• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bowe Bergdahl, once missing U.S. soldier, charged with desertion

How's that "omitting common sense" strategy working out for you?

I love it when you get to this point. You actually ignore your own claims and then move straight to pretending you never made them. You made claims, where is the evidence Grim17? I can wait all day for it.
 
If the issue is Obama not going to Congress then I can concede that Obama erred. However, it's a tempest in a teapot in the grand scheme of things. In the words of Reagan "You can't quarrel with success". Obama got it done.

Yeah, I guess Obama can claim a victory, albeit, a very hollow one. In the end cost / benefit analysis, Obama and his legendary negotiation skills (or rather lack there of), he was an easy mark for the likes of the Islamic Fundamentalists Militants.

5 senior, hardened militant leaders for a single deserted, hardly a bargain that one should be proud of. Even at one for one, it'd still would have been a losing deal for the US.
 
Yeah, I guess Obama can claim a victory, albeit, a very hollow one. In the end cost / benefit analysis, Obama and his legendary negotiation skills (or rather lack there of), he was an easy mark for the likes of the Islamic Fundamentalists Militants.

5 senior, hardened militant leaders for a single deserted, hardly a bargain that one should be proud of. Even at one for one, it'd still would have been a losing deal for the US.

You and others can attach titles to those prisoners like "senior" and "leaders," but they are meaningless. We're talking about organized groups of terrorists in which everyone is expendable and easily replaceable including the "senior" militants and "leaders" among them. Pretty much all of the "top militants" who have been killed or captured over the last 13 years were replaced by someone else in the days or weeks that followed.
 
I love it when you get to this point. You actually ignore your own claims and then move straight to pretending you never made them. You made claims, where is the evidence Grim17? I can wait all day for it.

I'm not running from anything, ignoring anything, or backing down from anything I have said. I happen to believe the 7 guys that served in his platoon with him, while you obviously think they are liars. Why don't you send me a link to the guys in his platoon who tell a different story?

Only in the progressive world would someone actually claim that Obama had no knowledge of the fact that Bergdahl willfully deserted his post in the dead of night. That means you must also believe that members of his own Administration lied to him. Like I said, only in a progressive world could such stupidity and willful ignorance exist.

This all started because you attacked republicans for criticizing Obama for the deal he made for Bergdahl, claiming they all were in favor of it before it took place.

That sir is a lie, because none of them had all the facts.

[I tore a liberal thread to shreads back when the trade took place, that claimed Republicans said "bring him home" before the deal, and changed there minds and opposed bringing him home after the deal was made... I proved that thread was a lie using the very statement that were made by republicans, just as I have shown your words attacking republicans to be a lie.

You lied, fibbed, told a whopper, an untruth... You attacked those you disagree with politically based on false pretenses, in what can only be described as a lame ass attempt to carry water for our dishonest, failed president. Then you put the icing on the cake by not having the integrity to own up to your dishonesty, even when you've been caught dead to rights.

Put simply, you're a lying disgrace... aka, just another dangerous, dishonest progressive
 
That means you must also believe that members of his own Administration lied to him. Like I said, only in a progressive world could such stupidity and willful ignorance exist.

It worked for Reagan during the Iran-Contra scandal. Then again, maybe he just forgot.

That sir is a lie, because none of them had all the facts.

That's a hoot. I don't remember you saying the same about Democrats criticizing and later opposing the Iraq War. Maybe the Republicans shouldn't have opened their pie holes before having all of the facts, but they did and they were screeching about it like banshees so they are fair game now.
 
Last edited:
Heya Erod. :2wave: Nah it sadly demonstrates why Susan Rice shouldn't be in government.....let alone BO's National Security Advisor.

A shameless liar like Obama needs to surround himself with other shameless liars like Runaround Sue. Holder is another damned slimy liar. And Obama's former Secretary of State is as dishonest as President Pinocchio himself. Like him, she can stand right before the cameras and lie through her teeth with a straight face. Neither of them has the least bit of honor, and they both have been flagrant liars throughout their shabby, undistinguished political careers.
 
From what I've seen of your posts, you would do better to ask that question of yourself.

Oooh, sick burn.

The extent of your posting appears to be "durrr libruls hate America." Adios.
 
Holder is another damned slimy liar.
If Holder is such a liar, why are the GOP asshole racists in the Senate lynching Lynch.
Someone who is not only thoroughly trusted, but fully supported by Giuliani and O'Reilly .
 
US Conservative, don't you ever get tired of calling out people by their names.
Kobie, recent polls back that assertion.
Let's see some of those polls--otherwise it's back to the BIL Zone with you .
 
Jeez people...he has been charged, not convicted.

Wait for the verdict before you judge.
 
Because they don't like this country any better than B. Hussein Obama does.

Riiiiiiight.

Every single liberal hates America.

:roll:

I am neither lib nor con...but do you even begin to realize how ridiculous that statement of yours is?

