Bergdahl !

[DZ]

This is embarrassing - I'm so glad this Presidential social experiment only has two years left. I only hope they implanted human tracking chips into the Taliban 5.

[Raven]

Originally Posted by DZ

This is embarrassing - I'm so glad this Presidential social experiment only has two years left. I only hope they implanted human tracking chips into the Taliban 5.

that is precisely what is always on my mind....

[beamie]

Originally Posted by DZ

This is embarrassing - I'm so glad this Presidential social experiment only has two years left. I only hope they implanted human tracking chips into the Taliban 5.

No DZ, I think smallpox would be better, just like with the Indians.

[wdmso]

Soldiers strained by six years at war are deserting their posts at the highest rate since 1980, with the number of Army deserters this year showing an 80% increase since the United States invaded Iraq in 2003. a story from 2007 ...

More than 20,000 soldiers have been dropped from the rolls as deserters since 2006, Army data show. how is Bergdahl different from the other 20,000 i'll tell you.. it's Obama ! he made the call to get him out ..


This is nothing new deserters... He showed how dumb or unstable he was for not waiting until he went Home on leave to become a deserter .. but no he became a deserter and POW on the same night..

I was a Plt Sgt in Iraq and if any of my men deserted I would expect them to be charged under the UCMJ regardless of the Location of the desertion as is happening now ... and men and women died looking for him because that what we do!! they were KIA conducting combat operations IED's thats war its dangerous and happened all the time



But I would never support the belief that if they were captured the United States should abandon them!!
deserter or not



why is the the right willing to sacrifice a US soldier for 5 Taliban None who were facing charges in either military or civilian courts for their actions. ??

[buckman]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Soldiers strained by six years at war are deserting their posts at the highest rate since 1980, with the number of Army deserters this year showing an 80% increase since the United States invaded Iraq in 2003. a story from 2007 ...

More than 20,000 soldiers have been dropped from the rolls as deserters since 2006, Army data show. how is Bergdahl different from the other 20,000 i'll tell you.. it's Obama ! he made the call to get him out ..


This is nothing new deserters... He showed how dumb or unstable he was for not waiting until he went Home on leave to become a deserter .. but no he became a deserter and POW on the same night..

I was a Plt Sgt in Iraq and if any of my men deserted I would expect them to be charged under the UCMJ regardless of the Location of the desertion as is happening now ... and men and women died looking for him because that what we do!! they were KIA conducting combat operations IED's thats war its dangerous and happened all the time



But I would never support the belief that if they were captured the United States should abandon them!!
deserter or not



why is the the right willing to sacrifice a US soldier for 5 Taliban None who were facing charges in either military or civilian courts for their actions. ??

I don't believe he was captured by the Taliban I think he went looking for them.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by buckman

I don't believe he was captured by the Taliban I think he went looking for them.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not only that, but it leaves a bitter taste when the government forbids private citizens from ransoming their own son, because it would endanger American lives:

“We believe that paying ransoms or making concessions would put all Americans overseas at greater risk” and would provide funding for groups whose capabilities “we are trying to degrade,” Marie Harf, a State Department spokeswoman, said in a briefing Thursday. Harf said it is illegal for any American citizen to pay ransom to a group, such as the Islamic State, that the U.S. government has designated as a terrorist organization. …

But then it gives up five dangerous terrorists to get back one of its employees who has deserted and put in danger the American lives of his brothers in combat, not only because of attempts to rescue him, but because it makes it even more attractive to capture others.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Not only that, but it leaves a bitter taste when the government forbids private citizens from ransoming their own son, because it would endanger American lives:

“We believe that paying ransoms or making concessions would put all Americans overseas at greater risk” and would provide funding for groups whose capabilities “we are trying to degrade,” Marie Harf, a State Department spokeswoman, said in a briefing Thursday. Harf said it is illegal for any American citizen to pay ransom to a group, such as the Islamic State, that the U.S. government has designated as a terrorist organization. …

But then it gives up five dangerous terrorists to get back one of its employees who has deserted and put in danger the American lives of his brothers in combat, not only because of attempts to rescue him, but because it makes it even more attractive to capture others.

I see, so an active duty soldier held prisoner should be left behind because it's presumed he may have deserted? Is that going to instill confidence in our troops?

Remember when Israel swapped over 1000 prisoners for a single IDF soldier? Did that cause a swing in kidnappings for ransom?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Not only that, but it leaves a bitter taste when the government forbids private citizens from ransoming their own son, because it would endanger American lives:

“We believe that paying ransoms or making concessions would put all Americans overseas at greater risk” and would provide funding for groups whose capabilities “we are trying to degrade,” Marie Harf, a State Department spokeswoman, said in a briefing Thursday. Harf said it is illegal for any American citizen to pay ransom to a group, such as the Islamic State, that the U.S. government has designated as a terrorist organization. …

But then it gives up five dangerous terrorists to get back one of its employees who has deserted and put in danger the American lives of his brothers in combat, not only because of attempts to rescue him, but because it makes it even more attractive to capture others.

It's an awful scenario, no easy choices that I can see.

IMHO, if a guy enlists with good intentions, but cracks under the pressure of war, I'd say we still owe him a debt. If he joined with the specific intent of collaberating with the enemy, that's something else. But we don't know. Heck, what if he developed a brain tumor and that's why he lost his bearings? Pure speculation, obviously...And I think a case can be made that this was a POW swap, which we have engaged in, as long as we have existed. This is a different war to be sure. In previous wars, if you did a POW swap at the end, you knew the guy you were releasing, wasn't going to take up arms against you.

This is a different, uglier world. We need rules to live by, but the old rules may not be applicable anymore. We are in a unique war with a very unique enemy, who has unique motivations.

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

I don't believe he was captured by the Taliban I think he went looking for them.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

From his writing he was certainly disillusioned with the war, but To walk out of camp at night with only a compass is suicidal. I don't think you could say he was exactly right in the head at that point.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

From his writing he was certainly disillusioned with the war, but To walk out of camp at night with only a compass is suicidal. I don't think you could say he was exactly right in the head at that point.

"To walk out of camp at night with only a compass is suicidal."

Well he's still alive. He is also charged not just with desertion, but for some kind of inappropriate action while with the enemy.

I don't think we had a choice but to get him back. If it was my call, I would plug my nose and make the deal, because we need to know what happened, and it's possible we stioll owe a debt to this man - maybe he's not even really responsible for what happened.

But I wouldn't have staged that phony, farsical, manipulative Rose Garden ceremony until I had the facts. That's what I call "shooting without aiming", which Obama likes to accuse Bush of.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Well he's still alive. He is also charged not just with desertion, but for some kind of inappropriate action while with the enemy.

Misbehavior before the enemy and it's the more serious charge. I'm not sure I buy his story he was going out to report on problems within his unit, not that there weren't any, but to do so alone and at night seems pretty reckless. I'd like to know if there actually was a senior officer in the area he could have gone to.

I don't think we had a choice but to get him back. If it was my call, I would plug my nose and make the deal, because we need to know what happened, and it's possible we stioll owe a debt to this man - maybe he's not even really responsible for what happened.

I'm sure that was the reasoning.

But I wouldn't have staged that phony, farsical, manipulative Rose Garden ceremony until I had the facts. That's what I call "shooting without aiming", which Obama likes to accuse Bush of.

Had his father not had such freakish behavior I think people would have read the situation a lot differently. More empathy and less ridicule.