• 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!

We Don’t Leave Our Men or Women in Uniform Behind

We Don’t Leave Our Men or Women in Uniform Behind


  • Total voters
    59
Obviously war zones are a hard place to be in, some can handle it and some can't. Leaving an American behind to be tortured is just shameful. The military is full of dirtbags as well and we bring all of them home. Just because someone doesn't agree with what the military is doing or got scared or started second guessing themselves isn't cause to be called a traitor.

No. If the reports that he actively aided the Taliban in targeting his fellow soldiers are true, that is cause to be called a traitor. As it is all the evidence really demonstrates is that he is a deserter.
 
I'm comfortable with the conclusion he walked away. The only question is whether he meant to stay away. :peace

My bet would be that after his first attempted escape when they beat the snot out of him, threw him in a cage, and then probably raped him mistreated him, that he was pretty clear he was no longer happy where he was. But by then, it was too late, buddy.
 
I agree, but since the reports are not conclusive I think the outrage by a lot of Americans is very shameful. If he in fact did aid terrorists then being a traitor would be correct, but if we find out that he helped in fear of his life I would not consider him to be a traitor.
 
Actually I know quite a lot of my known unknowns. For example, I don't know if "bergdahl" is still really "in there", or if his mind chose to check out years ago. My bet would be the latter, but we don't really have that much evidence for that yet.

We do have a massive preponderance of evidence that he deserted his post.

No, you have news reports (and maybe some gossip). You have little else.
 
I'm comfortable with the conclusion he walked away. The only question is whether he meant to stay away. :peace

You may be comfortable. But that us hardly enough to convict.
 
You may be comfortable. But that us hardly enough to convict.

He'll be convicted of abandoning his post. Whether his offense rises to desertion will depend on the finding of his subsequent intent. Desertion requires that he intended never to return.:peace
 
He'll be convicted of abandoning his post. Whether his offense rises to desertion will depend on the finding of his subsequent intent. Desertion requires that he intended never to return.:peace

He may well. I only know I've seen these certainties before turn out to not go as expected.
 
I would like to think that an American deserter, but otherwise good man, is worth more than a bunch of washed-up Taliban. All of whom would going back to Afghanistan anyway.
 
yes this military man was a pow.... we are at war with the Taliban.....al queda are terrorist... two different people/groups .. this American soldier could have been killed at any time by them ......we were going to give the 5 Taliban back in 2 years anyway after we pulled out and war ended...I doubt they can be recycled back in to active duty that quick after being out 10 years and I also think they are being tracked(body implant?) the repubs do not have a good record of keeping their mouth shut on things if it can mess can mess Obama up hmmmmmmm... that is why he/the prez did not tell them/ repubs period.....sorry obama pic.jpg
 
Last edited:
No, you have news reports (and maybe some gossip). You have little else.

:lol: Boo we have every piece of evidence necessary to convict in a court of law. Not a military one, either. If the best defense you have of this guy deserting his post is to argue that the only evidence we have is the overwhelming evidence that we have, well, again, that says more about his guilt than his innocence.

But I can't help but notice you continue to refuse to put forth any alternate explanation.
 
:lol: Boo we have every piece of evidence necessary to convict in a court of law. Not a military one, either. If the best defense you have of this guy deserting his post is to argue that the only evidence we have is the overwhelming evidence that we have, well, again, that says more about his guilt than his innocence.

But I can't help but notice you continue to refuse to put forth any alternate explanation.

Only if everything you think you have is as reported. We all know reports have never, ever, ever been wrong. Right?
 
yes this military man was a pow.... we are at war with the Taliban.....al queda are terrorist... two different people/groups ..

This guy was being held by the Haqqanni, who A) fall under the Taliban but B) are officially designated a terrorist organization.

this American soldier could have been killed at any time by them ......we were going to give the 5 Taliban back in 2 years anyway after we pulled out and war ended...

Why? They have plenty enough links to AQ.

