Page 8 of 17 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 166

Thread: Former POW Bergdahl set to return to active duty [W:159]

  1. #71
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 06:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    re: Former POW Bergdahl set to return to active duty [W:159]

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    my hope is the investigation finds him to be deserving of it
    honestly, that's my hope too.

    it would suck to find out he's a deserter.

  2. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Last Seen
    01-30-15 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    15,633

    re: Former POW Bergdahl set to return to active duty [W:159]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    NJP does not convict you of a crime. Thank you for playing.
    Yes it does, you just don't get to defend yourself and your CO doesn't need to produce any evidence.

    I'm not a barracks JAG officer but I kind of got the idea what the UCMJ was while standing on the yellow footprints at MCRDSD.

    I also learned what it meant that Marines take care of their own and also police themselves.

    Lets see, you have NJP's. administrative discharge boards, Captains Mast, Summary Court Martial, General Court Martial.

    Then you have all of the unofficial trials and punishment that aren't found in any field manuals or in the UCMJ. This is usually found in combat arms. We police ourselves.

    How did it work on ship Redress ? There must have been some sailors reporting to sick bay and saying they walked into a hatchway. Better than facing a Summary or General Court Martial.

    You know that movie with Jack Nicholson, "A Few Good Men" ? Based upon a true event with in the Corps. It happened all of the time. Still does but Obama and the progressive caucus in Congress are trying to stop it.

    Rep. Judy Chu (D/progressive) is so stupid, she would have rather had her nephew to be tried in a General Court Martial for falling asleep on perimeter watch in combat and facing death by musketry if convicted. Instead the Marines of Chu's nephew unit decided to police themselves instead of having him face a firing squad.

    BTW: Bergdahl bugging out in combat also carries the same maximum penalty, death by musketry.

  3. #73
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 06:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    re: Former POW Bergdahl set to return to active duty [W:159]

    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    Yes it does, you just don't get to defend yourself and your CO doesn't need to produce any evidence.

    I'm not a barracks JAG officer but I kind of got the idea what the UCMJ was while standing on the yellow footprints at MCRDSD.

    I also learned what it meant that Marines take care of their own and also police themselves.

    Lets see, you have NJP's. administrative discharge boards, Captains Mast, Summary Court Martial, General Court Martial.

    Then you have all of the unofficial trials and punishment that aren't found in any field manuals or in the UCMJ. This is usually found in combat arms. We police ourselves.

    How did it work on ship Redress ? There must have been some sailors reporting to sick bay and saying they walked into a hatchway. Better than facing a Summary or General Court Martial.

    You know that movie with Jack Nicholson, "A Few Good Men" ? Based upon a true event with in the Corps. It happened all of the time. Still does but Obama and the progressive caucus in Congress are trying to stop it.

    Rep. Judy Chu (D/progressive) is so stupid, she would have rather had her nephew to be tried in a General Court Martial for falling asleep on perimeter watch in combat and facing death by musketry if convicted. Instead the Marines of Chu's nephew unit decided to police themselves instead of having him face a firing squad.

    BTW: Bergdahl bugging out in combat also carries the same maximum penalty, death by musketry.
    redress is right, non-judicial punishment does not convict you of a crime..... the assumption is that you are already guilty when NJP is imposed.

    in laymans terms...when you walk into an Office Hours proceeding.. you're already guilty... you're just there to find out what your punishment is.
    ( you can decline NJP, if you so choose, but it's usually a bad idea.. unless you are innocent of the charges and have very very good evidence to prove it.... bu then again, if you had evidence, you wouldn't be standing tall in the first place )

  4. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Last Seen
    01-30-15 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    15,633

    re: Former POW Bergdahl set to return to active duty [W:159]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Dana's reference to pundits was not the soldiers who accused him, but those pundits who made a big deal out of it. To the best of my knowledge, the army investigation is still ongoing(and contrary to what some think, yes, the army is in his chain of command). Until the investigation is done, or at least far enough along to make a firm accusation of wrongdoing, he is still a soldier, and still going to be treated as such. That means putting him back to work is not surprising, nor is it some kind of conspiracy. Those suggestions are just stupid.
    When Burgdahl bugged out he was listed as a deserter in combat. As soon as they learned he worked his way into Taliban captivity, Bergdahl was listed as a POW.

    Up to four weeks ago not one member of Bergdahls platoon has ever been interviewed by Army investigators, not one.

    Something stinks.

  5. #75
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:14 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,328
    Blog Entries
    2

    re: Former POW Bergdahl set to return to active duty [W:159]

    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    Yes it does, you just don't get to defend yourself and your CO doesn't need to produce any evidence.

    I'm not a barracks JAG officer but I kind of got the idea what the UCMJ was while standing on the yellow footprints at MCRDSD.

    I also learned what it meant that Marines take care of their own and also police themselves.

    Lets see, you have NJP's. administrative discharge boards, Captains Mast, Summary Court Martial, General Court Martial.

    Then you have all of the unofficial trials and punishment that aren't found in any field manuals or in the UCMJ. This is usually found in combat arms. We police ourselves.

    How did it work on ship Redress ? There must have been some sailors reporting to sick bay and saying they walked into a hatchway. Better than facing a Summary or General Court Martial.

    You know that movie with Jack Nicholson, "A Few Good Men" ? Based upon a true event with in the Corps. It happened all of the time. Still does but Obama and the progressive caucus in Congress are trying to stop it.

    Rep. Judy Chu (D/progressive) is so stupid, she would have rather had her nephew to be tried in a General Court Martial for falling asleep on perimeter watch in combat and facing death by musketry if convicted. Instead the Marines of Chu's nephew unit decided to police themselves instead of having him face a firing squad.

    BTW: Bergdahl bugging out in combat also carries the same maximum penalty, death by musketry.
    Congratz, you are wrong in pretty much every detail. Here, let me help:

    http://www.usarj.army.mil/cmdstaffs/...aw/ar27-10.pdf
    10 U.S. Code 815 - Art. 15. Commanding officer
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  6. #76
    American
    cpgrad08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Lakewood,WA
    Last Seen
    10-18-17 @ 07:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    5,388
    Blog Entries
    10

    re: Former POW Bergdahl set to return to active duty [W:159]

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    I believe the Army, who put him back on active duty instead of prosecuting him.
    The investigation is still on going. When it is over then we will see if charges are brought against him or not. It's Standard SOP when a investigation is going on that the person in question has a low risk job. It's a called due process. He is innocent until proven guilty.

  7. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Last Seen
    01-30-15 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    15,633

    re: Former POW Bergdahl set to return to active duty [W:159]

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    my hope is the investigation finds him to be deserving of it
    Hoping and what really happened are two diffrent things.

    There are times when an example has to be made and POTUS shouldn't be involved.

    Gen. Eisenhower had to make the same decision with Private Slovik. It sent out a message that resulted in that the U.S. military didn't have to deal with soldiers deserting in combat for over sixtyfive years.

  8. #78
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Last Seen
    01-30-15 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    15,633

    re: Former POW Bergdahl set to return to active duty [W:159]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Congratz, you are wrong in pretty much every detail. Here, let me help:

    http://www.usarj.army.mil/cmdstaffs/...aw/ar27-10.pdf
    10 U.S. Code 815 - Art. 15. Commanding officer
    Point out exactly where I'm wrong ?

    I'm an officer and you are a deck monkey. You **** up and don't salute me. You end up standing before the man with an Article 15.

    You don't get no lawyer and my word over rules you because you're just a piece of amphibious ****.

    The Captain passes judgement and turns you over the a U.S. Marine who throws you in the brig for two weeks.

  9. #79
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 06:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    re: Former POW Bergdahl set to return to active duty [W:159]

    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    Point out exactly where I'm wrong ?

    I'm an officer and you are a deck monkey. You **** up and don't salute me. You end up standing before the man with an Article 15.

    You don't get no lawyer and my word over rules you because you're just a piece of amphibious ****.

    The Captain passes judgement and turns you over the a U.S. Marine who throws you in the brig for two weeks.
    failure to salute is certainly a "crime" punishable by NJP.... but that's generally only if it's a recurring problem.

    an officer failing to return a salute is also an offense punishable by NJP ( yes, officers get article 15's as well)


    if we were to compare civilian law with UCMJ..... NJP would not be considered a trial.. it would be the sentencing hearing.

    if you want a trial, and a lawyer.. just deny the NJP and request a court martial.... it's as easy as that.

  10. #80
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Colorado mountains
    Last Seen
    01-03-15 @ 08:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,729

    re: Former POW Bergdahl set to return to active duty [W:159]

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Wow, why on earth would you? Do you seriously believe the Army is going to go against the POTUS?
    Yeah sure ...THAT never happened before...
    /sarc
    Truman relieves MacArthur of duties in Korea — History.com This Day in History — 4/11/1951

Page 8 of 17 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •