Bergdahl story

[framer]

Good point.

Should have let the soldier rot?

Dude didn't want to be a soldier. He quit the military then wandered off into the countryside populated by terrorists somehow thinking they would be friendly. If we couldn't spare a second thought for Chris Stevens when our embassy was attacked, I don't know why we spent a dime on this jackhole, let alone the lives of other members of our military. Yeah, letting him rot was a decent option. Also, we should have returned the 5 terrorist leaders a few years back. . .from 10,000 feet up.

 

[Hantlers]

This guys fellow co-workers sure do think highly of him.

Pretty nice how we don't abandon somebody who abandoned us though.

 

[gandalfe]

It is also very possible that one or more of the leaders we returned have been flipped.

 

[Stoked]

Failing others is not justification for failing again. Also the bad, possibly even traitorous, behavior of this man is not reason the suddenly embrace leaving an American behind. Throw out how we got him back for a second. Are there those actually arguing that we should have abandoned him? Is that a precedent we want our soldiers to face? Behave the way we want under conditions we, as the general public, don't truly comprehend on an emotional and intimate level or we will abandon you?

Jesus...

 

[Harambe]

I heard that's only if you don't paint the blood of a young ram above your door.

Are you kidding? He is worse than just 10 commandments bad.












All of you external door frames have to be bathed 7 hours in the blood of the poor.

 

[framer]

It is also very possible that one or more of the leaders we returned have been flipped.

There is even a better possibility that these dudes will be &%^&^ rockstars in the Muslim extremist community and become much more powerful than they were before we picked them up. These guys aren't yokels from the sticks. They are educated and held considerable positions of power before they were captured. Most of them were turned over by fellow Afghans, because they were monsters. I just think a lot of people think that these are 25 year old dudes that ended up where they were because they grew up poor and unschooled, and that it is possible they have seen the error of their ways. These guys committed genocide, and do charming things like kill and rape women for wanting to be educated. Taking them out of commission was a tremendous victory for mankind.

 

[Surely]

He also killed the economy, destroyed healthcare, single handedly shut down the government, and owns the soul of every firstborn son born during his tenure.

Go ahead and make fun of it if you will but do you seriously believe that what Obama did wasn't harmful? I'm guessing you're not LDS but there is a movie about 2 missionaries taken captive in Russia. In the movie, someone anonymously leaves a cashiers check (for enough money to pay the ransom) on the door of the parents of one of the missionaries. Their dilemma becomes whether to pay the money or not. If the don't, then there is a good chance their son dies. If they do, then they have effectively painted targets on every missionary. This is no different. Now that these terrorists know that they can get their brethren out of Gitmo (at a 5 to 1 ratio no less) I wouldn't be surprised to see more of these types of things.

 

[Surely]

Good point.

Should have let the soldier rot?

If he deserted the military then, yes, let him rot. If he was captured in battle then it's a different story.

 

[trigg3r]

If it is found to be true that he did walk away from his platoon and collaborated with the enemy then he not only has blood on his hands, he should face a court martial. The more and more I hear his platoon mates say he is guilty of desertion, the worse it looks. I don't believe he is going to face a court martial either way. It would look too bad politically for the administration.

 

[gandalfe]

He is not, technically at least, a deserter, and from what I have seen, was never classified as such. Whether you consider him to be one is not the question, it's how the military considers him.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/quick-facts-army-deserters-bergdahl

https://www.stripes.com/news/army-w...-of-bergdahl-disappearance-captivity-1.286777

 

[Harambe]

Go ahead and make fun of it if you will but do you seriously believe that what Obama did wasn't harmful? I'm guessing you're not LDS but there is a movie about 2 missionaries taken captive in Russia. In the movie, someone anonymously leaves a cashiers check (for enough money to pay the ransom) on the door of the parents of one of the missionaries. Their dilemma becomes whether to pay the money or not. If the don't, then there is a good chance their son dies. If they do, then they have effectively painted targets on every missionary. This is no different. Now that these terrorists know that they can get their brethren out of Gitmo (at a 5 to 1 ratio no less) I wouldn't be surprised to see more of these types of things.

You're putting yourself in a situation that didn't exist.

Look at the position we are in:
It's a matter of time before Gitmo gets shut down. Eventually, they were going to have to do something else with these prisoners, and I doubt the American people will want them on US Soil, and we'd be sending an "improper message" if we execute them(although this would have been my choice). Why not get something back in return?

Look at the position it puts us in externally and historically:
They no longer have a "hostage". We now have the one POW situation from this conflict resolved, and we don't need to have the media drum up horror stories.

It's not like we gave them money, weapons, nukes, gasoline, food, medical supplies, or a free pass to invade wherever the hell they want. We gave them 5 members that have long since been replaced. 5 members that are forever changed from the tortu--.. er... "enhanced interrogation techniques" and neglect provided them at an American POW camp. 3 of those members have been in custody for more than 10 years.

We gained more than we lost. That's all there is to it.

 

[One Brow]

They are educated and held considerable positions of power before they were captured.

With all those bold statements, perhaps you can tell us their names and backgrounds. You know, actual details.

