Chelsea Manning running for US Senate

[Great Lakes Municipalities]

It's kind of a cliche to call someone a Benedict Arnold whenever someone does something the national leadership disapproves of, isn't it? I mean, leaking information of warcrimes can hardly qualify one for being a traitor.

I wasn't calling Manning a Benedict Arnold. I was using Arnold as an example, I'm not so much arguing against Manning (I'm not even sure what exactly she leaked or the consequences of that leak) as I am against the idea apparently evident in this thread that it's totally fine to allow open, clear traitors into the government.

Which is basically saying we should allow the government and the country to shoot itself in the head based on a extremely naive and foolish idea of egalitarianism.

Betraying an unjust imperialist regime indicates that she is brave and moral in times where it would be easier to stay quiet.

[Tekania]

You haven't.... I absolutely abhor hypocrites.

As do I. And I also dislike ideas that are potentially extremely destructive to ones own country like yours.

I do not see how supporting the "we the people's" power to select representatives that they think best represents their interest is destructive to my Country... My country is the United States of America and allowed that is what makes America great. I would say it would be more destructive to deny "we the people's" voice than it would be allowing it. While the later surely may cause conflict, the former is effective DEATH to what makes USA , USA in the first place.

You're effectively advocating shooting the USA in the head to protect it. Fucking absurd.

[Opfornia]

Chelsea Manning didn't "switch sides" or do it for the money, tho

No, but both betrayed their country.

Arnold betrayed the rebellion, Chelsea betrayed the empire.

[Great Lakes Municipalities]

No, but both betrayed their country.

Arnold betrayed the rebellion, Chelsea betrayed the empire.

Bingo!

[Salus Maior]

I wasn't calling Manning a Benedict Arnold. I was using Arnold as an example, I'm not so much arguing against Manning (I'm not even sure what exactly she leaked or the consequences of that leak) as I am against the idea apparently evident in this thread that it's totally fine to allow open, clear traitors into the government.

Which is basically saying we should allow the government and the country to shoot itself in the head based on a extremely naive and foolish idea of egalitarianism.

Betraying an unjust imperialist regime indicates that she is brave and moral in times where it would be easier to stay quiet.

Every country that's worth anything in the world has done awful things. Hell, probably even the all the smaller insignificant countries have their fair share of blood on their hands. It's naive to expect that a country be completely straight-edge and forthright, that's just not the world we live in.

[Great Lakes Municipalities]

Betraying an unjust imperialist regime indicates that she is brave and moral in times where it would be easier to stay quiet.

Every country that's worth anything in the world has done awful things. Hell, probably even the all the smaller insignificant countries have their fair share of blood on their hands. It's naive to expect that a country be completely straight-edge and forthright, that's just not the world we live in.

Ahh okay, so, you think it is impossible to condemn all countries with a shady history? Challenge accepted.
The US is the world superpower with more capability to carry out immoral actions. This does not make its crimes any less, however. Thinking that we should look over it because of the reasons you said is not only cynical but also misanthropic.

[Wysten]

Betraying an unjust imperialist regime indicates that she is brave and moral in times where it would be easier to stay quiet.

Every country that's worth anything in the world has done awful things. Hell, probably even the all the smaller insignificant countries have their fair share of blood on their hands. It's naive to expect that a country be completely straight-edge and forthright, that's just not the world we live in.

It's Lichtenstein I tell you they killed the most.

[Wysten]

Every country that's worth anything in the world has done awful things. Hell, probably even the all the smaller insignificant countries have their fair share of blood on their hands. It's naive to expect that a country be completely straight-edge and forthright, that's just not the world we live in.

Ahh okay, so, you think it is impossible to condemn all countries with a shady history? Challenge accepted.
The US is the world superpower with more capability to carry out immoral actions. This does not make its crimes any less, however. Thinking that we should look over it because of the reasons you said is not only cynical but also misanthropic.

You tell me what purpose did the leaks serve? Snowden actually had good reason to Manning didn't really do anything else except confirm a general thought among most people who study the conflict in the area.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Every country that's worth anything in the world has done awful things. Hell, probably even the all the smaller insignificant countries have their fair share of blood on their hands. It's naive to expect that a country be completely straight-edge and forthright, that's just not the world we live in.

It's Lichtenstein I tell you they killed the most.

I dunno. Just last week I was killed by the Sanmarinese Crossbow Corps.

[USS Monitor]

No, but both betrayed their country.

