I don't quite understand the juxtaposition of these two arguments: 1)This information is meaningless because it is intelligence at it rawest, least vetted form. Even if it weren't meaningless, it is comprised of only things that we all already know, that the current and previous admins have been completely forthright about, so that this leak isn't a big deal. 2)This leak is a big deal and soldiers will be placed in harm's way (implicitly moreso than already) by this information, and also that the person who leaked it should, at the very least, be punched in the nuts.
How can this info be common knowledge, but still endanger our troops?
With respect to the endangerment of the troops, I hold the leaker in slightly higher regard than I do the folks who got us in this mess in the first place and now won't show the political backbone required to admit that it ain't going well.
|