Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Wikileaks and Julian Assange: The moral dilemma
smitty237    8/3/2010 1:52:09 AM
Wikileaks is a Swedish-based web site that has become a sort of a clearing house for sensitive documents. Their latest venture has been to release sensitive U.S. military documents related to military operations and intelligence in Iraq and Afghanistan. Wikileaks was largely responsible for releasing the video showing a U.S. Army Apache gunship attack on a group of Iraqi men in which two Reuters cameramen were killed. Wikileaks appears to be run by a rather nomadic Australian named Julian Assange. He denies being the founder of the site, but admits to be Wikileaks' "editor in chief". Assange is viewed as a sort of celebrity in international anti-censorship circles and has appeared as a keynote speaker in a lot of anti-censorship conferences around the world. In all fairness, Wikileaks has exposed documents from a lot of different government and international companies all across the political spectrum, but most recently they seem to be focusing their attention on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and US foreign military policy specifically. Just last week PFC Bradley Manning, a twenty two year old US Army intelligence specialist serving in the Middle East, was arrested and faces court martial for releasing sensitive military data that was eventually released on Wikileaks. Wikileaks has not confirmed that Manning is the source of some of the footage and documents displayed on its site, but they have hired US defense attorneys to represent him. At this point Manning faces a maximum of fifty two years in prison. The United States government has expressed alarm over some of the documents released on Wikileaks and has said that the information could hamper our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan and could result in US military and civilian casualties. The US government has asked Wikileaks to withdraw the documents and to stop displaying classified materials, but not only has Wikileaks refused to stop posting sensitive items, they have indicated that they are going to release thousands of additional documents. A spokesman for the Taliban have stated that they will review the documents released on Wikileaks to see if they can identify informants and punish them accordingly. The media pundits have been discussing what can be legally done to stop Wikileaks from releasing sensitive intelligence that could endanger the lives of military personnel. The problem is that Wikileaks has no official headquarters, and while it is based in Sweden its contributors seem to operate out of private residences or rented office spaces. Reportedly Assange was using a rental house in Iceland to release most of the recent documents and video involving sensitive US documents. Presumably Iceland could expel Assange and foreign nationals working for Wikileaks, but they would simply set up camp somewhere else. Assange is an Australian national, and has indicated that his attorneys have advised him against travelling to the United States. There have been rumblings among some circles in Australia that Assange is aiding the enemies of Australia and endangering the lives of Australian soldiers in Afghanistan. The Australian government could revoke his passport and order him to the country, but so far they have not done so, probably fearing the outcry from the media and censorship critics. What, if anything, should be done about Julian Assange and Wikileaks? If Assange were an American citizen this would be easy. PFC Manning will almost definitely be convicted of mishandling classified data and will more than likely spend the next couple of decades making little rocks out of big rocks in Ft. Leavenworth. Two MIT students that may have assisted Bradley are under investigation by the FBI, and for all we know are sweating in an interrogation room right now. An imaginative U.S. Attorney will have no problem finding something to charge them with, and most definitely have the leverage to scare the wits out of them. It is probably wise for Assange to stay out of the United States, but could the Justice Department put out a warrant for his arrest and request extradition? Should they even try? Should the US put pressure on Australia to muzzle Assange? The next question I would submit is this: What if the United States is unable to silence Assange or stop Wikileaks through legal means? At one point does a foreign national or group that exposes intelligence documents sensitive to our national security become considered a threat? You can make arguments all day long that the United States shouldn't target the citizens of foreign nationals living outside the boundaries of the United States, but at one point does a person like Assange become like a foreign terrorist? Assange may not be planting roadside bombs or planning terrorist attacks against American civilians or military personnel, but one could convincingly argue that by releasing sensitive data Assange and his ilk at Wikileaks are placing the lives of Am
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4   NEXT
gf0012-aust       8/3/2010 9:40:11 PM
I have a pretty linear view of these kinds of leaks.
 
where material is classified and released pursue and prosecute
 
if goverments or their officers are found to have committed internationally and nationally recognised crimes, then let due process sort them out.
 
if the latter is involved them seek out due process to take action.
 
assange is not altruistic- he has his own agenda
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

earlm       8/4/2010 1:00:50 AM
Couldn't wikileaks remove the names of Afghans who have collaborated with NATO and still achieve their stated objective of transparency?  Why leave the names in unless you're taking sides?
 
