[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

The Global War on Terror - kurtster - Oct 20, 2019 - 6:45pm
 
Puzzle it - kcar - Oct 20, 2019 - 5:50pm
 
Things You Thought Today - ScottFromWyoming - Oct 20, 2019 - 5:15pm
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - GeneP59 - Oct 20, 2019 - 4:40pm
 
Today in History - Ohmsen - Oct 20, 2019 - 2:49pm
 
Trump - R_P - Oct 20, 2019 - 12:19pm
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - Oct 20, 2019 - 11:23am
 
What are you listening to now? - SeriousLee - Oct 20, 2019 - 10:26am
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - SeriousLee - Oct 20, 2019 - 7:53am
 
Baseball, anyone? - triskele - Oct 20, 2019 - 7:00am
 
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests - triskele - Oct 20, 2019 - 6:44am
 
The Dragons' Roost - triskele - Oct 20, 2019 - 6:43am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - gtufano - Oct 20, 2019 - 1:04am
 
If you are allowed to pack ten things to take to the Afte... - rashad - Oct 19, 2019 - 10:27pm
 
President Elizabeth Warren - haresfur - Oct 19, 2019 - 6:28pm
 
Derplahoma Questions and Points of Interest - haresfur - Oct 19, 2019 - 6:18pm
 
Tech & Science - Ohmsen - Oct 19, 2019 - 4:05pm
 
Evolution! - R_P - Oct 19, 2019 - 3:40pm
 
Fake News*  ?  ! - Ohmsen - Oct 19, 2019 - 2:50pm
 
Gotta Get Your Drink On - Ohmsen - Oct 19, 2019 - 2:33pm
 
Classical Music - R_P - Oct 19, 2019 - 2:19pm
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - Ohmsen - Oct 19, 2019 - 11:18am
 
Counting with Pictures - Ohmsen - Oct 19, 2019 - 10:51am
 
Anti-War - Ohmsen - Oct 19, 2019 - 10:43am
 
• • • What Makes You Happy? • • •  - Ohmsen - Oct 19, 2019 - 10:29am
 
Democratic Party - Ohmsen - Oct 19, 2019 - 10:00am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - SeriousLee - Oct 19, 2019 - 8:02am
 
Bob Dylan - ScottFromWyoming - Oct 19, 2019 - 7:27am
 
Health Care - miamizsun - Oct 19, 2019 - 5:45am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - miamizsun - Oct 19, 2019 - 5:13am
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - R_P - Oct 19, 2019 - 12:03am
 
New Music - R_P - Oct 18, 2019 - 11:45am
 
Room 3a - Proclivities - Oct 18, 2019 - 11:19am
 
Interesting or Weird Cover Versions - ScottFromWyoming - Oct 18, 2019 - 9:20am
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - SeriousLee - Oct 18, 2019 - 9:08am
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - oldviolin - Oct 18, 2019 - 8:29am
 
Economix - miamizsun - Oct 18, 2019 - 5:01am
 
Freedom of speech? - miamizsun - Oct 18, 2019 - 4:14am
 
The RANT Forum - miamizsun - Oct 18, 2019 - 4:02am
 
Nice set Bill.... - miamizsun - Oct 18, 2019 - 3:55am
 
Would you drive this car for dating with ur girl? - SeriousLee - Oct 18, 2019 - 1:26am
 
Words that should be put on the substitutes bench for a year - SeriousLee - Oct 18, 2019 - 1:23am
 
