Bowe Bergdahl pleads guilty to desertion

[Arjay81]

And you can present the evidence to us here that showed beyond any shadow of a doubt that he 100% definitely deserted and that was the only possibility? Please do.

After being repatriated his admission at trial does that nicely.

 

[Arjay81]

I already knew those details. That does not prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, with 100% certainty that he deserted. I'll repost my relevant statement on it:



An American soldier's disappearance being fishy is not enough to abandon him as a POW and sentence him to death. In this case, yes, he is guilty of desertion and he will be punished for it. It was not 100% certain at the time and one is innocent until proven guilty. You're familiar with that concept, right?

Other than you defending him in the face of all evidence, there is nothing 100% in this case. Just that he left his post without authorization (desertion) and that is enough.

 

[Arjay81]

We got off topic when you brought up Obama. You're the one who claims he's relevant to this discussion.

He was president at the time of desertion and through the entire time until his release.

Of course he is relevant to the discussion. Your denial does not impact that at all.

 

[Arjay81]

Hyperbolic much?

In denial much?

 

[Arjay81]

Shhh..I am not a Dem, is that your best retort?

Calling out obvious liars is an honorable tactic.

 

[Top Cat]

It happened on his watch.

So Niger is Trump's fault then? Got it.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

There is also a law about a speedy trial, which was obstructed by the Obama administration. Can't claim one law is more important than another one that directly applies.

I agree. The right to a speedy is one of the most consistently trampled rights in our country.

 

[yankintx]

Calling out obvious liars is an honorable tactic.

Bwahaha goes to show how little you know, I have disliked Dishonest Don since the 80's, when he was a Dem. I could care less about his knuckle dragging politics, the man needs therapy.

 

[yankintx]

Calling out obvious liars is an honorable tactic.

Bwahaha goes to show how little you know, I have disliked Dishonest Don since the 80's, when he was a Dem. I could care less about his knuckle dragging politics, the man needs therapy.

 

[yankintx]

Calling out obvious liars is an honorable tactic.

Bwahaha goes to show how little you know, I have disliked Dishonest Don since the 80's, when he was a Dem. I could care less about his knuckle dragging politics, the man needs therapy

 

[yankintx]

Calling out obvious liars is an honorable tactic.

Bwahaha goes to show how little you know, I have disliked Dishonest Don since the 80's, when he was a Dem. I could care less about his knuckle dragging politics, the man needs therapy

 

[bearpoker]

In denial much?

Reign of terror? Really. Somebody's very very sensitive!

 

[Arjay81]

Bwahaha goes to show how little you know, I have disliked Dishonest Don since the 80's, when he was a Dem. I could care less about his knuckle dragging politics, the man needs therapy.

So either you agree with my statement or are just objecting because a democrat dis not say it.

 

[Arjay81]

Bwahaha goes to show how little you know, I have disliked Dishonest Don since the 80's, when he was a Dem. I could care less about his knuckle dragging politics, the man needs therapy.

Bwahaha goes to show how little you know, I have disliked Dishonest Don since the 80's, when he was a Dem. I could care less about his knuckle dragging politics, the man needs therapy.

Bwahaha goes to show how little you know, I have disliked Dishonest Don since the 80's, when he was a Dem. I could care less about his knuckle dragging politics, the man needs therapy

Your number of identical replies certainly shows a lack of imagination.

 

[Arjay81]

Reign of terror? Really. Somebody's very very sensitive!

That would appear to be you with your replies to any who dare to disagree with you.

 

[yankintx]

Your number of identical replies certainly shows a lack of imagination.

Looks like someone is stalking, oh my !!

 

[braindrain]

Running a ship into another ship is called an accident. It is not a trend. Perhaps if the Navy just slapped him on the wrist and downplayed it we would see a trend. When this happens repeatedly, get back to me. Relying on the other branches individual mistakes cannot excuse the undisciplined trend of the Army. The reason this topic angers me is that the soldier's need to personally downplay the trend is matched by the institution's need. In the mean time, our civilian population only see "military." They lump us all into the garbage.




