2010-11-30, 05:03 | Link #10181 |
Disabled By Request
|
I never said you're American, just that that's what it would look like to an American
And you're right in saying that someone who would feel hurt because someone talked behind his back shouldn't be in politics, but that's also an idealistic pov and history taught us that politicians care about what people say behind their back regardless. There's more than just a few politicians who cared about that kind of thing both historically and in present day (especially present day). What you said means that pretty much everyone in politics right now shouldn't be in politics You say the leaks damaged your enemies more than the US, yet you say Assange wants to hurt the US. But doesn't that little fact about Assage's leaks show you that perhaps Assange's purpose isn't to hurt the US but simply put info out there that orthodox media would not? While you're correct in saying that other countries will think twice before revealing some personal things like the ones you mentioned in future, the US should also do the same because they did the exact same thing here. The fact of the matter is that this will hurt all sides in diplomatic relations because everyone will be extra careful now. How it will affect the level of trust other countries place on each other (not just trust in the US) depends entirely now how the country wants to be affected. Australia, for instance, openly claimed it did not damage their interests. How other people will consider the leaks will be seen in future. Detaining him would certainly give them something to negotiate with, but from China's pov, I would imagine this is a real case because like anyone else, they want to protect their personal interests. |
2010-11-30, 05:27 | Link #10182 | ||
Um-Shmum
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 39
|
Quote:
not the US. (again, not american) the US was clearly the one damaged most by these revelations. and there is a reason why the "orthodox" media doesn't get classified diplomatic information. its classified diplomatic information. I.E, none of our business. you won't expect a doctor to expose his patients medical records, and you won't expect a lawyer to expose his clients criminal confessions. somethings have to remain confidential in order to work. Quote:
its a severe blow to international diplomacy.
__________________
|
||
2010-11-30, 05:31 | Link #10183 |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
I'll say it again... only idiots write things down they don't want published later in politics and government. Even the most classified data has an "expiration date". Obviously, the leadership of the human race is rife with idiots.
Here's an interesting tidbit about China's off-the-record thoughts on North Korea http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11871641
__________________
|
2010-11-30, 05:34 | Link #10184 |
Disabled By Request
|
Ah ok, I thought you meant that more in a general sense than a personal one, my mistake.
The way I had understood it, classified meant secret because they didn't want people to know about it because it would compromise them. A doctor doesn't reveal medical records not because it would compromise him, but because it would compromise his patients. The same goes for the lawyer because his client's criminal confession would compromise his client more than himself. That's a different kind of classified information. The classified information Assange leaked out compromised the US itself more than anything, it compromised the doctor, the lawyer. That's also what I expect to happen because people do care about what's said behind their back. There is no telling at this stage but this is the most likely thing to happen. |
2010-11-30, 05:42 | Link #10185 | |
Um-Shmum
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 39
|
Quote:
and the patient/client is a foreign diplomat. because thats what many of these diplomatic cables discuss. what the patient told the doctor under the belief that his words are under the protection of doctor-patient confidentiality. now that the medical records are all over the internet, along with pictures of the patients Penis and the doctors opinion about the patients personal hygiene, the willingness to trust doctor-patient confidentiality goes out the window
__________________
|
|
2010-11-30, 05:48 | Link #10186 | |
It's how you think.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Anywhere.
Age: 44
|
Quote:
Could this really be Fox feeding info to Assange? |
|
2010-11-30, 05:50 | Link #10187 | ||
Disabled By Request
|
Quote:
That being said, however, I do see what you're trying to get at because the documents reveal information about other countries and their activities which they preferred to keep in the dark but this information, which was kept by the US like medical records are kept by a doctor, and it compromised them. However, I still believe these are of a different nature as it hurt the reputation of the US more than it did the foreign diplomats. Quote:
|
||
2010-11-30, 05:56 | Link #10189 | ||
It's how you think.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Anywhere.
Age: 44
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
2010-11-30, 05:56 | Link #10190 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Boston
Age: 34
|
FYI, something to keep an eye out for:
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010...robiology.html Quote:
__________________
|
|
2010-11-30, 06:02 | Link #10191 | |
Komrades of Kitamura Kou
Join Date: Jul 2004
Age: 39
|
Quote:
If Assange hadn't already opened a Pandora's Box before, documents detailing other countries directly certainly will. Even if you could argue that his focus was on the US government, he has now pulled countries mentioned in the leaks into the entire issue, which will obviously just magnify probably exponentially the problems the leaks will generate. So the question, again: At what cost? If Assange thinks that the Right to Information is absolute, then I call him naive and dangerous.
__________________
|
|
2010-11-30, 06:05 | Link #10192 | |
It's how you think.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Anywhere.
