I just noticed something

[AvgGuyIA]

How about we let the military do their investigation before we decide what Bergdahl is or is not?

We already have people saying he deserted. We have witnesses.

Democrats are going to lose more seats in the House and Senate over this. Hillary had better denounce Obozo immediately.

 

[Seawytch]

First time in American History that getting a POW released is a bad thing...of course, first black President and all...

 

[AvgGuyIA]

You people are certain Bergdahl is guilty and certain the guy in Mexico is innocent.

The bliss of certainty. Is that similar to the bliss of ignorance?

What, exactly, is the Marine supposed to be guilty of? Do you have any idea how easy it is to get trapped in the lanes going into Mexico, even if you have no intention of going there? I grew up on the border, and learned that the only solution is to either go, or break the law and drive across a few lanes of traffic. Most people wouldn't know they were trapped because they would expect a turnaround since they are over a fucking mile from the border.

Talk to TK. He is certain that Bergdahl is guilty of desertion. TK is the one engaging in guilty until proven innocent.

Never-mind that he left a desertion note.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

First time in American History that getting a POW released is a bad thing...of course, first black President and all...

Correction. First moron president.

 

[paperview]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

It's a funny thing to say one person is guilty of desertion while five others are war criminals when not a single one of them have had one single day in court to answer to any charges brought against them.

Just looking at the information available on Bergdahl, I see him more as being mentally ill than being a deserter. If the reports of what he said prior to leaving his post are true, why was he not sent for a psychological evaluation immediately? Klinger is only funny on MASH. When Klinger shows up in your unit, you've got a problem and it needs to be addressed immediately. This was a complete failure on the part or his commanding officers.

Very well put.

We need to understand that there are consequences to sending soldiers into multiple tours of duty.

There are stories of people who went back over there like a dozen or more times. One soldier a couple years back died on his 14th tour of duty in Afghanistan.

There's something seriously wrong with any military operation when you have to send somebody back there that many times.

The PTSD and all the other things that emotionally scar these brave people is unprecedented as a result. I hope he gets the help he needs.

I read his e-mail to his parents. He wrote of abuses to Afghan people from our military. The actions of other soldiers that he writes about, along with his own actions reveal to me that that's what you get when you put our military in a mission that is not clearly defined and which is terribly executed as a result.

For that I blame military commanders all the way up to President George W. Bush, who figured we'd just send everybody over there and then just wing it as we go along. Our soldiers deserved better than that.

If you're on a serious nation building effort, you have to make friends with the people of that country and earn their trust. We didn't do that. A lot of people went in there with a kick-ass attitude and a lot of civilians got poor treatment from us. It's something we need to face as a country that that's what you get when the mission is poorly planned and terribly executed.

^ This.

 

[zeke]

Amazing. Here we have a US Marine who evidently had something go bad wrong in his head. Possibly related to his tours of duty serving this country.

And on here, the supposed military loving right wingers are ready to convict and apply the death penalty to this man.

All the while the supposed military hating left wingers are going; wait a minute. Lets not convict the man till at least he has a trial. And btw, lets be glad he made it back home.

Pretty strange turn around of attitudes.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The OP sets up a false equivalency.

The prisoner of war exchange accomplishes:

one, the principle we bring our people home

two, putting suspect ones like Bergdahl in the military system.

 

[NYcarbineer]

How about we let the military do their investigation before we decide what Bergdahl is or is not?

We already have people saying he deserted. We have witnesses.

Democrats are going to lose more seats in the House and Senate over this. Hillary had better denounce Obozo immediately.

Frank Luntz the Republican pollster said yesterday that attacking this soldier will hurt the GOP badly in the 2014 election.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Big difference. They are American. Perhaps I should clarify: terrorists who are from middle eastern countries who work to kill or harm Americans don't deserve trials. They should be summarily executed as enemy combatants.

Like I said before, they don't get 14th Amendment rights. American terrorists are American. They on the other hand, do.

How much more simplistic must I make it?

We don't shoot prisoners. That isn't our policy.

Throughout the history of American justice, people guilty of capital crimes stateside were hung, shot, electrocuted, and injected with poison. To say it wasn't our policy to shoot those types of prisoners is inaccurate.

Really? We have routinely, summarily and without trial, shot prisoners of war? And done so with the blessing of our legal system?

Cite those cases.