Oh, you mean the incident in which the Marines were cleared of wrongdoing? Galvin and his men were cleared in court a year after of any responsibility after testimony by more than 50 witnesses. So, this would be a poor attempt to deflect on your part. Sort of like your Haditha example, right? Here we see where you will go just to deflect and avoid a truth. You actually need the Marines and other branches to mess up just to be able to hide. But again, even if Courts Martial were handed out, it would be individual incident in which a trend is non-existent. You might want to cling to Marines pissing on corpses to excuse the Army Bergdhal and Lynch trends. At least you would have something solid to hide behind.

Like I stated, I ignore your irrelevancies because it only encourages your need to deny.


Here's another example of poor institutional discipline...

View attachment 67224181

Behind the Air Force?! How in hell is the Army the fattest by far? Which branch is supposed to be supplying the "soldiers?" This is exactly a part of that larger discipline problem. And what do you think the Army's response to this data was? The same old excuses and downplaying. Don't worry, the Air Force and the Navy also downplayed. In the mean time, the Marine Corps didn't even bother to respond because the Marine Corps requires strict adherence to its fitness standards and over the years has seen Marines resort to even unsafe weight-loss methods for fear that failing will jeopardize their careers (and it does). As you can see, despite pointing out that there are fat Marines too in order to excuse and downplay what the Army presents, discipline is consistent for the Marines over the years. A lack of discipline gets worse over the years for the Army. And this graph represents the years after Army standards got back to its normal low. Can you cipher the graph? This would be the personal discipline that is lacking in the Army and makes room for the Bergdhal and Lynch trends. Weak in body, weak in mind.

You must not be keeping up with the news. The Navy had multiple similar accidents within a few months stretch. And it wasn’t individual mistakes. Maybe you should actually study up on the things you are talking about. Then you wouldn’t sound so foolish.

And no one needs or wants the other branches to screw up. Well maybe no one besides you. The fact of the matter is they all do and they all suffer from their own issues. The difference is you can only see faults in the Army and make excuses or ignore the problems within the other branches. Like I said all you have been doing is picking and choosing which displays of lack of discipline and poor/behavior count as institutional problems and which ones don’t. And your entire decision depends on if it was the Army or not. It’s rather pathetic.

As to the Army being fat. Like I said the Army does have plenty of problems. Being overweight is for sure one of them.

The difference is that while I can admit the Army has problems I can also understand that fact that being much smaller and less diverse when it comes to roles makes a huge difference. While you struggle with that concept. Mainly because you are blinded by you bias.

Answer this. Why exactly do you think SOCOM has much less discipline problems and weight issues then the Marine Corps. Does that fact demonstrate a problem within the Corps. By your silly level of logic it for sure does.

 

[MSgt]

The difference is that while I can admit the Army has problems....

No, you absolutely cannot. This is why you try to file the issue under "all branches have problems." It's avoidance. Instead of looking at what is so very obvious, you decide to pull in a crashed Navy ship to avoid the Bergdhal, Hasan, Manning, Lynch, etc. issue. Your need to avoid has you looking for the Marine who was late to formation. And you actually think you are going to get somewhere by comparing Navy ship mistakes to Army traitors and murderers? Tossing grenades at leaders during the Gulf War? Refusing to deploy during Bosnia? Caught in ambush with dirty and missing weapons in Iraq? Leaving the base to murder women and children in Afghanistan? Why shouldn't Manning release sensitive material? After all, even his General did it, right? Soldierly incompetence is routine. Crashing a ship is not. And when shown the lack of self discipline in terms of weight standards, you still can't bring yourself to understanding that such a fundamental lack of personal discipline translates into bad military conduct. So no, you really can't admit a thing.

Answer this. Why exactly do you think SOCOM has much less discipline problems and weight issues then the Marine Corps. Does that fact demonstrate a problem within the Corps. By your silly level of logic it for sure does.

First of all, SOCOM is a mixture of the branches, which include the Marine Corps. It is not its own Branch to be measured for its discipline against others. You would have been better off had you tried a Seal versus average Sailor type thing. But this goes within the Branch.

Second, if SOCOM were a Branch, the Marine Corps would still be measured for its continued higher standards of discipline. It would still not boast the Bergdahls, Mannings, and Lynchs.

