• 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, U.S. soldier held in Afghanistan, freed in swap

Some of the families have doubts their sons were killed looking for Bergdahl....


Family of killed Utah soldier has questions about Bowe Bergdahl | The Salt Lake Tribune

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...dahl-and-military-lied-10.html#post1063357496


The above bolded was the headline to the article when I first posted it yesterday. Today when I reposted the same article here I noticed the newspaper changed the headline.....

Father of killed Utah soldier calls Bowe Bergdahl deal


Anyway there seems to be a lot conflicting stories suddenly coming to light and the stories being told by some of the soldiers from Bergdahl's platoon are starting to smell very fishy.
 
Last edited:
Filthy McNasty said:
What is odd about your post is that you seemed to be acting as if these soldiers did not exist before.
Click to expand...

I'm sure they exist, and I'm sure that everyone who hates Bergdahl wants to link every fatality directly to his actions. Even if they did die looking for Bergdahl, that's their job.

Using your logic, Bush traded 4000+ American lives to kill Saddam Hussein.
 
Samhain said:
I'm fascinated by gyrations you are making on this topic.
Click to expand...
That went so far over his head that he "liked" it.:lamo

Amadeus said:
I'm sure they exist, and I'm sure that everyone who hates Bergdahl wants to link every fatality directly to his actions. Even if they did die looking for Bergdahl, that's their job.

Using your logic, Bush traded 4000+ American lives to kill Saddam Hussein.
Click to expand...
Using my logic? Well it was my (and other posters) logic that noticed first you were off to the races about how the other members of Bergdahl's troop must be to blame. Before you trotted out the Daily Kos conspiracy theory about how a republican strategist is behind all of this, and is therefore to blame. Those are arguments plucked from a booby hatch of idiocy. Here is a news flash, what you are "sure of" won't sell anyone with an IQ above room temp on anything. As you were sure that Daily Kos had put their finger on the fact that a republican strategist was behind all of this. I guess prevarication and weak deflections are all you have to offer, aside from idiotic Daily Kos conspiracy theories.:doh
 
Filthy McNasty said:
That went so far over his head that he "liked" it.:lamo


Using my logic? Well it was my (and other posters) logic that noticed first you were off to the races about how the other members of Bergdahl's troop must be to blame. Before you trotted out the Daily Kos conspiracy theory about how a republican strategist is behind all of this, and is therefore to blame. Those are arguments plucked from a booby hatch of idiocy. Here is a news flash, what you are "sure of" won't sell anyone with an IQ above room temp on anything. As you were sure that Daily Kos had put their finger on the fact that a republican strategist was behind all of this. I guess prevarication and weak deflections are all you have to offer, aside from idiotic Daily Kos conspiracy theories.:doh
Click to expand...

I don't recall posting anything from Daily KOS.
 
Amadeus said:
I don't recall posting anything from Daily KOS.
Click to expand...
No doubt you don't recall lots of things. None the less I bet you recall ignoring tres borachos debunking of your BBC "republican strategist" argument way back in #118. I know I do.
 
Moot said:
Some of the families have doubts their sons were killed looking for Bergdahl....


Family of killed Utah soldier has questions about Bowe Bergdahl | The Salt Lake Tribune

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...dahl-and-military-lied-10.html#post1063357496


The above bolded was the headline to the article when I first posted it yesterday. Today when I reposted the same article here I noticed the newspaper changed the headline.....

Father of killed Utah soldier calls Bowe Bergdahl deal


Anyway there seems to be a lot conflicting stories suddenly coming to light and the stories being told by some of the soldiers from Bergdahl's platoon are starting to smell very fishy.
Click to expand...

The article above didn't just change the headline....they changed the first paragraph which changed the entire tone of the article and then didn't mention the edit whatsoever. That is very odd....very, very odd indeed. hmmm.
 
Amadeus said:
One of the vocal critics from Bergdahl's platoon, Cody Full, frequents twitter and rants about libtards and lower taxes.
Click to expand...

Oh OK, so you want to ignore all evidence because one of the soldiers who was there and served with Bergdahl isn't a fan of liberals? Are you really that stupid?
 
jmotivator said:
Oh OK, so you want to ignore all evidence because one of the soldiers who was there and served with Bergdahl isn't a fan of liberals? Are you really that stupid?
Click to expand...

