There was no letter on the bed

[Jarhead]

and there you go again...

My answer is..."it is because it is"....and its not my fault that you cant understand that.

So, in other words, you don't know why we are going to do it....but we are going to do it anyway.

Let me repeat it for you again: When the war is over we release prisoners.

You dont understand. Fine. Once again understanding doesnt change the facts. 1. I answered your question. 2. We release them when the war is over



Let me repeat again: This war is different BECAUSE THERE IS NO STATE TO SIGN THAT THE WAR IS OVER.

When you grow up, Ill debate ideas with you....until then, no interest.

Good...the perpetual dumb act is getting old

I'm curious, Closed...do you REALLY think that the war with Al Queda is over?

his argument is that since there is no state to sign a treaty with, the war ends when we retreat....even tough the enemy still plans to wage war against us.

That is why I say he debates like a child.

 

[Jarhead]

(1) He has the Constitutional authority to conduct the war as he sees fit. He is not answerable to you or Congress.

(2) Why are you surprised? He let folks know in his signing statement that he would interpret the law in the manner he wished.

You're a bit naive, Jake.

Just because a President is overseeing an American conflict does not give him authority to disregard law passed by the Congress. That's NOT how our system operates.

Then I guess the real dereliction of duty here would be if the Republicans in the House don't file articles of impeachment.

Showing how naïve you are....AGAIN.

if it is deemed at he did not follow the law, it is a law that is NOT deemed a "crime" if breeched.

A crime must be committed for impeachment.

Moron.

 

[Little-Acorn]

There was no letter on the bed


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/03/u...ho-pow-vanished-angered-his-unit.html?hp&_r=2

WASHINGTON — Sometime after midnight on June 30, 2009, Pfc. Bowe Bergdahl left behind a note in his tent saying he had become disillusioned with the Army, did not support the American mission in Afghanistan and was leaving to start a new life. He slipped off the remote military outpost in Paktika Province on the border with Pakistan and took with him a soft backpack, water, knives, a notebook and writing materials, but left behind his body armor and weapons — startling, given the hostile environment around his outpost.

That account, provided by a former senior military officer briefed on the investigation into the private’s disappearance, is part of a more complicated picture emerging of the capture of a soldier whose five years as a Taliban prisoner influenced high-level diplomatic negotiations, brought in foreign governments, and ended with him whisked away on a helicopter by American commandos.

That takes care of that leftist lie.....

 

[jc456]

No, Tell me why that has to do with the topic...I bet you cant

Well sure, why would he just walk off base and not tell anyone? Did his personals go home three days before? So did he walk off of base on his own? Do you even know how he got captured? No you don't, so, why would he be captured if he were on base where he was supposed to be? letter on the bed? how would you know that either?

I knew you didnt have a point. just question marks

And I knew you had no answers. You never do! You be a follower.

 

[Mojo2]

WASHINGTON — Sometime after midnight on June 30, 2009, Pfc. Bowe Bergdahl left behind a note in his tent saying he had become disillusioned with the Army, did not support the American mission in Afghanistan and was leaving to start a new life. He slipped off the remote military outpost in Paktika Province on the border with Pakistan and took with him a soft backpack, water, knives, a notebook and writing materials, but left behind his body armor and weapons — startling, given the hostile environment around his outpost.

That account, provided by a former senior military officer briefed on the investigation into the private’s disappearance, is part of a more complicated picture emerging of the capture of a soldier whose five years as a Taliban prisoner influenced high-level diplomatic negotiations, brought in foreign governments, and ended with him whisked away on a helicopter by American commandos.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/03/u...ho-pow-vanished-angered-his-unit.html?hp&_r=2

 

[jc456]

You almost gotta laugh. The administration practically concedes that Bergdahl abandoned his post but the radical left thinks he was innocent because he didn't leave a note on his bed.

Maybe if you stopped confusing leaving his post with being innocent of leaving a note you'd understand it.

But I guess its easier for you to lie about it and believe that being guilty of leaving your post means you have to be guilty of leaving a note in the name of fairness

CC, leave a note and your free from desertion? Wow, too bad you ain't in charge!

 

[ClosedCaption]

Well sure, why would he just walk off base and not tell anyone? Did his personals go home three days before? So did he walk off of base on his own? Do you even know how he got captured? No you don't, so, why would he be captured if he were on base where he was supposed to be? letter on the bed? how would you know that either?

I knew you didnt have a point. just question marks

And I knew you had no answers. You never do! You be a follower.

You asked if I knew how he got captured. I answered no and asked if you had a point. I guess thats what you mean by I never answer questions right?

You had no point and asked more questions

Then claimed I never answered you question

Good job

 

[Little-Acorn]

Let me repeat it for you again: When the war is over we release prisoners.

Then why did we release able-bodied prisoners a few days ago, while this war was still going on?

 

[Little-Acorn]

War is violence, but that's not all it is. War is also threat.

