Whistleblower Bradley Manning was nominated for Nobel Peace Prize. Hugo Martins asks if we should consider him a hero or a traitor…
In May 2010 U.S. soldier Bradley Manning was arrested in Iraq on suspicion of having passed restricted material to the website Wikileaks. Bradley was charged with a dozen crimes from transferring classified data into his personal computer to aiding the enemy. Since then he has been locked in maximum security and inhumane conditions which, according to Salon, could easily be considered torture in many develop countries nowadays. But one thing might change his destiny.
Last week, February 1, The Movement of The Icelandic Parliament nominated Private Bradley Manning for the Nobel Peace Prize. The letter sent to the Nobel Peace Prize Committee is very explicit on why Private Bradley should be considered for the Nobel Peace Prize:
“We have the great honor of nominating Private First Class Bradley Manning for the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize. Manning is a soldier in the United States army who stands accused of releasing hundreds of thousands of documents to the whistleblower website WikiLeaks. The leaked documents pointed to a long history of corruption, war crimes, and imperialism by the United States government in international dealings. These revelations have fueled democratic uprising around the world, including a democratic revolution in Tunisia. According to journalists, his alleged actions helped motivate the democratic Arab Spring movements, shed light on secret corporate influence on our foreign policies, and most recently contributed to the Obama Administration agreeing to withdraw all U.S.troops from the occupation in Iraq.
Bradley Manning has been incarcerated for well over a year by the U.S. government without a trial. He spent over ten months of that time period in solitary confinement, conditions which experts worldwide have criticized as torturous. Juan Mendez, the United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on Torture and Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment, has repeatedly requested and been denied a private meeting with Manning to assess his conditions.
Don’t like ads? Become a supporter and enjoy The Good Men Project ad freeThe documents made public by WikiLeaks should never have been kept from public scrutiny. The revelations – including video documentation of an incident in which American soldiers gunned down Reuters journalists in Iraq – have helped to fuel a worldwide discussion about America’s overseas engagements, civilian casualties of war, imperialistic manipulations, and rules of engagement. Citizens worldwide owe a great debt to the WikiLeaks whistleblower for shedding light on these issues, and so I urge the Committee to award this prestigious prize to accused whistleblower Bradley Manning.
Sincerely,
Birgitta Jónsdóttir
Margrét Tryggvadóttir
Þór Saari
Members of the Icelandic Parliament for The Movement”
Many accused him of being a whistleblower, of lacking patriotism and not loving his country – being a traitor. I don’t agree, I believe it shows tremendous courage and humanity to do something for which one knows he could be severely punished and ostracized, and act accordingly with one’s conscience. I, therefore, believe that the many who had acess to the information and didn’t use it the way Private Bradley did—didn’t do something to stop it—could and should be convicted of war crimes and associated with some of the worst war criminals. The documents Private Bradley released are the proof of war crimes, murders and much more.
Some places around the world are, at this moment, probably, better places because of what Private Bradley did and, with time, maybe the world would be a better place for what he did.
There’s only one thing for you to decide now: is he a hero or a traitor?
—Photo savebradley/Flickr
copy. I suppose you could read Mark Steyn’s book “After America”. You’d love the picture.
Do we rule the world? No. Then your point fails. We don’t order everybody else around. Your point fails.
Other than your philosophical brethren, who in, say, Europe really meant AMERICA OUT? I used to talk with European excnange students and agree that we should have stayed home in 1917 and ever since. After giving them enough time to get really going. They got kind of uncomfortable. IOW, it was a pose. Like yours.
Yeah. And you got the oil.
And the Med is short one nutcase dictator to be replaced by an organized bunch of fundy Islamicists.
Terrific.
Valter. You didn’t choose. But you got the oil anyway. How’s that for sitting pretty? Your hands are clean and you have the oil.
As I say, you’re welcome.
Richard, I didn’t choose because nobody asked me. 🙄
As you might now, for several years Italy had a government (read: Berlusconi) that didn’t care much – if at all – for people’s opinions. As a matter of fact, most Italians were against Italy’s intervention in wars – any war. But the government didn’t care.
