Is Bradley Manning a hero or a traitor?

  • Thread starter Thread starter njlisa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Gricken said:
Do you honestly think that his superiors would have done anything? Risk the military looking bad? I would not be surprised if his report ended up “lost” or the people who were looking at it reassigned. He wasn’t going to take that chance.
Click to expand...
Mr. Manning’s reckless disregard for the safety of others invalidates the morality of his actions. The ends don’t justify the means. As I’ve pointed out before, and to which no one has bothered to address, Mr. Manning’s actions are far different than those of Mr. Snowden’s (who took the time to actually bother figuring out what info was relevant and should be released on what info wasn’t relevant and shouldn’t be released). Additionally, he still had a duty to report any actions he viewed as illegal. “Well they wouldn’t have done anything” does not negate his duty to attempt to use the correct means by which to address the issue.
 
oldcatholicguy said:
Mr. Manning’s reckless disregard for the safety of others invalidates the morality of his actions. The ends don’t justify the means. As I’ve pointed out before, and to which no one has bothered to address, Mr. Manning’s actions are far different than those of Mr. Snowden’s (who took the time to actually bother figuring out what info was relevant and should be released on what info wasn’t relevant and shouldn’t be released). Additionally, he still had a duty to report any actions he viewed as illegal. “Well they wouldn’t have done anything” does not negate his duty to attempt to use the correct means by which to address the issue.
Click to expand...
I’m not saying he was right or wrong in what he did. I’m merely going through the reasoning, as far as I can see it.
 
I am coming into this discussion late and dont want to read all posts, so if this was already covered then forgive me.

I dont understand the fuss over this whole issueis. If Bradley Manning is such a bad man or a traitor, why dont we feel the same way about Bill Clinton? Bill Clinton while he was president SOLD our secrets to the Chinese. Does anyone not care about that issue?

Am I bothered by the whole Bradley Manning issue? Yes, I am but I am even more bothered that Clinton made a load of money SELLING our secrets.

Is this another diversion from the biggier issue that we are facing in the WH and this country? The dollar will collapse soon and we are worried about Bradley Manning. 2 weeks ago we were worried about Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman. All the while the president is finding ways to go around congress to pass is ideals on every US Citizen.

This is just a smoke screen so Obama can do what he wants to destroy this country.

Move on people and be more aware of what is really happening.
 
oldcatholicguy said:
Source?
Click to expand...
NYT article on this:
nytimes.com/2012/02/06/world/asia/us-drone-strikes-are-said-to-target-rescuers.html?_r=0

The Guardian Article concerning this:
theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/20/us-drones-strikes-target-rescuers-pakistan

Business Insider article about a NYU Law school study on this:
businessinsider.com/drone-double-tap-first-responders-2012-9

Just released two days ago report by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism:
thebureauinvestigates.com/2013/08/01/bureau-investigation-finds-fresh-evidence-of-cia-drone-strikes-on-rescuers/

Waterboarding is well documented, as is the fact that the CIA would send terrorists to prisons in allied countries to be tortured during the Bush years, so I don’t really feel the need to cite those.

Point being, I think there is ample evidence that the U.S. War on Terror is not a just war. As for Robert’s point about not Vatican declaration: that isn’t how the Church works. She lays out broad moral principles, and allows her member’s to form their conscience on individual proposals. JPII condemned Iraq in the most vocal terms possible, and numerous bishops have come out attacking the policies that I cited above.
 
StJudeprayforme said:
NYT article on this:
nytimes.com/2012/02/06/world/asia/us-drone-strikes-are-said-to-target-rescuers.html?_r=0

The Guardian Article concerning this:
theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/20/us-drones-strikes-target-rescuers-pakistan

Business Insider article about a NYU Law school study on this:
businessinsider.com/drone-double-tap-first-responders-2012-9

Just released two days ago report by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism:
thebureauinvestigates.com/2013/08/01/bureau-investigation-finds-fresh-evidence-of-cia-drone-strikes-on-rescuers/

Waterboarding is well documented, as is the fact that the CIA would send terrorists to prisons in allied countries to be tortured during the Bush years, so I don’t really feel the need to cite those.

Point being, I think there is ample evidence that the U.S. War on Terror is not a just war. As for Robert’s point about not Vatican declaration: that isn’t how the Church works. She lays out broad moral principles, and allows her member’s to form their conscience on individual proposals. JPII condemned Iraq in the most vocal terms possible, and numerous bishops have come out attacking the policies that I cited above.
Click to expand...
Yes, and Bradley Manning freely choose to disclose classified information based on his conscience, and now he is suffering the consequences. If he was really concerned with the ‘unjust’ war, he should have waited until he was out of service and joined some anti-war organizations. Hey, you’re still free to call him a hero, and he’s getting his hero status, but behind bars. I truly feel sorry for him. May God bless him abundantly.
 
