• 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!

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

Let's see, the Army that won WWII is the same one that celebrated Christmas Day with the enemy somewhere in Germany or France, wasn't it?

Were those soldiers derelict in their duty? Did they abandon their posts? Did they aid the enemy?
 
i have read two versions of bergdahl's differing views. one was that he believed the US military was abusing its authority in the region and was not truly helping the average citizens of afghanistan. the other view is that he thought the US military was not doing enough militarily, and he wanted to be more of a cowboy than what was actually being expected of him. some massive variances in those two depictions
now to the potential motives of those who served with him, to publicly criticize them
possibly, he did abandon his brothers in arms and went over to the taliban
possibly, the others were very culpable for war crimes and feared a mister clean bergdahl might expose their wrongdoing
Share with us the source of these two versions you have read, that we may judge their merit. And since you appear to be carrying Montecresto's water for him, can you share with us how specifically it is that Bergdahl's fellow soldiers would have "thrown him under the bus"? We are aware of what has been shared by his fellow soldiers, so please won't one of you two crystal ball wielding wizards share with us exactly what you two perceive as "bus throwing under" activity? This ought to be very easy yet I bet it won't be...............for some reason.

Due Process is a good thing. I stand beside it.
Wonderful. Since this seems to be the position that everyone in the thread already holds, how wonderful for you. That was pretty obvious to everyone else.
 
Last edited:
Some Muslims are against interfaith relationships, but I say give it a chance. Photo of Bowe Bergdahl with Taliban commander posted on Twitter | Mail Online

LOL, that sure puts an interesting twist into a ready made twisted story.

A few weeks to recover from 5 years of captivity, seems rather quick. And the fact he is free to leave the base according to the media, is the administration hoping he'll go AWOL? Never having to answer any questions....justifing BHO trade deal.
 
I didn't say that either. I said the government wouldn't be prosecuting him for political reasons. The white house won't allow the army to prosecute him because it would make Obama look silly for his rose garden antics with the parents of a deserter. Bergdahl is going to get away with it.

I haven't convicted him. All I said was that the comments from his fellow soldiers was evidence. And they are. If the Army were to prosecute him, every one of those former soldiers would be brought in to testify. Witnesses are often used as evidence. No?


No, witness testimony isn't evidence. Witnesses can be discredited through cross examination. Not saying they will be, but, investigation and trial will determine his fate. Not you and I.
 
No, witness testimony isn't evidence. Witnesses can be discredited through cross examination. Not saying they will be, but, investigation and trial will determine his fate. Not you and I.
Yes Montecresto, best thing to do now is repeat the mantra that Bergdahl will get his day in court. That it has nothing to do with what is being discussed nor has anyone argued otherwise is a flight right over your head. Of course now you will argue that the testimony of Bergdahl's company members won't count as evidence against him. Yet these same fellow company members are open target for posters like you to malign and impugn. Unless of course you have managed to muster up the courage to address rather than dodge the thrice asked question? If these soldiers testimony is not "evidence" then what "evidence" do you have that these soldiers have "motives" to throw Bergdahl under this imaginary bus of yours?:screwy
 
Last edited:
Yes Montecresto, best thing to do now is repeat the mantra that Bergdahl will get his day in court. That it has nothing to do with what is being discussed nor has anyone argued otherwise is a flight right over your head. Of course now you will argue that the testimony of Bergdahl's company members won't count as evidence against him. Yet these same fellow company members are open target for posters like you to malign and impugn. Unless of course you have managed to muster up the courage to address rather than dodge the thrice asked question? If these soldiers testimony is not "evidence" then what "evidence" do you have that these soldiers have "motives" to throw Bergdahl under this imaginary bus of yours?:screwy

Wtf is your problem man?? Have you read any of the inflammatory things that Bergdahl has said about US foreign policy and US military abuses? Fellow soldiers don't like such things. There's the motive. But again, there must be investigation to determine probability and then trial to get conviction. What's your problem with waiting for that. Do you have something against due process?
 
