Why WikiLeaks Will Fail

FrontPage Magazine ^ | Ryan Mauro

[Michael van der Galien]

In April of this year, the Swedish-based whistleblower website WikiLeaks released classified video of an American helicopter attack in Baghdad in 2007 in which several civilians were killed. Military sources protested that the video was taken out of context, but WikiLeaks’ intent was plain enough: to undermine support for the U.S. military effort in Iraq. Now WikiLeaks is attempting to repeat the ploy for Afghanistan. This week it released over 90,000 secret documents with the goal of casting U.S. military efforts in the country in a negative light.

But just as the earlier video triggered a backlash from the military challenging WikiLeaks’ credibility, the new leaks also may not serve the website’s antiwar agenda. Indeed, some of the documents — already being hailed in media quarters as the successor to the Pentagon Papers — could backfire on WikiLeaks because they expose the Taliban’s close alliances with Iran, Pakistan and Al-Qaeda and thus bolster a key rationale for the war in Afghanistan – that the U.S. military is fighting terrorists abroad so that we do not have to face them at home.

Documents released this week make nonsense of the antiwar Left’s claim that the Taliban are really nationalists fighting against occupation. They reveal them instead as radical Islamists acting as proxies for foreign elements, including al-Qaeda. The documents also show why U.S. military commanders accuse Iran of supporting the Taliban with arms, including advanced improvised explosive devices, and training. Although the two nearly went to war in 1999 after the Taliban murdered eight Iranian diplomats, they reconciled shortly after the 9/11 attacks. The alliance is tighter and has existed much longer than one would conclude from the recent statements by American and Afghan officials.

[drangundsturm]

No doubt dozens, if not hundreds, of our operatives overseas will be killed by these leaks. The wikileaks founders have blood on their hands. The military personnel involved in the leaks should at the very least be sent to a harsh military prison for life, if not lined up against a wall and shot for treason. People leak information because there are no consequences for leaking it. We need to re-establish the consequences.

Yeah, I know, under obama this is an impossible pipe dream. His culture wants to destroy the military from within by encouraging this kind of behavior.

[pogo101]

Folks would have more respect for WikiLeaks if it were an equal opportunity offender, at least. Where, for example, are the “anti-LEFT” leaks from it? Like a Breitbart vid showing that a lefty anti-military protester isn’t really a veteran, etc.?

[kabar]

Obama welcomes the leaks, which some of the MSM have already described as the equivalent of the Pentagon Papers that greased the skids for our withdrawal from Vietnam. Some Dems in Congress are already citing the leaked papers as justification for the US to get out of Afghanistan, something that Obama wants to do but can’t figure out how to do it politically. This could be his pretext and opportunity.

[RedStateRocker]

“Indeed, some of the documents — already being hailed in media quarters as the successor to the Pentagon Papers — could backfire on WikiLeaks because they expose the Taliban’s close alliances with Iran, Pakistan and Al-Qaeda and thus bolster a key rationale for the war in Afghanistan – that the U.S. military is fighting terrorists abroad so that we do not have to face them at home.”

Maybe being a bit younger than many here at the time of the Pentagon Papers, but I thought they showed pretty conclusively that it was DEMOCRATS Kennedy and Johnson that got us into, and munged the Vietnam war. If we're on the side of right we have nothing to fear from the truth, if we're doing things that are distasteful and ‘immoral’ the people of the U.S. should still know. It's not like the terrorists are going to hate us any less. I respect our troops, and want us to kill every terrorist and, as far as I'm concerned anyone within 1500 meters from them, but we should keep a jaded eye on when things are ‘classified’, because from everything I've seen over the last 30 years a vast majority of information is classified to cover up incompetence and poor judgment.

We shouldn't even *HAVE* anywhere that many documents classified; making ANYTHING classified should be like getting a warrant for search and seizure, or even executing someone- an acknowledgment that something evil, distasteful and potentially harmful to liberty unfortunately must be done for the greater long term good, but only when undeniably necessary.

[TornadoAlley3]

The documents also show why U.S. military commanders accuse Iran of supporting the Taliban with arms

So Obama has his October surprise and will bomb Iran?

[Cboldt]

I'm roughly of the same mind you are. We prosecuted Calley for My Lai -- and others in the current war zones -- so it's not as though the government intends to bury all of its mistakes.

I'll keep an open mind, but I think this "massive dump" is about as harmful as the NYT disclosure that the US captures all international communications traffic (and probably most domestic traffic); and listens to a wide swath of it to decide if it should be suspicious or not. Sure, a new revelation to many, distasteful to many (it irks me), but the disclosure doesn't affect ongoing operations, didn't disclose methods of collection or filtering, and in time it's forgotten.

And in what may seem to be a contradiction, I think all military action reports are pe se worthy of being classified - the leaker(s) here should be prosecuted.

[EQAndyBuzz]

Obama is the proverbial dog that chases the car. I caught the car, now what?

Obama embraced Afghanistan as HIS war. Ok, he got HIS war, now what? The fact that Wikileaks exposed this will no doubt force Obama to once again blame Bush. Is this the October supris for the Dems?

[jwparkerjr]

Going for the kill in dealing with the enemy leaders could have a serendipitous side. If you strike every militant you can find, hard and without warning, it won't be long before no citizen in their right mind will be anywhere near a known militant. Then when your UAV’s go into the field it will be very easy to spot the militants. They're the ones standing or sitting around all by themselves! People who know them for what they are will give them wide berth rather than be a collateral statistic in the WOT.

Of course there will be a few who die simply because they have body odor and no one wants to be near them, but hey, there are prices to pay in war. Better their side pay them than our side!

[kabar]

Obama never wanted any war, Iraq or Afghanistan. He had to campaign on Afghanistan as being the "Good War," and the fact that Bush had been wrong in going into Iraq in order to buttress his national security credentials. He doesn't support the war in Afghanistan and is only trying to figure out how to get out as quickly as possible. He gave McCrystal only part of the troops he wanted after three months of delay and even with the increase he also set a date for withdrawal. So by the time the buildup is done, it will be followed immediately by the drawdown.

Obama has already blamed Bush for Afghanistan. Now he wants some Dems and Reps to bail him out of Afghanistan. The Wikileaks could assist the opponents of the war and the MSM to provide the fig leaf for an Obama withdrawal.

[McGruff]

Boy I wouldn't want to be this guy right now.

Where's Jack Bauer when you need him.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

Imagine what Putin would have done, had a similar leak occurred in Russia.

Here's what he had to say about those suspected of leaking the names of the Russian spies, in the U.S.:

‘It was the result of treason,’ he said, predicting a grim future for those responsible. ‘It always ends badly for traitors: as a rule, their end comes from drink or drugs, lying in a ditch. And for what?’

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2559318/posts