I Hate Dialysis Message Board
Off-Topic => Political Debates - Thick Skin Required for Entry => Topic started by: MooseMom on July 30, 2013, 02:16:00 PM
-
I'm not sure if this is a political issue, so if a mod wants to move this discussion, feel free.
How do you all view the verdict re Bradley Manning? He was acquitted by a judge of charges of aiding the enemy but was found guilty of all 19 other charges resulting in his leaking of confidential documents to Wikileaks who put them on the internet.
So, do you see Pvt. Manning as a traitor who compromised our national security or as a whistleblower who wanted to focus attention on the plight of civilians who had been killed by American forces?
I'd be particularly interested in the thoughts of anyone here who has/had ties to the military.
-
A traitor. Should be shot!
-
interesting.... i hope to hear more..
-
He is a mistreated hero. He should have been given a medal.
I am a retired USAF Lt. Colonel.
He showed us who the enemy within can be sometimes -- our own government.
-
And I am a (long) retired humble Artillery sergeant. I'll take back my comment about shooting him. Too soft! I'd apply the old British solution of strapping him across the barrell of a cannon and blasting him to pieces. So perish all traitors
-
What I feel about Soldier Manning depends on what he revealed. Any one have a list?
-
Shoot him.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning
:Kit n Stik;
-
And, for good measure, a bullet in the back of the skull is too good for that NSA traitor who has defected to Russia. Lord knows what he is revealing at this very moment!
-
My time in the US Army was back in the late 1950s and early 1960s – before the Vietnam War. Back then, the rules on classifying information was very specific, even stating what would be classified Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret. There are other security classifications, mostly for the purpose of sorting out internal documents. For users of classified data, the practices of handling were universal, if it was classified, it was treated the same, meaning; it was inventoried at least once per shift, three times a day. Since we were a 24 hour operations, we did not concern ourselves with safes and who could open such.
Only certain people could classify a document; the operator, the Watch Commander or the President. Documents that never left the building did not have to be classified. We were most careful with codes. When sending a coded message it was assumed to be Top Secret. I sent several hundred per shift.
Security practices became sloppy with the advent of the Vietnam War when my unit was changed from strategic intelligence gathering to tactical. Any grunt in the field handled classified documents and under the circumstances, accountability became impossible. The Army put its trust in the individual, a very big mistake. It is my understanding that this did not change with the end of the war – and finally the unit was disbanded or absorbed into the regular Army.
In my Army, Manning would not be handling classified material. We did not keep files. A document had a death date and was burned when it became irrelevant. There was a series log entries that had to be entered by the Watch Commander before striking the match. Manning worked for the NSA. I worked for a branch of the NSA. The documents described as “leaked” would not have been classified in my day. They might have been kept in a reader file on paper that could not be Xeroxed, not for distribution.
I fail to see what was so sensitive in the documents Manning released. I can see why some in government would be embarrassed, but that is not grounds for classification. It is the basis for “cover-up”. Far worse would be the sale of technical information to China by IBM. No one made a big deal about that. How about the Pentagon spending billions to develop the latest fighter jet then giving the plane to Egypt.
Manning? I thought a couple of months in the jailhouse and a dishonorable discharge would be appropriate. What he got was the penalty for embarrassing a government official.