Wkileaks' Diplomatic 9/11

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11858895

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1333879/WikiLeaks-Diplomatic-crisis-Americas-secret-cables-published-online.html

I am all for transparency, but this is reckless. Wikileaks are now consequently destabilising the Middle East, and are revealing a much darker side to diplomatic relations. What is their f***ing problem? Nothing productive is going to come of this, if you think they'll mend their ways, they probably won't. If you think oyu have the right to know, then at such an expense i declare you don't, so really, what is their problem? Its feeding conspiracy nutters, trolls like me who care and rant online, and causing a phenominal amount of distrust for... what exactly? Jack squat.

This has annoyed me. I am annoyed.

IF wikileaks can find this information, I highly suspect that most countries governments already know it. I doubt wikileaks has the resources of most country's intelligence agencies.

uh huh the middle east is being destabilized by wiki-leaks. you dont get to whine when your exposed for doing things you arent supposed to be.

IF wikileaks can find this information, I highly suspect that most countries governments already know it. I doubt wikileaks has the resources of most country's intelligence agencies.

sonicare

Hm, ignorance is bliss I suppose.-Fromage-

IF wikileaks can find this information, I highly suspect that most countries governments already know it. I doubt wikileaks has the resources of most country's intelligence agencies.

sonicare

No. It was leaked supposedly from intelligence officers, information like this is hard to get. Others may have had suspicions, but never conclusive, and such damning, proof as this.

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

IF wikileaks can find this information, I highly suspect that most countries governments already know it. I doubt wikileaks has the resources of most country's intelligence agencies.

No. It was leaked supposedly from intelligence officers, information like this is hard to get. Others may have had suspicions, but never conclusive, and such damning, proof as this.

Hm, ignorance is bliss I suppose.-Fromage-

[QUOTE="IAMTHEJOKER88"]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11858895

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1333879/WikiLeaks-Diplomatic-crisis-Americas-secret-cables-published-online.html

I am all for transparency, but this is reckless. Wikileaks are now consequently destabilising the Middle East, and are revealing a much darker side to diplomatic relations. What is their f**king problem? Nothing productive is going to come of this, if you think they'll mend their ways, they probably won't. If you think oyu have the right to know, then at such an expense i declare you don't, so really, what is their problem? Its feeding conspiracy nutters, trolls like me who care and rant online, and causing a phenominal amount of distrust for... what exactly? Jack squat.

This has annoyed me. I am annoyed.

chandu83

You are all for transperency but you don't want to know what the government is doing?

Sure. That makes a lot of sense

That's not what i said, i said this was not the way to do it. Do you not understand that?

none of the stuff wikileaks relased were that big a deal, the main one is s.arabia asking usa to bomb iran but if anyone understood american-saudi relations and how saud sees iran then it would make sense. Saudi hypocrisy at its finest with them backing al-qaeda financially, this is the one i was most shocked about. most the 9/11 terrorists were from saudi so no shock there, i hope this puts more pressure on other countires to sort saudi arabia out-Y2J-

none of the stuff wikileaks relased were that big a deal, the main one is s.arabia asking usa to bomb iran but if anyone understood american-saudi relations and how saud sees iran then it would make sense. Saudi hypocrisy at its finest with them backing al-qaeda financially, this is the one i was most shocked about. most the 9/11 terrorists were from saudi so no shock there, i hope this puts more pressure on other countires to sort saudi arabia out-Y2J-

You should be more mad at the people committing the "crimes" than the people reporting them. Maybe a third party canidate can use this to disrupt the 2012 election.MoonMarvel

you don't even want to know if your country might be doing something unethical?

sheeple.

you don't even want to know if your country might be doing something unethical?

sheeple.

SkyWard20

This crap shouldn't have happened in the first place, if it gets out then the governments should build a bridge, then get over it.

[QUOTE="-Y2J-"]none of the stuff wikileaks relased were that big a deal, the main one is s.arabia asking usa to bomb iran but if anyone understood american-saudi relations and how saud sees iran then it would make sense. Saudi hypocrisy at its finest with them backing al-qaeda financially, this is the one i was most shocked about. most the 9/11 terrorists were from saudi so no shock there, i hope this puts more pressure on other countires to sort saudi arabia outp2250

lol no wonder Iran wants nuclear weapons, they're surrounded by countries that want them gone

This crap shouldn't have happened in the first place, if it gets out then the governments should build a bridge, then get over it.

pengo93

[QUOTE="pengo93"]

This crap shouldn't have happened in the first place, if it gets out then the governments should build a bridge, then get over it.

quetzalcoatI

Whoa, whoa, whoa; international relations are stable now?

[QUOTE="p2250"]

[QUOTE="-Y2J-"]none of the stuff wikileaks relased were that big a deal, the main one is s.arabia asking usa to bomb iran but if anyone understood american-saudi relations and how saud sees iran then it would make sense. Saudi hypocrisy at its finest with them backing al-qaeda financially, this is the one i was most shocked about. most the 9/11 terrorists were from saudi so no shock there, i hope this puts more pressure on other countires to sort saudi arabia outosiris667

lol no wonder Iran wants nuclear weapons, they're surrounded by countries that want them gone

I would say the reverse is true. Other countries want to attack Iran due to them wanting nuclear weapons.

WikiLeaks asked the US for help redacting potentially injurious information. The US refused

smooth move.

Once again we shoot the messenger rather than the criminal; the US shouldn't be slandering the rest of the world in writing if you ask me. Ninja-Hippo

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11858895

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1333879/WikiLeaks-Diplomatic-crisis-Americas-secret-cables-published-online.html

I am all for transparency, but this is reckless. Wikileaks are now consequently destabilising the Middle East, and are revealing a much darker side to diplomatic relations. What is their f**king problem? Nothing productive is going to come of this, if you think they'll mend their ways, they probably won't. If you think oyu have the right to know, then at such an expense i declare you don't, so really, what is their problem? Its feeding conspiracy nutters, trolls like me who care and rant online, and causing a phenominal amount of distrust for... what exactly? Jack squat.