Age: 44
|
More on Assange:
Quote:
|
|
2010-11-30, 06:16 | Link #10193 | |
Disabled By Request
|
Quote:
|
|
2010-11-30, 06:55 | Link #10194 |
It's how you think.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Anywhere.
Age: 44
|
To get my feet deep into the debate.
Obviously, this is a debate between the freedom of information vs state sovereignty. As much as this is so, most democratic nations have a system in place for an ordinary person to obtain information. In the UK and Australia, this is known as the "Freedom of Information" request process, where the government will release information when it is requested, while cancelling out any sensitive information. Therefore, the information released gives salient information, yet not giving up state sovereignty. That usually works. However, if one looks at the quality of the cable documents leaked by Assange, they obviously provide more information than your usual FOI request. However, most of this information is of the kind that you'd tell your friend in confidence. How'd feel if that person then told it to someone else? Not the most pleasant feeling, I'd tell you. Anyways, that aside, the fact that the information was dug out without permission or knowledge of the authority concerned, is clearly trespass. That in itself is a crime, whether you agree with it or not. Additionally, we're talking about somebody who jumped off Australia to run off the the US, as an indirect result of membership of the group International Subversives going by the pen-name "Mendax" (derived from a phrase of Horace: "splendide mendax," or "nobly untruthful"). as he was the subject of a 1991 raid of his Melbourne home by the Australian Federal Police. He purportedly advocates a "transparent" and "scientific" approach to journalism, saying that "you can't publish a paper on physics without the full experimental data and results; that should be the standard in journalism. Obviously, he's confused politics with academics. Look, I do agree with what he's done previously, on the illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, including the "Collateral Murder" video he dd with Icelandic MP Birgitta Jónsdóttir. But the diplomatic cables are ONE STEP TOO FAR. Diplomacy is about relationships with other nations, and having someone pry into such relations, while fully morally justified, is ethically flawed. Maybe he's trying to bring Australia against the US. |
2010-11-30, 07:14 | Link #10195 | |
Sensei, aishite imasu
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hong Kong Shatterdome
|
Well these wiki leaks documents put an interesting spin on all the symbolic overtures of support, or at least understanding and cooperation in North korea.
Quote:
Jeez. Matt Stone and Trey Parker really DID hit the mark in Team America. Well, I suppose this is good in the long term. The Norks will be less likely to do anything like wage all out war if they know that the Chinese won't lift a finger to help them...even worse, to cement an image of themselves as good world citizens (and to expedite the withdrawal of any major US forces) they might infact invade the DPRK from the North in conjuncture with the ROK and US military. edit:Another thing to consider. These documents all seem to be pre-2010...meaning that they don't cover ANY Chinese reactions to the sinking of the Cheonan and the shelling of that Island by North Korean artillery. I don't imagine the Chinese would be very happy with anything that gets an US Aircraft carrier battlegroup practicing war games in their back yard though. |
|
2010-11-30, 07:29 | Link #10196 | |
It's how you think.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Anywhere.
Age: 44
|
Quote:
Also, it seems that China is more interested in Japan than Korea or Taiwan. |
|
2010-11-30, 07:56 | Link #10197 | |||
Disabled By Request
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by Tsuyoshi; 2010-11-30 at 08:34. |
|||
2010-11-30, 08:32 | Link #10198 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Dai Korai Teikoku
|
"Interesting" things about China. They're all information that has been revealed quite often. Basically, PRC is in a squeeze where DPRK is a buffer against a nationalist reunified Korea, but at the same time DPRK is being ultrarational to the point it's making PRC pissed off.
And oh yes, the worst case scenario for everyone is a nuclear reunified Korea. Nationalism is already a big part of Korean society, and if a reunified Korea is nuclear..... expect to see a constant struggle to reclaim Manchuria. This is most likely the reason why PRC is supporting DPRK: They can't risk a reunified Korea being the worst possible enemy for China. Forget Japan, forget Russia, forget the United States: Reunified Korea is the deadliest foe the state capitalist regime would face militarily and economically. Still, what makes me sigh is people thinking DPRK was ever a puppet of any state. It was never a puppet, just like PRC and Vietnam were neither puppets. |
2010-11-30, 09:42 | Link #10199 | |
It's how you think.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Anywhere.
Age: 44
|
Quote:
Taiwan becomes the UK - USED to be powerful (as the Republic of China), but now culturally fixated. And Singapore FINALLY becomes Switzerland: neutral zone. |
|
2010-11-30, 13:33 | Link #10200 | |
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
Well looking at your location, you are proving the nationalism part correct.
__________________
|
|
Tags |
current affairs, discussion, international |
Thread Tools | |
|
|