Bradley Manning and Nobel Peace Prize

I believe the abuse is better hidden.

No proof, since my statement is based on the absence of proof.

I realize this sounds paranoid.

• Also, who is Alex Jones?

edited 12th Feb '12 5:43:26 PM by Natasel

I'll just say that you're better off not knowing and leave it at that.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.

Why? Lets go back a few posts.

But a lot of it did, and even if it didn't, he still didn't have any right to release those things, and thus should be punished because he did, in fact, break the law, and does not, in fact, contest that he did.

Again, I would be tough on whistleblowers too, if I were the government. Being that, if I were the government, whistleblowers would be nothing but trouble.

Then again, the US Government is (semi-literally) full of shit at this point.

"Shit, our candidate is a psychopath. Better replace him with Newt Gingrich."

A few jackasses who murder civilians getting dismissed will somehow destroy the most powerful military in the world?

Jackasses, murder, civilians, dismissal. All these things are nothing to a military, specially the most powerful military in the world.

Militaries are in the business of death and destruction. Their main purpose is to kill, threaten to kill or destory/threaten to destroy.

And businesses have "Branding"

This is above for bodies, since they can always recriut more, but they only have one image and a tarnished image is harder to fix than men to replace.

Once something threatens the image, its treated as a greater threat than the loss of personel because men are expendable and the image is not.

edited 12th Feb '12 5:56:11 PM by Natasel

I said a few people getting dismissed wouldn't destroy the US military in response to your claim it would.

To keep your image intact you prosecute those involved in things like Haditha and abu gharib. If you don't commit horrific abuses you don't need to punish whistle blowers.

edited 9th Mar '12 1:30:31 AM by kyfhv

If the price of such action is small, why not? Prosecute away.

However, IF the price is great?

Business focuss on what is cheap and cost effective when choosing solutions to problems.

Confronting problems and solving them in a manner that tarnishes Image, costs Image.

Hiding the problem, costs no Image unless caught.

Its a gamble : 'Pay the price now or hide it and risk a greater problem later?'

Much like Watergate.

Its a calculated business choice in my eyes.

edited 12th Feb '12 6:26:53 PM by Natasel

I think you're misunderstanding what the group is and what it's goals are. Last I checked the military is serving the country, not itself. War is a means to an end, not an end in itself.

edited 12th Feb '12 7:02:16 PM by Clarste

Ideally yes, but how do we quantifiably prove that difinitively if that is the case?

You can insist that things are on one end of the scale of cynism VS idealism and I can insist on the other.

We could argue forever and still not budge the other as to what is the right opinion.

I am unsure as how to settle this so I will suggest we go back a little to the topic.

As relating to Bradley Manning, if the world were ideal I suppose he shall play the role of the brave young man who acted alone in a system full of cold, calous abuse and made the world aware of the horrible injustices his own military was performing.

As normal narative in such uplifting tales, he shall be paraded about upon the shoulders of jubilant, grateful citizens, flower petals showered at his feet, and great monuments to his bravery be errected.

IF, this were not.....Bradley may "disappear."

....so far so good.

It's not a question of idealism, it's a question of governmental structure. Look up the wording of whatever act Congress passed to make a national military. There we go.

Ah yes, Law. Was there a Law in place to prevent the problems Bradley's publishing revealed?

Not ALL of it of course, the Wikileaks were very extensive.

Perhaps just a few? Not killing civilians or covering things up?

Were there laws like that before Bradley?

You really think some one with this amount of spotlight will "cut himself shaving"? Possibly, just possibly something might happen a few years down the road when he's largely been forgotten about, but not right now.

Am I a good man or a bad man?

Natasel, are you really serious here? Nobody is going to assassinate him.

Even assuming the US government is the Evil Empire, it won't happen. Bad PR.

Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.

And of course, assassination is totally unnecessary, as well.

We live in the corporate world, people. Why assassinate people when you can blacklist them instead? It's so much... cleaner, for the plutarchs.

"Shit, our candidate is a psychopath. Better replace him with Newt Gingrich."

Aye, the cost is too high. But I will bet the higher up wish it were cheaper.

My imagination fails me. How is blackmail going to be utilized now with Bradley? Or do you mean as a general strategy?

Not blackmail, blacklist.

To blacklist someone is to declare that they are to be refused a job in any given industry. Given how wide-ranging and influential transnational corporations are these days, doing a wider-scale blacklisting would not be that hard.

"Shit, our candidate is a psychopath. Better replace him with Newt Gingrich."

New account stauts. Lovely.

Still, do you think the Blacklist threat is enough?

Corporations don't have a total world wide reach, or at least, no single one has. There are still competing spheres of influence vying for markets.

Well, given that such a thing, if properly enforced, would mean he could never live in the US or anywhere with a US business domination again, that's one hell of a life-ruiner.

"Shit, our candidate is a psychopath. Better replace him with Newt Gingrich."

Uh, that would prevent him from having a job, Flyboy, not from living in the United States. I assume this guy still has family who might take him in. Otherwise, there's the really shit jobs he could take to pay rent. Exile is not a thing people do these days.

It should be pointed out that a dishonorable discharge(which is the least of the sentences Manning will get) in itself is being put on a blacklist.

No company that does business with the US Government, in any way, is allowed to knowingly hire someone with a dishonorable discharge from the military. If they do, the US is allowed to break said business deal. And the "kicker"... The US will reimburse companies that they do business with for background checks(so none of said companies can use the "I didn't know" excuse).

So, mom & pop stores and foreign companies are really the only option after a dishonorable discharge. Since the global/national fast-food chains(and those are just the "crappy" jobs) cannot take you.

edited 12th Feb '12 8:41:58 PM by Swish

In very practical terms, he won't be able to live comfortably in the States anymore, as Swish helpfully pointed out. Dishonorable discharge in the US is essentially a "get out or suffer in misery" card.

"Shit, our candidate is a psychopath. Better replace him with Newt Gingrich."

Hash....

Is this a subtle hint or a blatant one to get the hell out of Dodge?

Exile in the modern world. Not sure what to think about that.

Well, like most exiles, it's kinda deserved.

Please.

I'm pretty sure that even those with dishonorable discharge manage to live in some comfort. Also, people don't move just because of this. There's probably many dishonorably discharged people who manage to go on and live their lives just as normally as anyone else. They just don't talk about being discharged much.

Hmmm, ok, BEST case scenario, what happens to Brad after he gets out?

Ophra? A book tour? Maybe a movie about his life?