Valter. You know that light, sweet Libyan crude, the only kind that can be refined by countries bordering the Med?
You’re welcome.
What do you mean with that? ❓
If I had to choose a war for having crude (oil/gas/petrol/whatever), I’d choose no war and no oil.
Some things are not worth that price.
That is the reason you do not get to choose. 3:)
Ladies and gentlemen, I present The Ugly American. “We don’t want to rule the world and order everyone else around, but we got no choice. It’s the white man’s burden. Sigh. Now fetch me another cocktail.”
Nice joke.
Valter. We weren’t talking about Mussolini’s soldiers. Neither were you, until you got busted. Believe me, most Americans would love to be able to stand on the Atlantic or Pacific shore and give the rest of the world the Digit of Delight. Love to. You people aren’t worth it. But, for now, we can’t. Complaints like yours are like the kid who says to her parents, “I hate you. Now take me and Brittany to the mall.” The European Union, successor to the Hapsburg Empire except without the music, dancing, and snazzy uniforms, managed to blow through all the money… Read more »
Soldiers might be. Airmen are not. One of my complaints with the Air Force. And the DoD will throw anyone under the bus, as needed. No loyalty there. So where are we headed with the I support Manning people? All classified information should be revealed for the betterment of the world or just US information? Since we are such an evil influence, how about we just disengage with the rest of the planet and see how it shakes out? We will just pick up the pieces after it’s over. The funny thing is that much of what came out in… Read more »
The unprincipled often call men of principle foolish. It helps them sleep at night.
PursuitAce: “how about we just disengage with the rest of the planet and see how it shakes out”
It will go fine; not worse, at least.
Do you really think USA’s interventions made anything better in the world? 😯
(after WWII, of course)
It was all imperialism and fighting for resources. Has Vietnam taught anything?
Valter. You got Full Metal Jacket mixed up with “Victory at Sea”. The former is fiction, the latter is not. Using fiction to prove something in the real world is dicey. Let’s look at Haditha. That was ginned up by an unscrupulous Time reporter and a Baathist pretending to be a journalist. The Marines took that so seriously that they imprisoned the guys in worse conditions than the Gitmo Goons. In fact, in order to be helpful, NCIS withheld exculpatory evidence. Mark Harmon was on vacation or something. Result was 100% acquittals. There was a firefight. People got killed. The… Read more »
@Richard Aubrey: “I will tell you that following an illegal order is a crime” I can believe you, but I cannot believe every army, everywhere, everytime, has followed that directive. I’m quite sure it happened the opposite. My discourse was talking in a general sense, though I took Manning as starting point. BTW I’m Italian, so I I cannot know much about USA training. But I can tell you that during WWII, Italian soldiers had to follow Mussolini orders, regardless they were illegal or immoral (and, anyway, a government may make slaughtering of innocents a legal thing: this doesn’t make… Read more »
I stand with Manning. A man has to do what he feels right to him, rules or not. Otherwise, he’s just a robot anyone can manipulate; a puppet. Not by chance, military training condition soldiers to NOT feel, otherwise they wouldn’t obey orders (remember the training in Kubrick’s “Full Metal Jacket”?). Anyone blindingly following orders, can become a killer and a monster at any moment. He can’t be trusted; he’s not a man anymore, he’s just a machine, a cog. You have to “betray” your country, when your country is doing the wrong thing. Otherwise you’re the accomplice in the… Read more »
“A man has to do what he feels right to him, rules or not.” A man should do what he feels right to him till a point i.e. join armed forces or not. When you wear the military uniform, the military rules are your conscience and if any soldier dishonor them, then he is a hypocrite and not conscientious. In democratic countries, armed forces are under civilian control and are answerable to the civilian authorities. Armed forces do not start wars , political leadership does. Armed forces execute order of political leadership which is elected. It is for political leadership… Read more »
@Rapses: “the military rules are your conscience”
I didn’t know the conscience was interchangeable, like a spare part. 🙄
If your values don’t match military rule, then do not join army.
