Comments:U.S. President Trump defends decision to share classified information with Russians

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.

President Trump's decision to share classified information about ISIS with Russian officials in 2017 raises significant concerns about national security and intelligence integrity. While the President claimed the disclosure was necessary for combating terrorism, this action could jeopardize sensitive sources and strain relationships with international intelligence partners. Trust and discretion are paramount in intelligence operations, and undermining these principles can have far-reaching consequences. The global community relies on mutual confidence to maintain security, and such unilateral decisions threaten to erode this essential trust. Moving forward, stringent safeguards and protocols must be upheld to protect national and global security interests.

"Trump's decision to share classified information about ISIS with Russian officials in 2017 raises significant concerns about national security and intelligence integrity" - So he helped Russia with the one goal we can agree on (counter-terrorism). How terrible. "this action could jeopardize sensitive sources and strain relationships with international intelligence partners" - Why? Trumps not an idiot, he won't reveal anything otherwise important. "Trust and discretion are paramount in intelligence operations, and undermining these principles can have far-reaching consequences" - Yes. Trust is not built by refusing to help each other achieve a common goal. "The global community relies on mutual confidence to maintain security, and such unilateral decisions threaten to erode this essential trust" - Fighting terrorism together erodes trust? I fail to understand this arguement. "stringent safeguards and protocols must be upheld to protect national and global security interests." - It's in everyone's interest for everyone to fight terrorism. @004bvan:

Although it might not be altogether clear from any one individual comment, from the collection of comments on this article it does seems that someone, somewhere, set out to wage a disinformation campaign against this news item.

Once again the mainstream media and professional politicians attack when they are supposed to report or support. The information I understand was passed on to Russia was put in the media hands before he ever met with the Russians. We need a media source that reports when they have facts and politicians who back a leader until they see him put our country at risk. We don't need people grandstanding trying to make President Trump look bad.Report facts and let it go.

Do you have any evidence to back up any of those [bizarre] claims?

Sounds like MSN gave up the source of the intell not trump. Adam Goldman, Matthew Rosenberg, Matt Apuzzo. "Israel Was Source of Secret Intelligence That Trump Gave to Russians, Officials Say" — MSN, May 16, 2017 Subject- Trump an Russia Steve Just saying.

A small clarification: that was a syndicated New York Times article, actually.

Note that the key question — and I don't claim to know the answer — is not who told the public, but who told the Russians. It seems likely that those who leaked this information to the public believed Russia already knew it because of what Trump had told them (the claim is that he gave the Russians enough information to work it out for themselves). There are all sorts of branching variations on this. Afaik we, the public, don't even know whether the information from Israel was the most sensitive part of what the Russians were told.

This article seems to make several conclusions & assumptions that it should not be. Report the FACTS not the opinion / spin.

Be specific. What conclusions and assumptions?

Vague accusations of reporting opinion are a propaganda tactic.