I'm a bit worried over this latest batch of wiki leaks..

[boston bean]

I just don't think the good outweighs the bad.

Some of this stuff can lead to serious diplomacy issues for decades. It truly hurts our standing in the world at a time when not many countries trust us. Maybe the good will be that we will clean up our act a bit.

I've got to really think about this. I would like re-assurance that this won't be truly harmful to foreign policy.

[meow mix]

1. not knowing the truth and letting it continue.. is more harmful?

how is learning truth ever a bad thing?

[boston bean]

4. meow, every government has secrets. I don't know if I needed to know what America

felt about Angela Merkle.

I don't think its a good idea to have them know for sure how we spy on them.

Maybe some of the stuff should come out, but can you agree some of this could lead difficulties?

[jberryhill]

27. Nixon felt the same way about the DNC

Everyone got all over his shit just for wanting to know what was going on in the DNC offices, and what was being hidden there.

[fascisthunter]

46. you are conflating a crime with the release of these papers

without knowing what is in them.

[Pavulon]

47. So continuing to secure 90% HEU is bad? Cause the wikidicks

blew that operation.

[PeaceNikki]

2. I am on the fence and withholding actual judgement

until the actual release. I would really hate to see diplomatic relations hurt, harm done that could escalate tensions in NK/SK, all for the sake of juicy gossip about the royals.

Also, where the fuck was Assange all through the Bush years?!

[dixiegrrrrl]

39. Wikileaks was not started until 2007.

[asdjrocky]

3. I worry more about being lied to on a daily basis.

There is always more long term harm from hiding the truth than revealing the truth.

[villager]

22. ...which has already been going on for decades, and the harm of which

...not only remains unaddressed, but continues unabated, regardless of which of the "two" parties is currently in power...

[villager]

23. while I appreciate the enthusiam of DU's software repeating my post for emphasis...

... I believe one time 'round is enough... ;-)

[leftygolfer]

40. Who was doing the lying here?

Sorry, this whole thing has me confused. i have no idea if I should even be concerned. But everyone is talking about the lying. What lying?

[Warren Stupidity]

5. It will only be harmful to our foreign policy if we were secretly up to really bad things

that are now going to seriously embarrass a lot of people. I think we have the right to know what is being done in our name. I further think that if we are doing really awful shit that we should be ashamed of, then perhaps we should stop doing those things.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Oh everybody does it

Will blow over in two weeks...

Yes I am blasé since it is situation normal, serious.

[boston bean]

7. maybe...

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. Go over to the library

And read the Zimmerman Telegraph...WW I vintage...different tech, same shit.

[boston bean]

15. thank you. I will try to do that. i will also try to research on the web.

[TexasObserver]

8. Worry about the real problem: secrecy hiding treachery.

[boston bean]

13. I absolutely do worry about that.

[rainbow4321]

9. From what I read (granted it was a tweet)

What has been released as of right now is just over 200 of the 200,000+ that they have. It's being referred to as "the tip of the iceberg". Gonna be a looooonnngggg week for some people in DC. Because while WE don't know what is to yet be released, you know that THEY do.

[cherokeeprogressive]

11. I think it's going to expose the sad fact current practices aren't really that different

from past ones.

I see lots of hand-wringing in the near future.

[MadMaddie]

12. If anyone is really surprised that countries are spying on each other

today in 2010 then there is a great denial.

Countries from the earliest of times have been spying on each other and they will continue until we are long gone.

Why is this a surprise?

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ozymanithrax]

16. Moral relativism always raises difficult issues. n/t

[avaistheone1]

17. Tried but true.

The truth will set you free.

[Very_Boring_Name]

18. Trust needs to be earned

If the country is acting in an untrustworthy way behind the scenes, they have no one to blame but themselves when they're exposed. If they didn't want diplomatic channels to be damaged, they never should have done it in the first place.

[boston bean]

19. I hear what you are saying. And yes, I have real problems with what has been done in our names.

Do you think other countries aren't doing this to us. I would say it's standard procedure, no?

Atleast from some of the stuff I have read so far.

