7 ms·

Clinton is not democracy. Anti-Clinton is not anti democracy. Being anti the US government is not anti democratic. And no, letting USA or any other nation for

by gklitz 2y ago

Clinton is not democracy. Anti-Clinton is not anti democracy. Being anti the US government is not anti democratic. And no, letting USA or any other nation for that matter commit war crimes quietly does not support democracy.

seanieb 2y ago
When Russia enables it, amplifies it, builds their disinformation and propaganda machine around those facts and there’s no counter weight it gets into the realm of anti-democratic adjacent. There’s nothing simple when it comes to international politics. But foreign meddling by an adversary is a pretty bright line.
- LudwigNagasena 2y ago
  The US enabled it. If there were no wrongdoings, there would be nothing to leak.
  - 0dayz 2y ago
    Every government/corporation has some "wrong doing" if it hadn't been the military there's plenty in the police force if not that then I'm sure there would have been cases of corruption. Your statement doesn't add any nuance to said concerns.
    - gklitz 2y ago
      “But Your honor! yes my client murdered his wife, but every country has murderers, so why should we punish him for that? Isn’t the true criminals his kids who went to the cops and thus caused permanent damage to his and therefore their chance of them having a happy household again?” Not “adding any nuance” is suggesting that publishing the truth about warcrimes is worse than committing war crimes.
      - 0dayz 2y ago
        That's a nice defense towards the straw man you constructed. I'll repeat my point so maybe you can focus on that than the straw man. It's not hard to find scandals, that's the whole point of having institutions meant to watchdog corporations and governments. But of course governments/corporation will try and cover it up or deregulate said institutions, but this doesn't make an obvious adversary (Russia) a helping hand in holding the corporations /governments accountable because it's not meant to, it's meant to create cynicism and a feeling of hopelessness. So no publishing truth is never bad, the issue is how you do it.
        the_optimist 2y ago
        You take the self-contradictory position that “publishing the truth is never bad,” but in some cases “how you publish the truth” is bad. You weight the perceived interpretation by the consumer of information against the information itself. While consistent with in-your-face Russell-conjugated “news” stories and “accountability journalism,” this is practical nonsense, unjustifiable, unprincipled, and a loophole for terrible excuses that countervail the entire purpose of a successful free press.
        0dayz 2y ago
        There's no contradiction as this example will show: If I publish an internal report that has good undercover agents doing good things but also has bad undercover agents that are acting against the country's interest, it would be absurdly dumb and reckless of me to publish the internal report as is without redacting names that has nothing to do with said bad actors. There are correct guidelines specifically about doing whistle blowing and failing to do so can and will cause lives to be lost.
        the_optimist 2y ago
        This relies on an artificial and false morality. You reference “correct guidelines.” Please cite them, and what is definitely good and bad outside a local construct within a modern Westphalian political nation state. Separately: Should nationally critical information controls survive mere legal disobedience? If they don’t how much security theater fulfills your appetite?
    - underlipton 2y ago
      You want me on that wall etc. He was the villain, you know.
  - chinchilla2020 2y ago
    Chelsea Manning leaded a bunch of random diplomatic cables and medical information on the families of servicemembers. How does any of that constitute a 'war crime'? Please, name the war crimes that Chelsea Manning exposed.
    - DoItToMe81 2y ago
      Manning leaked multiple files relating to the execution of surrendering fighters and murder of civilians. "Collateral Murder" being the big one.
    - impossiblefork 2y ago
      The diplomatic cables contain all sorts of information about extraordinary rendition, about the use Turkish airbases, Irish complicity, etc. This isn't small potatoes. Here in Sweden it wasn't just the extradition from Bromma in 2001, but the US flew multiple illegal flights with prisoners through Sweden, possibly to the US torture camps in Poland and eastern Europe. I also think these cables revealed information about the Thailand black site, where the US was torturing some people.
      - chinchilla2020 2y ago
        fascinating how Swedes are so concerned about the small number of crimes committed by the US and want the US to withdraw. Yet they remain steadfastly silent on the crimes committed by Russia and China. Should the US withdraw from geopolitics and allow those other two to fill the vacuum? Like Julian Assange himself - I suspect many Russia supporters are hiding in plain sight.
        impossiblefork 2y ago
        >fascinating how Swedes are so concerned about the small number of crimes committed by the US and want the US to withdraw. Withdraw from what? >Yet they remain steadfastly silent on the crimes committed by Russia and China. How have we been silent on those crimes. We have been quite concerned, they are almost next to us. I don't myself want to be part of NATO, but evidently the government is to afraid not to be, so now we are. >Should the US withdraw from geopolitics and allow those other two to fill the vacuum? The US has not gained anything of geopolitical value by storing people in the Guantanamo Bay prison camp or by flying suspect terrorist to torture camps in Europe, or by inhuman treatment of prisoners, as happened at Bromma. It hasn't gained anything geopolitically by going after people who revealed war crimes. The US actions that I oppose are for the large part neither of benefit to the US itself, nor to me. On the whole these actions are just stupid. To the degree that I want to avoid US troops in Sweden, this stupidity, these useless and harmful decisions that get implemented are one of the problems. Because if the US can this stupid on matters like Assange, or can desperately want to torture some random nobody, and are in such a hurry to do so, that they fly him through Bromma just because can refuel there, then they can do any kind of idiocy, and it can end up being me, or something Swedish that matters that pays the price. The US can defend its interests in a more co-operative way and with greater respect for international law and for its partners. >Like Julian Assange himself - I suspect many Russia supporters are hiding in plain sight. If you're implying that I would like Putin, who I consider basically a Chechen-cuddler. I've had less problems with him historically, and I don't think I fully understood how vengeful he was until he did as he did against the Karabach-Armenians. I'm probably more pro-Russia than Zelensky is-- I don't hate the Russians and I like many aspects of Russian culture, including their mathematics tradition and some of their music. I don't see the Ukraine war as per se very different from the Iraq war. This means that I view Russia and the US as closer on the level of morality than most people, who I feel have a bit of short term view of the world. These things 20 years ago are like yesterday to me. Details matter though, and scale, and many other things. Rather, when it comes to support of Ukraine my view is not based on morality as such, although I do believe that the Ukrainians have a right to rule their country, but rather on Swedish defence needs. We Swedes need to support them and ensure that Russia does not expand and get a border against Poland or some other unnecessarily forward position. There is no reason why we should allow such a situation, which will only cause us problems.