I strongly guess; 'no'.
 
Yeah, I guess Obama can claim a victory, albeit, a very hollow one. In the end cost / benefit analysis,
Kind of like "Mission Accomplished"--we're still dealing with that hollow victory.
We may never know the end cost/benefit analysis in my lifetime.

And then we have the three dumbest words of all time--"Bring It On".
I'm sure you would agree that "THEY" have brought it on.

"Smooth move there eh ex lax" as we both might say to Bungling Bush .
 
I'm not running from anything, ignoring anything, or backing down from anything I have said.

Good. So where is the evidence? Your diatribes are boring me. Why can't you show what everyone supposedly knew and when they knew it? I can wait all day for you to post these "facts" that you've avoided posting for what... 3 posts now? C'man Grim17. Post the evidence that they knew it. I can wait all day if I have to. :) Hell, I already know why you won't post it ;)
 
Last edited:
Riiiiiiight.

Every single liberal hates America.

:roll:

I am neither lib nor con...but do you even begin to realize how ridiculous that statement of yours is?

I strongly guess; 'no'.

What you guess does not interest me.

Statists dislike most things American, including our constitution. For these know-nothing drones, as for their president, the Constitution is just an obstacle to implementing utopian, centrally controlled social schemes in which individual liberties are subordinated to the power of the state. They indignantly deny this animosity toward American culture and traditions and the rule of law, and yet they prove it all the time. They are constantly running down this country, while making excuses for its enemies--they can be seen doing this again and again on forums like these every day.

These fine citizens, most of whom don't understand even basic civics, share their president's contempt for the Constitution and applaud his lawlessness. Like him, they think government by executive fiat is just fine--and the separation of powers (whose vital purpose they neither understand nor care about) be damned. The reason Barack Obama wants to "fundamentally transform" the United States is that he does not like it--and his acolytes applaud him because they don't like it either.

No one who wished the United States well would buy the freedom of a traitor by releasing five very dangerous jihadists so they can go back to waging war against us. People like Mr. Obama and Ms. Rice admire rats like Bergdahl, as they made clear. They believe that to betray this country as he did is to "serve it with honor and distinction," and that it was unthinkable to leave him with his jihadist pals. The effort to recover a traitor got five good men killed, but for the sorry specimens in this administration, their lives don't count. They share the sentiment of Mr. Obama's preacher of twenty years: "God damn America."
 
Last edited:
I'm not running from anything, ignoring anything, or backing down from anything I have said. I happen to believe the 7 guys that served in his platoon with him, while you obviously think they are liars. Why don't you send me a link to the guys in his platoon who tell a different story?

Only in the progressive world would someone actually claim that Obama had no knowledge of the fact that Bergdahl willfully deserted his post in the dead of night. That means you must also believe that members of his own Administration lied to him. Like I said, only in a progressive world could such stupidity and willful ignorance exist.

This all started because you attacked republicans for criticizing Obama for the deal he made for Bergdahl, claiming they all were in favor of it before it took place.

That sir is a lie, because none of them had all the facts.

[I tore a liberal thread to shreads back when the trade took place, that claimed Republicans said "bring him home" before the deal, and changed there minds and opposed bringing him home after the deal was made... I proved that thread was a lie using the very statement that were made by republicans, just as I have shown your words attacking republicans to be a lie.

You lied, fibbed, told a whopper, an untruth... You attacked those you disagree with politically based on false pretenses, in what can only be described as a lame ass attempt to carry water for our dishonest, failed president. Then you put the icing on the cake by not having the integrity to own up to your dishonesty, even when you've been caught dead to rights.

Put simply, you're a lying disgrace... aka, just another dangerous, dishonest progressive
You don't really expect Hatuey to not enter into hackery do you?
 
Good. So where is the evidence? Your diatribes are boring me. Why can't you show what everyone supposedly knew and when they knew it? I can wait all day for you to post these "facts" that you've avoided posting for what... 3 posts now? C'man Grim17. Post the evidence that they knew it. I can wait all day if I have to. :) Hell, I already know why you won't post it ;)


"What" are you back in here with that BS again. :roll: Damn, what it is with you Lefties when YOUR MAN comes under fire. Knowing not one of ya would take a bullet for him. That none of you can throw a baseball 90 feet and throw that strike. That all just look to run away and hide from all that bad news.

Lets see you want to go back 2 years and want people to post up all the Repubs said at first. Knowing they knew nothing at the time. Yet then some changed their stance once details from those who served with the Deserter came out and gave background on the Traitor. Now you act like you made some point while not even being realistic? That is some hilarious ****. :lamo

Yet you can't even figure out when the Repubs changed their statements. Some never changed their stance. Like your BOY Johnny Quest McCain.....who was a prisoner of War that gave up info to the Enemy when they captured him and beat his ass non stop for days.

Awww its a shame you lefties can't handle people talking **** about those who you Idolize that are weak and cowardly. Why would you expect those to not talk **** about those of the weak and meek that can't handle to much reality? Let me guess you also run around and tell all how you have friends from the Right too, huh? :lol:

Make Note: the New Repubs who really are old school are out and about.....and one thing is for certain. We will play just like you lefties do.....while doing all we can to destroy that which you love most. That Free Ride!
 
Yeah, I guess Obama can claim a victory, albeit, a very hollow one. In the end cost / benefit analysis, Obama and his legendary negotiation skills (or rather lack there of), he was an easy mark for the likes of the Islamic Fundamentalists Militants.

5 senior, hardened militant leaders for a single deserted, hardly a bargain that one should be proud of. Even at one for one, it'd still would have been a losing deal for the US.



Mornin EB. :2wave: Even better was the BO peep excuse of......they found out they were going to kill him. Despite being able to do so at any given time. Despite threatening to do even before the swap. What BO didn't want out there was the fact that he was Negotiating with terrorists. The Same terrorists tied to AQ and the Same ones that BO gave an Office to in Qatar.
 
"Lets see you want to go back 2 years and want people to post up all the Repubs said at first. Knowing they knew nothing at the time.


Posts such as these make you look like you don't read the posts of others. Since when is February 2014, "2 years ago"? Get serious and come back when you've got something other than silliness and diatribes. K thanks. :) Or is it that you can't even shown what the administration knew? ;) I think it's a little bit of A and B. Anywho, since Grim17 loves factcheckers:

Did John McCain flip-flop on the Bergdahl deal? - The Washington Post

As you can see, the key elements of the deal that was announced last week were apparent in the article four months ago — the exchange of five Taliban members held at Guantanamo for Bergdahl and the protective custody of Qatar.Throughout the discussions, it has always been the same five men, so their identities would have been no surprise to any lawmaker keeping track of the discussions. The five are Khirullah Said Wali Khairkhwa, the former interior minister; Mullah Mohammed Fazi, a senior commander; Mullah Norullah Noori, a provincial governor; Abdul Haq Wasiq, deputy chief of intelligence; and Mohammned Nabi Omari, a member of a joint al-Qaeda-Taliban cell in eastern Khost province.
In August 2011, the Associated Press reported that Afghan negotiators were seeking the release of Taliban fighters in exchange for Bergdahl, naming specifically Khairkhwa, Fazi and Wasiq. In January 2012, the Guardian newspaper reported that Washington would free Khairkhwa and Noori, and possibly Fazi, in exchange for getting the Taliban to open an office in Qatar for peace talks.
In a March 9, 2012, report, the Afghanistan Analysts Network issued a long report on the Guantanamo Five, which actually found that the men were less hard-line than believed.
Then in August 2012, Reuters reported that the Obama administration had offered to trade “five senior Taliban leaders” — including Khairkhwa, Wasiq, Noori and Fazi — for Bergdahl. The headline on Business Insider’s Web site was: “The US Wants To Trade Five Taliban Leaders In Guantánamo For This One American POW.”
In April 2013, Post columnist David Ignatius reported that the same deal nearly came together in 2011: “They worked out a deal in which the United States would release five Taliban prisoners and send them to Qatar. The Taliban, in return, would condemn international terrorism and release U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, whom the militants had been holding since 2009.” But it fell through because of a conflict with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
In other words, these names were not a secret — and in any case, McCain sits on the relevant Senate committees (Armed Services and Foreign Relations), with security clearances, and thus could have found out about the names and the background of the individuals.


McCain may have thought he left himself an out when he said his support was dependent on the details. But then he can’t object to the most important detail — the identity of the prisoners — that was known at the time he indicated his support. McCain earns an upside-down Pinocchio, constituting a flip-flop.

View attachment 67182363

I guess McCain was caught in a ... catch 22? ;)
 
Last edited:
5 Taliban leaders go free probably to wreak havoc and death upon us and our allies. The one we traded the 5 Taliban leaders for goes to jail. Is there any logic behind this?

Heya Pero :2wave:.....the left isn't to bright on such finite details such as that. Oh and they can't seem to find a couple of them in Qatar. Wonder what happened to BO peep keeping tabs on them?

If they are missing in Qatar.....did BO peep fail again?
 
Posts such as these make you look like you don't read the posts of others. Since when is February 2014, "2 years ago"? Get serious and come back when you've got something other than silliness and diatribes. K thanks. :) Or is it that you can't even shown what the administration knew? ;) I think it's a little bit of A and B.

Oh come on now.....that's now when Your Traitor went missing. Do you need to recheck dates?

Again what Part about Republican changings their stance after news was released can't you figure out? Oh wait......it took you 6 years to figure out why an opposing party does what it needs to do against the party of Sell outs. :roll:
 
Back
Top Bottom