• 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 faces Rare Charge with Desertion......

MMC said:
Like I said it didn't take releasing 5 top Islamic Radical Commanders. Which the Taliban back then had asked for several recently captured members to be released and had placed dollar figure with the deal. That came out after BO gave up more than he should have.

So the reality of the Fab 5.....came from BO who was thinking political and all about closing Gitmo.
Click to expand...

We'll have to agree to disagree then...and remember, Israel once swapped just over 1000 Palestinian prisoners for one Israeli soldier. Those "top Islamic Radical Commanders", btw, are NOT on American soil, nor are they anywhere close to American soil, and it doesn't seem that what few troops we still have in Afghanistan aren't in any danger of being overrun by "top Islamic Radical Commanders"...so I'd say it was an acceptable deal in consonance with what's been done before, even by George Washington.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Swapping prisoners is something that's been done for far longer than America's been around, and we've done it before many times ourselves. And Dereliction of Duty would be a lesser charge included within the Desertion charge.
Click to expand...
Doesn't exchanging POWs usually come after the conflict has ended?

Has this conflict ended?
 
Glen Contrarian said:
We'll have to agree to disagree then...and remember, Israel once swapped just over 1000 Palestinian prisoners for one Israeli soldier. Those "top Islamic Radical Commanders", btw, are NOT on American soil, nor are they anywhere close to American soil, and it doesn't seem that what few troops we still have in Afghanistan aren't in any danger of being overrun by "top Islamic Radical Commanders"...so I'd say it was an acceptable deal in consonance with what's been done before, even by George Washington.
Click to expand...

I thought it would be an easy one after the Taliban had admitted to what their first offer was. They weren't even thinking about any of those top commanders. But one. This all goes back to when BO gave the Taliban an Office in Qatar. Back when they said they weren't going to negotiate.

The one top commander was an Intel Operative with connections to more than just AQ. Moreover not one has to be on American soil in order to go after American assets and Interests.

Oh and our Troops that are still there are very much in danger of being overran. This in from August 9th last month. Which doesn't even count Daesh now being in Afghanistan and looking to go after our troopers.





Attacks on army, police and U.S. special forces kill 50 in Kabul.....


A wave of attacks on the Afghan army and police and U.S. special forces in Kabul have killed at least 50 people and wounded hundreds, dimming hopes that the Taliban might be weakened by a leadership struggle after their longtime leader's death.

The bloodshed began on Friday with a truck bomb that exploded in a heavily populated district and included an hours-long battle at a base used by U.S. special forces. It became the deadliest day in Kabul for years. The Islamist insurgents claimed responsibility for both the police academy attack and the battle at the U.S. special forces base, though not for the truck bomb.

The violence was a reminder of the difficulty of reviving a stalled peace process, conveying a no-compromise message from the Taliban following the late July revelation of Mullah Mohammad Omar's death and a dispute over the leadership of the insurgency.....snip~

Attacks on army, police and U.S. special forces kill 50 in Kabul | Reuters
 
we traded how many savage terrorist for this asshole?


meanwhile 4 hostages stuck in Iran and obama cheers a nuke deal.


**** that guy.
 
MMC said:
I thought it would be an easy one after the Taliban had admitted to what their first offer was. They weren't even thinking about any of those top commanders. But one. This all goes back to when BO gave the Taliban an Office in Qatar. Back when they said they weren't going to negotiate.

The one top commander was an Intel Operative with connections to more than just AQ. Moreover not one has to be on American soil in order to go after American assets and Interests.

Oh and our Troops that are still there are very much in danger of being overran. This in from August 9th last month. Which doesn't even count Daesh now being in Afghanistan and looking to go after our troopers.





Attacks on army, police and U.S. special forces kill 50 in Kabul.....


A wave of attacks on the Afghan army and police and U.S. special forces in Kabul have killed at least 50 people and wounded hundreds, dimming hopes that the Taliban might be weakened by a leadership struggle after their longtime leader's death.

The bloodshed began on Friday with a truck bomb that exploded in a heavily populated district and included an hours-long battle at a base used by U.S. special forces. It became the deadliest day in Kabul for years. The Islamist insurgents claimed responsibility for both the police academy attack and the battle at the U.S. special forces base, though not for the truck bomb.

The violence was a reminder of the difficulty of reviving a stalled peace process, conveying a no-compromise message from the Taliban following the late July revelation of Mullah Mohammad Omar's death and a dispute over the leadership of the insurgency.....snip~

Attacks on army, police and U.S. special forces kill 50 in Kabul | Reuters
Click to expand...

