Is Bradley Manning a hero or a traitor?

  • Thread starter Thread starter njlisa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Robert_Sock said:
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.
Click to expand...
So are you then of the opinion that no soldier on any side, in any war, regardless of what war crimes and atrocities are being committed by his own side (even if these are part of official policy, rather than individual miscreant acts) should ever speak out or reveal such information? Or does that only apply when the soldier is on our side and it is our side who are committing the war crimes?

At what level of war crime is a serving soldier bound by his conscience to whistle blow? On deliberate innocent death, 2 deliberate innocent deaths, 6, 10, 100, 1000? Where would you have that line drawn? Or is it a simple, never speak out? In which case a German soldier in WWII would be morally bound to keep silent about what was going on in the death camps?
 
Reep said:
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.
Click to expand...
Certainly, the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was mass murder and condemned by every Pope since the event, and by Vatican II. Yet how many Catholics will justify this act as a ‘necessary evil’? Does our sense of patriotism over-rule our sense of basic morality?

“My country right or wrong”, is that how we should view things? Is that where our loyalties should lie? With Caesar? “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”? Does our sense of morality and justice belong to Caesar?
 
Brendan_64 said:
So are you then of the opinion that no soldier on any side, in any war, regardless of what war crimes and atrocities are being committed by his own side (even if these are part of official policy, rather than individual miscreant acts) should ever speak out or reveal such information? Or does that only apply when the soldier is on our side and it is our side who are committing the war crimes?

At what level of war crime is a serving soldier bound by his conscience to whistle blow? On deliberate innocent death, 2 deliberate innocent deaths, 6, 10, 100, 1000? Where would you have that line drawn? Or is it a simple, never speak out? In which case a German soldier in WWII would be morally bound to keep silent about what was going on in the death camps?
Click to expand...
In an idealistic sense, I’m against all wars. We should never condone a single ‘innocent’ death, and many servicemen were tried and convicted of such crimes. All war crimes ought to be investigated and tried. All I’m saying is that BM ought to have taken things to the proper authorities and left things there. Even BM now believes that what he did was wrong.

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.
 
Bergon said:
I stated my position in post #2. I haven’t reached a firm conclusion about Manning. I most certainly don’t support traitors. Should governments be able to do whatever they want without being held to account? My response is a definite no. Did Manning reveal too much? I can’t say for sure. Did he have an alternative? That depends on whether he should’ve revealed all or some of what he revealed. I believe if he had taken his concerns to his superiors or Congress, I doubt anything he revealed would’ve seen the light of day.
Click to expand...
Sadly, one of the biggest problems is precisely that taking this information to superiors doesn’t amount to just action, and in many cases leads to the exclusion if not outright ostracizing of the person bringing the complaint.

It’s also not merely a matter of “going through proper channels”. If the end of pursuing grievances is to make the public aware of incompetent and unjust military action, which I think Mr. Manning was at least partly trying to accomplish, then his method–although very unsavory–was worthwhile.

As a side note, I don’t think we can point fingers at whistle-blowers like Mr. Manning and Mr. Snowden for potentially compromising individuals or groups of individuals when those individuals’ actions are indefensible. It’s like one brother getting angry at the other for telling on him: He clearly broke the cookie jar and the other brother had every right to point that out to his parents. If the boy gets spanked, it’s not because his brother told on him, it’s because he broke the cookie jar.
 
Robert_Sock said:
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.
Click to expand...
Judas Iscariot was a traitor. Bradley Manning is not.
 
If I were in BM’s place in the war, I would have simply have cracked. I personally would have become a pacifist and refused to fight; a ‘coward.’ But I doubt that I would have leaked any classified info.
 
Robert_Sock said:
All I’m saying is that BM ought to have taken things to the proper authorities and left things there.
Click to expand...
And what if it is the proper authorities who are responsible? What is such actions are not the result of individuals who are transgressing, what if the actions are part of official policy? All he would be doing would be informing the authorities that they are following their own policy.

A bit like an SS man informing his superiors saying, “I wish to inform you that Jews are being deliberately killed, and not ‘de-loused’ in those gas chambers”.
 
Robert_Sock said:
If I were in BM’s place in the war, I would have simply have cracked. I personally would have become a pacifist and refused to fight.
Click to expand...
What? And refuse to obey the governing authorities to which you have pledged an oath?

How does this stack up against what St Paul said in his letter to the Romans?

This would be a defiance of governing authority and a refusal to be subject to their laws and your oath. In terms of the principle of disobedience, how is this different from what Bradley manning did?
 
Brendan_64 said:
What? And refuse to obey the governing authorities to which you have pledged an oath?

How does this stack up against what St Paul said in his letter to the Romans?

This would be a defiance of governing authority and a refusal to be subject to their laws and your oath. In terms of the principle of disobedience, how is this different from what Bradley manning did?
Click to expand...
It’s me. Again, I would have had a mental breakdown and would have been incapacitated. I doubt that I would have leaked any classified info.
 
Robert_Sock said:
It’s me. Again, I would have had a mental breakdown and would have been incapacitated.
Click to expand...
You simply do not know that your mental health would breakdown (conveniently to avoid having to make a moral choice) and if you hadn’t become incapacitated would you have continued to obey the governing authorities and carry on fighting? Or would you have chosen to disobey the governing authorities and refuse to fight?
Robert_Sock said:
I doubt that I would have leaked any classified info.
Click to expand...
The principle of disobedience to governing authorities is the same whether that disobedience involves a refusal to fight or releasing information to the press.
 
Brendan_64 said:
You simply do not know that your mental health would breakdown (conveniently to avoid having to make a moral choice) and if you hadn’t become incapacitated would you have continued to obey the governing authorities and carry on fighting? Or would you have chosen to disobey the governing authorities and refuse to fight?

The principle of disobedience to governing authorities is the same whether that disobedience involves a refusal to fight or releasing information to the press.
Click to expand...
If my mental health would not have broken down, I would be willing to fight.
 
Brendan_64 said:
And what if it is the proper authorities who are responsible? What is such actions are not the result of individuals who are transgressing, what if the actions are part of official policy? All he would be doing would be informing the authorities that they are following their own policy.

A bit like an SS man informing his superiors saying, “I wish to inform you that Jews are being deliberately killed, and not ‘de-loused’ in those gas chambers”.
Click to expand...
What do you suppose should have happened to BM? Do you think he’s completely innocent?
 
Robert_Sock said:
I always try to answer your questions to the best of my ability, but you sidetrack mine. Why?
Click to expand...
Not at all. You ask me is Bradley Manning completely innocent. I simply ask you to specify of what crime you are referring, and under whose law.
 
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...
  1. Notice I did not ask for sources on the use of torture by the US Government.
  2. Most of your linked articles deal with the CIA. The department of the IRS that deals with non-profits engaged in illegal/immoral actions, therefore I’m morally right to release the tax records of private individuals? Mr. Manning didn’t release just documents related to CIA operations. He released anything he could get his hands on.
  3. None of your articles showed where the government (the military or the CIA) is intentionally and/or knowingly targeting non-combatant first responders.
  4. As for the war in Iraq being just or unjust, BJPtG made it rather clear what his opinion on the matter was. That is good enough for me, even if his opinion is “unofficial.”
    4a. Even if the war in Iraq was unjust and/or the War on Terror is unjust, that does not excuse us of acting morally. Mr. Manning did not (I’ve explained this in a previous post).
    4b. And even if the wars are unjust, that does not equate to all actions taken in the wars as being unjust. I don’t think anyone on here would argue that the numerous humanitarian and infrastructure missions my unit conducted were unjust just because the war is unjust.
 
oldcatholicguy said:
  1. Notice I did not ask for sources on the use of torture by the US Government.
Click to expand...
I included the line on torture to be comprehensive.
  1. Most of your linked articles deal with the CIA. The department of the IRS that deals with non-profits engaged in illegal/immoral actions, therefore I’m morally right to release the tax records of private individuals? Mr. Manning didn’t release just documents related to CIA operations. He released anything he could get his hands on.
Click to expand...
The CIA articles show that the overall policy of the U.S. government in the war effort are unjust. The drone war in Pakistan is more documented than others. The best documentation of the atrocities which Manning leaked are the leaked videos themselves. Manning himself said that he did not leak anything that would harm U.S. troops. That is why he was acquitted of aiding the enemy, so your claim about him releasing whatever he could get his hands on isn’t even believed by the U.S. military.

A member of the IRS could have gone to the public leaking the immoral actions of the IRS, yes.
  1. None of your articles showed where the government (the military or the CIA) is intentionally and/or knowingly targeting non-combatant first responders.
Click to expand...
They show that anyone with an ounce of commonsense would know that the tactics are killing first responders treating the wounded. They also show that funerals (with civilians) are being deliberately targeted.
  1. As for the war in Iraq being just or unjust, BJPtG made it rather clear what his opinion on the matter was. That is good enough for me, even if his opinion is “unofficial.”
    4a. Even if the war in Iraq was unjust and/or the War on Terror is unjust, that does not excuse us of acting morally. Mr. Manning did not (I’ve explained this in a previous post).
Click to expand...
It does mean that the normal conditions that bind conscience to follow civil positive law do not exist in certain matters. As such, it would be completely moral to disregard restrictions ordering the coverup of atrocities by the U.S. military.
 
Robert_Sock said:
In an idealistic sense, I’m against all wars. We should never condone a single ‘innocent’ death, and many servicemen were tried and convicted of such crimes. All war crimes ought to be investigated and tried. All I’m saying is that BM ought to have taken things to the proper authorities and left things there. Even BM now believes that what he did was wrong.

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.
Click to expand...
Again, feelings of guilt after the fact do not equate to the objective morality of an action. If I were being held by the U.S. military and interrogated, I would probably feel guilty too.

Also, as has already been pointed out numerous times, your interpretation of St. Paul is not the Church’s interpretation of St. Paul.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top