Massive leak of millitary documents on War in Afganistan

With more to come, apparently.

WikiLeaks site

Discuss.

edited 26th Jul '10 1:28:15 AM by DonZabu

"Wax on, wax off..." "But Mr. Miyagi, I don't see how this is helping me do Karate..." "Pubic hair is weakness, Daniel-san!"

Interesting. I hope someone does a more concise and complete collation of the data, especially with an eye towards finding cases in which 1. The reality on the ground didn't match the narrative presented by the Do D to the media, and 2. Coalition forces being hilariously incompetent and/or cartoonishly evil.

I'm sure that out of 75,000 military reports, there will be plenty of both. Basically there is no way you can put 75,000 military reports together, and not find examples of gross incompetence, evil, and embellishing the truth.

This applies to every facet of human endeavour, ever. Collate enough information about anything people do, and you'll find enough dirt to bury Mother Theresa and all the people she killed.

My latest liveblog.

I wouldn't be surprised if the pentagon lied about what was going on. That's to be expected. I'm surprised they say anything at all.

Fight smart, not fair.

Massive tl;dr, I'll leave it to the analysts to scrounge through that stuff. That said, hopefully this won't compromise the safety of individual soldiers, though I could care less about the army's reputation as a whole.

I know what you said, sugar, but 'platonic' still entails a world of ideas.

I wouldn't be surprised if the pentagon lied about what was going on.

You really think truth stands a chance when you're playing the political game?

Massive Sorry, I skipped some posts.

Oh look, that one guy complaining for word filters got his wish -_-

edited 26th Jul '10 6:59:43 AM by Starscream

MariaMoments: The wonder of 91% accuracy is that it [Thunder] still misses 50% of the time.

Is this like that chopper video they had that was taken massively out of context? If so why should I believe them on this?

Just remember, for all the reports that are ugly, there's usually something like this to go along with it.

I hate Wikileaks.

Elaborate.

"Wax on, wax off..." "But Mr. Miyagi, I don't see how this is helping me do Karate..." "Pubic hair is weakness, Daniel-san!"

Our journalistic culture is far too dependent on "leaks". Whatever happened to good old fashioned investigative journalism? Or even government transparency? On the other hand, given how hostile the media environment is to even the slightest hint of wrongdoing and how easily things get taken out of context, it's no wonder nobody in government wants to let anything out.

Leakers are the lowest of the low in this regard, whether they are operating on "principle", greed, or whatever. Of course, I fully recognize an element of hypocrisy here, because one person's leaker is another person's hero, depending on what got leaked and whose side it can be spun towards. The whole culture is sick.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Glad to hear about this. I hope somebody is able to make sense of the data and paint a more accurate picture of the war.

Legally Free Content

^^ Journalists don't get away with making shit up for nearly as long anymore. That's good at least.

Fight smart, not fair.

I'm of the mind that War is Peace. I don't care if we shoot "innocent" women and children. They were marked for doom the moment they allowed their men to put the Taliban in power. They are all complicit to the crime of terrorism.

We could win this war in half a year's time if they'd just let our soldiers take off the pillow-gloves and put on the gauntlets. Corral the population of Afghanistan in concentration camps, occasionally shoot a prisoner of war or two on national television, poison their wells and torch their goats, you get the general idea. War is not nice, and it is hypocritical to think and act otherwise.

Fear is our ally. The gasoline will be ours. A Honey Badger does not kill you to eat you. It tears off your testicles.

A guy leaked a video that was purportedly a helicopter firing on a Reuters photographer and his bodyguards. It was a bit more complicated, but Wikileaks kind of skewed it.

75000 military documents constitutes more in the way of context than a ten minute video, I think.

edited 26th Jul '10 9:28:03 AM by Tzetze

[1] This facsimile operated in part by synAC.

Nice (and by nice I mean pathetic) attempt at trolling, Bioelectricclam.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

How the hell did this happen?

You can't even write racist abuse in excrement on somebody's car without the politically correct brigade jumping down your throat!

I blame Lady Gaga

Machinima in my color model?!

I think it was done on purpose by some faction or another who has clearance and the power to either hide their tracks or completely get away with it.

Giving the den of incompetence and bickering that the Munitorum is, anything is possible, it might even be a plot by the President himself.

'''YOU SEE THIS DOG I'M PETTING? THAT WAS COURAGE WOLF.Cute, isn't he?