WORDS OF WISDOM - Proclivities - Oct 17, 2019 - 11:32am
 
Graphs, Charts & Maps - R_P - Oct 17, 2019 - 10:24am
 
Climate Change - westslope - Oct 17, 2019 - 10:15am
 
Ideology and large breasts - westslope - Oct 17, 2019 - 9:57am
 
KEF LS50 Wireless + Mac Mini + ? + RP FLAC = paradise - BillG - Oct 17, 2019 - 9:33am
 
sounds like... - Proclivities - Oct 17, 2019 - 9:25am
 
Amazon Echo/Alexa stream not working - jarro - Oct 17, 2019 - 8:42am
 
The Obituary Page - Isabeau - Oct 17, 2019 - 6:06am
 
Race in America - miamizsun - Oct 17, 2019 - 4:46am
 
Suggestion: Americana Mix - sirdroseph - Oct 17, 2019 - 1:34am
 
Regarding dogs - kcar - Oct 16, 2019 - 10:20pm
 
Live Music - R_P - Oct 16, 2019 - 1:11pm
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - KurtfromLaQuinta - Oct 16, 2019 - 12:29pm
 
What Did You See Today? - KurtfromLaQuinta - Oct 16, 2019 - 12:24pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Oct 16, 2019 - 10:31am
 
Google Inc. - miamizsun - Oct 16, 2019 - 6:56am
 
Things for which you would sell ManBird's soul - miamizsun - Oct 16, 2019 - 4:23am
 
Favorite Quotes - sirdroseph - Oct 16, 2019 - 2:12am
 
MANBIRD: appropriate or not? Dicuss. - SeriousLee - Oct 15, 2019 - 6:35pm
 
What did you have for dinner? - R_P - Oct 15, 2019 - 4:27pm
 
Visual DNA – Another fine time-waster .... - haresfur - Oct 15, 2019 - 4:00pm
 
David Bowie tribute show.... - Proclivities - Oct 15, 2019 - 1:54pm
 
Vintage Vinyl - ScottFromWyoming - Oct 15, 2019 - 12:43pm
 
What Are You Going To Do Today? - GeneP59 - Oct 15, 2019 - 9:14am
 
Ask the Libertarian - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Oct 15, 2019 - 8:26am
 
Syria - sirdroseph - Oct 15, 2019 - 8:24am
 
Tesla (motors, batteries, etc) - miamizsun - Oct 15, 2019 - 4:35am
 
The All-Things Beatles Forum - Steely_D - Oct 14, 2019 - 3:54pm
 
King Crimson - Steely_D - Oct 14, 2019 - 3:51pm
 
HomeKit HomePod AppleTV - Steely_D - Oct 14, 2019 - 3:33pm
 
Manbird's Episiotomy Stitch Licking Clinic - KEEP OUT - miamizsun - Oct 14, 2019 - 1:12pm
 
kurtster's quiet vinyl - miamizsun - Oct 14, 2019 - 12:43pm
 
'Til Death - miamizsun - Oct 14, 2019 - 7:54am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » WikiLeaks Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 54, 55, 56  Next
Post to this Topic
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 12:00pm

 Beaker wrote:


I'm not buying that argument. 

And seems to me, didn't Obama promise an investigation into the Bush years seeking to root out any crimes committed? How's that going anyway?

 

And I'm not buying yours.  I'm not a disciple of Obama, if he said he would do that then he should.  Of course he won't because he's a lying politician no different from the rest.
peter_james_bond

peter_james_bond Avatar

Location: West Of The Burg
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 11:56am

 Beaker wrote:
Last time I looked, we were still fighting a war or two.  When Wikileaks puts out info that gets others killed, then yeah, summary execution seems quite appropriate.
 
Where's your proof that WikiLeaks has released information that has gotten people killed? Robert Gates said a review of a previous large release of information from WikiLeaks "has not revealed any sensitive intelligence sources and methods compromised by the disclosure"

WikiLeaks does go to some lengths to remove names and sensitive information (as do the newspapers that have the documents) from the leaked documents. They would appear to have more ethics than Dick Cheney who exposed a CIA operative Valerie Plame to get back at her husband who had exposed a serious lie put forth by the Bush administration.

musik_knut

musik_knut Avatar

Location: Third Stone From The Sun
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 11:55am

 Lazy8 wrote:
 Beaker wrote:
Doesn't matter what my point is or what any of our feelings here are about any of this.  There are those who are in a position to silence Assange and Wikileaks, one way or another, and I suspect that is what will eventually happen.

Well, you brought it up. I figured you had a point. My mistake.

Assange knows the risks (to him) of what he's doing. Somebody may indeed take him out; feel free to celebrate.

When Russian hackers published the Climategate emails you hailed it as a blow struck for Truth. Other than the target, how is this different?
 

The more obvious difference: only integrity was killed. Wikileaks might lead to individuals being killed.
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 11:53am

 Beaker wrote:
Doesn't matter what my point is or what any of our feelings here are about any of this.  There are those who are in a position to silence Assange and Wikileaks, one way or another, and I suspect that is what will eventually happen.

Well, you brought it up. I figured you had a point. My mistake.

Assange knows the risks (to him) of what he's doing. Somebody may indeed take him out; feel free to celebrate.

When Russian hackers published the Climategate emails you hailed it as a blow struck for Truth. Other than the target, how is this different?

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 11:50am

 Beaker wrote:

Last time I looked, we were still fighting a war or two.  When Wikileaks puts out info that gets others killed, then yeah, summary execution seems quite appropriate.
 

And what sort of penalty should those who have involved us in these wars on false pretenses be afforded?
musik_knut

musik_knut Avatar

Location: Third Stone From The Sun
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 11:38am

 beamends wrote:

It would, I'm sure. If it was given the info and it was pertinent. Or even worth bothering with - for example what the UK thinks about such and such is pretty much irrelevant on a global scale. Wikileaks isn't about taking the piss, it's about wrongness. I'm also sure the every country spends quite a lot of time slagging off every other country too - just like neighbours in a street. Why is the US, seemingly, the main target? I'd go along with the Guardian article below - it's double standards - such as railing China for human rights abuses while denying the inmates of Guantanamo Bay the fundamental right of legal representation (never mind how they came to be there in the first place). It's evident from this forum that many (most?) US citizens don't see the contradiction, but many outside the US do.

If they were to post a load of stuff about China or Russia, both would just shrug and say "And?" - neither even pretends to hold the moral high ground.
 

The US offered 'fundamental right' of legal representation to Ahmed Ghailani, the mad bomber behind the simultaneous attacks on US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Many of us, knowing how convoluted the US Justice system can be, how demanding it is of evidence and so forth, knew that removing a Gitmo detainee from Gitmo and not using a Military Tribunal, would result in Mr. Ghailani escaping the more damning charges. 291 innocent souls were lost due to his actions yet in a Federal Court, he was found guilty only of committing conspiracy to damage property. I don't think most of the world outside the US understands our system, yet they bray on as if they do and we don't.
Many of us in the US understand the mindset of Attorneys such as Lynne Stewart, defender of the blind Egyptian Sheik who orchestrated the first attacks on the Twin Towers: she passed on messages from the Sheik to his equally radical supporters and then committed perjury when denying those actions. Most of the lawyers in the US who foam on about how radicals held at Gitmo must have a day in Court, are of that same liberal mindset.
If Khalid Sheik Mohammed, self-confessed mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks *supported by data on his computers and other electronic means*, comes to a Federal Court, he will likely walk when the Court is fully instructed on interrogation methods used while being held at Gitmo. Wouldn't that be a fine day...he walks, 3,000 are dead due to his actions.
This administration, led by President Obama and the Attorney General, appear to want settings for radicals that will likely see a re-do of the nonsense findings in the case of Mr. Ghailani. Meanwhile, Team Obama promises that KSM will never be a free man. What if a Court says different? Working the system for the perpetrators of death and destruction invites such findings. Some of us, in the US, understand that. Many, outside the US, don't.
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 11:35am

 Beaker wrote:

Wikileaks has nothing to do with freedom of speech.  The information it offers up is STOLEN.
 

So the penalty for theft should be summary execution?
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 11:32am

 Beaker wrote:
What's your point?

Yes, Wikileaks is making powerful people angry. We knew that. Is there some secret Moscow is keeping that you think it would be bad for us to know?

peter_james_bond

peter_james_bond Avatar

Location: West Of The Burg
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 11:13am

 Beaker wrote: 
Yes, it's dangerous to be a journalist in Russia. This is from WikiPedia:

In its September 2009 report the Committee to Protect Journalists repeated its conclusion that Russia was one of the deadliest countries in the world for journalists and added that it remains among the worst at solving their murders. The Anatomy of Injustice<6> (Russian version: Анатомия безнаказанности<7>) offers an account of the deaths of 17 journalists in Russia since 2000. They died or were killed, the CPJ is convinced, because of the work they were doing and in only one case, it notes, has there been a partially successful prosecution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_Russia

Freedom of speech doesn't exist in Russia, and you're suggesting that the West should follow this horrendous example?

bokey

bokey Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 11:04am

 Beaker wrote: 
Good call.
I'm still not sure what side of the fence I'm on though, I've been out of the news loop for a few days and have no clue what the facts are. (not that I think the news provides too many facts)

beamends

beamends Avatar



Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 11:02am

 musik_knut wrote:


Interestingly, and I don't know the laundry list of wikileaks, but it seems ever pointed at the US. Can anyone doubt that behind closed doors, chatter in other countries often brings about derogatory comments about other countries, other leaders and other global events?
Would wikileaks spill that pillow talk?

 
It would, I'm sure. If it was given the info and it was pertinent. Or even worth bothering with - for example what the UK thinks about such and such is pretty much irrelevant on a global scale. Wikileaks isn't about taking the piss, it's about wrongness. I'm also sure the every country spends quite a lot of time slagging off every other country too - just like neighbours in a street. Why is the US, seemingly, the main target? I'd go along with the Guardian article below - it's double standards - such as railing China for human rights abuses while denying the inmates of Guantanamo Bay the fundamental right of legal representation (never mind how they came to be there in the first place). It's evident from this forum that many (most?) US citizens don't see the contradiction, but many outside the US do.

If they were to post a load of stuff about China or Russia, both would just shrug and say "And?" - neither even pretends to hold the moral high ground.

musik_knut

musik_knut Avatar

Location: Third Stone From The Sun
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 10:28am

 beamends wrote:

but how many lives have already been lost due to the skulduggery and resulting cock-ups? How many will be saved now people, ordinary folk (none of this is news to governments), have a much better idea of where they stand and who their friends are? The 'it'll put people in danger' is just a smokescreen to hide embarrassment, not only of having true intentions exposed, but how dumb some of the assessments are - Angela Merkel being described, in a derogatory tone,  as 'unimaginative' completely misses the point that in troubled times that's exactly what the Germans want (and it has served them well over the years). Prince Andrew being 'rude'? Tough, don't listen into other people's conversations if you don't want to find out what people really think.

It would be great if Wikileaks revealed the other side of the coin too, mind. I suspect that Mrs. Clinton would have plenty to complain about then {#Wink}

 

Interestingly, and I don't know the laundry list of wikileaks, but it seems ever pointed at the US. Can anyone doubt that behind closed doors, chatter in other countries often brings about derogatory comments about other countries, other leaders and other global events?
Would wikileaks spill that pillow talk?
beamends

beamends Avatar



Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 10:24am

 peter_james_bond wrote:
From The Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/29/the-revolution-will-be-digitised?intcmp=239

WikiLeaks: the revolution has begun – and it will be digitised

The web is changing the way in which people relate to power, and politics will have no choice but to adapt too

.............


 
Damn it! An article in the Guardian I can't pick fault with - now that is annoying!

beamends

beamends Avatar



Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 10:20am

 musik_knut wrote:
Many speak of seeing dark secrets come to light. But how many will be talking if innocent lives are lost as a result? It's always fun until someone loses an eye...

 
but how many lives have already been lost due to the skulduggery and resulting cock-ups? How many will be saved now people, ordinary folk (none of this is news to governments), have a much better idea of where they stand and who their friends are? The 'it'll put people in danger' is just a smokescreen to hide embarrassment, not only of having true intentions exposed, but how dumb some of the assessments are - Angela Merkel being described, in a derogatory tone,  as 'unimaginative' completely misses the point that in troubled times that's exactly what the Germans want (and it has served them well over the years). Prince Andrew being 'rude'? Tough, don't listen into other people's conversations if you don't want to find out what people really think.

It would be great if Wikileaks revealed the other side of the coin too, mind. I suspect that Mrs. Clinton would have plenty to complain about then {#Wink}
peter_james_bond

peter_james_bond Avatar

Location: West Of The Burg
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 10:03am

From The Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/29/the-revolution-will-be-digitised?intcmp=239

WikiLeaks: the revolution has begun – and it will be digitised

The web is changing the way in which people relate to power, and politics will have no choice but to adapt too

Diplomacy has always involved dinners with ruling elites, backroom deals and clandestine meetings. Now, in the digital age, the reports of all those parties and patrician chats can be collected in one enormous database. And once collected in digital form, it becomes very easy for them to be shared.

Indeed, that is why the Siprnet database – from which these US embassy cables are drawn – was created in the first place. The 9/11 commission had made the remarkable discovery that it wasn't sharing information that had put the nation's security at risk; it was not sharing information that was the problem. The lack of co-operation between government agencies, and the hoarding of information by bureaucrats, led to numerous "lost opportunities" to stop the 9/11 attacks. As a result, the commission ordered a restructuring of government and intelligence services to better mimic the web itself. Collaboration and information-sharing was the new ethos. But while millions of government officials and contractors had access to Siprnet, the public did not.

But data has a habit of spreading. It slips past military security and it can also leak from WikiLeaks, which is how I came to obtain the data. It even slipped past the embargoes of the Guardian and other media organisations involved in this story when a rogue copy of Der Spiegel accidentally went on sale in Basle, Switzerland, on Sunday. Someone bought it, realised what they had, and began scanning the pages, translating them from German to English and posting updates on Twitter. It would seem digital data respects no authority, be it the Pentagon, WikiLeaks or a newspaper editor.

Individually, we have all already experienced the massive changes resulting from digitisation. Events or information that we once considered ephemeral and private are now aggregated, permanent, public. If these cables seem large, think about the 500 million users of Facebook or the millions of records kept by Google. Governments hold our personal data in huge databases. It used to cost money to disclose and distribute information. In the digital age it costs money not to.

But when data breaches happen to the public, politicians don't care much. Our privacy is expendable. It is no surprise that the reaction to these leaks is different. What has changed the dynamic of power in a revolutionary way isn't just the scale of the databases being kept, but that individuals can upload a copy and present it to the world. In paper form, these cables amount to some 13,969 pages, which would stack about 25m high – not something that one could have easily slipped past security in the paper age.

To some this marks a crisis, to others an opportunity. Technology is breaking down traditional social barriers of status, class, power, wealth and geography – replacing them with an ethos of collaboration and transparency.

The former US ambassador to Russia James Collins told CNN the disclosure of the cables, "will impede doing things in a normal, civilised way". Too often what is normal and civilised in diplomacy means turning a blind eye to large-scale social injustices, corruption and abuse of power. Having read through several hundred cables, much of the "harm" is embarrassment and the highlighting of inconvenient truths. For the sake of a military base in a country, our leaders accept a brutal dictator who oppresses his population. This may be convenient in the short term for politicians, but the long-term consequences for the world's citizens can be catastrophic.

Leaks are not the problem; they are the symptom. They reveal a disconnect between what people want and need to know and what they actually do know. The greater the secrecy, the more likely a leak. The way to move beyond leaks is to ensure a robust regime for the public to access important information.

Thanks to the internet, we have come to expect a greater level of knowledge and participation in most areas of our lives. Politics, however, has remained resolutely unreconstructed. Politicians, see themselves as parents to a public they view as children – a public that cannot be trusted with the truth, nor with the real power that knowledge brings.

Much of the outrage about WikiLeaks is not over the content of the leaks but from the audacity of breaching previously inviable strongholds of authority. In the past, we deferred to authority and if an official told us something would damage national security we took that as true. Now the raw data behind these claims is increasingly getting into the public domain. What we have seen from disclosures like MPs' expenses or revelations about the complicity of government in torture is that when politicians speak of a threat to "national security", often what they mean is that the security of their own position is threatened.

We are at a pivotal moment where the visionaries at the vanguard of a global digital age are clashing with those who are desperate to control what we know. WikiLeaks is the guerrilla front in a global movement for greater transparency and participation. There are projects like Ushahidi that use social networking to create maps where locals can report incidents of violence that challenge the official version of events. There are activists seeking to free official data so that citizens can see, for example, government spending in detail.

Ironically, the US state department has been one of the biggest cheerleaders for technical innovation as a means of bringing democracy to places like Iran and China. President Obama has urged repressive regimes to stop censoring the internet, yet a bill before Congress would allow the attorney general to create a blacklist of websites. Is robust democracy only good when it's not at home?

It used to be that a leader controlled citizens by controlling information. Now it's harder than ever for the powerful to control what people read, see and hear. Technology gives people the ability to band together and challenge authority. The powerful have long spied on citizens (surveillance) as a means of control, now citizens are turning their collected eyes back upon the powerful (sousveillance).

This is a revolution, and all revolutions create fear and uncertainty. Will we move to a New Information Enlightenment or will the backlash from those who seek to maintain control no matter the cost lead us to a new totalitarianism? What happens in the next five years will define the future of democracy for the next century, so it would be well if our leaders responded to the current challenge with an eye on the future.


musik_knut

musik_knut Avatar

Location: Third Stone From The Sun
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 9:54am

Many speak of seeing dark secrets come to light. But how many will be talking if innocent lives are lost as a result? It's always fun until someone loses an eye...
HazzeSwede

HazzeSwede Avatar

Location: Hammerdal
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 8:45am

 Beaker wrote:

fvck Assange.  I'll bet Putin gets to him first.  Wikileaks needs to be blown off the Innerweb.
 
The servers are 5 clicks from my place,just saying ! {#Whistle}
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 8:21am

 Beaker wrote:

A message needs to be sent.  And the way to do that is take out Assange and his followers by any means necessary.  If the current US administration is too chickenshit to do that, then I'm sure there's plenty of others who have little concern about removing Assange and his enterprise from among the living.
 

wow.  just wow.
Mugro

Mugro Avatar

Location: 1,000 shades of green (Ireland)


Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 8:17am

 Beaker wrote:



Though some heads need to roll too —- allowing that kind of unrestricted access to a relatively low level civilian means there's more to be fixed than one detail.  Of course the apparent fact that this tool smuggled it all out over 8 months on a CDRW also gives an IT security guy quite a bit of pause.

A message needs to be sent.  And the way to do that is take out Assange and his followers by any means necessary.  If the current US administration is too chickenshit to do that, then I'm sure there's plenty of others who have little concern about removing Assange and his enterprise from among the living.
 
There will be a LOT of changes. There have been some already. You can be sure that there will be increased security involved in cable traffic and less sharing of information between State and DoD. These leaks were sourced in the Department of Defense, not State. Until now, there had been sharing of information between State and Defense — the "One Team" approach. Now, not so much. 
Mugro

Mugro Avatar

Location: 1,000 shades of green (Ireland)


Posted: Nov 30, 2010 - 8:15am

 rosedraws wrote:

cable dump?

and, I assume you mean the ramifications will be negative? 
 

Some ramifications positive (like perhaps finally the fall of the N. Korean regime now that the world knows that China no longer supports them), and some negative (Diplomacy is better than war, if no one can trust diplomacy, there will be more war). 
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 54, 55, 56  Next