- user3939382 2y ago
  Foreign meddling in what? Foreign meddling in the Clinton campaign’s lies and obfuscations?
- raxxorraxor 2y ago
  That has nothing to do with democracy. On the contrary, a democracy needs the electorate to be informed and officials not having secrets or starting a war on the basis of lies.
- nataliste 2y ago
  The failure of the United States to provide a positive counterweight to propaganda due to launching two wars of aggression filled with warcrimes is not Russia's fault, nor Assange's. The United States is responsible for sowing the good, not Russia for not hiding the bad.
  - kelnos 2y ago
    "Not hiding" is a pretty disingenuous way of putting it. "Being better at targeted propaganda" isn't really how I'd like our leaders to be chosen. Obviously that's where we are, but I wish we could do better.
    - nataliste 2y ago
      I don't want domestic propaganda from government. I want policy from government that creates good will domestically and abroad. "Russia might use this against us" is a good policy litmus test to not do those things.
0dayz 2y ago
No one said Clinton is democracy that title goes to the dear leader Kim Jong-un. That however does not mean you are the good guy for playing into the hands of an adversary that wanted to rig a democratic election.
- gklitz 2y ago
  Is people knowing more truthful facts to you considered “rigging an election”?
  - 0dayz 2y ago
    No? Please point out where I said this. But then if we care about truthful facts then why didn't Assange release rnc documents?
    - chrisco255 2y ago
      Wikileaks only leaked what they got handed to them. In the DNC case, it seems that the leaker was motivated by Clinton railroading Bernie in the primary. Meanwhile on the Republican ticket, the populist, Trump, was able to sweep aside the established Bush dynasty and other party insider favorites.
      - the_why_of_y 2y ago
        SVR/Cozy Bear were fans of Bernie? https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/01/dutch-intelligence-hacked-video-cameras-in-office-of-russians-who-hacked-dnc/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/01/dutch...
        willcipriano 2y ago
        Was that the same hacker team that created the fake laptop that is actually real and not from a hacker team?
        chrisco255 2y ago
TheArcane 2y ago
This has the same energy as labelling any critique of Israel anti-semitic
- oldandboring 2y ago
  Our problem isn't with the critiques of Israel, it's with the fact that the people critiquing Israel are almost universally singling Israel out for critique.
  - racional 2y ago
    The people critiquing Israel are almost universally singling Israel out for critique. They're not, of course. But labeling them as such is one of the myriad ways by which criticism of Israel gets automatically branded as you-know-what.
    - oldandboring 2y ago
      I love the "of course" you threw in. Do please try to appreciate the emotional toll of having non-Jews out there all helpfully informing us Jews what is, and isn't, antisemitism. It must be nice not having to endure that kind of thing in your daily life, to say nothing of having to bring my children past armed guards to get into synagogue.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
      - racional 2y ago
        Do please try to appreciate the emotional toll of having non-Jews out there all helpfully informing us Jews what is, and isn't, antisemitism. I have no idea what your essential attributes are. Nor do you have any idea as to mine. And I'm not telling you what to think about anything. This thread is getting far from the original topic. Recommend we both close shop here, and move on.
      - oska 2y ago
sabarn01 2y ago
If Assange showed any interest in also undermining Russia or other authoritarian regimes I would feel more compassion. I think criticization of the US foreign policy is fine and the press has a role. To me his case has always been grey. States have secrets its just the nature of the world.
- yesco 2y ago
  Personally as an American, I'm far more interested about the shit my government is hiding from me than getting yet another reason to hate Putin, what could possibly be leaked from Russia that would make their optics worse than it already is? This was true even pre-invasion. The whataboutism surrounding this feels completely disingenuous to me considering much of what was leaked by Wikileaks was war crimes, media collusion with Clinton's campaign and embarrassing mistakes the government tried to cover up, that they had no business trying to cover up. States have secrets, but that is a privilege granted to them by the people to protect national security, their abuse of this privilege has been completely unacceptable even if the reveal made your preferred candidate look bad for actions they were personally responsible for. If Wikileaks accomplished anything, it was revealing the hypocrites and those who lack even an inch of integrity.
  - sabarn01 2y ago
    Its not like what wiki leaks did is new. The pentagon papers were published 50 years ago. The us government should be held to high standards and we need a press to do that. At some level however in a world of competing states if an organization is only interested in undermining one state it makes it less trust worthy in my eyes. I think Assange views the US as an evil actor and that informs what he thinks is worthy of coverage. Its why he could call Afghans who worked with the US as collaborators as in his eyes working with the US makes you evil. I think that world view is insane and naive. However as I said there is real utility to publishing information which shouldn't be kept from the public. Which is why I think Assange is a hard case.
  - CRConrad 2y ago
    > If Wikileaks accomplished anything, it was revealing the hypocrites and those who lack even an inch of integrity. It revealed some hypocrites who lack integrity. The main effect, if any, of their exposure was to pave the way for other hypocrites who lack integrity to take over the positions of power and influence of the former.