[pinto]

20. Mixed bag, imo. Some of it pretty pointless, some not so. I think the players

are apt to take it all in stride, for the most part, I hope. (disclaimer) I've only scanned what's been released by various media, so my take is a bit limited to what's getting released as this unfolds.

[LaurenG]

26. This is my take too. So far it's just diplomatic slams

Other countries say and do the same thing about us. (I'd love to hear what they had to say about bush.) Its like a giant chess game with the players all talking smack about the other side.

edit: word

[pinto]

34. LOL -

"I'd love to hear what they had to say about bush."

I bet it was pretty blunt...

[Taverner]

21. To be honest, its all stuff that was out there anyway

the only surprise is how much King Abdullah wants Iran bombed. I guess there can only be one theocrat, huh? One to rule them all...

[EFerrari]

43. But now there are primary docs. n/t

[Taverner]

49. Yes and it 'refudiates' the lie in Bush's book that Germany was all get your war on

[xchrom]

24. This is transparency - it should make you uncomfortable.

But you should know it as well.

[gtar100]

25. We need more transparency, not less.

Hopefully it will lead to other governments having their secrets exposed. Criminals hate being discovered for being the lying scum that they are. But that is justice and our means of correcting what is wrong.

[NorthCarolina]

64. Exactly. nt

[MadHound]

28. I'm a bit more worried about how many people think that secrecy is such a good thing

Geez, if this sort of attitude was this prevalent thirty eight years ago, Nixon would have served out his full term in office.

[boston bean]

29. I'm conflicted MadHound, for the time being anyhow. Was looking for input

on pro's and con's.

[BrklynLiberal]

30. “Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive”

More honesty and less deception would have gone a long way to avoid this kind of "diplomatic disaster".

Our government was/is lying to just about EVERYONE! That includes its own citizens, as well as the leaders and citizens of just about very other country on the planet. One needs to carefully think about the motives for its actions, and what the government was doing, that made it believe it was necessary to lie to just about everyone.

[Gregorian]

31. Corporate interest is harmful to foreign policy.

The truth may be harmful to our lifestyle. That's the only worry we have.

[Little Star]

32. Well, I do not see this as a black or white/good or bad..

situation. I for one will wait until it all shakes out before I decide for myself how I feel about these leaks.

I don't blame you for being worried nor do I think that those who feel this kind of transparency is good are wrong.
Only time will tell I think.

[MineralMan]

33. You're right to be worried, I think.

I'm worried, too. We're not going to know the full impact of this for some time. And some impacts we won't ever know. There are going to be a number of diplomatic people in a number of countries who are going to be looking for work. There are going to be some seriously embarrassing revelations about a number of governments and their leaders, which may end with some unpleasantness for them.

The events that come out of this will take some time to develop, and it's not going to be predictable. Predictability is pretty important when dealing with international affairs, and that's going to take some time to restore.

As far as it affects US foreign policy goes, I don't know. There will, of course, be effects, but exactly what they will be and how severe remains to be seen. It's going to affect, however, every current discussion, along with decisions made in the past. Trust will be lost in some quarters and there will be new animosities that had been held in check prior to the information becoming public.

Until there has been time to carefully study the released material, it's impossible to say what the results will be. But, we'll be finding out. Probably the first impact will be on what's going on in Korea and the diplomatic attempts to control that situation. I don't think the impact will be in any way positive, either.

Worry is an appropriate response.

[pinto]

35. I agree about the NK / SK / China / US situation. Things are so volatile right now.

And the diplomatic / military dance is so convoluted. I read elsewhere that Sec. Clinton has been in direct contact with Chinese officials - a good thing in my take.

[MineralMan]

51. Yes, and the mistrust is going to be a factor, I'm afraid.

Lots of people seem to feel that getting the "truth" out is more important than actual real-life situations. I can't agree. Diplomacy is always done with a lot of secrecy behind the scenes. It's expected and understood. But, putting it out in the open causes people to be embarrassed, and "losing face" is a real issue. I expect some prominent diplomats in several countries to lose their jobs over this whole thing, and that's going to throw a monkey wrench into some delicate negotiations. It's not just about us.

[FourScore]

56. I agree wholeheartedly.

I am glad I am not alone. So many people seem to be applauding these document dumps with such enthusiasm. I am not one of those people. I worry. I really hope no one's life is endangered.

