• 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!

US soldier freed from captivity in Afghanistan

tres borrachos said:
There's a reason why I never venture into the Conspiracy Theory section. This is a reminder why.

Dear doG, can someone please stop the 9/11 truther madness and get back to this story?
Click to expand...

Can we give him just long enough to explain how his "aviation perspective" gives him such insight into 9-11. His claimed expertise peeked the commercial pilot side of me. :)
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/05/world/asia/taliban-video-shows-handover-of-us-soldier.html?_r=0

"KABUL, Afghanistan — The Taliban released a video on Wednesday showing its fighters handing over Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl to American troops, providing a direct look at a moment in the Afghan war that has prompted relief in some quarters but has drawn sharp criticism in Afghanistan and Washington.

Sergeant Bergdahl is seen in the video wearing traditional Afghan robes, and his face and head appear to have been recently shaved. For much of the video, he is seen waiting in a silver and red pickup truck surrounded by Taliban fighters armed with assault rifles and at least one rocket-propelled grenade launcher, standard armaments for the insurgents. The faces of many of the Taliban fighters are covered by scarves.

As an American Blackhawk helicopter approaches, one of the insurgents is heard telling Sergeant Bergdahl: “Don’t come back to Afghanistan. If you do, you won’t make it out alive next time.” Other insurgents standing nearby laugh at the warning.

Then the helicopter lands and Sergeant Bergdahl is handed over to Americans wearing civilian clothes. The Americans quickly lead him away, patting him down and casually dropping a plastic shopping bag he was holding. They board the helicopter and fly off.

Much of the video clip’s audio track consists of an interview with one of the Taliban fighters who is described as having taken part in the handover. He talks about the arrangements that were made with the Americans, and then narrates how the American forces arrived by helicopter, with warplanes circling in the sky above. At times, the camera shifts from the Taliban fighters and Sergeant Bergdahl to show aircraft overhead. If the Taliban fighter’s account is accurate, the video adds new details to what had been reported about the transfer, which took place on Saturday in the eastern province of Khost."
 
hammer2 said:
Can we give him just long enough to explain how his "aviation perspective" gives him such insight into 9-11. His claimed expertise peeked the commercial pilot side of me. :)
Click to expand...

He doesn't seem to want to. And reading his conspiracy theory posts makes my teeth hurt.

I'm lost anyway how we got from this soldier to the WTC anyway.
 
Henry David said:
I say again Hammer, for the comprehension impaired: "The story is impossible, it is not true".

Further, it's off topic.

What do you think of Bergdahl's disillusionment with the war he was in?
Click to expand...
My "aviation perspective" and your unwillingness to answer tells me you're clueless.

As far as Bergdahi, at first sight, I don't like it, but I'm not in the know. I'm going to wait and let this play out before I draw any conclusions.

If we end up covertly killing these 5 war criminals in Qatar, I give it 5 jalapeños (good job)! If they don't kill these bastards...I don't like it, but I don't have to like everything all the time.
 
Henry David said:
Which idiot do you refer to?

My point is that the Bush administration was on friendly terms with the Taliban, until we invaded their country under fraud.

That's the only point, and it is relevant in any calculation as to their inherent evil, as some people get anxious about.

What will eventually happen in this Bergdahl case is that it will become public knowledge that he became a conscientious objector, either before or after he arrived in country. Most likely he understood that we invaded the country under fraud, but whatever his motivation it will become public and the debate will shift.

In a way, this reminds me a bit of the case of Ehren Watada, 1LT USA, who refused orders to Iraq and was court martialed.
Click to expand...

I refer to Obama and his actions. Thats what we're talking about here, not Bush. It was wrong for the US govt to give the Taliban money to top opium production, but thats a seperate wrong from the US govt releasing terrorists.
 
I wonder if this whole prisoner exchange is some kind of diversion for some other mission, or to take the heat off one of Obama's other ****ups.
 
American said:
I wonder if this whole prisoner exchange is some kind of diversion for some other mission, or to take the heat off one of Obama's other ****ups.
Click to expand...

Another mission? Could be.

Take the heat off? More likely.

My opinion is that he wanted to give the Democrats up for re-election something to crow about...something to help them. If so, instead, he screwed them.

Nobody has ever said Obama was smart.
 