Quote    Reply

Mikko       8/4/2010 5:49:03 AM
No leak is more severe than a nation withholding crucial information from its subjects to wage a war. A nation is never that smart. Military planning should be kept safe as well as people linked to military activities like giving public support in the operational area.
 
Wars should be fought with transparency and public support and leave the unaccepted wars unfought. 
 
But the very essence of the presence of the troops of a nation should never be withheld from the voters. That is sick. We, the voters, don't need to know strategies but we need to know the operating principles and know precisely what information in general can't be given to the public and why.
 
Assange should be left completely alone. Completely unharrassed. It is the blind checks and arrogant communication principles our governments have that have come to an end. Wikileaks and its kind will never go away so how about avoiding making martyrs.
 
As long as the grand public is manipulated in any way by their elected officials, then there is a bubble waiting to be burst. Only thing to be done is to make Wikileaks unnecessary and adopt a culture of transparency in all things not needed to withhold for strict military operations and their safety.
 
M
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       8/4/2010 9:03:41 AM
Better to die with honour than stoop to the level of the other guy eh Mikko?
 
Is it also better to watch innocent civilians be murdered in there thousands?
 
And before you ask, yes I do place the lives of Australians and westerners in general higher than others because I am an Australian and a westerner and I rate the safety of those I love and my way of life above the well being of scum who choose to bring war and death to my own.  It is called human nature.
 
Quote    Reply

Mikko       8/4/2010 9:29:02 AM

Better to die with honour than stoop to the level of the other guy eh Mikko?

No. Living with honour is the thing. Maybe I missed your point.
 
Is it also better to watch innocent civilians be murdered in there thousands?

Than to stoop? Sorry you got to give me bit more to bite on, since I can't follow the connection between your two first sentences and with what I wrote. (No sarcasm there)
 
And before you ask, yes I do place the lives of Australians and westerners in general higher than others because I am an Australian and a westerner and I rate the safety of those I love and my way of life above the well being of scum who choose to bring war and death to my own.  It is called human nature.
 
Of course. I do too. Fighting with honour and transparency isn't about the enemy, it is about me. If it is my tax money and my elected authority that is doing the fighting, I expect the fighting arm to be used exactly according to the principles I signed for. And all lapses be shared in a transparent manner. The "industry standard" of modern governments and politicians in general to treat their subjects as reactive sheep is what gives fuel to Wikileaks and such, lack of trust does.
 
The good guys suck at information strategies. The entire mindset is wrong, assuming that people can handle only bedtime stories and juicy cleavages. They can handle a whole lot more if empowered with transparency and honesty. The craving for those two things and the deep mistrust earned with all this makes it inevitable that information age brings forth wikileaks and such.



 
Quote    Reply

Panther    Hello Mikko   8/6/2010 12:17:21 AM

No leak is more severe than a nation withholding crucial information from its subjects to wage a war. A nation is never that smart. Military planning should be kept safe as well as people linked to military activities like giving public support in the operational area.

I don't understand your point here Mikko? If i am understanding you correctly, then you can't have both ways and hope too survive for long. Either a military feels secure from prying eyes with the information it has gained, otherwise what is the purpose of intelligence gathering if it is not denied to the enemy too!

Wars should be fought with transparency and public support and leave the unaccepted wars unfought. 

I have too disagree. Part of warfare is deception, no room for transparency. Also, no true wars are acceptable too the sane. Still when in need, then they needed too be fought according to their own rules, as laid out by Sun Tzu and Clausewitz and not based on our handicap of over reliance on a just as equally confused and factually challenged press corps.
 

But the very essence of the presence of the troops of a nation should never be withheld from the voters. That is sick. We, the voters, don't need to know strategies but we need to know the operating principles and know precisely what information in general can't be given to the public and why.

I'm not sure what country you come from, but i don't think the majority of US voters is unaware of how many countries our troops are stationed in. .

 

Assange should be left completely alone. Completely unharrassed. It is the blind checks and arrogant communication principles our governments have that have come to an end. Wikileaks and its kind will never go away so how about avoiding making martyrs.