Arnold betrayed the rebellion, Chelsea betrayed the empire.

Whupty shit. Rebellion isn't inherently positive.

[Great Lakes Municipalities]

Arnold betrayed the rebellion, Chelsea betrayed the empire.

Whupty shit. Rebellion isn't inherently positive.

Bingo bango! Also true.

Ahh okay, so, you think it is impossible to condemn all countries with a shady history? Challenge accepted.
The US is the world superpower with more capability to carry out immoral actions. This does not make its crimes any less, however. Thinking that we should look over it because of the reasons you said is not only cynical but also misanthropic.

You tell me what purpose did the leaks serve? Snowden actually had good reason to Manning didn't really do anything else except confirm a general thought among most people who study the conflict in the area.

Even if it didn't do anything, some hard proof of the USA's shifty shit is a good thing to me.

[Salus Maior]

Every country that's worth anything in the world has done awful things. Hell, probably even the all the smaller insignificant countries have their fair share of blood on their hands. It's naive to expect that a country be completely straight-edge and forthright, that's just not the world we live in.

Ahh okay, so, you think it is impossible to condemn all countries with a shady history? Challenge accepted.
The US is the world superpower with more capability to carry out immoral actions. This does not make its crimes any less, however. Thinking that we should look over it because of the reasons you said is not only cynical but also misanthropic.

And what's that going to accomplish? Nothing, all you'll do is confirm what anyone with a decent understanding of history already knows; to maintain power you have to do shady shit. This is true for everyone, especially world powers.

Sometimes one has to overlook bad things for a greater good, the survival and future welfare of the nation/empire. Now, again, I'm not familiar with what Manning leaked or the consequences of it so I'm not really talking about her. What I'm saying is that the world we live in is full of shady shit, and there is no way to make it 100% above the table do-good all the time. Sometimes we just have to accept that bad things are necessary or inevitable when it comes to running a country.

[Salus Maior]

I do not see how supporting the "we the people's" power to select representatives that they think best represents their interest is destructive to my Country... My country is the United States of America and allowed that is what makes America great. I would say it would be more destructive to deny "we the people's" voice than it would be allowing it. While the later surely may cause conflict, the former is effective DEATH to what makes USA , USA in the first place.

You're effectively advocating shooting the USA in the head to protect it. Fucking absurd.

It's destructive because "the people" for the most part aren't that invested in running the country, or really have the knowledge to make the best possible decision. And this is not me saying the people are stupid, I'm saying the majority of the people do not put in the time and the energy to really research candidates to vote for and to make sure the best possible outcome of elections for the future of the country happens. Because people are invested in their own lives, they're being going to work, taking care of their kids, having their own social lives, putting food on the table, they don't know about the minutia of foreign relations or whether a tax will hurt or help, not really. They just rely on the news, second hand sources to tell them what's right or wrong. This is a fact, and is easily observable when election season comes around. People look for their hot button issues in candidates, and that's it. They don't know or care how talented they are or how good they'd really be.

My rant about the flaws of "we the people" worship and governance aside, that's not really how it works in the U.S anyway. The 'people' don't really rule, the parties do, and they're the ones that decide who we get to vote for from their own ranks.

[The Lone Alliance]

He also switched sides and fought against us with the British because he didn't get the promotion he wanted. Don't be a fool.

Actually he switched sides after getting passed over for promotion multiple times, having other generals taking credit for his successes, and getting blamed for failures he had no control over, oh and likely being encouraged by the fact he was short on money and his wife was Pro-British.

[Ethel mermania]

He also switched sides and fought against us with the British because he didn't get the promotion he wanted. Don't be a fool.

Actually he switched sides after getting passed over for promotion multiple times, having other generals taking credit for his successes, and getting blamed for failures he had no control over, oh and likely being encouraged by the fact he was short on money and his wife was Pro-British.

she was hot, i dont blame him.

[Arlenton]

He should be in jail.


Or maybe.....

[Soldati Senza Confini]

He also switched sides and fought against us with the British because he didn't get the promotion he wanted. Don't be a fool.

Actually he switched sides after getting passed over for promotion multiple times, having other generals taking credit for his successes, and getting blamed for failures he had no control over, oh and likely being encouraged by the fact he was short on money and his wife was Pro-British.

I, too, would defect if the future wife was hot and had connections to hide somewhere else and she told me "the hell with this shit".