I doubt they can be recycled back in to active duty that quick after being out 10 years

Then you aren't aware of who these guys are. They aren't tactical level leadership who will need to relearn how to build an IED. These are their strategic level thinkers and leaders. We just gave them back their Generals Matthis, Petraeus, McChrystal, Dunford, and Odierno. It doesn't matter if they don't know the differences between an M240G and an M240B. That's not their job.

and I also think they are being tracked(body implant?)

That's fascinating. Tell us more about that program. Is it the same tech they used in Operation Treadstone?

And what are we going to do when they go back to Quetta, and then push north into Afghanistan, wreaking havoc? Bomb them for attacking Afghanistan?

the repubs do not have a good record of keeping their mouth shut on things if it can mess can mess Obama up hmmmmmmm... that is why he/the prez did not tell them/ repubs period.....sorry View attachment 67167942

Ah. So your theory on why the President chose to ignore the law is that it would have been inconvenient? Well, I agree.
 
Only if everything you think you have is as reported. We all know reports have never, ever, ever been wrong. Right?

:) Again, if your only argument is that the evidence does not meet a standard that no evidence in the history of mankind has ever met, it says more about his guilt than his innocence.
 
:) Again, if your only argument is that the evidence does not meet a standard that no evidence in the history of mankind has ever met, it says more about his guilt than his innocence.

Now, you know that's not my argument. Odd that you should pretend that it is. My argument is that you only have what you hear, and don't know if what you hear is accurate, or if there is information you don't have. Nothing has been confirmed, supported, or examined.
 
Now, you know that's not my argument.

It is indeed. Your counter to the evidence that exists is that it is not a hundred percent proof. But that level does not exist for anything.

:shrug: the man abandoned his post. He deserted. It's not really a matter of debate, it's what he physically did.

My argument is that you only have what you hear, and don't know if what you hear is accurate, or if there is information you don't have. Nothing has been confirmed, supported, or examined.

There have been multiple investigations into this, dude, and the case file on him is thick as crap. It's been examined ad nauseum, as have any reports of his movements or activities.
 
It is indeed. Your counter to the evidence that exists is that it is not a hundred percent proof. But that level does not exist for anything.

:shrug: the man abandoned his post. He deserted. It's not really a matter of debate, it's what he physically did.



There have been multiple investigations into this, dude, and the case file on him is thick as crap. It's been examined ad nauseum, as have any reports of his movements or activities.

No, you misread, perhaps on purpose. I don't stop there. I explain that you have nothing but reports. Each not complete. Without verification or examination, missing bits of information. This has not been completed yet.
 
No, you misread, perhaps on purpose. I don't stop there. I explain that you have nothing but reports. Each not complete. Without verification or examination, missing bits of information. This has not been completed yet.

On the contrary, we have multi source, multi discipline verification of the same event. You are right it hasn't been completed - he hasn't been put on trial. However, the lack of a legal procedure does not require that we also suspend reason.
 
On the contrary, we have multi source, multi discipline verification of the same event. You are right it hasn't been completed - he hasn't been put on trial. However, the lack of a legal procedure does not require that we also suspend reason.

Again, until under examination, it's just noise. You have no idea what you don't know.
 
Again, until under examination, it's just noise. You have no idea what you don't know.

I keep waiting for you to propose any other plausible explanation for what every single witness said happened, the physical evidence said happened, the Taliban said happened, and what Bergdahl has not disputed.
 
I keep waiting for you to propose any other plausible explanation for what every single witness said happened, the physical evidence said happened, the Taliban said happened, and what Bergdahl has not disputed.

I don't have to. So quite trying pretend that's a valid question. We simply don't know enough. Most of the conclusions were based on hearsay and lack of evidence. That lack of evidence bite the hell out of us in Iraq. When will people learn?
 
Changes nothing...terrorists threaten to kill their hostages all the time.

Imo, don't negotiate with terrorists.

Will that mean some hostages will die initially? Probably.

But it also means that far less hostages will probably be kidnapped in the future. Why will terrorists bother if they know you will not negotiate with them?

To make beheading videos?
 
Back
Top Bottom