War is not over until Al Qaeda stops attacking us... AND stops threatening and plotting to attack us.

We can cut and run from Afghanistan any time. That won't end the war.

 

[Jarhead]

So answer the question asked CC....

When one side opts to retreat and the other side opts to continue to wage war...

Does that mean the war is over?

 

[koshergrl]

"
The bottom line is we want to find out why the Obama administration felt they were justified in breaking the law,” one Republican aide said, adding that terrorists’ recidivism also is expected to be a major topic.
“That was the point of the law passed five or six months ago,” the aide said. “We agreed to give the president flexibility on Guantanamo if he gave us 30 days’ notice to make sure the Obama administration would not release someone who should not be released. In this case, they released five people who should not have been released.”


Read more: Inside the Ring: Hagel to testify before House panel on Bergdahl prisoner exchange - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

 

[Jarhead]

You almost gotta laugh. The administration practically concedes that Bergdahl abandoned his post but the radical left thinks he was innocent because he didn't leave a note on his bed.

Maybe if you stopped confusing leaving his post with being innocent of leaving a note you'd understand it.

But I guess its easier for you to lie about it and believe that being guilty of leaving your post means you have to be guilty of leaving a note in the name of fairness

CC, leave a note and your free from desertion? Wow, too bad you ain't in charge!

CC is well known to divert from answering difficult questions by asking you questions about your questions....


And then when you answer those questions he asks why you brought them up.

And then he insults you and moves on.

It is his style.

Ugly and childish.

 

[ClosedCaption]

So answer the question asked CC....

When one side opts to retreat and the other side opts to continue to wage war...

Does that mean the war is over?

We consider it to be over. Dont understand it again? Want to ask more questions then cry when you dont understand it more?

 

[koshergrl]

"If they wanted to get [Sgt. Bergdahl] out, they could have sent in Seal Team Six and killed a bunch of his [captors],” the aide said. “Instead they let five bad guys go.”

Read more: Inside the Ring: Hagel to testify before House panel on Bergdahl prisoner exchange - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

 

[Jarhead]

"
The bottom line is we want to find out why the Obama administration felt they were justified in breaking the law,” one Republican aide said, adding that terrorists’ recidivism also is expected to be a major topic.
“That was the point of the law passed five or six months ago,” the aide said. “We agreed to give the president flexibility on Guantanamo if he gave us 30 days’ notice to make sure the Obama administration would not release someone who should not be released. In this case, they released five people who should not have been released.”


Read more: Inside the Ring: Hagel to testify before House panel on Bergdahl prisoner exchange - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

The real irony?

Bush broke the law even though he got approval from congress.

Obama did nothing wrong even though he bypassed congress against the terms of the law he signed.

Pretty much sums things up.

 

[Jarhead]

So answer the question asked CC....

When one side opts to retreat and the other side opts to continue to wage war...

Does that mean the war is over?

We consider it to be over.

Really?

Wow.

I wonder how that works.

Do we tell them to stop it, we don't want to play anymore?

Or do we simply let them kill us and not fight back because "we said the war is over"?

Fool. Your answer is ridiculous.

 

[Little-Acorn]

In WWII, we took scads of prisoners, and the enemy took scads of our servicement prisoners.

After the war was over, we sent all the prisoners back to their country, and the enemy sent all his American prisoners back to us.

It is sometimes done that an ill or injured prisoner is sent back before the war is over. That is done because the ill/injured man is unlikely to rejoin the fight. Bergdahl was said to be ill, and that's why he was released to come back here now while the war was still going on, after not being released for five years.

Were the five terrorists we just released, ill or injured?

If not, why or EARTH did we release them???

 

[ClosedCaption]

You almost gotta laugh. The administration practically concedes that Bergdahl abandoned his post but the radical left thinks he was innocent because he didn't leave a note on his bed.

Maybe if you stopped confusing leaving his post with being innocent of leaving a note you'd understand it.

But I guess its easier for you to lie about it and believe that being guilty of leaving your post means you have to be guilty of leaving a note in the name of fairness

CC, leave a note and your free from desertion? Wow, too bad you ain't in charge!

Go ahead and bold the part that says leaving a note means you are free from desertion.

I'll wait while you use words like "allude" and "suggest"

 

[jc456]

I knew you didnt have a point. just question marks

And I knew you had no answers. You never do! You be a follower.

You asked if I knew how he got captured. I answered no and asked if you had a point. I guess thats what you mean by I never answer questions right?

You had no point and asked more questions

Then claimed I never answered you question

Good job

You have no answer, yet your on here babbling like you know something. Gitmo detainees are not prisoners of war. They will not be released, another answer you have no knowledge of.

 

[ClosedCaption]

So answer the question asked CC....

When one side opts to retreat and the other side opts to continue to wage war...

Does that mean the war is over?

We consider it to be over.

Really?

Wow.

I wonder how that works.

Wow, you dont get it....I'm shocked