You may match all military values, but what if a crazy general orders you to uselessly kill thousands?
To napalm a village with mothers and children?
Or to bomb a city just because there’s oil to get?
Should you follow the order, or your own conscience?
And don’t tell me this has never happened… 🙄
The problem with your “values”, is they work flawlessly in theory; but, in practice, things have often many shades of grey.
I like to remind you that civilian authorities control military. Political leadership in democracy is controlled by voters. Therefore, it is ultimately the responsibility of people to stop any injustice.
Soldiers are citizens too. And they’re in a better position than most to know when a commander is committing an injustice.
Do we really have to trot out the Nuremberg lesson AGAIN? “It was my job to follow orders” is never a defense for immoral actions. Never.
““It was my job to follow orders” is never a defense for immoral actions. Never.”
Only when your side loses the war and you have to stand trial. If your side wins, you are a hero and all the killings and destruction you did was heroism.
Yep.
History – and rules – are written by the winner. 🙄
Maybe the military has become all well-meaning and good, and I’m not updated; but throughout the course of history, armies and soldiers often behaved in a reproachable way.
Besides, theory is one thing – but practice often contradicts it.
Also because soldiers are like everybody else, human and imperfect.
“If your side wins, you are a hero and all the killings and destruction you did was heroism.”
Riiiight. Because we’ve never prosecuted any of our own soldiers for war crimes or anything.
Oh, wait… we DID.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes
Joining the military does not involve signing away your conscience, and it does not absolve you of your legal and moral responsibilities.
Do you know the difference between doing justice and window dressing? The number of prosecutions for a microscopic minority of the war crimes committed by the U.S. armed forces.
Julie.
Wrong. It is a crime to follow an illegal order. Soldiers are given training on the difference.
That said, it appears that Iceland has too few people IYKWIMAITYD. They’re going to regret losing Keflavik.
We also need to differentiate between war crimes and things America does. In law, there’s a difference. In other places, not so much.
Also, those complaining might want to have on hand files of earlier complaints about war crimes commtted by America’s enemies in the last, say, twenty years. Just to show they have principles.
I would say that there are two sides to this coin.
The first being that transparency is something I value deeply and I think is an important part of government and the international scene.
That being said, making countries less likely to trust each other isn’t a great way to encourage world peace. Trust is how neoliberal institutions like the United Nations function today.
So I don’t know. He is a traitor, but is he a morally justified traitor? What enemy did Manning sell us out to? Is he a hero? Has anything changed because of what Manning did?
Speaking of manipulation and dishonesty – one of Obama’s 2007/8 campaign promises was to end the war in Iraq. That this group discounts that historic fact as if it didn’t happen casts doubt on the honesty and integrity of any of their claims and arguments.
Barack Obama promised to end the war in Iraq and won Nobel Peace Prize. Actually he never made any effort for peace. Now, Bradley Manning betrayed the U.S. army and has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Nobel Peace Prize has become a joke.
The U.S. army leadership has betrayed the U.S., as evidenced by the information that Private Manning made public. That’s the real joke, but it’s not particularly funny.
The problem is not the army leadership. It is the political leadership which is creating all the mess.
Proof of war crimes, huh? Proof, please.
I saw Assange asked what about the names of Afghans who helped Americans. The taliban, he said, would know how to deal with collaborators. And I think his current gig is a talk show hosted by the KGB. Scratch a lefty hero and find a vicious, murderous tyrant or his enabler. Never fails.
Nope, just because it’s secret doesn’t mean there’s anything vile about it.
Bradley Manning is undoubtedly a traitor. He betrayed the trust of his unit and deserves the harshest punishment.
So Rapses, no matter what the unit is ordered to do, even if it is wrong, it is even more wrong to disobey orders? Sounds like how Nazi Germany happened.
There is a rule in army “Follow order, no mistake” which means that when you are following the orders, you are guilty of nothing.