As Tzetze said, Wikileaks posted a gun cam video from an American Apache helicopter firing on targets in a town in Iraq in 2006 (2007?). Among those hit was a journalist. Now the video also showed the pilots acting a little enthusiastically about all of that.

What Wikileaks didn't do was take into account the 3+ visible men with weapons (including at least one RPG-7) in the footage and the fact that the town was neither safe nor friendly at the time. Additionally, the chopper was running close air support for GIs in the area who were under attack by insurgents. The reporter merely decided to stand next to legitimate military targets during a battle.

Wikileaks as an organization took a ton of shit for such a bastardized take out of context.

That's pretty much it, yeah.

But I'm not so worried about them taking text out of context. Videos are videos and don't really have much worth except to cause an emotional reaction (like OMG THEY SHOT A CIVILIAN!!). It's not really the same with text.

I've read a couple of leaked CIA documents on Wikileaks. They don't just post excerpts or something, they post the whole thing, good parts and bad. For example, if there's thousands of incident reports it wouldn't make sense for there to be more horrible incidents than run-of-the-mill things, unless of course the leaker is being malicious.

[1] This facsimile operated in part by synAC.

The above comments, to me, seem like people are taking this leak as a black mark on U.S. policy, the Pentagon, White House, etc., (take your pick). I'm not sure where that impression is coming from, but my assessment is much different.

This leak shows the incredible challenges the U.S. military has been facing in the war in Afghanistan for the last nine years, going up against an enemy that has been actively aided and abetted by neighboring Pakistan in a variety of ways, from providing shelter to going so far as helping plan and guide attacks, recruit suicide bombers, etc., for use against Afghan and NATO troops/officials. This leak to me shows America swallowing the bitter pill and trying to work with Pakistan and be an ally in spite of the spanner in the works that is the ISI, and potentially a large portion of their military.

What WOULD show the U.S. being the bad guys here (or just incompetent), I think, is if as soon as they got wind of this information the government started shouting it from the rooftops publicly to try and affect change in Pakistan - an action that would most certainly destabilize an already precarious nation. Instead we've tried to keep Pakistan moving forward and stable for the last nine years while making nice and aiding them in an attempt to make them an ally in the region while keeping this ugly fact under wraps, which once again I believe shows the government in a positive light.

The real question now is, with this in the open, what happens to U.S./Pakistani relations? How is this ugly fact dealt with in the public arena, and what does it mean for our success or ultimate failure to help Afghanistan become a functioning state (Democratic or not, just something that doesn't fall over in a few months or years after we leave). It certainly makes me feel very demoralized about our ability to affect any kind of change in Afghanistan, when the insurgent elements are just chilling on the Pakistani side of the border, sheltered by the ISI, just waiting for the U.S and NATO to leave (as we must, sooner rather than later), to return the country to the status quo it has had since the Soviets left in the 80s. Sad times.

If you're reading this, there's probably a huge wall'o'text around here somewhere.

The source of the leak should be prosecuted under treason laws and shot (assuming they find out who did it), as divulging such information in a time of war strikes me a treasonous. I'm not sure what to do about Wikileaks, though.

I will add, the mention of Pakistan intelligence help being given to the Taliban is rather discomforting, but I heard on NPR that that tidbit, and much of hte documents, were merely raw intel information and much of what we already know was the prettied up version of the raw info anyway.

edited 26th Jul '10 10:49:19 AM by pvtnum11

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.

How come? Is it just Wikileaks, or whistleblowers in general, or what?

"Wax on, wax off..." "But Mr. Miyagi, I don't see how this is helping me do Karate..." "Pubic hair is weakness, Daniel-san!"

That's hardly new, though. The Taliban probably wouldn't exist without the ISI's meddling.

[1] This facsimile operated in part by synAC.

^ It isn't exactly new, but it's disconcerting to learn the depths to which it goes. Turning a blind eye to the presence of the Taliban (presumably, to me, in the interest of national stability and not instigating a civil war), is one thing. Actively giving aid and shelter, sanctioned in part by the government and ISI, is another thing altogether and something that has been quite surprising to me, if not unbelievable.

If you're reading this, there's probably a huge wall'o'text around here somewhere.

The comments in this thread in general, but that quote specifically, worry me.
For me, they indicate a set of values that I think are a danger to any free society.
The public cannot decide if actions taken are correct, if they aren't truthfully informed by the actions taken.
That said, I'm curious for some extracts of the leaked material, and different views from war supporters and war haters.

Pour y voir clair, il suffit souvent de changer la direction de son regard www.xkcd.com/386/