Bowe Bergdahl, traitor or patsy?

[Geezil 24]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-seeks-prisoner-swap-with-taliban-to-free-army-sgt-bowe-bergdahl/2014/02/17/f142ed50-9590-11e3-afce-3e7c922ef31e_story.html

 

There is talk of a 5 to 1 swap for this clown. He walked off his base in 2009 in one of the most dangerous places on the planet. He is a pawn and traitor in my opinion. I think it is a set up to gain the release of some top Taliban commanders currently being held in Gitmo Interestingly enough Michael Hastings wrote a piece about him in 2012, one year before his car exploded.

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/americas-last-prisoner-of-war-20120607

 

[drobeski 3,061]

most overrated receiver in the league

[Geezil 24]

Did you win?

[GobbleDog 1,006]

There is talk of a 5 to 1 swap for this clown. He walked off his base in 2009 in one of the most dangerous places on the planet. He is a pawn and traitor in my opinion. I think it is a set up to gain the release of some top Taliban commanders currently being held in Gitmo

 

Did he try to help the enemy or did he do something stupid and/or went insane? Walking off his base for unknown reasons doesn't sound like a traitor.

 

Regardelss I'm surprised the US is willing to offer a prisoner exchange deal.

[drobeski 3,061]

great foreign policy, so niow we do negotiate with terrorists ?

[Geezil 24]

The deal is being done and some of these cats are bad ass.

[Voltaire 5,397]

He's on his way home. And five top shelf Taliban terrorists are being released to get him. http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140531/NATION/305310043/U-S-soldier-freed-from-captivity-Afghanistan

[Vikings4ever 568]

http://news.yahoo.com/gop-lawmakers-prisoner-exchange-violated-law-210934403--politics.html

Two Republican lawmakers on Saturday accused President Barack Obama of breaking the law by approving the release of five Afghan detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in exchange for a U.S. soldier believed held by Islamist insurgents for five years.

The White House agreed that actions were taken in spite of legal requirements and cited "unique and exigent circumstances" as justification.

Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, 28, of Hailey, Idaho, was handed over to U.S. special operations forces by the Taliban. In return, five Afghans who were held at a U.S. detention facility in Cuba were released to the custody of the government of Qatar, which served as a go-between in negotiations for the trade.

Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon of California and Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma said in a statement that Obama is required by law to notify Congress 30 days before any terrorists are transferred from the U.S. facility. They said Obama also is required to explain how the threat posed by such terrorists has been substantially mitigated.

McKeon is chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Inhofe is the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

In response, the White House said it moved as quickly as possible given the opportunity that arose to secure Bergdahl's release. Citing "these unique and exigent circumstances," the White House said a decision was made to go ahead with the transfer despite the legal requirement of 30 days advance notice to Congress.

[NorthernVike 2,088]

[Big Blue 06 195]

Don't get me wrong here, I'm glad this guy is back on U.S. Soil. God bless him for his service, and I wish only good things for him.

 

What concerns me is that the White House essentially said, "yeah, this is the law, but we're gonna do this anyway; special circumstances and all".

 

I'm usually not a fan of slippery slope arguments, as most of the time, the logic behind them makes no sense. However, this slope is just about paved with ice. What's to stop the White House, now or in the future, from playing that card again? I thought laws were generally in place to prevent abuse of power. I'm simplifying this to be sure, but I have concerns.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

Wow, sad day when getting a captured soldier back home is a partisan issue

[Drizzay 736]

Don't get me wrong here, I'm glad this guy is back on U.S. Soil. God bless him for his service, and I wish only good things for him.

 

What concerns me is that the White House essentially said, "yeah, this is the law, but we're gonna do this anyway; special circumstances and all".

 

I'm usually not a fan of slippery slope arguments, as most of the time, the logic behind them makes no sense. However, this slope is just about paved with ice. What's to stop the White House, now or in the future, from playing that card again? I thought laws were generally in place to prevent abuse of power. I'm simplifying this to be sure, but I have concerns.

 

It is a political move. They know no Republican will make a bigger deal out of this. It would be too easy for a Democrat to say "I guess this guy thinks a few terrorists in detention are more important than getting a US soldier back."

 

Blah Blah Blah

[Vikings4ever 568]

Wow, sad day when getting a captured soldier back home is a partisan issue

Shouldn't the president knowingly doing something illegal be an issue?

[Saint Elistan 106]

Should have just shot the Taliban that showed up with him and killed the 5 they were giving back. Say the deal went bad and call it a good day.

[BunnysBastatrds 2,544]

Looks like were in for nasty weather.

[NorthernVike 2,088]

Shouldn't the president knowingly doing something illegal be an issue?

Evidently it's not to the biggest partisan hack on the bored.

[TimmySmith 2,783]

This is akin to a pardon. The President is sticking his neck out and ignoring the law. He obviously believes he will get intelligence. I have my doubts.

[Googballz 39]

I thought we did not negotiate with terrorists.

 

Obama just told them to grab as many Americans as you can and I will cave to your demands.