 I am indifferent to Assange. He is the Australians problem. However, if they wished too hand him over then i feel sure that there are plenty of US troopers and intelligence officers who would love to tell him a thing or two or three or four or five.... Oh hell... They would send him to any school that taught warfare and information denial to the enemy.

As long as the grand public is manipulated in any way by their elected officials, then there is a bubble waiting to be burst. Only thing to be done is to make Wikileaks unnecessary and adopt a culture of transparency in all things not needed to withhold for strict military operations and their safety.

Anyone is capable of manipulating anything they so desire starting with an agenda. Besides, i think you are missing the point? If i am reading you correctly, and i can only "assume" that you do not have all the information needed too judge this, then you would be against what Mr Assange had done in jeopardizing not only the lives of coalition troops in theater, but also the thousands of locals who cooperated with them as well, who are in the process of being hunted down at this moment and liquidated, as in nazi brutality type of liquidation! Just think for a moment of what that means of them ever participating in the affairs of their own country in the future. They have been told countless times by the Taliban not to be involved with the affairs of their country and now Mr. Assange has given them a very good reason not to help in the strengthening of inter-tribal communities and in a much larger essence, the rebuilding of their own country!
 

M


 
Quote    Reply

Mikko    @Panther   8/6/2010 5:26:29 AM
You critisicm to my writing is just and deserved. Allow me to clarify and re-adjust what I was trying to say.
 
Never reveal military secrets that might endanger your soldiers or operations, strengthen enemy or their resolve, or as in this case, endanger lives of co-operators and supporters. If some Finn had leaked such endangering information on Finnish troops in Afghanistan and their local network I would like to do the Rambo's Special Adam's Apple Throat Rip to the person in question.
 
And I understand the very same sentiment in military and intelligence circles of US. 
 
I was talking of operational principles above operational planning and execution. How should I put this... The culture of openness. For example, as the leaked documents had information on previously unknown incidents of collateral damage caused by NATO use of force, that is a surprise that shouldn't be allowed to happen. And don't get me wrong, I strongly support NATO and US presence down there. Especially with the reported mineral riches.
 
Objectives of strategic planning should be clear to the public. In full scale war it would be for example: "We aim to repel the attacker in strategic depth, crush their political will and inflict such heavy losses on them that they are unlikely to try again in years to come." And as to collateral damage in this instance it could be like: "We have stopped the daily reporting of incidents with collateral damage because such news always strengthen our enemy. However all cases and numbers are reported once a year." Period.
 
When secrecy has a purpose it has to be maintained and that purpose should be regularly reminded upon to the public. "We can't tell you all you are entitled to know because...". Hell, even the president should always remind people of things he can't talk about and use a quarter of his speeches to list those things and reasons for secrecy.
 
But then again, how many times have you seen sneaking, white lies and dodging questions in todays information sharing culture? It's not a recurring issue, it's the only way it is done! People lying and sneaking out of responsibility because they figure they can manage 'till the next elections without people figuring something out. That's no leadership, that's just weaseling. The public can stomach just about everything as long as they feel they are a respected part of it. They never are.
 
I am quite sure that the individuals responsible for these leaks didn't do it because they wanted to endanger people, they wanted to burst a bubble of rotten information culture. It doesn't make their action acceptable but it is an indication of a tendency that can't be stopped and that is rooted in a genuine attitude problem today's people-in-charge have.
 
I know I'm not very brief but just wanted to make it clear that I understand the military perspective of secrecy fully but never the political. As to me being informed on things in the field, well, nothing compared to someone actually being part of the ops or planning and actually there.
 
M
 
Quote    Reply

RockyMTNClimber    What should be done?   8/7/2010 8:49:43 PM
 
Assange isn't worth one operator's life. Not one Sailor, not one Marine (Royal or otherwise), not one Airman, Soldier, citizen, or my arthritic dog. I'd deal with this very directly at the sources. Then I'd use all of the computer magic I could conjure to track the accomplices. I'm just a neaderthalic old cowboy so its lucky for them I'm not making the decision.
 
May God watch over our sons and daughters. O' Australia & America.
 
Check Six
 
Rocky
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Panther    Hello again Mikko   8/7/2010 10:22:44 PM

Never reveal military secrets that might endanger your soldiers or operations, strengthen enemy or their resolve, or as in this case, endanger lives of co-operators and supporters. If some Finn had leaked such endangering information on Finnish troops in Afghanistan and their local network I would like to do the Rambo's Special Adam's Apple Throat Rip to the person in question.

Unfortunately, that is exactly what he did do! Though he is not an American, he also put diggers in the same position as our troops. How many of their lives will be traded for this and how far back did he set the coalition efforts in Afghanistan remains to be seen?
 

I was talking of operational principles above operational planning and execution. How should I put this... The culture of openness. For example, as the leaked documents had information on previously unknown incidents of collateral damage caused by NATO use of force, that is a surprise that shouldn't be allowed to happen. And don't get me wrong, I strongly support NATO and US presence down there. Especially with the reported mineral riches.

Regretfully, a person need not too have served in their nations military to have known what was going on. Most of this type of information has always been accessible to the English media and well known to those who have been following the action in Afghanistan. What he had done was released with out redacting the names of units, operators and the names of the locals now know to have cooperated in the hunting down top level Talibans and AQ leadership, as well as their strategies in hunting them down. The locals will be actively sought and eliminated by the insurgents and special operation units just might need to be disbanded and new ones formed, if that is possible. Operators who have served a long time in the theater just might find themselves reassigned away from it just when their expertise is needed the most!
 

Objectives of strategic planning should be clear to the public. In full scale war it would be for example: "We aim to repel the attacker in strategic depth, crush their political will and inflict such heavy losses on them that they are unlikely to try again in years to come." And as to collateral damage in this instance it could be like: "We have stopped the daily reporting of incidents with collateral damage because such news always strengthen our enemy. However all cases and numbers are reported once a year." Period.

That would be counter productive in that which you seek, which is what confuses me on what you are arguing for? The coalition efforts in the region couldn't have been more transparent then it once was with out giving the initiative to the insurgents. I think Mr. Assange has given that too them? I also hear he is planning on releasing more soon on wikileaks, so i think it will be rather interesting too see if he had learned anything at all!
 

When secrecy has a purpose it has to be maintained and that purpose should be regularly reminded upon to the public. "We can't tell you all you are entitled to know because...". Hell, even the president should always remind people of things he can't talk about and use a quarter of his speeches to list those things and reasons for secrecy.

Been there and done that and look at what happened to the previous administration? They stopped talking to the public because nobody within the media was listening to what they were saying. Just a lot of reports shortened and taken out of context! Sure they tried to go through the internet to get their message across, but i think the effort was largely ineffective..
 

But then again, how many times have you seen sneaking, white lies and dodging questions in todays information sharing culture? It's not a recurring issue, it's the only way it is done! People lying and sneaking out of responsibility because they figure they can manage 'till the next elections without people figuring something out. That's no leadership, that's just weaseling. The public can stomach just about everything as long as they feel they are a respected part of it. They never are.

 Yes, and look with what we are stuck with now. The Republicans were defeated due to their domestic shortcomings only to be replaced by the much more worse Democrats.

I am quite sure that the individuals responsible for these leaks didn'
 
Quote    Reply

Mikko    @Panther   8/8/2010 4:14:23 AM
I can't argue with just about anything you've written (still without taking stances in US domestic politics which to me have become quite hard to unlock). My point - as you understood - was more with a general trend and not with this particular incident. I have only seen little bits and pieces of the leaked documents referred to in this dscussion and rely mostly on media coverage by multiple sources and am thus probably slightly misled on the issue too.
 
In all cases, in just about every problem in the world, I try to emphasize the importance of proactive measures instead of reprisal (which is always the least important part of what is to be done), and of proactive measures I like to emphasize Looking-In-The-Mirror -maneuver as the first step. In general level that is. In an incident leaking information on individuals on the field (which is unforgivable) there's not much to be done than dig into recruiting policies, psychiatric scanning and HR-function of military units, well maybe to IT-department too but that hardly has been the issue here.
 
And I am not sure what the proactive measures should be! Finding and moving large amounts of information back and forth is so easy nowadays and becoming easier that one has to think of switching mindsets as all leaks can never be plugged. Better either to fix the roof or installing a water-proof tilted floor than run around placing buckets. This particular bucket of course has to be placed but after the rain stops I should assess this high probability of information leaks as a new aspect to my battle environment and adjust accordingly. Maybe I shouldn't go there since it would require an whole another thread.

M
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics