[rrc]

I think I would have worded this differently:

It's possible that Manning's actions would cost lives. It's also possible that Manning's actions would save lives, perhaps by aborting pending military actions.

Actual metrics are impossible to calculate, but we should acknowledge that both possibilities exist.

I also think it's useful to consider that you can betray a nation or government, but net a positive for the world as a whole. Many people believe that the US government has overused classification of documents which could prove embarrassing to those in positions of power. Perhaps people like Manning act as a natural counterweight, ensuring that those in power never believe that their actions will remain secret for eternity; someday, some loudmouth kid might spew your secrets to the world.

[Rod]

If the (in)famous video leaked by Wikileaks showed U.S. servicemen following the ROE, why is that the Pentagon was so upset by its release? Generally speaking, U.S. citizens greatly romanticize war, and videos such as this one show the crudeness of warfare, something few people want to see.

Do people really think that this video will enrage Iraqis further? Well, think about it. Iraqi citizens have endured decades of opression under Saddam, they had their country bombed to the ground in 1991, they endured a decade of embargo, they were bombed and invaded again in 2003, and have lived the past 7 years in chaos. I think the Iraqis are pretty jaded about violence by now. If someone is going to be upset about that video, that someone is the U.S. citizen who pays taxes and, unwillingly, subsidizes such slaughter.

I don't oppose Wikileaks leaking the video. What I oppose is Wikileaks editing for propaganda purposes. A raw video would have been more than enough.