Is it in our interests?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/

Is the Guardian along with others putting our troops further at risk by publishing these war log?

Would it have been in the nations interest to have imposed a .media ban on reporting these logs?

[rov1200]

Maybe my answer to an earlier question would better be served here:

///I see a report has just come out that we are killing too many civilians. As these terrorists hide behind the local populations what do they expect. If the forces get it right 50% of the time we will eventually rid the country of this scum.

As terrorists don't wear uniforms maybe a solution is for the innocents to wear a recognisable garment? ///

[jake-the-peg]

It was already in the public domain it was first published on line in Wiki-leaks


Perhaps you'd like to block politically inconveniant websites like China does?

[McMouse]

If the public knew more about what really goes on in places like Afghanistan there might be more pressure on the politicians to pull the troops out, or better still not engage in these overseas adventures in the first place.

[Gromit]

If the enemy had wanted to read them, they will have done so on wiki-leaks.

They are fighting a war with us, so they wouldn't wait around for the juicy bits to pop through their front in the Guardian, they will have been on the internet immediately.

Official secrets usually keep information from the public, not the enemy, because if we were fully aware of everything that was happening, we would demand that it cease. (not just wars, applies to all Government secrets).

[Zeuhl]

According to the Guardian journo on BBC News this morning, they heard this material had been leaked to Wikileaks back in June.
They approached them and have, in conjunction with New York Times and Der Spiegl, sorted through the material rather than just dumping it all in line.

They claim to have identified and held back items they judged to put people at risk and selected only a few hundred pages from thousands that represent several interesting threads;

one is the number of civilians killed by the Taliban which greatly exceeds the number killed by foreign troops and something not always appreciated in the west or by the Afghan population at large

second is the dubious nature of the Special Ops assassination squads who frequently kill people fingered by their afghan feud or business enemies

third is the lack of honesty regarding accidental killings of civilians by foreign troops

Assuming they have indeed retained info that would put our people at greater risk, then as this is all being done in our name with our money I think we have the right to know about it.
.

[youngmafbog]

You cannot fight a war telling the public everything.

[Zeuhl]

Clearly, the material in question is not /// telling the public everything///
.

[123everton]

On the one hand you say let's take the gloves off and give em a proper fight, then on the other you get a report saying just that and it's sssh.
It's very hard to wage war to create peace, whilst killing civilians in a country with a blood feud culture.
Afghanistan is winnable, if we can endure, Afghanistan is winnable when you are content to realise that we'd have to there for twenty thirty more years.
Forty years ago Kabul was quite a nice cosmopolitan city.