What evidence?
 
Filthy McNasty said:
That went so far over his head that he "liked" it.:lamo


Using my logic? Well it was my (and other posters) logic that noticed first you were off to the races about how the other members of Bergdahl's troop must be to blame. Before you trotted out the Daily Kos conspiracy theory about how a republican strategist is behind all of this, and is therefore to blame. Those are arguments plucked from a booby hatch of idiocy. Here is a news flash, what you are "sure of" won't sell anyone with an IQ above room temp on anything. As you were sure that Daily Kos had put their finger on the fact that a republican strategist was behind all of this. I guess prevarication and weak deflections are all you have to offer, aside from idiotic Daily Kos conspiracy theories.:doh
Click to expand...

Y'know, what's really stupid here is that the we-love-the-troops-and-will-do-anything-for-them (except for raising the budget for the VA) Right is suddenly SO offended that we brought this guy home using the SAME system we and every other major power has used for centuries.

It is our tradition to bring all soldiers home. There's no caveat in there that "we won't bring him home if he's said or done something we don't like" - we bring them home. ALL of them. If we fail to do so, then what does that tell the soldiers in the field? "If we don't like you because {insert reason here}, we won't care about bringing you home if you're captured."

We bring them home, period. If the guy we brought home should be court-martialed, then that's up to the Army, isn't it? If there's sufficient evidence to court-martial him for desertion and sentence him to Leavenworth, then that's what the Army should and will do. But that is SECONDARY to bringing him - and any other soldier - home.

I can't think of a single other president who would not have done the same thing.
 
Moot said:
The article above didn't just change the headline....they changed the first paragraph which changed the entire tone of the article and then didn't mention the edit whatsoever. That is very odd....very, very odd indeed. hmmm.
Click to expand...

You do realize that what that telling the family that the soldier died kicking in a door in search of a Taliban member is not actually mutually exclusive from dying while searching for Bergdahl, right?
 
Amadeus said:
I'm sure they exist, and I'm sure that everyone who hates Bergdahl wants to link every fatality directly to his actions. Even if they did die looking for Bergdahl, that's their job.

Using your logic, Bush traded 4000+ American lives to kill Saddam Hussein.
Click to expand...

That's their job????

If they hadnt been betrayed by a fellow soldier that CHOSE to desert? Their job is to defend our country....not take unnecessary risks for other soldiers that walk away from their obligations.

I am still waiting for proof of this desertion myself but apparently he left a note.
 
jmotivator said:
Oh OK, so you want to ignore all evidence because one of the soldiers who was there and served with Bergdahl isn't a fan of liberals? Are you really that stupid?
Click to expand...

I've only seen one soldier....one....making almost all the claims about Bergdahl in the media and going on all the talk shows. He seems to be in a hurry to imbed his story in peoples minds before Bergdahl even has a chance to defend himself.
 
Lursa said:
That's their job????

If they hadnt been betrayed by a fellow soldier that CHOSE to desert? Their job is to defend our country....not take unnecessary risks for other soldiers that walk away from their obligations.
Click to expand...

Actually, it is, if those are the orders.
 
Lursa said:
That's their job????

If they hadnt been betrayed by a fellow soldier that CHOSE to desert? Their job is to defend our country....not take unnecessary risks for other soldiers that walk away from their obligations.

I am still waiting for proof of this desertion myself but apparently he left a note.
Click to expand...
He did more than left a note, he left all his gear too. The fact of the matter is that the more the facts of this matter come to light, the worse it looks for both the administration that perpetrated this "trade" and for our country. Truly the Obama administration have become poster children for institutional incompetence.
 
Amadeus said:
What evidence?
Click to expand...

The unerring recount by several of Bergdahl's squad mates, as well as numerous accounts by sources in the military and Pentagon.
 
jmotivator said:
You do realize that what that telling the family that the soldier died kicking in a door in search of a Taliban member is not actually mutually exclusive from dying while searching for Bergdahl, right?
Click to expand...


Since it was their mission to secure the area and the military knew Bergdahl was taken to Pakistan within days of his capture and it was two months after his disappearance.......yes, it is definitely a streeeeeeeetch to say that at least four of the fallen were killed looking for Bergdahl. In fact, it's probably a lie.
 
Last edited:
jmotivator said:
The unerring recount by several of Bergdahl's squad mates, as well as numerous accounts by sources in the military and Pentagon.
Click to expand...

And NONE of that matters. Why? Because it is our national tradition that ALL our military comes home. Whatever the soldier in question may have done is SECONDARY to that tradition. Once he's home, if the Army needs to court-martial him, then go for it! I feel about the same level of sympathy for him as I do for Bradley Manning: none.

But that is SECONDARY to keeping up our national tradition of bringing them all home. What the Right doesn't understand about that, I really don't see.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Y'know, what's really stupid here is that the we-love-the-troops-and-will-do-anything-for-them (except for raising the budget for the VA) Right is suddenly SO offended that we brought this guy home using the SAME system we and every other major power has used for centuries.

It is our tradition to bring all soldiers home. There's no caveat in there that "we won't bring him home if he's said or done something we don't like" - we bring them home. ALL of them. If we fail to do so, then what does that tell the soldiers in the field? "If we don't like you because {insert reason here}, we won't care about bringing you home if you're captured."

We bring them home, period. If the guy we brought home should be court-martialed, then that's up to the Army, isn't it? If there's sufficient evidence to court-martial him for desertion and sentence him to Leavenworth, then that's what the Army should and will do. But that is SECONDARY to bringing him - and any other soldier - home.

I can't think of a single other president who would not have done the same thing.
Click to expand...
Given the people we gave up to actually get this deal done I think the bolded part is a stretch. It violates the spirit of "we don't negotiate with terrorists" and I don't believe that other Presidents would have made this same deal under the same circumstances.

The rest of your post I agree with. We should exhaust all reasonable efforts to bring them home no matter if they are perceived as deserters or not. Those questions can be dealt with after.
 
Amadeus said:
Actually, it is, if those are the orders.
Click to expand...

You are missing the point, deliberately.

Their own soldier put them in danger, notht the enemy. It was a waste.

Not only that, he knows there would be a search for himself, in enemy territory. He deliberately placed his fellows in danger and it's his fault they were killed.

If he did desert.
 
ecofarm said:
Those orders were made on the presumption of his unwilling capture.
Click to expand...

Exactly, as it became clear that Bergdahl left by choice the searches stopped. As has been told by sources in the Military, Bergdahl's location had been known for a while but the military command had concluded that Bergdahl was not worth any more soldier's lives trying to rescue him.

How many died capturing the 5 animals that we traded for Bergdahl? Their ultimate sacrifice was ultimately wasted as well.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
Given the people we gave up to actually get this deal done I think the bolded part is a stretch. It violates the spirit of "we don't negotiate with terrorists" and I don't believe that other Presidents would have made this same deal under the same circumstances.

The rest of your post I agree with. We should exhaust all reasonable efforts to bring them home no matter if they are perceived as deserters or not. Those questions can be dealt with after.
Click to expand...
Then there is also the dangerous precedent this "trade" sets up, particularly with regard to our soldiers being kidnapped for ransom as we see with the PLO and Israel. As the top-ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee said, this a “dangerous precedent that puts all Americans at risk throughout the world.”
Ruppersberger Calls Taliban Prisoner Exchange ‘A Dangerous Precedent’ « CBS Baltimore
 
Jack Fabulous said:
Given the people we gave up to actually get this deal done I think the bolded part is a stretch. It violates the spirit of "we don't negotiate with terrorists" and I don't believe that other Presidents would have made this same deal under the same circumstances.

The rest of your post I agree with. We should exhaust all reasonable efforts to bring them home no matter if they are perceived as deserters or not. Those questions can be dealt with after.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The defenders are simply playing a game of extremes here like when you say the government should cut the budget by 1% annually until it is balanced and they claim you want to turn American into Somalia. Same deal. For those people apparently having serious problem with releasing what amounts to 5 Osama bin Laden level Taliban leaders for a deserter means you hate the military and want all POWs to die in enemy prisons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom