5 ms·

When you comment that these cables are mundane in nature, you are assuming that you yourself are indicative of the audience as a whole. If you do not believe th

by joshes 16y ago

When you comment that these cables are mundane in nature, you are assuming that you yourself are indicative of the audience as a whole. If you do not believe that millions upon millions of people will read this, you are mistaken. And many, if not the vast majority, of these readers will have previously been in the dark as to the information contained therein. So to them, this is not mundane; it's extraordinary. Furthermore, all that we are reading right now are redacted and cherry picked summaries and analyses. Please wait for more data to be released before passing a quick, premature, unframed sigh against what is happening here. We're at the beginning of this, not the end.

utku_karatas2 16y ago
Very true. Only a tiny fraction of the leaks are published as of writing this and yet the information leaked so far is enough to put my country - Turkey - in political turmoil for months.
kissickas 16y ago
I agree, especially as these summaries are written by the NYT, which has (so far) had the least interesting and most pro-American reporting on every Wikileaks leak.
cabalamat 16y ago
> When you comment that these cables are mundane in nature, you are assuming that you yourself are indicative of the audience as a whole. I don't think they're mundane -- some are quite amusing, such as the Afghan vice president trousering $52 million. > If you do not believe that millions upon millions of people will read this, you are mistaken. I'm sure millions will read them. > And many, if not the vast majority, of these readers will have previously been in the dark as to the information contained therein. It's not so much that they're in the dark about the information, it's that they have an unrealistic view of how world affairs are conducted. This might be because they're naive, or because their nationalist sentiments cause them to believe their own country acts more virtuously on the world stage than countries actually do, or whatever. Or it may just be because most people don't pay much attention to world affairs. But for whatever reason, if someone's bubble is pricked and they later understand world affairs better, that person is more rational. And improving rationality worldwide is likely to be in the long term interest of the human species. > So to them, this is not mundane; it's extraordinary. Then hopefully it will cause them to update their worldview.
- tibbon 16y ago
  I'm curious- how does one actually carry $52mm on your person? In $100 bills I calculated that as roughly 170 feet deep of bills (at .1mm per $100).
  - warp 16y ago
    Using EUR 500 notes would help a bit, though even then you'd have several suitcases.
  - gms 16y ago
    Suitcases, big garbage bags, cardboard boxes, etc
  - foffen 16y ago
    If you have "$52mm on your person" you don't carry it, you have ppl carrying it for you. =)
anigbrowl 16y ago
Agreed. These revelations are not so scandalous by US standards but may well lead to the collapse of governments in some other countries, for which the US will be blamed.
btmorex 16y ago
I don't think these are mundane at all, but I also don't think the US comes out looking very bad. There are surely going to be some relationships that are slightly damaged especially with some allies, but so far, it's nothing too bad. Other countries on the other hand... I know this isn't hugely surprising, but it's now public that essentially everyone in the middle east is lobbying the US to attack Iran. That's got to mess up some relations there. Also, some of the back room disses within foreign countries are probably going to screw up their domestic politics.
- berntb 16y ago
  Consider this: How many (sober) politicians will now have an open heart discussion with an US diplomatic official, which really couldn't reach his own voters/subjects? Without being that knowledgeable about diplomacy internals, that should be worse than most any scandal.
  - kolektiv 16y ago
    If politicians no longer feel comfortable stating opinions or plans which would be unacceptable to the electorate and/or their own voters, I for one don't feel that's entirely bad. I'm pretty much in favour of politicians being open about their plans and principles.
    - _djo_ 16y ago
      It's not only about their own populations, it will also have a detrimental effect on world leaders' willingness to discuss other countries, especially their neighbours, with US diplomats. The end result of the Wikileaks cable dump is that it's going to make it much more difficult for American diplomats to engage in calm, rational diplomacy behind closed doors with most of the world's countries. That may bring immeasurable harm to America's foreign policy and make it harder to maintain a peaceful and stable international system. I don't believe this leak was necessary or in the best interest of most of the world's people.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
- hugh3 16y ago
  Examples?
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
    - trotsky 16y ago
      I'm confused. This practice is so widespread and so well known that there's even a wikipedia entry explaining it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_cover http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_cover The reason why you don't shoot the messenger is precisely because he has diplomatic credentials. Why did you think "diplomats" get expelled from foreign embassies as fall out from espionage scandals?
      - deleted 16y ago
        [deleted]

by joshes 16y ago

utku_karatas2 16y ago

Very true. Only a tiny fraction of the leaks are published as of writing this and yet the information leaked so far is enough to put my country - Turkey - in political turmoil for months.

kissickas 16y ago

I agree, especially as these summaries are written by the NYT, which has (so far) had the least interesting and most pro-American reporting on every Wikileaks leak.

cabalamat 16y ago

> When you comment that these cables are mundane in nature, you are assuming that you yourself are indicative of the audience as a whole. I don't think they're mundane -- some are quite amusing, such as the Afghan vice president trousering $52 million. > If you do not believe that millions upon millions of people will read this, you are mistaken. I'm sure millions will read them. > And many, if not the vast majority, of these readers will have previously been in the dark as to the information contained therein. It's not so much that they're in the dark about the information, it's that they have an unrealistic view of how world affairs are conducted. This might be because they're naive, or because their nationalist sentiments cause them to believe their own country acts more virtuously on the world stage than countries actually do, or whatever. Or it may just be because most people don't pay much attention to world affairs. But for whatever reason, if someone's bubble is pricked and they later understand world affairs better, that person is more rational. And improving rationality worldwide is likely to be in the long term interest of the human species. > So to them, this is not mundane; it's extraordinary. Then hopefully it will cause them to update their worldview.

tibbon 16y ago
I'm curious- how does one actually carry $52mm on your person? In $100 bills I calculated that as roughly 170 feet deep of bills (at .1mm per $100).
- warp 16y ago
  Using EUR 500 notes would help a bit, though even then you'd have several suitcases.
- gms 16y ago
  Suitcases, big garbage bags, cardboard boxes, etc
- foffen 16y ago
  If you have "$52mm on your person" you don't carry it, you have ppl carrying it for you. =)

anigbrowl 16y ago

Agreed. These revelations are not so scandalous by US standards but may well lead to the collapse of governments in some other countries, for which the US will be blamed.

btmorex 16y ago

I don't think these are mundane at all, but I also don't think the US comes out looking very bad. There are surely going to be some relationships that are slightly damaged especially with some allies, but so far, it's nothing too bad. Other countries on the other hand... I know this isn't hugely surprising, but it's now public that essentially everyone in the middle east is lobbying the US to attack Iran. That's got to mess up some relations there. Also, some of the back room disses within foreign countries are probably going to screw up their domestic politics.

berntb 16y ago
Consider this: How many (sober) politicians will now have an open heart discussion with an US diplomatic official, which really couldn't reach his own voters/subjects? Without being that knowledgeable about diplomacy internals, that should be worse than most any scandal.
- kolektiv 16y ago
  If politicians no longer feel comfortable stating opinions or plans which would be unacceptable to the electorate and/or their own voters, I for one don't feel that's entirely bad. I'm pretty much in favour of politicians being open about their plans and principles.
  - _djo_ 16y ago
    It's not only about their own populations, it will also have a detrimental effect on world leaders' willingness to discuss other countries, especially their neighbours, with US diplomats. The end result of the Wikileaks cable dump is that it's going to make it much more difficult for American diplomats to engage in calm, rational diplomacy behind closed doors with most of the world's countries. That may bring immeasurable harm to America's foreign policy and make it harder to maintain a peaceful and stable international system. I don't believe this leak was necessary or in the best interest of most of the world's people.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

hugh3 16y ago
Examples?
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
  - trotsky 16y ago
    I'm confused. This practice is so widespread and so well known that there's even a wikipedia entry explaining it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_cover http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_cover The reason why you don't shoot the messenger is precisely because he has diplomatic credentials. Why did you think "diplomats" get expelled from foreign embassies as fall out from espionage scandals?
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]