[MineralMan]

62. Yes, a lot of people are praising this, both here on DU and

elsewhere. Sometimes, it seems that they're praising the fact that the U.S. will be hurt by these revelations, as if that's a really good thing. I'm concerned for the safety of individuals, but I'm more concerned for how this may affect the progress of diplomatic negotiations that are currently underway even more.

The example that comes first to mind is the current situation in Korea. China, obviously, will play a large role in what North Korea ends up doing. If China feels, for some reason, that revelations from these leaks damages its reputation or causes its leaders to lose face, they may not decide to be helpful in making North Korea back off on its insanity. That could destroy the chances of coming to a diplomatic resolution of the current situation. That's nothing to celebrate, and could easily end in the loss of many lives, none of whom had anything to do with anything revealed. This is the indirect effect that may well occur.

The thing is that we are deeply involved with many negotiations, and often with nations who are not based on the same concepts as we supposedly are. Even though much of what will be released is tacitly understood in diplomatic circles, public knowledge of many things will lead some to alter their cooperation to avoid repercussions in their own country. This could lead to the breakdown of many diplomatic efforts, affecting not only military, but economic, trade, and human rights situations. Again, lives may be lost that have nothing to do with the actual information.

It's too early to even begin to assess what this release of diplomatic communications may cause. Far too early. We have only a minuscule fraction of the total collection of data. Some cables or other communications that may seem unimportant to those praising this release may have far-reaching and long-lasting effects that could harm many people. It's conceivable that some of the releases could cause breakdowns in relations between nations that will affect even the peace.

I don't know what the effects will be. I have not read the documents, and I'm not an expert on arcane diplomatic concerns. There will, however, be effects. What they will be will be revealed in time. In some cases, that time may be measured in months or years, and events may occur long after DU and other discussion forums have completely forgotten this incident. This whole thing will be off the Latest Page here, for example in a few short weeks.

This goes beyond facile assessments of impact, made before the vast majority of information has even appeared. Not much thought is really going into the current pronouncements here and elsewhere. It's all just reaction to the event, not the consequences. We'll see.

[FourScore]

67. Well said, Mineral Man.

It is so true -- this document dump is our news du jour, but the diplomatic repercussions will be long-lasting and negative. The relations between China and North Korea is a very good example. {{Sigh}}

I just really take issue with people comparing this document dump to the release of classified information by Daniel Ellsberg. I think they are two totally different things.

Glad I'm not alone, MM.

[kimi]

69. I'm not one of those people either

If there is any chance that anyone's life is endangered, then it isn't worth it, IMO, to leak anything.

Granted, I grew up a CIA brat . . . but I'm concerned.

[kentuck]

36. When first you practice to deceive....

Wikipedia will catch your ass and expose your deception and lies.

[drm604]

63. Wikileaks, NOT Wikipedia.

They are two different and unrelated things.

[annabanana]

37. We can't fix it if we don't know what the hell's going on.

If the people are going to be the arbiters of their own government, they damn well ought to have an idea.

[piratefish08]

38. you know what REALLY hurts our standing in the world? our military presence in 130 foreign

countries.

not a bunch of papers documenting political leaders and their behind the scenes bullshit.

[Bluerthanblue]

41. I'd like to know why Wiki didn't really start leaking till our party was

in power.

Sorry, I DO question the true motivation behind all this.

I also wonder how many people actually read what is leaked and form opinions, or do what seems to be the 'american way' and allow the msm to pick the cherries and feed them to a negativity hungry society.

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

42. Are you familiar with their history? They started 2006-07

and are dependent on volunteers.

Face it, there would be no convenient time for either party for these leaks to happen. Nancy Pelosi didn't want to know anything about torture in 2005, for example, any more than the Obama White House wants to know it in 2010.