Wtf is your problem man?? Have you read any of the inflammatory things that Bergdahl has said about US foreign policy and US military abuses? Fellow soldiers don't like such things. There's the motive. But again, there must be investigation to determine probability and then trial to get conviction. What's your problem with waiting for that. Do you have something against due process?
I can guarantee you that I'm very well versed with what Bergdahl has said and to whom he said it, and more importantly when he said these things. Which is why I asked you to support your comment, it is so obviously plucked from the ether. So which of the comments about the military is that you claim Bargdahl's fellow company members were aware of? That could have served as "motive" to throw him under the bus? Even though you rather humorlessly claim you did not claim they did throw him under the bus! See I don't think you have a clue about any of this, likewise I don't think you can demonstrate, timeline wise, that your "theory" has a lick of common sense to it. Frankly it is a hot mess, that leaves you contradicting yourself and dodging the question over and over again. Even offering ad homs to me rather than just answering the question. And then of course, here you are again, pretending not to recognize that nobody has argued anything but let Bergdahl have his day in court. These bromides and deflections of yours are not very persuasive, do you think they are?
 
i have read two versions of bergdahl's differing views. one was that he believed the US military was abusing its authority in the region and was not truly helping the average citizens of afghanistan. the other view is that he thought the US military was not doing enough militarily, and he wanted to be more of a cowboy than what was actually being expected of him. some massive variances in those two depictions
now to the potential motives of those who served with him, to publicly criticize them
possibly, he did abandon his brothers in arms and went over to the taliban
possibly, the others were very culpable for war crimes and feared a mister clean bergdahl might expose their wrongdoing


william calley was believed to be an honorable leader of men until his my lai massacre was exposed
it was the men who believed calley was committing war crimes who were responsible for exposing his wrongdoing
i hope those who served with bergdahl were honorable. but the possibility exists that they were not, explaining their motivations for trying to paint him as a deserter

how about we wait for the military investigation to conclude and its finding be made available to us before we make accusations that have no true basis at this time. suppress the emotion laden diatribes and await the facts of the matter. that alternative approach would seem to better serve us all

Hoot, there it is! He's a deserter. End of story, my friend.

The soldiers that testified against William Calley didn't desert their post.
 
So it turns out that investigators did not press AWOL charges against him, and from previous stories that he frequently left the base to take hikes, and then came back each time, it turns out that the accusations against him from many pundits here were unfounded. So why the firestorm over the trade to get him back? We don't leave our own in the hands of the enemy, whether or not they were AWOL, but it seems that some here were very willing to do that, whether or not Bergdahl had been AWOL or not. What the hell is happening to us if we are willing to throw our soldiers into the garbage over allegations, even before an investigation shows the evidence was not enough to put Bergdahl on trial? So we traded 5 Taliban members for Bergdahl - I call that a good trade. Bergdahl is one of ours, and we don't leave ours behind to rot on the battlefield, or in the prisons of the enemy. That is the American way.

Article is here.

You are simply ignorant, as most are, how the military works. Just because he was returned to duty does not mean charges will not be pressed against him. It is completely normal for someone to be returned to duty after an incident so that an investigation can be done and the person can be held accountable for whatever the investigation unveils. Even after an individual is charged, convicted of a crime and then discrarged, many times there is a length of time they are still "Active Duty" while they go thru the administration process of being discharged. Those who are charged and put in a military prison are still also technically "Active Duty" until they complete their punishment. Then they are administratively discharged dishonorably and have to pay back all benefits (Basically meaning they won't get paid to be in prison).

So you sir, are incorrect. The media is only trying to play off the ignorance of people like you.
I
 
You are simply ignorant, as most are, how the military works. Just because he was returned to duty does not mean charges will not be pressed against him. It is completely normal for someone to be returned to duty after an incident so that an investigation can be done and the person can be held accountable for whatever the investigation unveils. Even after an individual is charged, convicted of a crime and then discrarged, many times there is a length of time they are still "Active Duty" while they go thru the administration process of being discharged. Those who are charged and put in a military prison are still also technically "Active Duty" until they complete their punishment. Then they are administratively discharged dishonorably and have to pay back all benefits (Basically meaning they won't get paid to be in prison).

