November 30th, 2010 | Uncategorized

Hill on WikiLeaks

In a piece by Tunku Vardarajan on the Daily Beast, Yale’s own Charles Hill, the resident diplomat who teaches Yale’s renowned course in grand strategy, publicly bemoaned WikiLeaks’ publication of a quarter million state department cables.

Hill called the leak “something of a disaster for U.S. diplomacy,” Vardarajan writes. Hill continued:

Not because of what’s revealed — everyone knows all diplomatic services do and say such things — but because it has been revealed in a way that indicates the U.S. has lost its ability or willingness to keep such material closely held. So foreigners will tell us less and we will write less down and less substance will be conveyed to Washington. An earlier phase of this came in the late 1980s when it became clear — I was involved — that notes of internal Washington meetings could not be protected from release. So people stopped keeping notes. The result has been that the official record has withered, as has history’s knowledge of what happened. Now that loss is extended to foreign meetings.

  • DavidYeagley

    “…the U.S. has lost its ability or willingness to keep such material closely held.”

    That’s spin. The US *has* the power to control this, and *has had* since the first leaks. The Obama Adminstration is simply pleased to see this denigration of America. There is no other conclusion to be made. Furthermore, the attorney for WikiLeaks is the same who works for George Soros: Mark Stephens. This is public knowledge.

    I also think this is related to the question of homosexuals in the military. PFC Manning is, of course, an openly homosexual male. That may be a stretch, since Manning’s condition is unrelated to his treasonous document dump; but it certainly doesn’t recommend homosexuals for the military, does it?

  • b

    David, you’re already making my head hurt. What power could have stopped this, since all the material appears to have been leaked by PFC Manning at the same time? Do you mean we could have eradicated it from the web? I’d be interested in hearing how, since most experts seem to think that once something is out there it’s impossible to remove entirely. Or do you mean we could have roughed up a couple of Wikileaks people? Because, yes, we could have… and it wouldn’t have stopped the leak and would have introduced many additional problems.

    And the Obama administration is definitely NOT pleased about this.

    I know there’s no rational debate with you on these issues and you’re utterly convinced that Obama himself likes to drink the blood of Real Americans(tm) for dinner as he subverts the country to his evil will, but nevertheless I’d be interested in hearing how you’d have stopped this from happening without making a bad situation worse. Care to share?

  • The Anti-Yale

    “And the Obama administration is definitely NOT pleased about this”.

    Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive!

    Marmion, Sir Walter Scott

    (“But after we have practiced quite a while, how vastly we improve our style”
    Ogden Nash)