This has annoyed me. I am annoyed.

IAMTHEJOKER88

Perhapes the United States government shouldn't be doing dark and immoral acts that Wikileaks can leak.. I am all for this, if this forces the United States radically in how they do business over there..

[QUOTE="pengo93"]

This crap shouldn't have happened in the first place, if it gets out then the governments should build a bridge, then get over it.

quetzalcoatI

YES, if it changes the US's foreign policy of the past 60 years, the leading cause to why Middle Eastern terrorists target us to begin, then I am all for it.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]Once again we shoot the messenger rather than the criminal; the US shouldn't be slandering the rest of the world in writing if you ask me. quetzalcoatI

Regarding two wars that were unnecessary.. Uh huh.. Right. If the US are committing two highly questionable wars, one that made the US infamous to the rest of the world, then they are going to be under the microscope.. The US government are the ones that put themselves in this position and no one else.

Ifpeople get killed or the leaks cause other serious consequences, I look forward to blaming Wikileaks 110%.

WikiLeaks asked the US for help redacting potentially injurious information. The US refused

smooth move.

Ifpeople get killed or the leaks cause other serious consequences, I look forward to blaming Wikileaks 110%.

p2250

And not the fact we are in 2 unnecessary wars to fight a small group of terrorists? Especially when the Taliban could be set back extremely if Pakistan would stop staring at India in their Cold War to do something..

[QUOTE="p2250"]

Ifpeople get killed or the leaks cause other serious consequences, I look forward to blaming Wikileaks 110%.

And not the fact we are in 2 unnecessary wars to fight a small group of terrorists? Especially when the Taliban could be set back extremely if Pakistan would stop staring at India in their Cold War to do something..

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="p2250"]

Ifpeople get killed or the leaks cause other serious consequences, I look forward to blaming Wikileaks 110%.

p2250

And not the fact we are in 2 unnecessary wars to fight a small group of terrorists? Especially when the Taliban could be set back extremely if Pakistan would stop staring at India in their Cold War to do something..

AQ is a small group, when you go to war you go against a actual nation.. The Iraq Army dwarfed anything close to what AQ has.. Furthermore our invasions along with the staggering collateral damage is increasing the terrorist group's recruitment rate..

so this is what irani president had to say about the leaks:

"We don't think this information was leaked," he said. "We think it was organised to be released on a regular basis and they are pursuing political goals."

this is pretty much what i said yesterday lol

[QUOTE="p2250"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

And not the fact we are in 2 unnecessary wars to fight a small group of terrorists? Especially when the Taliban could be set back extremely if Pakistan would stop staring at India in their Cold War to do something..

AQ is a small group, when you go to war you go against a actual nation.. The Iraq Army dwarfed anything close to what AQ has.. Furthermore our invasions along with the staggering collateral damage is increasing the terrorist group's recruitment rate..

[QUOTE="grounderman"]

WikiLeaks asked the US for help redacting potentially injurious information. The US refused

smooth move.

p2250

I dont think you read the linked article there, buddy.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="p2250"] Small group? Wishful thinking on your part....p2250

AQ is a small group, when you go to war you go against a actual nation.. The Iraq Army dwarfed anything close to what AQ has.. Furthermore our invasions along with the staggering collateral damage is increasing the terrorist group's recruitment rate..

Because I am a realist :|, the government didn't go for humanitarian reasons.. It was for WMD's, when that wasn't found it was to "save" the people.. Something the public found popular.. And no he never consorted with AQ, they in fact hated one another.. May I also point out that the United States foreign policy for the past 60 years has supported, armed to even installed brutal dictators, and we still do to this date with our unquestionable support of Saudi Arabia.. Or the fact that the United States for the past 40 years has been arming, giving money to Israel in a conflict where neither side is in the right..

[QUOTE="quetzalcoatI"][QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]Once again we shoot the messenger rather than the criminal; the US shouldn't be slandering the rest of the world in writing if you ask me. sSubZerOo

Regarding two wars that were unnecessary.. Uh huh.. Right. If the US are committing two highly questionable wars, one that made the US infamous to the rest of the world, then they are going to be under the microscope.. The US government are the ones that put themselves in this position and no one else.

[QUOTE="p2250"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

AQ is a small group, when you go to war you go against a actual nation.. The Iraq Army dwarfed anything close to what AQ has.. Furthermore our invasions along with the staggering collateral damage is increasing the terrorist group's recruitment rate..

Because I am a realist :|, the government didn't go for humanitarian reasons.. It was for WMD's, when that wasn't found it was to "save" the people.. Something the public found popular.. And no he never consorted with AQ, they in fact hated one another.. May I also point out that the United States foreign policy for the past 60 years has supported, armed to even installed brutal dictators, and we still do to this date with our unquestionable support of Saudi Arabia.. Or the fact that the United States for the past 40 years has been arming, giving money to Israel in a conflict where neither side is in the right..

I'd like to see wikileaks leak the secretive documents of every major western country for the last 60 years. They seem to be only focusing on one nation. I'd just be curious to see what kinds of policies the other nations have been pursuing.

I'd like to see wikileaks leak the secretive documents of every major western country for the last 60 years. They seem to be only focusing on one nation. I'd just be curious to see what kinds of policies the other nations have been pursuing.

sonicare

I'd like to see wikileaks leak the secretive documents of every major western country for the last 60 years. They seem to be only focusing on one nation. I'd just be curious to see what kinds of policies the other nations have been pursuing.

sonicare