Bergdahl story

[UGLI baby]

UGLIbro jumpin in them GD debates

lolololol

 

[Stoked]

Or just dont negotiate with terrorists.

So allow them to hold and possibly torture one of our own? Or do you favor a military response like finding his location and sending in a Seal team?

 

[Stoked]

Hopefully Obama was smart and had the military put GPS chips in the terrorist ball sacs before they let them go.

Why? They know exactly where they are going. Afghanistan.

 

[UGLI baby]

So allow them to hold and possibly torture one of our own? Or do you favor a military response like finding his location and sending in a Seal team?

Whichever one equals not negotiating with terrorists.

 

[Stoked]

Whichever one equals not negotiating with terrorists.

View I have on that is we are leaving Afghanistan anyways so why do we care if there are 10,000 Taliban or 10,005?

I get the whole we don't negotiate and it is a reasonable stance depending on the situation. If they know are only way to get him back was the give them 5 camel jockeys then so be it. We are leaving there anyways.

 

[UGLI baby]

Dude goes full Artard and wanders off base.

6 army dudes that didn't go full Artard die looking for him.

Yep, better exchange 5 high level terrorist dudes for him so that he can come home and watch tv and go to the mall and stuff.

 

[Deleted member 365]

I understand why we negotiated a trade to bring our soldier home even if he wasn't in good standing with the military. However, I think the price was too high to give up 5 leaders from this terrorist group. 1 for 1 would be reasonable despite a "we don't negotiate with terrorists" stance, but 5 leaders will likely cost many future American (and not American) lives.

I agree. We paid too high a price. We should have just done what a certain president in the 80s did to Iran. Offer them 1500 missiles for our the hostage.

Call me arrogant, but I don't fear 5 dudes with a 6th grade education who only know how to create crappy roadside bombs. I doubt sticking a piece of dynamite in their whitey righties is gonna bring down the USA anytime soon. Heck, maybe they've seen enough war and will basically go into retirement?

I'm guessing the USA will keep GOP track of these guys. If any of hem step out of line we'll send a drone or two to take them out.

 

[UGLI baby]

View I have on that is we are leaving Afghanistan anyways so why do we care if there are 10,000 Taliban or 10,005?

I get the whole we don't negotiate and it is a reasonable stance depending on the situation. If they know are only way to get him back was the give them 5 camel jockeys then so be it. We are leaving there anyways.

It's only an actual stance if it isn't situational...

This is the first time the US did something like this in 30 yrs, no? Sets a horrible precedent, and for what?

 

[framer]

One of those "camel jockeys" you refer to is responsible for killing up to 2000 civilians. But that seems like a good trade, no? Let's move that guy right back into the 'hood. I find it very humorous how most of the people commenting on this are just idiotically uninformed. Also, the president flat out broke a law voted into place by a Democratic Congress THAT HE SIGNED in order to make this deal. But, at this point, what difference does it make anyway. . .

 

[BabyPeterzz]

If they know are only way to get him back was the give them 5 camel jockeys then so be it.

Wait, wut?

 

[franklin]

Or just dont negotiate with terrorists.

We have drones bro. Problem solved soon.

 

[Stoked]

One of those "camel jockeys" you refer to is responsible for killing up to 2000 civilians. But that seems like a good trade, no? Let's move that guy right back into the 'hood. I find it very humorous how most of the people commenting on this are just idiotically uninformed. Also, the president flat out broke a law voted into place by a Democratic Congress THAT HE SIGNED in order to make this deal. But, at this point, what difference does it make anyway. . .

If true I was not aware of that.

As for the civilian killing. That is terrible but what were the other options for him? Enternal encarceration? No thank you Execution in Gitmo? Far preferable for the American pocket book than eternal incarceration. Also link?

I see the whole "no negotiating with terrorists" argument. Did we know his location? Was rescue a viable option? If not is the only problem the # of people we gave back? or the exact individuals we gave back? These terrorists all have horrible back stories and what is the difference betwwen 10,000 and 10,005 terrorists in an area we are leaving anyways?

Also if we are going to pretend that we are suddenly concerned with civilian deaths overseas then why arn't American forces at war by the 100,000s in Africa and China?

I don't fault them for getting Berghdahl back. Perhaps they could have done it in a better way though.

@UGLI - you do have a good point with the precedent it set. Risky business but isn't all of it?