2 ms·
Can we please stop with this myth? The State Department itself has said that the cables were "not damaging." "...State Department officials concluded late las
by aqme28 13y ago
Can we please stop with this myth?
The State Department itself has said that the cables were "not damaging."
"...State Department officials concluded late last year that the publication of leaked United States diplomatic cables obtained by WikiLeaks 'was embarrassing but not damaging.'
Robert Gates, Defense Secretary at the time:
"Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest."
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/19/u-s-officials-reportedly-said-wikileaks-revelations-were-not-damaging/?_r=1&gwh=5C2072DCEF61351895DD1C258EBDC5D6 http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/19/u-s-officials-re...
- mpyne 13y agoThere is a difference between "consequences for foreign policy" and "consequences for the people actually on the ground". Swift action on the part of the military and State Dept. after the leaks is what helped make it possible for there to be, in the end, little consequence to foreign policy and little to no fatalities for the people they knew about. That does not mean, however, that there was no existential threat between the time the leaks were published and the time when that action was finally complete. The fact that the State Dept. might have been able to salvage the situation doesn't mean there was never a problem in the first place.