[Bluerthanblue]

44. I honestly question why Mr. Assange feels that he needs to

leak these documents now- and why he didn't leak secrets during the Bush admin.
If he began his 'business' in O6 or so, where was Mr. Assange's keen sense of enlightening the world to everything he could get his hands on while Bush was in power???
And if "transparency" is his goal and creed, how can he really square not being "transparent" about who 'leaks' the information to HIM? Sorry, it's a double standard- and he is very well aware of the damage that he is doing to people who are caught in the crossfire- His leaks that included information on people within Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan who have aided the US & others- If he really cared about "protecting" people who aren't rich and powerful, he'd have taken the time to remove identifying information BEFORE his leak=
His lame, -after the damage was done- response to the fact that the information he was 'leaking' was indeed putting lives in danger really cost him quite abit of credibility in my book. He's not doing this out of any great moral stance, or burden of personal conscience in my opinion, but because he craves attention, notoriety and power. All of which he's getting and using- to WHAT end??

And he asks that the Administration give him names of people who would be at risk by his leaks? He's playing the world for fools-
:shrug:

I DON'T mean to say that I endorse some- hell, MOST of what our country has/is/ and likely WILL do in the name of 'democracy' 'safety' 'good'- but his leaking all sorts of government 'classified material' to the world isn't going to stop it, or change it in any positive way imo. And his motives matter- to WHAT end?

peace~

[EFerrari]

48. As I indicated in my post, they've been working on this since 2006-07.

And Wikileaks is not a business nor is it Julian, it's a cooperative site devoted to whistle blowing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

50. They did

[Spider Jerusalem]

52. You're just a bit naive if you really think it makes much difference which party is in power.

It really doesn't, and also, I don't think that something that I'd condemn if done by a party I opposed would suddenly become something I'd support if the guys I voted for were doing it.

[sendero]

45. I doubt it..

... the thing that most people here don't seem to get is that the DIPLOMATS already know all of this shit, just not the people.

The idea that there are real "state secrets" here is pretty unlikely. If you think that everyone playing the diplomacy game isn't involved in spying at some level, well where have you been?

[LisaL]

53. It's not like you could have changed what happened either way.

[de novo]

54. Our leaders have made their beds. It is long past time we act like the

all important empire, playing our little murderous games all over the world.

[BzaDem]

55. "I would like re-assurance that this won't be truly harmful to foreign policy."

You probably won't get that. But you will get assurance that this will be harmful to our foreign policy, since it will be.

(Though some here seem to have that as a goal.)

[TheKentuckian]

58. Oh Noes!! It will be ever so difficult to lie other nations into senseless wars or set up horrid

"free trade" agreements to hobble the American worker!

If we don't watch out we might not be able to set up despots and over turn democratically elected leaders in South America that are less than receptive to our bullshit economics.

Our foreign policy largely sucks ass. I'm sure this stuff won't interfere with feeding the hungry, getting water to the thirsty, or rights for the wronged.

[de novo]

60. You mean it will be harder to act like an empire?

That is a good thing, because we (thankfully) no longer are. It is time we take it on the chin and take our rightful place among the nations of the world. We are no better, no more powerful, no more righteous, no less evil, and no more a super-power or an empire.

[GliderGuider]

57. The USA killed over a million Iraqis who had done absolutely nothing wrong.

It was done for the sake of ideology. These vicious, subhuman, utterly debased events were enabled by lies and secured by "diplomatic" secrecy. I'm sorry, but a bit of disruption and embarrassment on the international stage is a small price to pay for such a wanton, amoral disregard for the lives of innocent human beings. I have absolutely no problem with the US being held up to a bit of dismay and disapproval in the court of public opinion and the corridors of power. I consider it just desserts, payback, karma - what goes around comes around. May those who thrive in secrecy wither from the truth.

[coalition_unwilling]

68. And that's not even including the 2-3 million (yes, million) southeast

Asians that died or were wounded thanks to U.S. military involvement in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia 1954-74.

[NNN0LHI]

59. Just got home from church. Anything specific that has you worried?

Thanks in advance.

Don

[riderinthestorm]

61. Frm what I've read ALL t;he countries in the world, engaging in diplomatic efforts are complicit

and are in this document dump.

What makes you believe the US is singled out?

Furthermore, if everyone is finally exposed being shitty behind the scenes, when that's been pretty much an open secret for decades, why is this a bad thing?

[L0oniX]

65. NO! What hurts our standing in the world are the assholes in our government and our military.

[L0oniX]

66. glitch dupe