What's the point of locking up Bradley Manning for 35 years?

There is no point but they have to appear to ‘do something.’ Of course, it’d draconian.

Because they couldn’t prove that he smoked marijuana, or he’d have got 99 years.

While I don’t agree with the sentence, I am sure the military has two reasons:

1) They now have a poster boy for anyone who even thinks about leaking anything including the menu from the mess hall.

2) They get their revenge jonesing taken care of.

Embarrassed government needs to show they’re still tough. It’s all about setting an example.

I think they are walking a fine line.
On the one hand, the sentence is harsh enough for him to serve as an example to anyone who thinks of doing the right thing, but on other hand it serves to bring the point across of “are we not merciful?”, because he could have gotten much worse than this.

Because the state is run by authoritarian lunatics who do not adhere to the standards and values of civilised and decent humanity. Embarrassing them by revealing their crimes is an insult to them, so they react the only way these fascists know—and yes, they are fascists—by harsh retribution, designed to deter anyone from embarrassing them again.

It’s extremely sad that Manning appeared to be a broken man in the end, and succumbed to their judgement pitifully—grovelling for leniency and presenting a narrative of himself as a weak and foolish man who made a tragic mistake.

I think the fascist fucktards who set up the kangaroo court to judge him—yes, they are fascist fucktards—probably got off on it, because that’s how loathsome and depraved these sub-humans are.

They must send a message. The punishment is not just for him. It is to discourage others from doing the same.

Personally, I am shocked the sentence was so light. But I am also shocked that he wasn’t simply disappeared.

That said, I wholeheartedly support him for what he did.

It is a deterrent to others who would think about leaking classified government documents.

If he thought he was going to be carried out on thier shoulders, he was mistaken. Ideology is often overruled by reality. He is actually fortunate to have been let off lightly.

Military justice is to justice as military music is to music.

It is how they do it in an organization where discipline and unity are critical to the mission and survival. Given a military court, I think it could easily have been worse.

@Jaxk – that’s true, I agree. But what will the incarceration do? It’s not like he’s in a position to repeat his crime.

The military isn’t about to rehabilitate him. So it’ll cost the US government $30,000/year to feed and board him, for the next 35 years. So we’ll spend a million dollars to keep him locked up. Where’s the benefit?

On the bright side, I doubt he will have many enemies in prison, except of course the fascist gulag guards.

Shall we start a pool for how long it takes for his sentence to be appealed and commuted to something significantly shorter?
I figure he will be in prison for only 5 years. Any takers?
(Five years is still a long time to be in the big house.)

@elbanditoroso

It is a message to others that may feel they can decide what can be revealed and what can’t. Lives are at stake and you can’t put them at risk just because you’re an anti war zealot. He knew what he was doing had consequences. Now he knows what those consequences look like. The next guy with an agenda may think twice.

It’s to send a message.

As far as him being a “broken” person, that’s the good work of his lawyer whose job is to make it appear that whatever are his physical health or mental health issues make him in such bad shape that he’s almost not responsible for his actions.

If this material was so vital to America’s national interest why did they give a 20 year old kid unlimited access to it?

@flutherother – excellent question.

@LuckyGuy My thoughts exactly. I would also bet his autism will have something to do with his accommodations, such a medical facility or such.

The point is to make an example of him. Of course there are more productive ways to punish him – but then, that’s true of most incarcerated people in the US.

@LuckyGuy The estimate is that he will spend nine years behind bars before parole, accounting for the 1200 days they count as already-served time.

@flutherother

Lots and lots of 20 somethings have volunteered to “pick up a rifle” and accept a big responsibility, at great physical, psychological and philosophical risk. In fact, I was one of them, and I know/knew plenty of them.

They gave him access because they had reason to believe he would not betray them. Same basis that a lot of people after marriage trust their spouse. Betrayal happens, of course, but most of us do not expect it as a matter of course. And we are justifiably hurt and disappointed when it happens. If he was on a mission, he could have separated, and then told his tale. Just like disloyal spouses should get a divorce first, and then pursue their fantasies.

I would suggest that you know that, and thus your answer is cynical and disingenuous. Cynicism and sarcasm are common on this site, and lots of people engage in it “for effect”. I understand that. So, I think secretly you know your answer is disingenuous, and you are simply engaging in theatre.

But if not, I submit that you should know better.

I could not agree more with @Jaxk. Do oaths mean anything anymore?

“I swear by God this sacred oath that to the Leader of the German empire and people, Adolf Hitler, supreme commander of the armed forces, I shall render unconditional obedience and that as a brave soldier I shall at all times be prepared to give my life for this oath.”

End of conversation.

We have now achieved Godwin’s Law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

@josie Don’t you think my question is a valid one?

@flutherother

I’ll let Josie answer but just out of curiosity, are you saying that his age is a mitigating factor? That he should be older to be trusted? At 18 I had access to technology, codes, and strategies that would have been very beneficial to our enemies. I knew not to discuss these with anyone let alone publish it in the newspaper.

How old do you think someone should be to be trusted, 21, 31, 51?

What I’m saying is if you have important secrets the fewer people who know about them the better. There isn’t a specific age at which you can be trusted but if you have to tell someone it’s probably wiser to pick someone who is more mature and better able to handle it.

@flutherother wrote ” someone who is more mature and better able to handle it.”

Another interpretation: .. is more likely to have ‘bought into’ the military mindset and is less likely to think creatively and holistically.

@elbanditoroso

If you don’t like the military DON’T join. Bradley may be more comfortable in a dress but I doubt he’ll like the end game.

@jaxk – oh please. Are you going to make the argument that the entirely military is single minded and always right? Because I have news for you…..

One could argue that the military has needed (since after the Korean war) a far larger number of “outside the box” thinkers to mitigate the excesses of the military mindset.

Now, Manning may not be a shining example of “outside the box” – but frankly, I can think of far worse people than he.

As for his sexual orientation – completely and totally irrelevant to the discussion. Why did you bring it up?

@elbanditoroso

If your intention is subtrafuge or sabotage, that’s a risky game in any organization. Especially true for the military. And calling that ‘Thinking outside the box’ is ridiculus.

As for his sexual orientation, I simply find that an amusing turn of events. Of all the times you may want to feel pretty, going to prison would be my last choice.