Perhaps the problem here is that you simply do not understand "logic." By the way, this attempt only provided more evidence of your desperation to explain away the issue.

 

[braindrain]

No, you absolutely cannot. This is why you try to file the issue under "all branches have problems." It's avoidance. Instead of looking at what is so very obvious, you decide to pull in a crashed Navy ship to avoid the Bergdhal, Hasan, Manning, Lynch, etc. issue. Your need to avoid has you looking for the Marine who was late to formation. And you actually think you are going to get somewhere by comparing Navy ship mistakes to Army traitors and murderers? Tossing grenades at leaders during the Gulf War? Refusing to deploy during Bosnia? Caught in ambush with dirty and missing weapons in Iraq? Leaving the base to murder women and children in Afghanistan? Why shouldn't Manning release sensitive material? After all, even his General did it, right? Soldierly incompetence is routine. Crashing a ship is not. And when shown the lack of self discipline in terms of weight standards, you still can't bring yourself to understanding that such a fundamental lack of personal discipline translates into bad military conduct. So no, you really can't admit a thing.



First of all, SOCOM is a mixture of the branches, which include the Marine Corps. It is not its own Branch to be measured for its discipline against others. You would have been better off had you tried a Seal versus average Sailor type thing. But this goes within the Branch.

Second, if SOCOM were a Branch, the Marine Corps would still be measured for its continued higher standards of discipline. It would still not boast the Bergdahls, Mannings, and Lynchs.

Perhaps the problem here is that you simply do not understand "logic." By the way, this attempt only provided more evidence of your desperation to explain away the issue.

Yes I most definitely do. Just because I know their are also issues with the other branches as does not mean I can not acknowledge problems in the Army. That is just you being ridiculous. I freely admit that the average Marine unit has higher discipline and better trained then the average unit in the Army.

And you thinking problems like killing hookers, giant sex scandles being covered up and pissing on dead bodies is the same as a Marine being late for formation just shows how out of touch with reality you are.

So why exactly is it that the fundamental lack of personal discipline displayed by killing a hooker or pissing on dead bodies doesn’t translate into bad military conduct. Oh that’s right it’s because those incidents were done by Marines so they don’t count for you.

And you missed the entire point of why I brought up SOCOM. It doesn’t matter if they are their own branch or not. That’s just you trying to avoid the issue. The fact that the units within SOCOM are much more selective and much less varied in their missions sets plays a big part in why they have much less discipline issues and higher standards. If tomorrow the Marines has to grow to the size of the Army and take over as many jobs they number of issues they have would grow to the same as the Army. You just can’t accept it because you are to caught up in your own bias and your own hype.

 

[MSgt]

I freely admit that the average Marine unit has higher discipline and better trained then the average unit in the Army.

Yet, you have denied and denied for days that discipline is not the problem in the Army. You have used "numbers" as an excuse. Yet the Air Force has high numbers. You have looked to hold up exonerated issues in the Marines to avoid it. And now a dead hooker is supposed to erase the constant Berghdal/Manning/Bales trend from a single Branch? You think Lynch & Co were the only Army units to maintain dirty weapons and roll around with their gear dropped? They just got caught and the Army response to ease the embarrassment was that they were "just support."

What you don't seem to quite get here is the difference between the isolated incidents of the other Branches and actual trends. Constant dead hookers would be a trend, in which other issues would need to be addressed on the institution level. So, the question is why does only one Branch present the trend of our discussion? Right back to that word, discipline. And I presented the obesity rate just to try to encourage you to actually look at the issue. Shouldn't the Air Force be the fattest? Your problem is that you immediately defaulted into defense mode. This is not about whose Branch is better, which is exactly how you attacked it. Each Branch does its thing. This is about a specific issue that is always downplayed and always repeated because of it.

 

[braindrain]

Yet, you have denied and denied for days that discipline is not the problem in the Army. You have used "numbers" as an excuse. Yet the Air Force has high numbers. You have looked to hold up exonerated issues in the Marines to avoid it. And now a dead hooker is supposed to erase the constant Berghdal/Manning/Bales trend from a single Branch? You think Lynch & Co were the only Army units to maintain dirty weapons and roll around with their gear dropped? They just got caught and the Army response to ease the embarrassment was that they were "just support."

