The war in Iraq has always been a controversial topic for many different reasons. The footage released to WikiLeaks shows two controversial moments that occurred during the fighting in Iraq. The main point of controversy in the two clips shown are the language used by the soldiers as well as the decisions made and the reasoning behind them. The language used by the soldiers was, in my opinion, very inappropriate and insensitive. While many argue that the decision making in the clips was justified, there are points to be made against that. When it comes to whistleblowing, there are many different reasons for someone to release the information. It could be out of respect, loyalty, fear, etc. Whistleblowing refers to the release of information that is believed to show wrongdoing to a recipient/recipients who would otherwise have never had access to said information. While Manning might not have released the footage out of loyalty to the United States in tees of a lot of people, I do believe that her actions were out of loyalty and moral. In this case analysis, I will argue that Utilitarianism shows that Manning’s actions were out of loyalty to the United States and a moral case of whistleblowing.

              Most people would probably describe loyalty as some form of doing whatever is in the best interests of/best supports whatever they are loyal to, regardless of any other implications. Depending, on one’s view of loyalty, whistleblowing could mean being unloyal. Vandekerckhove talks about rational loyalty. Rational loyalty is when an organization’s values, code of conduct, and mission statement are the object of loyalty. This would mean that the loyal actions of someone would be to not necessarily do whatever the organization wants them to do, but to hold the organization to its standards. Using this definition, Mannings’s actions can be viewed as being loyal to the United States. Of course, depending on which Americans you ask, Manning’s actions could still be seen as unloyal. This all depends on their moral code and how they interpret the objects of loyalty towards the United States. If they believe that all of the objects of loyalty towards the United States only apply to Americans, then they will not believe that Manning’s actions were loyal. On the other hand, there are those who believe that the American beliefs show apply to even those outside of the United States and that we as Americans have certain standards that we must uphold.

From a utilitarian point of view, using rational loyalty, I believe that Manning whistleblowing was the best course of action. As far as rational loyalty is concerned, Manning had to release those clips in order to help hold the military to the United States standards. The main issue being how they treated and talked about the Iraqi people. America is supposed to be a place where everyone is treated equal and given equal opportunities. The main argument in their defense is that they were in the heat of the moment and were worried about their own safety. While I do understand this, I still do not think that justifies the comments that they were making. As mentioned in the video, they were talking as if it was a game. Another issue to talk about is the decision making when it came to firing on the targets. The same defense is being made about this as well. While I also understand that the video quality was not the best and that I know little to nothing about military protocols, I do believe that there were still some iffy calls made. The most outstanding one to me was the choice to fire on the van. I do not understand how they could choose not to fire on the journalist because he did not go for a weapon but then chose to fire on the van when they also never went for any weapons. They also decided to launch missiles into a building that they watched one-to-two-armed people walk into, not taking into account who might already be in the building or who might be walking by. In the video you can see a pedestrian walking by the building as the first missile hits. Again, from a utilitarian perspective, Manning did the right thing. Manning releasing the clips absolutely had a more positive effect on the world than negative. The main positive is the fact that the children injured in the attack are to be compensated. Without Manning, those clips would have never been released. I was stated in the video that the clips had still not been officially released at the time of recording. It is safe to say that there would have never been any attention brought to the actions of these soldiers and the injured children would have never gotten any attention. Also, Manning releasing these clips help not only bring attention to these issues, but also indirectly helped bring attention to the same issue in other places. The thought process shown in the clips is also a thought process shared by people in similar positions like police. There have been many times where they show the same thought, course of action, and reactions as the soldiers did. While attention would have still been brought to them eventually, it never hurts for more. This attention can lead to greater reforms being made to help the military and other similar institutions in the United Staes uphold its standards.

Oxley and Wittkower talk about loyalty as a matter of relationships and feelings. They lean away from the usual definition of it leaning towards a sense of obligation. They compare loyalty to a company and its employees to a caring relationship. In this regard, some could say that this would mean Manning’s choice to release the clips was unloyal to the United States. However, if you think about it deeper, an argument can be made for Manning’s actions being loyal. At face value, using this view of loyalty, Manning’s actions can be compared to sharing the secrets of someone you are in a relationship with. This would clearly be labeled as unloyal by these terms. However, this does not mean that it was immoral. Oxley and Wittkower also talk about how not all loyal acts are moral and vice versa. While it might not look moral from some Americans’ point of view, some would argue otherwise. This again goes back to the fact that everyone deserves the same things as Americans.

From a utilitarian perspective, while also keeping Oxley and Wittkower’s definition of loyalty in mind, Manning made the wrong choice. This is because of the way they explain loyalty. The way that they explain loyalty leaves little room to incorporate the feeling of anyone outside of the United States. Again, if Manning would have never released the clips, they would have never ben released. While the journalist that went to the scene of the attack later might have still released their story, that doesn’t have anything to do with Mannings actions. If we just look at what Manning did and its affects alone, there would be little to no downside for the United States. Nobody would have known what happened except the people involved. Using this view of loyalty, Manning brought avoidable attention and ridicule to the United States. This caused downsides to the reputation of the United States and its military. While keeping all of this in mind, the complete opposite can also be said depending on how you view caring relationships. The views on relationships are very close to the original views on loyalty that I mentioned earlier. There are people who will do anything for the people that they are in a relationship regardless of the implications while there are others who want to hold the people that they are in a relationship with accountable for their actions and help them better themselves. This means that, from thew latter point of view, Manning’s actions were loyal. This is because Manning held the United States military accountable for its actions in Iraq. As for morality, the exact same arguments can be made. Depending on which perspective on relationships you look at them from, Mannings actions were both moral and immoral. The only caveat to the loyalty and morality of Manning’s actions, is the way Manning went about it. While there are people who want to hold the people that they are in a relationship with accountable, they might not do it publicly. Regardless of the reason, publicly shaming someone is usually viewed as immoral.        In conclusion, whether or not Manning’s choice to release the clips of what happened in Iraq was loyal and moral all depend on perspective and the definitions of loyalty. I believe that if both definitions of loyalty talked about in this paper were used in tandem, the argument for Manning’s action being loyal and moral is stronger. I personally believe that Manning did the right thing in both regards. This is not just due to my personal moral values and views on loyalty, but also because of my personal views on situations similar to this one. As an African American male, I am all too familiar with these kind of situations. As I mentioned earlier, the police are put in similar situations and make similar choices and act in a similar manner when it come to minority groups. This is why I believe that not only did Manning do the right thing, but that it needed to be done.