U.S. Army leak may have also compromised the investigation into China's attacks on Google

If the video is the video I am thinking it is, weren't the pilots of the Apache (I thought it was an AC 130, suppose I was wrong) basically bragging about what they were doing as if they were playing Call of Duty? I may be wrong, I sure as hell hope I am, but it wasn't a very pretty video regardless of their thoughts on their actions.

Treason is punishable by death, so there are a few rabbits up the sleeve of the mighty UCMJ. Once again, assuming he is guilty, I highly doubt he looked at the larger picture of the mess his actions would produce. There are analysts that are paid to determine the harm to national security each piece of classified information would cause if it were released, and it's somewhat puzzling that a 10 level analyst wouldn't stop and think about that. I can't figure out if he has faith that he won't become a Martyr for the sake of "exposing the truth" or if he really has a bag of paperclips for a brain. While every soldier has the obligation to do what's right legally and morally, he exercised piss poor judgment. American's count on the men and women who serve our armed forces to exercise sound judgment and damage our nations credibility, just like the Armed Forces count on our nation's leaders to not put us in a lose/lose situation.

(The following isn't aimed at you, and is a general rant because I'm on subject) People don't look at the whole picture. Before people started running their mouth about the video in question, they didn't even consider the fact that maybe the pilots had "confirmed" intel that there was known insurgents on ground that matched the exact description of what they had eyes on. The reporters put themselves in danger, due to a feeling of duty to ensure the world had an accurate picture of what was going on. The pilots were doing their duty to ensure the security of American forces. Sometimes fratricide occurs because war isn't choreographed. We have so many Armchair Commanders that were self taught at the War College of Wikipedia not volunteering to be part of the solution. There's bad apples everywhere, and if you don't feel justice is going to be served then stop bitching and become part of the solution.

I hope this is all fabricated by Adrian Lamo, and Manning had nothing to do with any of this.

Samuel: Just as you stated, this isn't meant to be a personal attack on you in any way, but simply a different perspective on the matter, from a citizen... who also loves to rant. I certainly do appreciate the work our soldiers are doing to protect us... it's the government and their "orders" that I take issue with. With that in mind:

"Soldiers aren't a bunch of blood thirsty dipshits with no sense of right or wrong like this helps make us out to be."

"While every soldier has the obligation to do what's right legally and morally, he exercised piss poor judgment."

"There's bad apples everywhere..."

Even your statements are somewhat contradictory. The fact is, we see it every day - people in power can and do misuse their power. Simply look at Abu Grhaib. And that just happens to be video that we DID see. What else is going on behind the closed doors of classified information? We certainly don't know, but with evidence such as that, should the citizens blindly trust their government and the people in power?

"...if you don't feel justice is going to be served then stop bitching and become part of the solution."

So, how do we do this? We don't have a place to report such things to the military or government. And even if they are reported, do we get support and information on such matters? Last I checked, the government is very good at ignoring, delaying, or covering up such things. Bringing this information forward in the media is exactly how the citizens can get quick action on such matters... and that's what's happening here. As the government always seems to tell its citizens: if you have done nothing wrong, what are you hiding? If the government wants transparency on its citizens, shouldn't the citizens expect the same of its government?

I'm not saying what happened here was right or wrong, but as you are coming forward against the action, I have to ask: What is the citizen's alternative course of action?

As for this specific incident, you say that there MAY have been circumstances leading to the events in the video. If there are, then why hasn't the military stepped forward to prove their case? You can theorize alternatives, but can you prove them? As an engineer, I believe in data, and the only "data" we have is the video... everything else is heresay, conjecture, or plain FUD.

@Scwhinn

To figure out the whole timeline from the video is close to impossible, here is a link to the actual investigation done.

http://www.lineofdeparture.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/070717-2nd-BCT-15-6.pdf

So as it turns out, the Apache's were reacting to a ground element's request for support. After reading the sworn statements from those involved, the conclusions drawn by the investigating officer, and taking into account the laws of war, this is a whole less shocking then people make it out to be. To hear about combat, and to be in combat is two totally different animals. I think a lot of the people who find this video so unbelievably shocking is because what reason would a citizen need to become thoroughly acquainted with the laws and regulations of war? The international community has recognized that collateral damage is a risk associated with combat operations, which is why things like the Articles of the Geneva Conventions exist. It doesn't take away from the horror of innocent people getting killed, but soldiers from all over the world don't have boots on ground to show off how effective our weapon systems are. There is an active insurgency who doesn't "play by the rules" who is making it difficult to distinguish between friend and foe.