So you sir, are incorrect. The media is only trying to play off the ignorance of people like you.
I

There aren't going to be any charges. We both know that.
 
There aren't going to be any charges. We both know that.

There will be as long as the public does not allow the Obama administration and his party to sweep this under the rug.
 
There will be as long as the public does not allow the Obama administration and his party to sweep this under the rug.

They're already swinging the broom, my friend. This is over, gone, history. Berdahl deserted his unit, Obama looks like a dumbass and he's going to have it fixed.
 
They're already swinging the broom, my friend. This is over, gone, history. Berdahl deserted his unit, Obama looks like a dumbass and he's going to have it fixed.

I hope not, but I don't discount the possibility. The Obama administration are masters at feel goodery rhetoric. That is what got them elected.
 
I hope not, but I don't discount the possibility. The Obama administration are masters at feel goodery rhetoric. That is what got them elected.

I hope I'm wrong, but when you look at the regime's track record, I'm afraid that I'm not.
 
I can guarantee you that I'm very well versed with what Bergdahl has said and to whom he said it, and more importantly when he said these things. Which is why I asked you to support your comment, it is so obviously plucked from the ether. So which of the comments about the military is that you claim Bargdahl's fellow company members were aware of? That could have served as "motive" to throw him under the bus? Even though you rather humorlessly claim you did not claim they did throw him under the bus! See I don't think you have a clue about any of this, likewise I don't think you can demonstrate, timeline wise, that your "theory" has a lick of common sense to it. Frankly it is a hot mess, that leaves you contradicting yourself and dodging the question over and over again. Even offering ad homs to me rather than just answering the question. And then of course, here you are again, pretending not to recognize that nobody has argued anything but let Bergdahl have his day in court. These bromides and deflections of yours are not very persuasive, do you think they are?

What a _______________Bergdhal will have his day in court, continue pouting.
 
What a _______________Bergdhal will have his day in court, continue pouting.
Is this brain dead on arrival brain fart all you have? You should probably fall back on your previously delivered ad homs at this point, rather than just illustrating a lack of cerebral activity. But sure, why not? Brilliant reply! Completely masks your previous contributions as equally brain dead. Why not?:lamo
 
No, witness testimony isn't evidence. Witnesses can be discredited through cross examination. Not saying they will be, but, investigation and trial will determine his fate. Not you and I.

His fate is already determined. There will be no court martial.
 
No, witness testimony isn't evidence. Witnesses can be discredited through cross examination. Not saying they will be, but, investigation and trial will determine his fate. Not you and I.

And the fact that he left the compound in the middle of the night without telling anyone that he was going and without his gear is not evidence? He deserted. The question is why and it is a question we will never have answered.
 
What I find strange is that so much emphasis is being put on Bergdahl himself by most of the posters in this thread. From my last two American Legion meetings and a VFW one, the emphasis is on whom was released and not on Bergdahl. Among these retired and active duty veterans, the fate of Bergdahl is divided between those who want a court martial to either clear him or convict him, those who want him just discharged thinking he has suffered enough and those who go along with the discharge as long as it is a dishonorable one.

But most vets at all three meetings were against the swap, one does not increase the risks, the dangers to your fellow soldiers, to our allies, to the Afghan people the military was charged with protecting by releasing and swapping 5 hard core Taliban leaders which will surely come back and bite us and our allies in the butt. The focus is on these 5 by the American Legion and the VFW members, not Bergdahl. The name of the soldier is irrelevant. This is viewed akin to having Himmler and Goering in our POW camp and releasing/swapping them for the release of a single enlisted man. It is against military protocol and the standards ingrained in the military to do something like this regardless of how much you want our man back. It all goes to what these 5 released hard core Taliban leaders will likely do, the fact their released has increased the dangers to American military, their allies, to the Afghan people of having more of them die, being wounded, being kidnapped for more prisoner releases.

Perhaps the focus is on Bergdahl for the civilian sector, not he is just a minor player in the military one, it is the release of the 5 hard core Taliban leaders that worry us. Then too what hasn’t been addressed is how soldiers lost their lives or were wounded, how many Afghan military were killed in apprehending these 5 to begin with. Apparently they do not count as soon those still over in Afghanistan will have to go capture these 5 once again or kill them. I suspect it will be kill them, capturing them seems not to work too good.
 
Doesn't it seem that every topic over the past year has simply been covered up as soon as it arises? Look at the top ten ten issues -which one has been closed out and all questions answered?
 
What I find strange is that so much emphasis is being put on Bergdahl himself by most of the posters in this thread. From my last two American Legion meetings and a VFW one, the emphasis is on whom was released and not on Bergdahl. Among these retired and active duty veterans, the fate of Bergdahl is divided between those who want a court martial to either clear him or convict him, those who want him just discharged thinking he has suffered enough and those who go along with the discharge as long as it is a dishonorable one.

But most vets at all three meetings were against the swap, one does not increase the risks, the dangers to your fellow soldiers, to our allies, to the Afghan people the military was charged with protecting by releasing and swapping 5 hard core Taliban leaders which will surely come back and bite us and our allies in the butt. The focus is on these 5 by the American Legion and the VFW members, not Bergdahl. The name of the soldier is irrelevant. This is viewed akin to having Himmler and Goering in our POW camp and releasing/swapping them for the release of a single enlisted man. It is against military protocol and the standards ingrained in the military to do something like this regardless of how much you want our man back. It all goes to what these 5 released hard core Taliban leaders will likely do, the fact their released has increased the dangers to American military, their allies, to the Afghan people of having more of them die, being wounded, being kidnapped for more prisoner releases.

Perhaps the focus is on Bergdahl for the civilian sector, not he is just a minor player in the military one, it is the release of the 5 hard core Taliban leaders that worry us. Then too what hasn’t been addressed is how soldiers lost their lives or were wounded, how many Afghan military were killed in apprehending these 5 to begin with. Apparently they do not count as soon those still over in Afghanistan will have to go capture these 5 once again or kill them. I suspect it will be kill them, capturing them seems not to work too good.

Excellent post.

Many in the media have mentioned that about the supposed danger of those Taliban officials exchanged for Bergdahl. I think comparing them to Goering or Himmler is a huge stretch.

Going back a number of years, it was very well established that many of those at Gitmo were turned in for a bounty. The US was paying bounties, and many innocents were caught up in that, including a number of Brits and Aussies. People literally in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Whether those 5 were in that situation I do not know.

But the irony would be complete if it turned out that any one of those five were present in the photo-op when Sec State Powell hand-delivered a $43 million check from the US government to the Taliban in April 2001 for their cooperation in the US led drug war, having virtually eliminated poppy and opium production in Afghanistan.

But the point that these 5 guys are some sort of Super Heros, dangerous to all the world, especially the US military is just silly. Irrational fear mongering at its worst. They put their pants on just like every other person on the planet.
 
What I find strange is that so much emphasis is being put on Bergdahl himself by most of the posters in this thread. From my last two American Legion meetings and a VFW one, the emphasis is on whom was released and not on Bergdahl. Among these retired and active duty veterans, the fate of Bergdahl is divided between those who want a court martial to either clear him or convict him, those who want him just discharged thinking he has suffered enough and those who go along with the discharge as long as it is a dishonorable one.

But most vets at all three meetings were against the swap, one does not increase the risks, the dangers to your fellow soldiers, to our allies, to the Afghan people the military was charged with protecting by releasing and swapping 5 hard core Taliban leaders which will surely come back and bite us and our allies in the butt. The focus is on these 5 by the American Legion and the VFW members, not Bergdahl. The name of the soldier is irrelevant. This is viewed akin to having Himmler and Goering in our POW camp and releasing/swapping them for the release of a single enlisted man. It is against military protocol and the standards ingrained in the military to do something like this regardless of how much you want our man back. It all goes to what these 5 released hard core Taliban leaders will likely do, the fact their released has increased the dangers to American military, their allies, to the Afghan people of having more of them die, being wounded, being kidnapped for more prisoner releases.