 

[rightwinger]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

Bergdahl was never accused or condemned of any crime. The dangerous war criminals had the same status. If they were war criminals, we should have tried them for their crimes against humanity. In the absence of that, they are POWs just like Bergdahl

Andrew Tahmooressi admits he brought three weapons into Mexico which is a crime. Whether he is guilty or innocent because of circumstances needs to be determined in a court of law

 

[JoeB131]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

Tahmooressi violated Mexico's laws. He brought three guns into their country illegally.

Mexico is a sovereign nation with their own court system, and they are adjudicating his case.

Your historonics about being "tortured and beaten" aside, we can't tell another country that their laws don't count.

We've insisted on our right to EXECUTE Mexican nationals for crimes committed here.

Kind of sucks when the shoe is on the other foot.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Apparently most of you don't know how 'desertion' is even treated by the US.

1. Camilo Mejía - convicted of desertion during Iraq war. Sentence - 1 year, served 9 months.

2. Kevin Benderman - convicted of desertion during Iraq - Sentence - 15 months, served 13.

3. Agustin Aguayo - convicted of desertion during Iraq - served 7 months

4. Robin Long - convicted of desertion during Iraq - sentenced to 15 months, served 12

Link:

List of Iraq War resisters - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And you want to shoot Bergdahl? Maybe you should just consider his 5 years imprisonment by the Taliban more than enough punishment, and move on.

 

[The Rabbi]

First time in American History that getting a POW released is a bad thing...of course, first black President and all...

He wasn't a POW
Obama isn't black.

You come at this with your typical keen understanding and knowledge of the facts.

 

[rightwinger]

First time in American History that getting a POW released is a bad thing...of course, first black President and all...

He wasn't a POW
Obama isn't black.

You come at this with your typical keen understanding and knowledge of the facts.

The sun does not rise in the east
The earth is not round

 

[deltex1]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

Obabble is saving the marine to distract from his next inevitable fuck up. Simple as dat.

 

[The Rabbi]

First time in American History that getting a POW released is a bad thing...of course, first black President and all...

He wasn't a POW
Obama isn't black.

You come at this with your typical keen understanding and knowledge of the facts.

The sun does not rise in the east
The earth is not round

Actually both of those are true.
The sun does not rise at all. The Earth rotates.
The Earth is not round but bulged out at the equator.

Ignorance is stupid. You prove it with every post.

 

[Lovebears65]

You guys called Bush a war criminal because of Iraq . EVEN though he had congress support ..snopes.com: Weapons of Mass Destruction Quotes But so far Obama can do anything and you guys support him..

 

[Care4all]

If all of these generals and other intelligence, knew he was a deserter, then why on heaven's earth did they not say he was AWOL back then? Why continue to promote him?

Do you all think that GITMO is going to stay opened even after we withdraw from Afghanistan?

We traded nothing for something...those in GITMO are already being prepared to be dispersed, and removed from GITMO....

GITMO is NOT staying opened after the Afghan war is over and our troops come home.

And where were the ex GITMO prisoners being sent or sent? And what are the conditions of their release? I know I read somewhere that the AFGHAN gvt was very upset about their release....but I thought they were being sent to Qatar??? Or being held in Qatar?

The first message received from the Marine just a couple of days after missing, was that he was captured when using the Latrine? weird.... But obviously we DO NOT KNOW the whole story....

Those Marines killed in the line of duty, were killed in the line of duty...period....and are heroes! Whether this marine went AWOL or was captured while using the latrine, these other heroes that were killed doing their job would not have been sitting behind the security of a fort twiddling their thumbs, they would have been out and about in the direct line of fire (IED's) and could have possibly died or their fellow soldier could have possibly been killed, as well, and in the line of duty.....

We'll learn more, eventually, when we are actually privileged to ALL THE FACTS.

 

[NYcarbineer]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

Obabble is saving the marine to distract from his next inevitable fuck up. Simple as dat.

Everything Obama has ever done has been labeled as some sort of distraction by the deranged;

you're making derangement boring.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You guys called Bush a war criminal because of Iraq . EVEN though he had congress support ..snopes.com: Weapons of Mass Destruction Quotes But so far Obama can do anything and you guys support him..

Bush was wrong to invade Iraq. Bergdahl was wrong to go wandering around Afghanistan.

I think the relative magnitude of the 2 wrongs is fairly apparent.