Bad war news all around

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100727/ap_on_bi_ge/ml_iraq

So the IRS is up our asses for every last dollar, and persecutes poor people for taking liberties with the earned income tax credit (http://www.allbusiness.com/government/government-bodies-offices-government/10246878-1.html). But I guess the Pentagon has fallen victim to the moral hazard of managing other people's money that they're not accountable for. Jeez, just hire some temps from Accenture or something. They can call in high-tech drone air strikes from 15,000 miles away, but can't use TurboTax? For such a regimented, hierarchical organization as our military, how can there be no oversight and leadership on something so major as Iraq reconstruction funds? I guess that's another example why soldiers shouldn't moonlight as "nation builders". We all have our roles, talents, and limitations.

Also, what do you guys think about the Afghanistan war Wikileaks? Good or bad for the NATO effort and our democracy? Definitely bad for US-Pakistan relations, which may not necessarily be a bad thing. Wikileaks founder Assange predicted that one day his org would have "blood on its hands" (but feels that it's worth it to expose government-military crimes and deception), and Washington is threatening that it may happen now, maybe to discourage future leakers and control the damage. Civilians and the media don't need to know about sensitive real-time operational info (like how stupid Geraldo and Faux News exposed US troop positions and were then expelled from Iraq by the Pentagon: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/01/international/worldspecial/01MEDI.html), but if the war is so justly and properly executed, why the need to hide it from us? They wouldn't even let us film returning caskets until recently. We all know that mistakes abound in wars and even allies quarrel, so why do they feel the need to project the illusion of perfection and harmony to us? They must really think we're that stupid. I understand the desire to maintain soldier morale and public war support, but getting caught in an embarrassing scandal is bad for morale too.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100727/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_afghanistan_wikileaks

---------

All information from the wikileaks was redacted to protect sources and the data released was at least 7 months old so there was no risk of releasing sensitive information.

---------

Yeah I think that is an unlikely risk as well (considering all the other ways you can be burnt in the intel game, even by your own leaders - Valerie Plame for example), but the gov't is desperate to discredit the act. Assange was smart to "re-leak" the info through the NYT, Guardian, and Der Spiegel because those org's would diligently check the content and only publish what passed their legal dept's. It's ironic because Assange has previously lambasted the mainstream media, since they often also have access to Wikileaks' secret content, sources, and more, but are too "cowardly" to bring it into the light.