by gklitz 2y ago

seanieb 2y ago

When Russia enables it, amplifies it, builds their disinformation and propaganda machine around those facts and there’s no counter weight it gets into the realm of anti-democratic adjacent. There’s nothing simple when it comes to international politics. But foreign meddling by an adversary is a pretty bright line.

LudwigNagasena 2y ago
The US enabled it. If there were no wrongdoings, there would be nothing to leak.
- 0dayz 2y ago
  Every government/corporation has some "wrong doing" if it hadn't been the military there's plenty in the police force if not that then I'm sure there would have been cases of corruption. Your statement doesn't add any nuance to said concerns.
  - gklitz 2y ago
    “But Your honor! yes my client murdered his wife, but every country has murderers, so why should we punish him for that? Isn’t the true criminals his kids who went to the cops and thus caused permanent damage to his and therefore their chance of them having a happy household again?” Not “adding any nuance” is suggesting that publishing the truth about warcrimes is worse than committing war crimes.
    - 0dayz 2y ago
      That's a nice defense towards the straw man you constructed. I'll repeat my point so maybe you can focus on that than the straw man. It's not hard to find scandals, that's the whole point of having institutions meant to watchdog corporations and governments. But of course governments/corporation will try and cover it up or deregulate said institutions, but this doesn't make an obvious adversary (Russia) a helping hand in holding the corporations /governments accountable because it's not meant to, it's meant to create cynicism and a feeling of hopelessness. So no publishing truth is never bad, the issue is how you do it.
      - the_optimist 2y ago
        You take the self-contradictory position that “publishing the truth is never bad,” but in some cases “how you publish the truth” is bad. You weight the perceived interpretation by the consumer of information against the information itself. While consistent with in-your-face Russell-conjugated “news” stories and “accountability journalism,” this is practical nonsense, unjustifiable, unprincipled, and a loophole for terrible excuses that countervail the entire purpose of a successful free press.
        0dayz 2y ago
        There's no contradiction as this example will show: If I publish an internal report that has good undercover agents doing good things but also has bad undercover agents that are acting against the country's interest, it would be absurdly dumb and reckless of me to publish the internal report as is without redacting names that has nothing to do with said bad actors. There are correct guidelines specifically about doing whistle blowing and failing to do so can and will cause lives to be lost.
        the_optimist 2y ago
        This relies on an artificial and false morality. You reference “correct guidelines.” Please cite them, and what is definitely good and bad outside a local construct within a modern Westphalian political nation state. Separately: Should nationally critical information controls survive mere legal disobedience? If they don’t how much security theater fulfills your appetite?
  - underlipton 2y ago
    You want me on that wall etc. He was the villain, you know.
- chinchilla2020 2y ago
  Chelsea Manning leaded a bunch of random diplomatic cables and medical information on the families of servicemembers. How does any of that constitute a 'war crime'? Please, name the war crimes that Chelsea Manning exposed.
  - DoItToMe81 2y ago
    Manning leaked multiple files relating to the execution of surrendering fighters and murder of civilians. "Collateral Murder" being the big one.
  - impossiblefork 2y ago
    The diplomatic cables contain all sorts of information about extraordinary rendition, about the use Turkish airbases, Irish complicity, etc. This isn't small potatoes. Here in Sweden it wasn't just the extradition from Bromma in 2001, but the US flew multiple illegal flights with prisoners through Sweden, possibly to the US torture camps in Poland and eastern Europe. I also think these cables revealed information about the Thailand black site, where the US was torturing some people.
    - chinchilla2020 2y ago
