• 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 to Face General Court Martial [W:318]

That's a shame, too. That means that there are a large number of voters in the US that think that lying to the American people by their President and his staff, is fine and acceptable. We had one President, a Republican, that paid a high price for doing so - he had to resign.

My how things have changed. Like I said, that's a shame.

Nixon didn't have to resign for "lying to the American people." He had to resign because he was about to get impeached for being complicit in criminal activity.
 
He wasn't a POW he was a deserter.

And under the laws and customs of war these men could and can be held until the cessation of hostilities.

A) The label of deserter goes against the testimony of the only person with first hand knowledge of the situation. Bergdahl stated that he was going to a more significant superior at another base in order to make a report when he was captured. I am not saying that he is telling the truth, but I am saying that a label of deserter requires a conviction in military court.

B) He was held by Taliban-Haqqani as a US army soldier. That makes him a PoW.
 
Bowe Bergdahl to Face General Court Martial - ABC News

This means that they will be going for Dishonorable Discharge as a minimum and, likely, substantial jail time. It also means that all the political posturing you heard from assorted brass over the past year was exactly that.

Desertion in his case where others died looking for him could result in a firing squad. He will be the first executed since Eddie Slovik in 1945.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Slovik
 
Depending on how public this is and whether or not it takes place early enough next year, it could have a negative impact on Democrats in the 2016 elections.

I do not see any causation in your syllogism (if/then statement).

We had to get the guy back.

What we do with him after that is up to the military and the UCMJ.
 
Nixon didn't have to resign for "lying to the American people." He had to resign because he was about to get impeached for being complicit in criminal activity.

From the articles of impeachment:


The means used to implement this course of conduct or plan included one or more of the following:

making false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;

withholding relevant and material evidence or information from lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States;

approving, condoning, acquiescing in, and counselling witnesses with respect to the giving of false or misleading statements to lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States and false or misleading testimony in duly instituted judicial and congressional proceedings;

interfering or endeavouring to interfere with the conduct of investigations by the Department of Justice of the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force, and Congressional Committees;

approving, condoning, and acquiescing in, the surreptitious payment of substantial sums of money for the purpose of obtaining the silence or influencing the testimony of witnesses, potential witnesses or individuals who participated in such unlawful entry and other illegal activities;

endeavouring to misuse the Central Intelligence Agency, an agency of the United States;

disseminating information received from officers of the Department of Justice of the United States to subjects of investigations conducted by lawfully authorized investigative officers and employees of the United States, for the purpose of aiding and assisting such subjects in their attempts to avoid criminal liability;

making or causing to be made false or misleading public statements for the purpose of deceiving the people of the United States into believing that a thorough and complete investigation had been conducted with respect to allegations of misconduct on the part of personnel of the executive branch of the United States and personnel of the Committee for the Re-election of the President, and that there was no involvement of such personnel in such misconduct: or

endeavouring to cause prospective defendants, and individuals duly tried and convicted, to expect favoured treatment and consideration in return for their silence or false testimony, or rewarding individuals for their silence or false testimony.


Watergate Articles Of Impeachment
 
He wasn't a POW he was a deserter.

And under the laws and customs of war these men could and can be held until the cessation of hostilities.

Normally they are tried and shot fairly quickly.

A lot of French and British deserters were shot.

I did not google if the USA shot any in WW1.

Only Eddie Slovik was shot during WW2 that I know of.

All the other military executions were for murder.
 
I do not see any causation in your syllogism (if/then statement).

We had to get the guy back.

What we do with him after that is up to the military and the UCMJ.

My point is that the American people would not begrudge releasing five prisoners, even if one or more reverted back to terrorist activity, if it returned an honorable American soldier to his country and his family. If it turns out that Bergdahl is not an honorable soldier and that other soldiers died attempting to recapture him and if on top of that one or more of the prisons who were exchanged for him do harm to America or its interests, then that will stain this administration and any Democrats associated with it. That's just a fact of life in politics.
 
Bowe Bergdahl to Face General Court Martial - ABC News

This means that they will be going for Dishonorable Discharge as a minimum and, likely, substantial jail time. It also means that all the political posturing you heard from assorted brass over the past year was exactly that.

He will beat the first charge and be convicted on the second, do his time and go on to his life of little achievement.
 
I do not see any causation in your syllogism (if/then statement).

We had to get the guy back.

What we do with him after that is up to the military and the UCMJ.

Yeah that wasn't really what it was all about though was it? If it was just about getting Bergdhal back for the sake of putting him on trial for desertion than there would not have been press coverage with the President and his parents in the White House Rose Garden. It was about the President seeing an opportunity to make himself look good and at the same time getting some guys out of GITMO; a facility he doesn't agree with and vowed to close during his campaign. In the end, however, the whole thing blew up in his face when the truth about Bergdhal came out and that is a big reason why it has taken this long just to proceeds to a Courts Martial. Under normal circumstances this guy would have been prosecuted and found guilty long ago.
 
A) The label of deserter goes against the testimony of the only person with first hand knowledge of the situation. Bergdahl stated that he was going to a more significant superior at another base in order to make a report when he was captured. I am not saying that he is telling the truth, but I am saying that a label of deserter requires a conviction in military court.

B) He was held by Taliban-Haqqani as a US army soldier. That makes him a PoW.

If he had been captured while performing his normal duties he would have been a POW. Wandering off post to find someone to complain to IS NOT normal duties.
 
Yeah that wasn't really what it was all about though was it? If it was just about getting Bergdhal back for the sake of putting him on trial for desertion than there would not have been press coverage with the President and his parents in the White House Rose Garden. It was about the President seeing an opportunity to make himself look good and at the same time getting some guys out of GITMO; a facility he doesn't agree with and vowed to close during his campaign. In the end, however, the whole thing blew up in his face when the truth about Bergdhal came out and that is a big reason why it has taken this long just to proceeds to a Courts Martial. Under normal circumstances this guy would have been prosecuted and found guilty long ago.

Are you asking me or are you telling me ??

Are you trying to be cute or are you trying to be funny ??
 
He will beat the first charge and be convicted on the second, do his time and go on to his life of little achievement.

If they are bringing Desertion charges then they have ample evidence to do so. This case has been made way too political to play games.
 
My point is that the American people would not begrudge releasing five prisoners, even if one or more reverted back to terrorist activity, if it returned an honorable American soldier to his country and his family. If it turns out that Bergdahl is not an honorable soldier and that other soldiers died attempting to recapture him and if on top of that one or more of the prisons who were exchanged for him do harm to America or its interests, then that will stain this administration and any Democrats associated with it. That's just a fact of life in politics.

Nobody said he was an honorable soldier ever.

He was one of ours.

That was good enough.
 
That won't happen. He deserves a long stay at Leavenworth but I'd be surprised if he gets even that.

A general court martial is empowered to sentence life in prison or death.

When the generals at JAG send someone to a general court martial they are normally doing it for the sake of the highest penalty.

I learned that while working at the JAG for 1 year at the end of my tour.
 
Depending on how public this is and whether or not it takes place early enough next year, it could have a negative impact on Democrats in the 2016 elections.

How so?
 
If they are bringing Desertion charges then they have ample evidence to do so. This case has been made way too political to play games.
I just think his JAG attorney will be able to fight and possibly win the first charge, on technicalities, in the end he will get some time, how much is anyone's guess the military can be unpredictable when it comes to punishments.
 
A general court martial is empowered to sentence life in prison or death.

When the generals at JAG send someone to a general court martial they are normally doing it for the sake of the highest penalty.

I learned that while working at the JAG for 1 year at the end of my tour.

I thought the DP was removed???
 
Back
Top Bottom