Sounds more like he was acting out of angst than moral outrage ..

"From the chat logs provided by Lamo, and examined by Wired.com, it appears Manning sensed a kindred spirit in the ex-hacker. He discussed personal issues that got him into trouble with his superiors and left him socially isolated, and said he had been demoted and was headed for an early discharge from the Army."

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/leak/#ixzz0qIjdUgqI

The problem with what he did, is a security clearance is granted based on a trust by the US Government (on behalf of it's citizens) that an individual will not disclose information that could threaten national security. I don't see how people praise this kid for breaching that trust. Access to classified information is based on a need-to-know, and by his own admission, he was snooping around. Just because he found something that some feel should be public, we forget that he broke the law to do so? Why is it acceptable for an individual to essentially spy, but if a Gov't intelligence agency is exposed for using the same measures people don the tin foil hats? How does the end justify the means when it comes to SPC Manning, but not if the Gov't wants to use the same logic to protect it's people? Propping him up as a hero devalues the Oath of Enlistment every member of the armed forces takes. He swore to follow the orders of the officers appointed over him. One of those orders is in regards to classified material. If the Oath is turned into nothing but words and a check in a block, then you're essentially encouraging the military to be filled with people whom use your tax payer dollars for personal gain, which is much more dangerous then collateral damage in a war zone. Calling him a hero is completely irrational.

@ Samuel

Nice rant.

While I do not disagree that he broke law, anyone who stands up and makes known an atrocity, irregardless of said ridiculous doomsday scenario, is still a hero.

Here is my outrageous doomsday scenario: If people did not expose the inhumane actions of governments and military, then you end up with a society of sheep, complacent with the idea that their government and military can do no wrong and protect them. All the while, the people YOU placed in charge know they can get away with anything at anytime for their own personal agenda.

Oh wait, that's already happening.

How does it feel, sheep?

@xanemadman

I generally know better then to feed the trolls, so I'll simply offer you advice.

Before you add commentary on a legal issue (in this case, what you presume is war crimes), you would be best off reading the law and regulations that define these alleged crimes you think were committed. I am in no means a legal expert, but I have had training on LOAC, Geneva Conventions, and RoE, and that could very well be the reason why we both see a tragedy in the video, but you see the "law" being broken and I don't. No one will dispute the loss of innocent human life is a horrible thing, so we at least share some common ground.

And as far as your ignorant rant about citizens becoming sheep, suggesting that a nation as powerful as the USA should be transparent shows you are as separated from reality as humanely possible. Could we use more transparency? I'm sure it would give some people more comfort, but it would be pretty hard for any nation to react to an asymmetric threat if our secrets were open and we didn't even know who the enemy is.

@ Troll pretending not to be a troll (aka Samuel)

Apparently, you read far too much into my posts. Never did I mention a transparent government. As a matter of fact, this simply proves there is not. Nor, am I concerned about the laws he broke. I called him a hero for the simple act of exposing an atrocity.

As far as being realistic, I don't have all day to sit around and read up on all of the laws he possibly broke. Nor do I really care. I should also call you on your "training" as only a troll would start to spout such ridiculousness.

As everyone is entitled to their own opinion, human and degenerate alike, we should probably both move on from this topic, as it is both becoming distracting and pointless.

Now I'm done feeding the troll and would hope this playful banter, albeit annoying now, would serve as sufficient payment to cross the bridge and we can be done with this.

Have a pleasant evening.

First, I think I've made it completely clear I'm not posting claiming to be an expert, so I don't mention said training to pretend I know more then you, but to simply say the law is relevant to me (which is why you won't see my name in any headlines in my lifetime). Clearly we're both reading too deep into each other's posts. But here's what I gather based purely on what you post:

The law doesn't concern you when a criminal does something you like (exposing an atrocity)

You're content with not caring about the real impact on what a traitor's actions accomplish

Your short sighted view is nothing short of amazing.