      fascinating how Swedes are so concerned about the small number of crimes committed by the US and want the US to withdraw. Yet they remain steadfastly silent on the crimes committed by Russia and China. Should the US withdraw from geopolitics and allow those other two to fill the vacuum? Like Julian Assange himself - I suspect many Russia supporters are hiding in plain sight.
      - impossiblefork 2y ago
        >fascinating how Swedes are so concerned about the small number of crimes committed by the US and want the US to withdraw. Withdraw from what? >Yet they remain steadfastly silent on the crimes committed by Russia and China. How have we been silent on those crimes. We have been quite concerned, they are almost next to us. I don't myself want to be part of NATO, but evidently the government is to afraid not to be, so now we are. >Should the US withdraw from geopolitics and allow those other two to fill the vacuum? The US has not gained anything of geopolitical value by storing people in the Guantanamo Bay prison camp or by flying suspect terrorist to torture camps in Europe, or by inhuman treatment of prisoners, as happened at Bromma. It hasn't gained anything geopolitically by going after people who revealed war crimes. The US actions that I oppose are for the large part neither of benefit to the US itself, nor to me. On the whole these actions are just stupid. To the degree that I want to avoid US troops in Sweden, this stupidity, these useless and harmful decisions that get implemented are one of the problems. Because if the US can this stupid on matters like Assange, or can desperately want to torture some random nobody, and are in such a hurry to do so, that they fly him through Bromma just because can refuel there, then they can do any kind of idiocy, and it can end up being me, or something Swedish that matters that pays the price. The US can defend its interests in a more co-operative way and with greater respect for international law and for its partners. >Like Julian Assange himself - I suspect many Russia supporters are hiding in plain sight. If you're implying that I would like Putin, who I consider basically a Chechen-cuddler. I've had less problems with him historically, and I don't think I fully understood how vengeful he was until he did as he did against the Karabach-Armenians. I'm probably more pro-Russia than Zelensky is-- I don't hate the Russians and I like many aspects of Russian culture, including their mathematics tradition and some of their music. I don't see the Ukraine war as per se very different from the Iraq war. This means that I view Russia and the US as closer on the level of morality than most people, who I feel have a bit of short term view of the world. These things 20 years ago are like yesterday to me. Details matter though, and scale, and many other things. Rather, when it comes to support of Ukraine my view is not based on morality as such, although I do believe that the Ukrainians have a right to rule their country, but rather on Swedish defence needs. We Swedes need to support them and ensure that Russia does not expand and get a border against Poland or some other unnecessarily forward position. There is no reason why we should allow such a situation, which will only cause us problems.
user3939382 2y ago
Foreign meddling in what? Foreign meddling in the Clinton campaign’s lies and obfuscations?
raxxorraxor 2y ago
That has nothing to do with democracy. On the contrary, a democracy needs the electorate to be informed and officials not having secrets or starting a war on the basis of lies.
nataliste 2y ago
The failure of the United States to provide a positive counterweight to propaganda due to launching two wars of aggression filled with warcrimes is not Russia's fault, nor Assange's. The United States is responsible for sowing the good, not Russia for not hiding the bad.
- kelnos 2y ago
  "Not hiding" is a pretty disingenuous way of putting it. "Being better at targeted propaganda" isn't really how I'd like our leaders to be chosen. Obviously that's where we are, but I wish we could do better.
  - nataliste 2y ago
    I don't want domestic propaganda from government. I want policy from government that creates good will domestically and abroad. "Russia might use this against us" is a good policy litmus test to not do those things.

0dayz 2y ago

No one said Clinton is democracy that title goes to the dear leader Kim Jong-un. That however does not mean you are the good guy for playing into the hands of an adversary that wanted to rig a democratic election.

gklitz 2y ago
Is people knowing more truthful facts to you considered “rigging an election”?
- 0dayz 2y ago
  No? Please point out where I said this. But then if we care about truthful facts then why didn't Assange release rnc documents?
  - chrisco255 2y ago
    Wikileaks only leaked what they got handed to them. In the DNC case, it seems that the leaker was motivated by Clinton railroading Bernie in the primary. Meanwhile on the Republican ticket, the populist, Trump, was able to sweep aside the established Bush dynasty and other party insider favorites.
    - the_why_of_y 2y ago
      SVR/Cozy Bear were fans of Bernie? https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/01/dutch-intelligence-hacked-video-cameras-in-office-of-russians-who-hacked-dnc/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/01/dutch...
      - willcipriano 2y ago
        Was that the same hacker team that created the fake laptop that is actually real and not from a hacker team?
      - chrisco255 2y ago

TheArcane 2y ago

This has the same energy as labelling any critique of Israel anti-semitic

oldandboring 2y ago
Our problem isn't with the critiques of Israel, it's with the fact that the people critiquing Israel are almost universally singling Israel out for critique.
- racional 2y ago
  The people critiquing Israel are almost universally singling Israel out for critique. They're not, of course. But labeling them as such is one of the myriad ways by which criticism of Israel gets automatically branded as you-know-what.
  - oldandboring 2y ago
    I love the "of course" you threw in. Do please try to appreciate the emotional toll of having non-Jews out there all helpfully informing us Jews what is, and isn't, antisemitism. It must be nice not having to endure that kind of thing in your daily life, to say nothing of having to bring my children past armed guards to get into synagogue.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - racional 2y ago
      Do please try to appreciate the emotional toll of having non-Jews out there all helpfully informing us Jews what is, and isn't, antisemitism. I have no idea what your essential attributes are. Nor do you have any idea as to mine. And I'm not telling you what to think about anything. This thread is getting far from the original topic. Recommend we both close shop here, and move on.
    - oska 2y ago

sabarn01 2y ago

If Assange showed any interest in also undermining Russia or other authoritarian regimes I would feel more compassion. I think criticization of the US foreign policy is fine and the press has a role. To me his case has always been grey. States have secrets its just the nature of the world.

yesco 2y ago
Personally as an American, I'm far more interested about the shit my government is hiding from me than getting yet another reason to hate Putin, what could possibly be leaked from Russia that would make their optics worse than it already is? This was true even pre-invasion. The whataboutism surrounding this feels completely disingenuous to me considering much of what was leaked by Wikileaks was war crimes, media collusion with Clinton's campaign and embarrassing mistakes the government tried to cover up, that they had no business trying to cover up. States have secrets, but that is a privilege granted to them by the people to protect national security, their abuse of this privilege has been completely unacceptable even if the reveal made your preferred candidate look bad for actions they were personally responsible for. If Wikileaks accomplished anything, it was revealing the hypocrites and those who lack even an inch of integrity.
- sabarn01 2y ago
  Its not like what wiki leaks did is new. The pentagon papers were published 50 years ago. The us government should be held to high standards and we need a press to do that. At some level however in a world of competing states if an organization is only interested in undermining one state it makes it less trust worthy in my eyes. I think Assange views the US as an evil actor and that informs what he thinks is worthy of coverage. Its why he could call Afghans who worked with the US as collaborators as in his eyes working with the US makes you evil. I think that world view is insane and naive. However as I said there is real utility to publishing information which shouldn't be kept from the public. Which is why I think Assange is a hard case.
- CRConrad 2y ago
  > If Wikileaks accomplished anything, it was revealing the hypocrites and those who lack even an inch of integrity. It revealed some hypocrites who lack integrity. The main effect, if any, of their exposure was to pave the way for other hypocrites who lack integrity to take over the positions of power and influence of the former.