 

[One Brow]

G... I wouldn't be surprised to see more of these types of things.

You mean, you think this will cause more Americans to wander off from their unit?

 

[Surely]

With all those bold statements, perhaps you can tell us their names and backgrounds. You know, actual details.

Well, there was this little bit about one of the terrori... um, detainees in the Wall Street Journal:

When the Taliban seized control of this area from their Northern Alliance rivals in 1999, they systematically demolished entire villages, blowing up houses, burning fields and seeding the land with mines, according to two comprehensive studies of war crimes and atrocities during wars in Afghanistan and human rights reports. Mr. Fazl played a major role in the destruction.

But hey, I'm sure he's a changed man now.

 

[♪alt13]

You're putting yourself in a situation that didn't exist.

Look at the position we are in:
It's a matter of time before Gitmo gets shut down. Eventually, they were going to have to do something else with these prisoners, and I doubt the American people will want them on US Soil, and we'd be sending an "improper message" if we execute them(although this would have been my choice). Why not get something back in return?

Look at the position it puts us in externally and historically:
They no longer have a "hostage". We now have the one POW situation from this conflict resolved, and we don't need to have the media drum up horror stories.

It's not like we gave them money, weapons, nukes, gasoline, food, medical supplies, or a free pass to invade wherever the hell they want. We gave them 5 members that have long since been replaced. 5 members that are forever changed from the tortu--.. er... "enhanced interrogation techniques" and neglect provided them at an American POW camp. 3 of those members have been in custody for more than 10 years.

We gained more than we lost. That's all there is to it.

bold 1
Let's not be naive. Just because a politician made a pledge on a then hot button issue in 2008 doesn't mean it will happen. If they do eventually shut Guantanamo down there are lovely facilities in other countries that these men will be sent to. The US will probably never again make the mistake of acknowledging the prisoners we hold.

bold 2
We have given an incentive not only to the Taliban but to every other nut job to ransom westerners and Americans in particular. I'm not going to say that I would have left the poor kid because I've never actually had to make a decision like that but this will lead to more hostage taking.

 

[Stoked]

bold 1
Let's not be naive. Just because a politician made a pledge on a then hot button issue in 2008 doesn't mean it will happen. If they do eventually shut Guantanamo down there are lovely facilities in other countries that these men will be sent to. The US will probably never again make the mistake of acknowledging the prisoners we hold.

bold 2
We have given an incentive not only to the Taliban but to every other nut job to ransom westerners and Americans in particular. I'm not going to say that I would have left the poor kid because I've never actually had to make a decision like that but this will lead to more hostage taking.

So do you agree that America should have gotten him back? You just dislike how they did so?

 

[♪alt13]

So do you agree that America should have gotten him back? You just dislike how they did so?

I am not being critical I am rather thinking critically. I am not going to condemn the President for bringing this kid home but I won't disregard the arguments against it. If made to answer I'd say that no I probably would not have gone through with the prisoner swap. For me it is a hypothetical and I'm sure it is easier to hold that opinion so long as it remains a hypothetical.

 

[Stoked]

I am not being critical I am rather thinking critically. I am not going to condemn the President for bringing this kid home but I won't disregard the arguments against it. If made to answer I'd say that no I probably would not have gone through with the prisoner swap. For me it is a hypothetical and I'm sure it is easier to hold that opinion so long as it remains a hypothetical.

Many positions are. This was not a trap question. Just wondered how you felt about getting him back and then how you felt about how it was done.

 

[fishonjazz]

We have given an incentive not only to the Taliban but to every other nut job to ransom westerners and Americans in particular.

This has already happened before i believe.

Do peole think this is the first time an enemy of the U.S. has tried to capture americans and hold them hostage?

I think this type of thing has been going on for a long time

 

[framer]

This is a problem on multiple levels.

1. The president broke the law to do this. I can't see how this is even arguable.

2. The president had a glorious WELCOME HOME!!! ceremony in the freakin' Rose Garden. For those accusing anyone else of playing politics, right there is where the game started.

3. To what extent Congress was involved in this discussion in years past, information about the deserter's situation was withheld. Senators just found about Bergdahl's "goodbye" note when the NYT ran the story a couple of days ago. Also, members of Bergdahl's platoon were told to hide the truth about what happened.

4. The people that got sent back are more important and dangerous NOW than when they were captured. And they were plenty bad then.

5. A precedent has been sent that we will give back prisoners for any fool American you can find floating around.

6. There is no chance that Bergdahl will be investigated completely and thoroughly because he was honored by Obama in a freakin' Rose Garden Ceremony.

7. People like OneBrow will jump in and have strong opinions about this case while showing they have absolutely no knowledge about the factors and details of said case. Will somehow try to accuse those pissed off about what happened as "racist!!!!"

8. During said Rose Garden ceremony, no mention was made of the soldiers who sacrificed and died working to free Bergdahl, and to cut the terrorists off from moving Bergdahl to Pakistan where he would have been separated from his head.

9. The entire purpose of this escapade was to remove the VA scandal from the front pages. Mission Accomplished.