According to the article most military prisoners serve at least 1/3 of their sentence and are then eligible for parole.
Bradley Manning - 35yrs in the slammer :(
- Thread starter CaNsA
- Start date
According to the article most military prisoners serve at least 1/3 of their sentence and are then eligible for parole.
Respect, lol. He did this for himself and like most criminals thought he could escape. It was not for the greater good.
If t was for the greater good, he would off gone though the info and removed certain articles and/r details.
He didnt, it was a self serving indiscrimant info dump.
People in power will always get to choose who breaks the law and who doesn't, unfortunately for Manning and Snowden they have no supporters in power so they are being hunted and tried while those they revealed as breaking the law get to walk free.
The government is just another gang wrapped up in fancy clothes and laws that are supposedly for our benefit. Once you realise that you have to either be able to accept that fact and be okay living under the thumb of the biggest gang on the block or do something to fight against it. As you can see fighting against it doesn't lead to a good outcome for you!
The government is just another gang wrapped up in fancy clothes and laws that are supposedly for our benefit. Once you realise that you have to either be able to accept that fact and be okay living under the thumb of the biggest gang on the block or do something to fight against it. As you can see fighting against it doesn't lead to a good outcome for you!
I don't even know how to respond to this, what exactly do you think he was expecting to get out of doing this? A medal? Do you think he was that naive? What information should he have removed specifically and why?
Huh? How did it benefit him??
It was 100,000+ documents he gave to wikileaks in the understanding that that organisation would filter any potentially dangerous information which I believe they did do.Yes he was very naive, probably thought he wouldn't get discovered, if he did he could get political asylum, make financial gains/goo down in history etc.
Kind of back fired like a lot oof criminals. Such people don't think about the consequences.
Huh? How did it benefit him??
No they didnt.
Do you by any chance work in government? I ask because I don't expect to read this kind of vitriolic response from anyone without a vested interest in putting people like Manning down.
God only know how someone as small minding as you got Man of Honour.
Of course, but the idea of involvement in the second Iraq War has always been a much criticised and discussed topic, both here and in the US. Many people didn't support it and for a video to then emerge, five years into the occupation of the country they are supposed to be helping, showing pilots needlessly killing unarmed people, which included children, it again raises the question as to why they are even there.... not just for Americans who already didn't support it, but those who did and the Iraqi people.
I'm sure to many Americans it was probably a bit of a wake up call, they will regularly hear about the atrocities that go in many third world countries and even just over the boarder in Mexico. But they probably didn't expect their own soldiers to be doing it to.
No I don't. What an odd question.
It is plain that over meats need to keep secrets, it is a very serious crime to leak such secrets, and he did it for self gains, not for some high good.
Wikileaks is even worse, they've gained massively from it and put security and people at risk by not filtering, something manning should have done anyway.
So if you were in his position and witnessed your country commuting atrocities against innocent human beings, you would just sit back and let them? I very much doubt he swore an oath to allow his government to get away with war crimes.
You can't use that argument this is not what he did, he got any and all information he could and dumped it. Most of it was nothing of the sort.
Then there's what is attroticities and the difference between civil a and military laws etc.
If he had screened it, only dumped rellevent info for the suppose cause you seem to think he did and removed any identifying info taht endangered security/people's life then it would be a very different matter. He did none of these as he had no such cause like you suggest, he just or his hands on any and all info and dumped it.
A very large difference. He's the one who leaked it, it his his responsibility to only leak rellevent stuff and insure safety.
I'd have gone with that if it wasn't all the other stuff he leaked. He could have got away with the leaked video and people would have thought he was correct in showing that. He then proceeded to push his luck and got exactly what he deserved.
Every document, google it.
For the vast majority of the leaks, there was no reason behind them. Very few contained any sort of cover up or anything of public interest. They didnt remove such documents, they didnt remove names etc.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 4,095
Were he not a soldier, I'd be more sympathetic. In the good old days, such people went before a firing squad.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 2,917
- Location
- Merseyside. UK
Really? I would like to know exactly what he gained by leaking this information?
Look at the barbaric treatment he has had to endure. Dress it up in Orwellian doublespeak if you wish but the guy was tortured by the state while the very people behind the killings are free.
Would you not, at the very least, want those people "brought to justice"?