Good to know. Sounds like you can kill, maim, destroy or whatever else so long as it is an order. Then you aren’t guilty of anything.
During a war there are three levels, strategic level includes the generals who make the war plan and policy, the tactical level which deals with deployment and then comes operational level which executes them. .Each level performs it assigned duty without any question. Discipline is the most important in maintaining unit cohesion and any breach of discipline has to be punished.
I totally understand that because I am not unintelligent. It doesn’t mean that the order is sound or moral or just. And I personally think anyone with the character to resist an order asking them to do something that they find immoral, unjust etc is worth attention. They may wind up being punished? But I respect them more than if they blindly commit atrocities based on the order of someone who is strategizing based on politics. That’s all wars.
He could have disobeyed any unjust orders or have reported it to any appropriate military authority, but leaking military classified information is unpardonable.
“Each level performs it assigned duty without any question. Discipline is the most important in maintaining unit cohesion and any breach of discipline has to be punished.” Yes. Heaven forfend that men who may have been conscripted into military service, who have little or no personal stake in the conflict, might not kill other men who likewise have been conscripted into service, who they do not know, and have no personal arguments with, merely because they were ordered to do so. What chaos might result from this? The whole idea of poor men going off to foreign lands to kill… Read more »
There’s also a rule in the military called the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which explicitly denies the “always follow orders” dodge that you claim. In fact, it explicitly TELLS soldiers they MUST disobey orders that are unlawful.
Your fantasy of a regiment of mindless, blindly obedient killing machines is both untrue and anti-American.
Do you know insubordination is a valid ground for court martial.
And the defendant is exonerated if it turns out he was disobeying an unlawful order.
Blind obedience is simply NOT a virtue, not even in the military.
Decisions in battlefield are not made after reading the law books. They are split second decisions which make the difference between life and death. In those situations there is very fine line between legal and illegal, but insubordination is a clear cut offense. Even if a soldier is exonerated in court martial, he would have to face his unit and officers, who would be hostile to him, affecting his career or worse. Unit cohesion goes beyond law manuals extends to camaraderie. I hope you know the motto “One for all and all for one.”
I’m sorry Julie, did you just set a record for Godwin’s Law? Two posts in and already we’re talking about Nazi Germany? Seriously? That glaring faux pas aside, I’m reasonably certain the two do not even remotely compare. If the leaked documents had only been about specific incidences dealing with potential war crimes, Pvt. Manning may have actually resembled whatever it is Hugo Martins sees through his rose-colored contact lenses. But the leak was not limited to specific incidences. Nor was it even limited to the war in Iraq. Included in Pvt. Manning’s ham-handed version of “justice” were 250,000 diplomatic… Read more »
Yes, idealism certainly has no place in awarding Nobel Peace Prizes, does it? Exposing corruption and inconveniencing warmongers and dictators that are nevertheless “key strategic allies” is just an awful, awful thing to do, and nobody should reward or encourage behavior like that.
So, what do you think of whistleblower laws–should we be killing all the stoolies and troublemakers, or just lock them up for life? How about the journalists too, while we’re at it? We can’t have people uncovering inconvenient facts and making them public, after all… not when there are economic interests at stake!
Whistleblowing has no place in armed forces. It is treason.
No, it is not. If your superior officers are breaking the law, you have both a legal and moral duty to report them.
Again, unquestioning obedience is not, and never will be, a good thing–not even in the military.
If your superior officers are breaking laws, then you have to report it to the appropriate military authority and not the media.
Copyleft, I never said that idealism has no place in awarding the Nobel Peace Prize. Everything you wrote after that is a pretty obvious straw man. I DID say that idealism needs to be tempered by pragmatism. Do you honestly believe that Pvt. Manning’s actions changed the world? Was this REALLY the best way to go about seeking the change that he likely sought? Pvt. Manning is a citizen in a democracy where he is guaranteed the vote and actions he takes to organize political opposition are protected. However, releasing thousands of documents, the vast majority of which he clearly… Read more »