Robert_Sock said:
Yes, and Bradley Manning freely choose to disclose classified information, and now he is suffering the consequences. If he was really concerned with the ‘unjust’ war, he should have waited until he was out of service and joined some anti-war organizations.
Click to expand...
Now you are talking about legality, rather than morality. Was what he did legal? No. Was what he did moral? Probably. The issue of legal guilt has little to do on with whether under Christian moral theology his actions were wrong.
 
StJudeprayforme said:
Now you are talking about legality, rather than morality. Was what he did legal? No. Was what he did moral? Probably. The issue of legal guilt has little to do on with whether under Christian moral theology his actions were wrong.
Click to expand...
As for the morality, reread Romans.

Romans
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

How can the Word of God be ignored? Yes, the war is morally unjust in the minds of some, but not with the vast majority. The Church would be obligated to say the war being fought was unjust within an official decree if this was truly so.
 
Robert_Sock said:
As for the morality, reread Romans.

Romans
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

How can the Word of God be ignored? Yes, the war is morally unjust in the minds of some, but not with the vast majority. The Church would be obligated to say the war being fought was unjust within an official decree if this was truly so.
Click to expand...
And around we go again.
 
Robert_Sock said:
As for the morality, reread Romans.

Romans
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

How can the Word of God be ignored? Yes, the war is morally unjust in the minds of some, but not with the vast majority. The Church would be obligated to say the war being fought was unjust within an official decree if this was truly so.
Click to expand...
No, the Church would not be obligated to do so with an official decree. Her job is to lay down the principles. Ample proof has been provided here that the U.S. War on Terror does not conform with just war doctrine, whether because of torture, or because of crimes against civilians being a part of the strategy. The Church does not need to write a specific document condemning the war, since she has already condemned the unjust actions. JPII made clear his belief on Iraq in both the build up and aftermath to the invasion.

As for your constant reference to Roman’s, the teaching of the Church on civil positive laws is that we do not have to obey them if they conflict with the moral law. U.S. actions overseas clearly do not conform to the moral law, so any civil positive law commanding that a soldier aid in covering up war crimes is not binding on conscience.
 
Gricken said:
It’s been seen, your interpretation of it has also been seen, and dismissed by most everyone here.
Click to expand...
How can you simply dismiss the Word of God? Why did God allow it to be in the bible unless He wanted it to be followed?
 
Robert_Sock said:
How can you simply dismiss the Word of God? Why did God allow it to be in the bible unless He wanted it to be followed?
Click to expand...
Only the Church has the authority to interpret the Bible. The Church has interpreted it differently than you, and people have explained that here. That is why people dismiss your view.
 
Robert_Sock said:
How can you simply dismiss the Word of God? Why did God allow it to be in the bible unless He wanted it to be followed?
Click to expand...
Unless you have suddenly become the arbitrator of what the bible means, I haven’t dismissed the bible at all. Merely what you think it means.
 
StJudeprayforme said:
No, the Church would not be obligated to do so with an official decree. Her job is to lay down the principles. Ample proof has been provided here that the U.S. War on Terror does not conform with just war doctrine, whether because of torture, or because of crimes against civilians being a part of the strategy. The Church does not need to write a specific document condemning the war, since she has already condemned the unjust actions. JPII made clear his belief on Iraq in both the build up and aftermath to the invasion.

As for your constant reference to Roman’s, the teaching of the Church on civil positive laws is that we do not have to obey them if they conflict with the moral law. U.S. actions overseas clearly do not conform to the moral law, so any civil positive law commanding that a soldier aid in covering up war crimes is not binding on conscience.
Click to expand...
May I ask: What do you suppose would have been a just outcome for Bradley Manning’s actions?
 
Robert_Sock said:
May I ask: What do you suppose would have been a just outcome for Bradley Manning’s actions?
Click to expand...
A just outcome? I think a just outcome would have been the military cleaning up and conforming with the moral law in response to the revelations of the killing of innocent lives. I think Manning should have been granted an honourable discharge if he desired, or should have been allowed to stay in if his conscience allowed him to do so. He should not have been prosecuted for being a whistleblower.
 
StJudeprayforme said:
A just outcome? I think a just outcome would have been the military cleaning up and conforming with the moral law in response to the revelations of the killing of innocent lives. I think Manning should have been granted an honourable discharge if he desired, or should have been allowed to stay in if his conscience allowed him to do so. He should not have been prosecuted for being a whistleblower.
Click to expand...
I too am for the military becoming in line with the the moral teaching of the Church; these types of atrocities are very painful to me; but I still believe that BM was a traitor in the grand scheme of things. We can’t afford having military personnel handing out classified info any time they feel that a war is unjust.
 
Has the US been involved in a truly just war since World War II? I’m not sure they have been.
 
epiclotus said:
Has the US been involved in a truly just war since World War II? I’m not sure they have been.
Click to expand...
I doubt whether we have been in a just war in almost 200 years. When you consider how hard Woodrow Wilson and FDR worked to get us into WW1 & WW2, respectively, I am reluctant to call those wars just either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top