WikiLeaks: Bradley Manning's motives are no defence, judge rules

[redgreenandblue]

88. In my view...

...once the US invaded Iraq, it became guilty of crimes against peace and crimes against humanity, as defined by the UN charta and the standards of Nuremberg. In principle, the correct procedure to deal with this, in accordance with the principles layed out by the UN charta, would have been exactly what happened to nazi Germany: A subsequent military defeat of the US by the international community, followed by demilitarization, a trial and subsequent execution for the leaders and eventually new elections after a re-education period.

The fact that this did not occur reflects the power hierachies of the world, but does not reflect international law as it stands. Since the USA was in principle in the process of criminal activity while waging war against Iraq (the war itself was illegal) there cannot exist any legal right to strategic self-interest with respect to anything surrounding said war. It was therefore the right of every citizen of the world, US citizen or otherwise, to do whatever was within their means to derail said efforts. By leaking classified material which was related to the war effort in Iraq, Bradley Manning did exactly that.

edit:

Given the situation as it is, the above scenario is implausible and impractical. However, the US needs to acknowledge that it was fully in the wrong for invading Iraq, and freeing Bradley Manning would be one step in that direction.