 

 

I am use to Obama ignoring lawz, but this time the consequences could be harsh.

[crackattack 520]

One of our military is worth 5 of theirs. I don't care about the we don't negotiate with terrorists argument. No man left behind is the mantra I prefer. Obama skirting the law....again...is the bigger problem. I applaud Obama for bringing him home, but we have laws, and he can't keep ignoring them. This might be the one that has consequences.

[The Moz 71]

Glad for the guy but I think it's terrible for Obama announce to the world that Negotiations with terrorists is OPEN FOR BUSINESS! I hope the intel they hope to get from this guy was worth it

[IGotWorms 4,060]

I'm really quite shocked and dismayed at the shortsightedness on display in this thread. Just when you think things couldn't get any worse...

 

Look, the deal as an American soldier is that you put your life on the line for the country, maybe you leave your wife without a husband, your kids without a father, your parents without a child. And in exchange for that possible sacrifice one of our promises is that if you are captured America WILL come for you.

 

The deal isn't that we'll come from you unless some fat, partisan whiner in Congress with an axe to grind against the president (talking about Mike Rogers there) raises enough of a stink that, oh what the hell, we'll just leave you in Taliban captivity because it wouldn't be politically expedient to come save your ass.

 

Who the hell would want to fight in that kind of army? I sure as hell wouldn't.

[The Moz 71]

I'm really quite shocked and dismayed at the shortsightedness on display in this thread. Just when you think things couldn't get any worse...

 

Look, the deal as an American soldier is that you put your life on the line for the country, maybe you leave your wife without a husband, your kids without a father, your parents without a child. And in exchange for that possible sacrifice one of our promises is that if you are captured America WILL come for you.

 

The deal isn't that we'll come from you unless some fat, partisan whiner in Congress with an axe to grind against the president (talking about Mike Rogers there) raises enough of a stink that, oh what the hell, we'll just leave you in Taliban captivity because it wouldn't be politically expedient to come save your ass.

 

Who the hell would want to fight in that kind of army? I sure as hell wouldn't.

It's not short sighted at all to think that shitting on the Policy of not Negotiating with Terrorists was a bad Idea. Tough to ever say "we don't negotiate with terrorists again and a good chance now to expect a solid uptick in Hostage taking.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

It's not short sighted at all to think that shitting on the Policy of not Negotiating with Terrorists was a bad Idea. Tough to ever say "we don't negotiate with terrorists again and a good chance now to expect a solid uptick in Hostage taking.

Yeah heard that talking point too. He was a POW, not a hostage. We had tens of thousands of troops on the ground in Afghanistan, it's not like the guy was abducted while backpacking through Syria.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Wow, sad day when getting a captured soldier back home is a partisan issue

I would not call it a partisan issue...though, some will make it that way sure.

 

From what I first read, these guys are not just being set free. I think a few...if not all...are being released to Qatar. Some may still be detained by someone and face war crimes and so on.

 

 

Im glad to have an American soldier back...but also want to know more about him surrounding why he walked away from his post and what he did while gone to make sure he is not now just some guy working for "the other side".

Lets not act like this was just some soldier captured either...he walked away.

Lets also not act like this is the first time we have negotiated with terrorists either (save y our asking for links...)

[TimmySmith 2,783]

Yeah heard that talking point too. He was a POW, not a hostage. We had tens of thousands of troops on the ground in Afghanistan, it's not like the guy was abducted while backpacking through Syria.

You obviously have not read anything about him. He deserted into enemy hands and then gets traded for 5 terrorists. The upside is limited. The downside could be tragic.

[The Moz 71]

Yeah heard that talking point too. He was a POW, not a hostage. We had tens of thousands of troops on the ground in Afghanistan, it's not like the guy was abducted while backpacking through Syria.

The guy went fockign AWOL and or may not of conspired with Terrorist. The only possible upside here is maybe they think they can get good intell from him to make it worth it.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

You guys have no focking clue what happened so you really should just shut it.

 

A focking traitor --come on!! You think Obama and the military are really going to move mountains to secure the return of an outright traitor? No focking way. Only way that makes sense is if you're one of those focking nutballs who think Obama is a secret Muslim who wants al Qaeda to win

 

Maybe the dude had a mental break or something. War is a high stress scenario and some people just can't handle it. Doesn't mean that his country shouldn't try their damnedest to rescue him anyway.

[Googballz 39]

Worms has his head so far up Obama's ass he can't see the ramifications of this deal.

 

If Obama did it, it has to be good.

 

What a hack.

[IGotWorms 4,060]

If W did it and stupid-ass Maxine Waters was out there making an ignorant fool of herself, I'd say the same damn thing

[NorthernVike 2,088]

You guys have no focking clue what happened so you really should just shut it.

That's focking rich, coming from the fuckchop that made up a million scenarios about tray tray and George.

 

 

 

Hack!

[drobeski 3,061]

Worms went hack big time in this one, typical

[Voltaire 5,397]

The guy went fockign AWOL and or may not of conspired with Terrorist. The only possible upside here is maybe they think they can get good intell from him to make it worth it.