Men have done much worse over pussy. *nods*

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Actually he switched sides after getting passed over for promotion multiple times, having other generals taking credit for his successes, and getting blamed for failures he had no control over, oh and likely being encouraged by the fact he was short on money and his wife was Pro-British.

she was hot, i dont blame him.

I honestly don't blame him either.

The wife also had connections.

[Talvezout]

i really want her to run and win, because of the light she cast on the stuff the us has done, but at the same time i don't know if she also has the necessary experience for senate

either way, i hope it works out well for her, win or lose

[Ifreann]

He should be in jail.


Or maybe.....

(Image)

Benedict Arnold? I'm pretty sure he's dead.

[Wysten]

i really want her to run and win, because of the light she cast on the stuff the us has done, but at the same time i don't know if she also has the necessary experience for senate

either way, i hope it works out well for her, win or lose

Can we agree though that leaking classified information no matter how horid does not bode well for any person seeking a position of higher power?

[Talvezout]

i really want her to run and win, because of the light she cast on the stuff the us has done, but at the same time i don't know if she also has the necessary experience for senate

either way, i hope it works out well for her, win or lose

Can we agree though that leaking classified information no matter how horid does not bode well for any person seeking a position of higher power?

yeah i agree

i mean i think she was on the right personally, but if she actually makes it to running that would be impressive

[Kramania]

No thanks.

We don't need a treacherous piece of shit like her in government.

[Tekania]

I do not see how supporting the "we the people's" power to select representatives that they think best represents their interest is destructive to my Country... My country is the United States of America and allowed that is what makes America great. I would say it would be more destructive to deny "we the people's" voice than it would be allowing it. While the later surely may cause conflict, the former is effective DEATH to what makes USA , USA in the first place.

You're effectively advocating shooting the USA in the head to protect it. Fucking absurd.

It's destructive because "the people" for the most part aren't that invested in running the country, or really have the knowledge to make the best possible decision. And this is not me saying the people are stupid, I'm saying the majority of the people do not put in the time and the energy to really research candidates to vote for and to make sure the best possible outcome of elections for the future of the country happens. Because people are invested in their own lives, they're being going to work, taking care of their kids, having their own social lives, putting food on the table, they don't know about the minutia of foreign relations or whether a tax will hurt or help, not really. They just rely on the news, second hand sources to tell them what's right or wrong. This is a fact, and is easily observable when election season comes around. People look for their hot button issues in candidates, and that's it. They don't know or care how talented they are or how good they'd really be.

My rant about the flaws of "we the people" worship and governance aside, that's not really how it works in the U.S anyway. The 'people' don't really rule, the parties do, and they're the ones that decide who we get to vote for from their own ranks.

Exactly... you hate the basic concept of what America is designed as, and as such under the supposed guise of concern for its "destruction" want to destroy its very foundation. Effectively shooting it in its head to "protect it". I'd be okay with you running for office as well. I wouldn't vote for you.... but I'd be okay with you running.

Not allowing treasonists to play a part is far worse to the core principals of American ideals than allowing those ideas to have a voice....Because if they have no voice then America is dead already.

[Telconi]

It's destructive because "the people" for the most part aren't that invested in running the country, or really have the knowledge to make the best possible decision. And this is not me saying the people are stupid, I'm saying the majority of the people do not put in the time and the energy to really research candidates to vote for and to make sure the best possible outcome of elections for the future of the country happens. Because people are invested in their own lives, they're being going to work, taking care of their kids, having their own social lives, putting food on the table, they don't know about the minutia of foreign relations or whether a tax will hurt or help, not really. They just rely on the news, second hand sources to tell them what's right or wrong. This is a fact, and is easily observable when election season comes around. People look for their hot button issues in candidates, and that's it. They don't know or care how talented they are or how good they'd really be.

My rant about the flaws of "we the people" worship and governance aside, that's not really how it works in the U.S anyway. The 'people' don't really rule, the parties do, and they're the ones that decide who we get to vote for from their own ranks.

Exactly... you hate the basic concept of what America is designed as, and as such under the supposed guise of concern for its "destruction" want to destroy its very foundation. Effectively shooting it in its head to "protect it". I'd be okay with you running for office as well. I wouldn't vote for you.... but I'd be okay with you running.

Not allowing treasonists to play a part is far worse to the core principals of American ideals than allowing those ideas to have a voice....Because if they have no voice then America is dead already.

Your America and my America sound like very different places...