Truth, Diplomacy and Wikileaks

[panader0]

The hubbub about the leaks is because deception has been exposed in our diplomacy. We lied, or in other cases, foriegn diplomats lied, and everyone is embarrassed and scared that they are caught. I, for one, do not approve of our nation lying in our name. While diplomats are not elected, they are appointed by elected officials. It should not be necessary to conduct our foriegn affairs with deception.
A lie is something that does not communicate information. If our policies, both foriegn and domestic, are deceitful, how can that help anyone? "Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive." Our policies should be open and honest. The truth may hurt, but only the truth has power. Some may think this is simplistic, but that's how it should be.

[shraby]

1. Yup...what you said.

[HereSince1628]

2. The fake outrage is diplomacy at it's iconic best.

Moi????????????

[KharmaTrain]

3. Diplomacy Is Not Transparent...

While I find the Wikileaks cables interesting these are examples of the gossip and chatter that has always occured in diplomatic channels. Diplomacy is more a chess game than a power one as diplomats look for ways to press their cases or leverage an opponent. Yes, there are some outrageous and downright criminal things discussed but the ultimate decisions always lie at the top...these are the "worker ants" manuevering for best position and advantage.

[EFerrari]

4. The whole realm has become so corrupt, if Wikileaks didn't exist

the State Department would have to invent it and here's the latest example I ran across.

Yesterday, BookTv was rerunning the segment where Tony Blair talks about his new book -- and Bill Clinton sits with him on the stage and the illusion is that they're just chatting about Blairs inner most thoughts and feelings.

It is an illusion. Yesterday I noticed that unlike most of these segments which are just shot in bookstores without much fancy lighting, this one was shot in a theater with all kinds of lighting effects. Then, when the questions started, I'd bet money the questions were planted because most people who ask questions at these events fumble and go on too long. These people were much too smooth. The kicker is that Bill Clinton has so much charisma, having him on stage drew your attention away from all this obvious stuff -- and also away from Blair, who is as attractive as leftover fried squash.

The whole elaborate concoction was meant to humanize the poodle and I wonder how much it cost and why was it so important to do in this way.