There's a Grand Canyon sized difference between being AWOL and being MIA. Sure, I guess he could have deliberately went AWOL and conspired with terrorists. There was certainly some fishiness and suspicions surrounding his disappearance. It's more likely he got lost on the way to taking a sh*t or went up the road a little bit looking for his keys. Going AWOL into civilized countries like Germany or Korea make more sense than disappearing into the Afghan countryside but I don't know anything about his frame of mind.

 

What he did was obviously boneheaded and caused a lot of problems all the way up the chain of command to the president himself. In the end they never could find him. On their way out, they wanted to tie up his loose end and so five super-dangerous first rate terrorists were released to get him home. Five top terrorist leaders for one low ranking American dumbfock? Was it worth it? Eh... the president thought it was.

[Voltaire 5,397]

Maybe instead of giving them five high level Taliban commanders for him, we could have given them five high level Bush administration officials instead. Or maybe two-three dozen, however many they can handle.

[TimmySmith 2,783]

You guys have no focking clue what happened so you really should just shut it.

 

 

Back at you.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,433]

The trade chart shows this as a one-sided deal. We have to wait a couple of years to see who really ends up winning on the deal. You guys are also ignoring the salary cap.

 

Big issue is ignoring the law. No one is above the law.

[NewbieJr 541]

My thoughts:

Any time an American prisoner of war is freed and brought home, it is a good thing. It's great for our men in the military to know that they are not disposable chess pieces and that their country will make every effort to bring them home.

 

I hope that homeland security has done a very thorough job on the guys we released. If one of them ends up as a contributing member of any future terror attack, it will be a permanent black eye and the defining moment of this administration's legacy.

 

I need to hear more details regarding why this wasn't done according to the letter of the law. As far as any information they have revealed to the public, I see no excuse for the White House to have bypassed protocol. That's troubling.

[Ken8080 6]

My thoughts:

Any time an American prisoner of war is freed and brought home, it is a good thing. It's great for our men in the military to know that they are not disposable chess pieces and that their country will make every effort to bring them home.

 

I hope that homeland security has done a very thorough job on the guys we released. If one of them ends up as a contributing member of any future terror attack, it will be a permanent black eye and the defining moment of this administration's legacy.

 

I need to hear more details regarding why this wasn't done according to the letter of the law. As far as any information they have revealed to the public, I see no excuse for the White House to have bypassed protocol. That's troubling.

 

Aren't you supposed to be in California buttfocking some tranny? jw

Or did you forget? Again jw.

[NewbieJr 541]

Aren't you supposed to be in California buttfocking some tranny? jw

Or did you forget? Again jw.

Pay attention, idiot. I leave Thursday.

[TimmySmith 2,783]

I need to hear more details regarding why this wasn't done according to the letter of the law. As far as any information they have revealed to the public, I see no excuse for the White House to have bypassed protocol. That's troubling.

Here lies the issue. The WH stated that his health had deteriorated, figuring no one would question the quick trigger. Then the State Department proclaimed him to be in excellent health. Whoops. Another case where the State Department does not seem to be getting the memos. The real reason is still out there.

[cbfalcon 827]

My thoughts:

Any time an American prisoner of war is freed and brought home, it is a good thing. It's great for our men in the military to know that they are not disposable chess pieces and that their country will make every effort to bring them home.

 

I hope that homeland security has done a very thorough job on the guys we released. If one of them ends up as a contributing member of any future terror attack, it will be a permanent black eye and the defining moment of this administration's legacy.

 

I need to hear more details regarding why this wasn't done according to the letter of the law. As far as any information they have revealed to the public, I see no excuse for the White House to have bypassed protocol. That's troubling.

 

I mostly agree with this.

 

Simply for military moral and the future of our armed forces, this was needed. Soldiers and potential soldiers need to believe we will do whatever we can to bring them home.

 

As for the guys released, this may sound silly, but I hope we implanted microchips in the bastards. Or maybe we turned one of them? Have we ever had someone in our custody for such a long time, that was released and had the potential to lead us back to the queen bees? In fact, if I was a terrorist group, I'd have trouble trusting these guys. So maybe that simple stigma has reduced their danger.

 

As for negotiating with terrorists....this is the slippery slope. Legally, I understand the difference between negotiating with terrorists over hostages, and negotiating with a foreign government/military/etc over prisoners. While it's not clear as day, I see this guy as a prisoner of war....But for probably the only time ever, I wonder if Ted Cruz is correct when he asks if we just put a price on the heads of our soldiers. Capture one and you can get 5 of your guys back......

 

But I'm also one of those guys that has general faith that our government has at least discussed all sides of it. I believed it with Bush and I believe it with Obama. I also have faith that our government attempts to do what they believe is best for our country as a whole. Here, they have more information as to the specifics, the potential, and the agenda of each character involved. . And in this case, very little of that info is available to the public, so I would feel out of order judging whether this was a mistake or a chance worth taking.