And I think you'll have to agree that those attacks will happen whether we're there or not...which begs the question: if the attacks are going to happen whether we're there or not, why are we still there?
 
eohrnberger said:
Doesn't exchanging POWs usually come after the conflict has ended?

Has this conflict ended?
Click to expand...

No, it does NOT "usually come after the conflict has ended". Google "prisoner swaps" and find out for yourself.

And besides, Bergdahl's desertion didn't come during the conflict, but during the OCCUPATION. We've been occupying Afghanistan since we took it over in, what, 2003? The fact that there was and continue to be an insurgency doesn't mean that it was any less an occupation.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
No, it does NOT "usually come after the conflict has ended". Google "prisoner swaps" and find out for yourself.

And besides, Bergdahl's desertion didn't come during the conflict, but during the OCCUPATION. We've been occupying Afghanistan since we took it over in, what, 2003? The fact that there was and continue to be an insurgency doesn't mean that it was any less an occupation.
Click to expand...

Do occupations usually have a Status of Forces agreement in place between the US and guest governments? Not sure that it then qualifies as an occupation.
 
eohrnberger said:
Do occupations usually have a Status of Forces agreement in place between the US and guest governments? Not sure that it then qualifies as an occupation.
Click to expand...

If there's a SofA, then that simply strengthens my contention that Bergdahl's desertion was not during time of war, doesn't it?
 
Glen Contrarian said:
And I think you'll have to agree that those attacks will happen whether we're there or not...which begs the question: if the attacks are going to happen whether we're there or not, why are we still there?
Click to expand...

So then you admit there is a clear and present danger for our troopers, Right? This doesn't count AQ Prime pledging to the Taliban last month. Nor the fact of some Taliban. That's Afghani Taliban pledging to Daesh.

To top it off, the Pakistani Taliban pledged to Daesh and operate in and out Afghanistan too.

Why are we still there.....BO's SOFA.
sofa.gif
 
Glen Contrarian said:
If there's a SofA, then that simply strengthens my contention that Bergdahl's desertion was not during time of war, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Negative.....he was in captivity for how long? SOFA.....came after the fact.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
If there's a SofA, then that simply strengthens my contention that Bergdahl's desertion was not during time of war, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

That a good point and a good question. What was the status of the theater of operations at the time?

We have to remember that Bergdhal walked off post some 5 years ago, so that'd be '09 or '10, right?
 
MMC said:
So then you admit there is a clear and present danger for our troopers, Right? This doesn't count AQ Prime pledging to the Taliban last month. Nor the fact of some Taliban. That's Afghani Taliban pledging to Daesh.

To top it off, the Pakistani Taliban pledged to Daesh and operate in and out Afghanistan too.

Why are we still there.....BO's SOFA.
sofa.gif
Click to expand...

Operating in an area that may be dangerous is not the same thing as operating in a war zone. They will get hostile fire pay and won't have to pay taxes or pay for stamps for letters...but it's not the same thing as operating in a war zone. For all effects and purposes, they are maintaining an occupation...and that's not the same thing as operating in a war zone.
 
MMC said:
Negative.....he was in captivity for how long? SOFA.....came after the fact.
Click to expand...

Either way, the Taliban had been defeated in 2003, and from that time on, it was an occupation. Yes, there was a significant insurgency, but it was still an occupation. Remember the French resistance after the fall of France in WWII? That resistance never stopped, did it? But as far as Germany was concerned, the war against France had ended in victory, and they had become its occupiers.

No, I'm not violating Godwin's rule. I'm only pointing out that in the modern world, as long as men are able to resist foreign troops on their soil, they will do so, just as the Afghans did (with our help) after the Soviets took over Afghanistan. You might ask why such didn't happen in Germany after WWII, and here's a good reason. But the point is, the war itself was over...and we were the occupying power.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Operating in an area that may be dangerous is not the same thing as operating in a war zone. They will get hostile fire pay and won't have to pay taxes or pay for stamps for letters...but it's not the same thing as operating in a war zone. For all effects and purposes, they are maintaining an occupation...and that's not the same thing as operating in a war zone.
Click to expand...

It doesn't change the fact that the limited amount of troops there can be overran. Nor are we occupying they held an election, remember.

Moreover, BO himself brought up about being able to use the Air Space.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Either way, the Taliban had been defeated in 2003, and from that time on, it was an occupation. Yes, there was a significant insurgency, but it was still an occupation. Remember the French resistance after the fall of France in WWII? That resistance never stopped, did it? But as far as Germany was concerned, the war against France had ended in victory, and they had become its occupiers.

No, I'm not violating Godwin's rule. I'm only pointing out that in the modern world, as long as men are able to resist foreign troops on their soil, they will do so, just as the Afghans did (with our help) after the Soviets took over Afghanistan. You might ask why such didn't happen in Germany after WWII, and here's a good reason. But the point is, the war itself was over...and we were the occupying power.
Click to expand...


Dec 28, 2014.



President Barack Obama says the longest war in American history is coming to a responsible conclusion.



Obama is welcoming the end of U.S. combat operations in Afghanistan. The war came to a formal end Sunday with a ceremony in Kabul. Obama says in a statement that the effort has devastated al-Qaida's core leadership, brought justice to Osama bin Laden and disrupted terrorist plots. He says U.S. troops and diplomats have helped Afghans reclaim their communities and move toward democracy.

Afghanistan remains a dangerous place, and the Afghan people and their security forces continue to make tremendous sacrifices in defense of their country. At the invitation of the Afghan government, and to preserve the gains we have made together, the United States--along with our allies and partners--will maintain a limited military presence in Afghanistan to train, advise and assist Afghan forces and to conduct counterterrorism operations against the remnants of al Qaeda. Our personnel will continue to face risks, but this reflects the enduring commitment of the United States to the Afghan people and to a united, secure and sovereign Afghanistan that is never again used as a source of attacks against our nation.....snip~

Obama Welcomes End Of The Longest War In American History
 
MMC said:
Yeah, and Obama can be remembered for it. Another one of his firsts.
Click to expand...

Yep, the great negotiator. First Bergdahl, then Iran. From bad to worse. And just think, some people still approve.
 
WCH said:
BTW: he can rot in prison.
Click to expand...

Who is the fool who claimed he "served with distinction"? What kind of distinction? In the old country such a person who be speedily put on trial and then shot. But not in the USA!
 
If we're sticking to the theme of old and rarely used today, might I suggest "hanged by the neck until dead"? He's a traitor who aided the enemy and caused the deaths of six of our guys. Execute him.
 
MMC said:
Bergdahl will appear in court on the 17th.....now he will face the Charge of Misbehaving before the enemy. That's Right......Bergdahl was misbehaving. What say ye?


Military selects rarely used charge for Bergdahl case.....

Military prosecutors have reached into a section of military law seldom used since World War II in the politically fraught case against Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, the soldier held prisoner for years by the Taliban after leaving his post in Afghanistan.

Observers wondered for months if Bergdahl would be charged with desertion after the deal brokered by the U.S. to bring him home. He was — but he was also charged with misbehavior before the enemy, a much rarer offense that carries a stiffer potential penalty in this case.....snip~

Military selects rarely used charge for Bergdahl case - Yahoo News
Click to expand...

Huh. I seem to recall that Bergdahl wasn't going to be charged, because Obummer Hates America.
 
Kobie said:
Huh. I seem to recall that Bergdahl wasn't going to be charged, because Obummer Hates America.
Click to expand...

Is that what you seem to recall. Imagine that. :lol: Looks like your recollection wasn't even close, huh? :mrgreen:

BO peep doesn't hate America. Just Republicans and Conservatives. Keep it real!
 
Glowpun said:
Who is the fool who claimed he "served with distinction"? What kind of distinction? In the old country such a person who be speedily put on trial and then shot. But not in the USA!
Click to expand...

I know. Those same people often side with the wrong and the evil. It fits their agenda.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1065018375 said:
Yep, the great negotiator. First Bergdahl, then Iran. From bad to worse. And just think, some people still approve.
Click to expand...

Mornin M.A. :2wave: This is what happens when GOP has no leadership and our worried about how they would look. Taking BO peep down for the count. So instead they let him do what he wants and let the minority party control issues.
 
MMC said:
Is that what you seem to recall. Imagine that. :lol: Looks like your recollection wasn't even close, huh? :mrgreen:

BO peep doesn't hate America. Just Republicans and Conservatives. Keep it real!
Click to expand...

I recall morons on this forum claiming it, that's for sure.
 
WCH said:
I know. Those same people often side with the wrong and the evil. It fits their agenda.
Click to expand...

Giving a person due process is apparently "wrong and evil." Good to know what twisted psychopathy you subscribe to.
 
Kobie said:
I recall morons on this forum claiming it, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

If he doesn't hate the country, why then is he hellbent on "fundamentally changing" it? Please oh great sage, explain......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom