We provide more direct aid to the Taliban than these documents do. We fund Warlords directly, we fund Pakistan, we fund ISI, we fund parts of the Karzai regime (yes it is a regime), we fund Militant Talibs from the haqqani network to Paki Talibs indirectly.And this is now, today, this does not include the massive amounts of funding and training that not just us but the Sauds et al gave to the mujaheddin in the 80's. We are our own worst enemy.
Even if we are our own worst enemy, that doesn't mean that we should help out the Taliban in any way, shape, or form.
Obama, like Bush, has a horrendous track record of using "States Secrets" to cover the collective asses of this government and shield us from the big bad wars. Things like covering the illegal rendition and torture of innocents, like Maher Arar.
First off, what about all of the cases that these "state secrets" protected information that should be protected? Are you saying that the vast majority of classified or senstitive documents are "State secrets" only to 'cover the asses' of X administration? The problem is, Wikileaks does not discriminate about what they want. They want people to post any and all classified, sentitive, or otherwise. Hell, why not just post a 'how to build nuclear weapons guide' for North Korea? Maybe all the military strike plans should be posted on wikileaks right before operations because everyone has the right to know? There is a reason for the classification system. It can be abused by the government just as it can be abused by Wikileaks. The difference is that the government has safeguards and oversight that is supposed to fight abuse--does Wikileaks have anything to do this?
"There are some good people in it, but the orchestra as a whole is equivalent to a gang bent on destruction." -- John Cage, composer