Henry David said:
Understood.

I'm wondering if the disillusionment experienced by Tillman (if I'm remember correctly) was similar to the disillusionment apparently experienced by Bergdahl?
Click to expand...

Don't know. But I'd be willing to bet that Tillman was twice the man that pushy Bergdahl is.
 
j-mac said:
Don't know. But I'd be willing to bet that Tillman was twice the man that pushy Bergdahl is.
Click to expand...

Thank you for at least a straight answer.

One of the advantages of the draft was that individuals could claim Conscientious Objector status. Many times the Army made them medics, and because I was in a medical unit I served with many of them. I was not CO, but knew many.

I understand that present policy still allows one to claim that status, but the procedures are cumbersome, so there are not that many. I wonder if that's true?
 
Henry David said:
Thank you for at least a straight answer.

One of the advantages of the draft was that individuals could claim Conscientious Objector status. Many times the Army made them medics, and because I was in a medical unit I served with many of them. I was not CO, but knew many.

I understand that present policy still allows one to claim that status, but the procedures are cumbersome, so there are not that many. I wonder if that's true?
Click to expand...

Couldnt you just refuse and go to jail instead?
 
jonny5 said:
Couldnt you just refuse and go to jail instead?
Click to expand...

Thoreau acted in a similar fashion and ended up in jail, suggesting that there might be more principled people in jail than the opposite.

With Vietnam, many objectors simply went to Canada, back when that country's government was not a pawn of the US government. I'm sure a few went to jail.

The guys I knew didn't want to go to jail, but they didn't want to kill people either in a fraudulent war.

I suspect Bergdahl was having the same experiences. The war is illegitimate and most folks know that, even (maybe especially) those in country in uniform.
 
Bowe Bergdahl: Taliban Captors Speak to TIME - TIME

Asked whether the Taliban would be inspired by the exchange to kidnap others, he laughed. “Definitely,” he says. “It’s better to kidnap one person like Bergdahl than kidnapping hundreds of useless people. It has encouraged our people. Now everybody will work hard to capture such an important bird.”
Click to expand...

Taliban Commanders Say They Found Bergdahl Cursing His Countrymen - NBC News

“Our people at the time couldn’t understand his language, but it was after he was shifted to a safe location, he said he wasn’t happy with his countrymen, but he didn’t intend to convert to Islam or join mujahideen (holy warriors),” one of the commanders said.

The commanders said that Taliban officers first thought it was a trick — perhaps an American soldier sent out alone to spy on the enemy.

“As we never saw their soldier patrolling alone … we would ask him how he managed to walk out of his base,” one of the commanders said. “He would tell us that it was personal issue.”
Click to expand...

EXCLUSIVE: Bergdahl declared jihad in captivity, secret documents show | Fox News

Clarridge further told Fox News that by the end of 2010, he had furnished at least 13 of these detailed SITREPs, or situation reports, that his network generated about Bergdahl to Brig. Gen. Robert P. Ashley Jr., who in April 2010 was named director of intelligence, at the J-2 level, at CENTCOM. Clarridge said Eclipse SITREP # 3023, dated Aug. 23, 2012 -- in which a member of the Haqqani network, said to be close to Bergdahl's captors, reported that the American prisoner had declared himself a "mujahid" -- was among the reports provided to Ashley.
Click to expand...
 
At least we only have to deal with Obama for 2.5 more years. Hopefully the next guy wont be just as bad.
 
Henry David said:
Thoreau acted in a similar fashion and ended up in jail, suggesting that there might be more principled people in jail than the opposite.
Click to expand...

Criminals often sympathize with each other.

With Vietnam, many objectors simply went to Canada, back when that country's government was not a pawn of the US government. I'm sure a few went to jail.
Click to expand...

As they should have.

The guys I knew didn't want to go to jail, but they didn't want to kill people either in a fraudulent war.
Click to expand...

Shocking.

I suspect Bergdahl was having the same experiences. The war is illegitimate and most folks know that, even (maybe especially) those in country in uniform.
Click to expand...

Seeing as that I answered your question, maybe you might feel the same about answering one for me...

What do you find "illegitimate" about the war in Afghanistan? And if you could be specific.
 
j-mac said:
Criminals often sympathize with each other.



As they should have.



Shocking.



Seeing as that I answered your question, maybe you might feel the same about answering one for me...

What do you find "illegitimate" about the war in Afghanistan? And if you could be specific.
Click to expand...

I thought we discussed this previously, but maybe I have you confused with another poster.

The invasion of Afghanistan was brought under fraud.

The predicate act to rationalize that invasion was a false flag operation. The delicious irony was that according to the official story there were no Afghanis involved in the events of 11 September, but no matter, we needed to invade the country anyway. :doh

But it was what it was. Life goes on.
 
Henry David said:
I thought we discussed this previously, but maybe I have you confused with another poster.

The invasion of Afghanistan was brought under fraud.

The predicate act to rationalize that invasion was a false flag operation. The delicious irony was that according to the official story there were no Afghanis involved in the events of 11 September, but no matter, we needed to invade the country anyway. :doh

But it was what it was. Life goes on.
Click to expand...


You're correct, in that no Afghans were involved in 9/11. But there were Taliban (the Leadership of the country at the time) that were involved in providing material support to AQ in furtherance of the attack on the US. They were offered to do the right thing and hand over AQ, including OBL, whom they were harboring at the time, and they refused. They faced the consequences....Simple as that.

Now, what are you confusing to be the "fraud"?
 
j-mac said:
You're correct, in that no Afghans were involved in 9/11. But there were Taliban (the Leadership of the country at the time) that were involved in providing material support to AQ in furtherance of the attack on the US. They were offered to do the right thing and hand over AQ, including OBL, whom they were harboring at the time, and they refused. They faced the consequences....Simple as that.

Now, what are you confusing to be the "fraud"?
Click to expand...

Dont bother debating conspiracies.
 
Henry David said:
I thought we discussed this previously, but maybe I have you confused with another poster.

The invasion of Afghanistan was brought under fraud.

The predicate act to rationalize that invasion was a false flag operation. The delicious irony was that according to the official story there were no Afghanis involved in the events of 11 September, but no matter, we needed to invade the country anyway. :doh

But it was what it was. Life goes on.
Click to expand...

I strongly disagree with you here. The Taliban, which ran the government of Afghanistan, gave bin Laden shelter, and refused to turn him over. We were right to invade Afghanistan. Now if you want to talk about a war brought about under fraud, then mention Iraq, and I will agree with you.
 
j-mac said:
You're correct, in that no Afghans were involved in 9/11. But there were Taliban (the Leadership of the country at the time) that were involved in providing material support to AQ in furtherance of the attack on the US. They were offered to do the right thing and hand over AQ, including OBL, whom they were harboring at the time, and they refused. They faced the consequences....Simple as that.

Now, what are you confusing to be the "fraud"?
Click to expand...

Reading your post somehow reminds me of listening to Colin Powell at the UN. :lol:

Sorry GI, no can do.
 
danarhea said:
I strongly disagree with you here. The Taliban, which ran the government of Afghanistan, gave bin Laden shelter, and refused to turn him over. We were right to invade Afghanistan. Now if you want to talk about a war brought about under fraud, then mention Iraq, and I will agree with you.
Click to expand...

I know you will disagree with me, but the simple truth is that Osama was but a figurehead, a character in a widely viewed morality play. Other than the use of his name, he had nothing to do with what actually happened on 11 SEptember.

If you happen to agree with the provisions of International Law, by definition the US committed 'military aggression' against Afghanistan. That country did nothing to us. It did not threaten us in any way, shape or form. Just 6 months prior, the US government sent its Sec State to deliver a $43 million check to the Taliban as a sign of gratitude for their cooperation in the drug war.

So, how does committing military aggression make us right?
 
Meanwhile

Freed Taliban Commander Tells Relative He'll Fight Americans Again - NBC News

"After arriving in Qatar, Noorullah Noori kept insisting he would go to Afghanistan and fight American forces there,” a Taliban commander told NBC News via telephone from Afghanistan.

Even if he's lying, hes motivating his fellow terrorists. We released 5 propaganda machines, thus aiding enemies. Under the constitution, thats treason.
 
Henry David said:
Reading your post somehow reminds me of listening to Colin Powell at the UN. :lol:

Sorry GI, no can do.
Click to expand...

It is what it is dude...You don't get to re write history, or manipulate things to fit your own notions of things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom