that is noticed and you can find on average 23 coincidences to cover any other position you wish to advocate.
You post as if you believe in Astrology.
Sad really.
#11 Guyver, specious argument of the day award, congrats. I forgot what we were even talking about. Oh yeah, those traitor whistle-blowers. Let’s hope they hang for this!
13, Bobbo,
What’s a “military conflict” by your definition? Sounds like you’re saying war is started to end wars.
Utterly stupid comparison. The first three phrases are nothing more than political theater to give a perception of an actual war. They do not equate to a war on terrorism. Most wars will fail if they do not have the support of the country sending their troops to war.
Surely you’re not stupid enough to think that I’m implying that war is infallible or somehow a desired solution.
15, Bobbo,
The military benefits in that they can advance certain agendas by utilizing the media as tools as well as relying on liberal intellectuals who have convinced themselves the military is only good at screwing things up. On the contrary, the military and the intel community exploit that. And no, you won’t always know about the success of their hidden agendas because often times it’s classified within plans with in plans. Having been in that community, I would say don’t simply take things at face value. Otherwise, the military and intel community benefits from your naive viewpoint.
Things that are said to be leaks aren’t always leaks. Diversion is a tactic that liberals don’t always understand when confronted with it head on. 🙂
All I’m saying is could be legit, but it could very well not be. Things get “leaked” or “lost” for special reasons that are not up for discussion in the public forum.
You should approach any and all leaks with “If this is true…”. But you can go right ahead and arm-chair quarterback if you prefer.
The military serves two fundamental purposes. Kill and destroy. Politicians do use the military as political tools, so you won’t get any disagreement with me from there. IMHO, the biggest thing that has hindered progress in Afghan and Iraq has been the ROEs, Lawyers, and political party members looking for a quick boost in their poll ratings (depending on which region of the country they’re in).
Those “young idiots” are all volunteer. However, it’s nice to see your true colors when it comes to the military troops. To each his own, but you definitely sound like the atypical liberal elitist.
It’s unfortunate, but true. Winning a war quickly and decisively is not a priority when it comes to politics.
#20–TheAntipropgandist Spoiler==talking about specious, my own post at #13 is. Overly focused on the word “war” and how it is misapplied rather than war as McGuyver was using it. Bad form on my part. Luckily I did hook into the correct subject with “WAR on terrorism” and later with the bankrupting of the USA as a result.
Yes, “words.” Powerful little symbolic events.
20, Are you with us,
It sounds like you’re assuming all “leaks” are unintentional.
I’ve worked in that community before, and all I’m saying is take things with a grain of salt.
And before Bobbo tries to play polemics here, I’m not referring to the person doing the “leak”. I’m referring to the organization where the document originated from.
This isn’t a war you win, in fact you can’t. It’s counter insurgency and maintaining forward position bases. Let us not forget the Princes of Arabia, that are scared shitless of radical Muslim groups, want to hide behind US forces so they can appear neutral. Our so called friendly oil suppliers and blind support of Israel will make for interesting times ahead. This course was set in the late 1940’s, and no one is really at the helm.
>># 3 Olo Baggins of Bywater said, on July 26th, 2010 at 6:02 am
>> The history buff in me is appalled by this breach of military security. Heads should roll.
What about the human in you?
If war crimes against civilians are being committed, do you think the military has the right to cover it up?
In other words, the soldier with a conscience should get punished rather than the people involved in the cover-up?
That’s bass ackwards.
>> Animal Mother said, on July 26th, 2010 at 6:30 am
>> Obama is really botching this war.
Obama is trying to fix the botching of this war by Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld.
Sadly, the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld botching was so epic, it’s probably not fixable.
I wish Obama had just pulled the troops out last year. The conservatives would have excoriated him as a “cut and runner” for sure.
Greg…No, of course I don’t think crimes against civilians should be covered up. If that’s all that was leaked is proof of such crimes, fine. But far more was released than just that.
#21–Guyver==in my 2-3 years of posting here, that is the best response I have ever seen. Entirely relevant, insightful, honest. Not quibbling, on point. I am humbled to even be in a conversation with you. Let’s see if I can halfway match you?
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
13, Bobbo,
1====Yes, WAR is totally effective at solving military conflicts.
What’s a “military conflict” by your definition? Sounds like you’re saying war is started to end wars. /////// Thats a fair reading in a vacuum but if you treated my comment as worthy of your attention you would not confine it so. Yes, wars are initiated to good effect as well, good if they succeed and that success is once again defined by defeating the other countries military. So, perhaps a quibble there and my original idea remains intact. Certainly wars are defined by who wins, Pyrrhic or otherwise?
2====YOU tell me, how is the war on drugs going? the war on illegal immigration? the war on poverty? the war on terrorism?
Utterly stupid comparison. The first three phrases are nothing more than political theater to give a perception of an actual war. They do not equate to a war on terrorism. Most wars will fail if they do not have the support of the country sending their troops to war. /// Or you develop a mercenary force and impose a news blackout and hide the cost of it off budget.
3====Now, I hope and do half assume you know this as well as I do and are just “trying” to throw a turd in the punchbowl, but of course, thinking someone stupid and misdirected is the default position of a humanist who hates to admit his species can be so easily led.
Surely you’re not stupid enough to think that I’m implying that war is infallible or somehow a desired solution. /// Yes, thats exactly what you did. Doesn’t matter what you privately think when you post something so unambiguous. Course, Heinlein, who also had more complex thoughts than a mere few dozen words could ever express outside of poetry ((is a Haiku coming next?)) really only talked about VIOLENCE and gave more than a military context. Wish he could join our little confab here since he’s had time to think about it.
4======Bobbo,
define “benefit?”
The military benefits in that they can advance certain agendas by utilizing the media as tools as well as relying on liberal intellectuals who have convinced themselves the military is only good at screwing things up. On the contrary, the military and the intel community exploit that. And no, you won’t always know about the success of their hidden agendas because often times it’s classified within plans with in plans. Having been in that community, I would say don’t simply take things at face value. Otherwise, the military and intel community benefits from your naive viewpoint. //// Well, thats no definition of benefit. If we get into it, it will resolve around the concept of “benefit to whom.” Ha, ha. Yes, when we are discussing WAR, we are all armchair GENERALS, not grunts. Ironically as the odds are we would be grunts or fodder in any war we might actually get involved in. BENEFIT–actually a measure of our connection to reality.
5=====Things that are said to be leaks aren’t always leaks. Diversion is a tactic that liberals don’t always understand when confronted with it head on. 🙂 //// Huh? Leaks can be real or intentional diversions but they are still leaks. “Unofficial Information.” And not to be egotistical, but I understand EVERY ASPECT OF WAR is a DIVERSION! Nice try on your part to confine it to leak/diversion as if the context weren’t much larger. Its like narrowing the discussion to “Is Charles Wrangle corrupt” rather than the entire Congress?
6=====All I’m saying is could be legit, but it could very well not be. Things get “leaked” or “lost” for special reasons that are not up for discussion in the public forum. //// Yes, that is all you are saying and it is irrelevant to anything actually important. You dither so.
7=====You should approach any and all leaks with “If this is true…”. But you can go right ahead and arm-chair quarterback if you prefer. /// No, I prefer a broader context/canvas where it matters little if some isolated factoid is true or false. Focusing on irrelevant details is the mark of the intellectually feeble or the propagandist.
8=====The military is a “tool” of international diplomacy.
The military serves two fundamental purposes. Kill and destroy. /// Those aren’t “purposes.”
9=====Politicians do use the military as political tools, so you won’t get any disagreement with me from there. IMHO, the biggest thing that has hindered progress in Afghan and Iraq has been the ROEs, Lawyers, and political party members looking for a quick boost in their poll ratings (depending on which region of the country they’re in). //// I don’t know what your private allusion is here so I will present the larger context for you: We won the Afghan war in 5 days about 8 years ago and are now using the military to nationbuild. Again, that tricky erroneous use of the war/idea of “war.” Whats hindering us(a) is trying to impose a CONSTITUTION on people who can’t read.
10=====I’ve never heard a military leader who wasn’t a dope when not talking about how easy it was to send young idiots to death.
Those “young idiots” are all volunteer. ///// Yes, even more the idiots they.
11=====However, it’s nice to see your true colors when it comes to the military troops. //// Yes, I’ve never undeerstood why PATRIOTISM is to cheer the death of our troops, paid for or not, while not figuring out how to keep them out of harms way.
12====To each his own, but you definitely sound like the atypical liberal elitist. /// I assume you mean typical without the “a?” And if by that you mean I recognize foreign wars fought when no real or absolute reason to do so has been the death of most Empires history has known while the military “leaders” have spounted “We are Winning” all the way down, then yes, I am that kind of liberal. What kind of liberal are you?
13=====Any general who doesn’t say we are winning is cashiered.
It’s unfortunate, but true. Winning a war quickly and decisively is not a priority when it comes to politics /// Yes, and yet you post Heinlein as if it were relevant?
IN CONCLUSION: after an excellent first few ideas, you come off looking very poorly. Heh, heh. but I sense within you an honest nature that might learn on honest confrontation. Should you post again, I will respond to only the first 3 issues you raise. I think my attention span is not as wide ranging as yours, for the good and the bad.
>> Ah_Yea said, on July 26th, 2010 at 8:30 am
> Is it any coincidence that these leaks were published to coincide nicely with McChrystal’s resignation and Petraeus’s new war strategy?
I’m not sure the timeline of these releases fit your theory.
But, you are right to be skeptical about the politics behind leaks. By many accounts, McChrystal was particularly fond of the self-serving “leaks” game.