What you don't seem to quite get here is the difference between the isolated incidents of the other Branches and actual trends. Constant dead hookers would be a trend, in which other issues would need to be addressed on the institution level. So, the question is why does only one Branch present the trend of our discussion? Right back to that word, discipline. And I presented the obesity rate just to try to encourage you to actually look at the issue. Shouldn't the Air Force be the fattest? Your problem is that you immediately defaulted into defense mode. This is not about whose Branch is better, which is exactly how you attacked it. Each Branch does its thing. This is about a specific issue that is always downplayed and always repeated because of it.

So now you have moved from simply not being able to see thru your bias to being dishonest. That or you simply have a problem with reading comprehension. That is unless you can quote me stating even once that the Army does not have a discipline problem. But we both know you can’t.

And pretending like numbers, size and vast difference in missions don’t matter is simply you just not living in the real world. It’s why you can’t answer the question of why the units within SOCOM, with far and away the biggest contingent coming from the Army, have much less problems with discipline then then the Marine Corps.
When you have a force that’s basically a quarter of the size as the other if the didn’t have a lot less issues then that is what would be surprising.

And to top it off you finish with another nice bit of being dishonest. That is unless you can quote me even implying that the Army is better then the Marine Corps. But we both know you can’t. And I can quote myself stating that the Marine Corps was better trained and better disciplined.

Bottom line we are pretty much done here as long as you continue to post dishonestly. I have no desire to have a conversation with someone that makes crap up and tries to put words in other people’s mouths.

 

[MSgt]

... being dishonest. That or you simply have a problem with reading comprehension. That is unless you can quote me stating even once that the Army does not have a discipline problem. But we both know you can’t.

All of your posts are on display for all to read. They are full of deflection and downplaying as you immediately jumped to find problems in other Branches to excuse the very obvious problem that the Army alone celebrates as a trend. The trend exists because the Army never really addresses it. THAT is the problem. THAT has been the subject of my posts. And THAT is what you kept avoiding.

And pretending like numbers, size and vast difference in missions don’t matter is simply you just not living in the real world.

And right here it is again. These are poor excuses. If you drop the Army down to Air Force numbers, we would still have the same Army culture. Nothing would change.

And to top it off you finish with another nice bit of being dishonest. That is unless you can quote me even implying that the Army is better then the Marine Corps.

Um...I didn't state this. I accused you of attacking my posts as if it was about some sort of Branch competition. Competition was not the theme of my post and has not been the theme. Yet your defense continued to theme around the notion that you needed to defend an unjust attack on the Army from "bias."
It is clearly justified. The Army discipline problem stems first from a lack of psychological training and internal peer pressure. Next, the other Branches allow the excuses, which mean that there lacks peer pressure from the other Branches. I will ask the simple question again...why is it that only the Army presents this high profile trend of betrayal, disobedience, and disrespect?

- Is it "numbers" that made McChrystal shoot his mouth off in the public's ear, only to be replaced by Patreaus, who, by the way, would go on to give sensitive material to a girlfriend? And what did Manning do? That is quite the rank jump for the same offense. And why should soldiers feel dishonorable about refusing the deploy when even their Generals behave in a subordinate manner?

- Is it "numbers" that make NCOs and SNCOs and Officers look the other way in regards to proper training? Cleaning weapons is important only in small numbers? More numbers means more units, not less leadership.

You know all the other examples. And you know full well that these cannot be dismissed as isolated incidents when they keep repeating up and down the chain from one war to the next. You may acknowledge that the Army has its problems, but you do not address what those are and where this garbage stems from. Neither does the Army, at the expense of the other Branches.

 

[Arjay81]

Looks like someone is stalking, oh my !!

And that would be you and your lack of anything relevant to say.

 

[yankintx]

And that would be you and your lack of anything relevant to say.

Oh its relevant, to most, integrity in a Pres is nice requirement.

 

[Arjay81]

Oh its relevant, to most, integrity in a Pres is nice requirement.

And this comment has what to do with Bergdahl?

Hence it is irrelevant to the conversation. Got you again trying to hijack the conversation and failing.