Perhaps the focus is on Bergdahl for the civilian sector, not he is just a minor player in the military one, it is the release of the 5 hard core Taliban leaders that worry us. Then too what hasn’t been addressed is how soldiers lost their lives or were wounded, how many Afghan military were killed in apprehending these 5 to begin with. Apparently they do not count as soon those still over in Afghanistan will have to go capture these 5 once again or kill them. I suspect it will be kill them, capturing them seems not to work too good.

Excellent post! You are correct - the media has put all the attention on Bergdahl. While they aren't exactly down-playing the terms of the swap, they have put the emphasis on the feel-good part of Bergdahl's release. They will not openly criticize Obama, even this this may not have been one of his more brilliant moves, but the public seems to wonder why the trade wasn't one for one, instead of five terrorists for one soldier. There didn't seem to be a whole lot of negotiating going on - they set the terms, and Obama acquiesced. Did Obama ask for any military advice at all, or did he just decide on his own? If those terrorists now do what they said they would do, Obama will be totally responsible for any deaths that will occur. Didn't he realize that?

Greetings, Pero. :2wave:
 
Excellent post.

Many in the media have mentioned that about the supposed danger of those Taliban officials exchanged for Bergdahl. I think comparing them to Goering or Himmler is a huge stretch.

Going back a number of years, it was very well established that many of those at Gitmo were turned in for a bounty. The US was paying bounties, and many innocents were caught up in that, including a number of Brits and Aussies. People literally in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Whether those 5 were in that situation I do not know.

But the irony would be complete if it turned out that any one of those five were present in the photo-op when Sec State Powell hand-delivered a $43 million check from the US government to the Taliban in April 2001 for their cooperation in the US led drug war, having virtually eliminated poppy and opium production in Afghanistan.

But the point that these 5 guys are some sort of Super Heros, dangerous to all the world, especially the US military is just silly. Irrational fear mongering at its worst. They put their pants on just like every other person on the planet.

Yes comparing the 5 Taliban to Goering and Himmler is a bit of a stretch, at least in the capabilities of those two had compared to what these 5 have/had. But the desired point is there. I and others have the feeling the threat assessment on these 5 was not either done or totally ignored. There may have been political reason for that, I do not know. The good news surrounding the release of Bergdahl to over shadow all the bad news coming out at the time. But after all these years, I am nothing more than an old cynic.

The surrounding circumstance of these 5 capture has never been addressed that I know of. Whether bounty, a raid, or being captured on the battlefield, I suppose on has to take his best guess. The bounty situation was never addressed at any of the meeting I attended.

Yeah, ironies occur all the time in war and in geopolitics in general. Today’s friend becomes tomorrows enemy and vice versa. One has to look no farther than Iraq to see that today. We are trying to overthrow Assad, and yet Assad is on our side fighting ISIS or IS in Iraq to help store up Maliki and the government we installed. Talk about Irony and then throw in Iran as helping too.

Super heroes no, but those 5 were received as such by the Taliban and their followers. The Taliban Commander we let loose has already stated he is headed back to the battlefield to do what damage he can, whether to us, our allies or the Afghan people. Sometimes technology and better training can be overcome with higher moral and determination. This has been proven time and time again throughout history. There are many ways to fight a superior enemy with much more firepower, head on charges never work. But there are many ways to sap the will and moral of your enemy. You also do not need to defeat them in battle either, that is if you make time your ally instead of your enemy.

It is true these 5 put their pants on the same as us, but so too did Genghis Kahn, Himmler, Hitler, Stalin, Giap, Pol Pot, etc.
 
Back
Top Bottom