Bergdahl to be charged with desertion

[bshole]

The punishment for deserting should be severe in order to deter others.

Yea and then they could put that in their commercials.

The NAVY, the only job in America that will execute you if you quit.

That should really help their recruitment efforts.

 

[Nograts]

It's more the principal. He was depended on by others to be a wingman and he voluntarily left them hanging.

 

[Moonbeam]

The punishment for deserting should be severe in order to deter others.

Especially when you invade a country to destroy all their hidden weapons of mass destruction that you invent as a pretext for the invasion. The destruction of imaginary weapons of mass destruction is serious business. Imagine the hypothetical disasters that could happen if you didn't. Their detonation could kill millions of people by the placebo effect alone, not to mention the fall our from all the radiation we would imagine is there.

 

[Moonbeam]

It's more the principal. He was depended on by others to be a wingman and he voluntarily left them hanging.

This is a very important principle. It's why the Mafia uses horse heads.

 

[cabri]

How much torture/imprisonment do we have confirmation about.

Compare his condition vs what the POW from Vietnam showed ....

How much confirmation do you think we'll get from the Taliban & how much of it can we believe? It's not like there's confirmation from fellow prisoners.

I believe that bshole opened that can of worms with his assertion.

 

[Vic]

Based on the UCMJ he could have been shot on sight for desertion during war time or a military action.

No US soldier has been legally executed for desertion since WWII.

We are still a nation of laws. Even in the military, even during wartime (declared or not).

Fear and outrage are not excuses for falling into mob rule.

 

[werepossum]

Yea and then they could put that in their commercials.

The NAVY, the only job in America that will execute you if you quit.

That should really help their recruitment efforts.

Even during World War II, a war to the knife, American soldiers were very seldom executed for desertion. There are situations in Afghanistan where desertion would merit penalties up to and including death, such as if one deserts a critical guard post, but in general it's not even on the table.

Especially when you invade a country to destroy all their hidden weapons of mass destruction that you invent as a pretext for the invasion. The destruction of imaginary weapons of mass destruction is serious business. Imagine the hypothetical disasters that could happen if you didn't. Their detonation could kill millions of people by the placebo effect alone, not to mention the fall our from all the radiation we would imagine is there.

You're mixing your delusions, dude. No one is alleging WMDs in Afghanistan. We started a war there because that country's leadership supported the group that murdered several thousand Americans. Google 9-11.

No US soldier has been legally executed for desertion since WWII.

We are still a nation of laws. Even in the military, even during wartime (declared or not).

Fear and outrage are not excuses for falling into mob rule.

Well said, as usual.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

No US soldier has been legally executed for desertion since WWII.

We are still a nation of laws. Even in the military, even during wartime (declared or not).

Fear and outrage are not excuses for falling into mob rule.

Yes, we are a nation of laws but military law is not the same. Maybe you should read the UCMJ. During time of war the death penalty is still an option. During bootcamp you are taught that should you desert you can be shot on sight without any trial or court martial.

Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)
ART. 85. DESERTION

(a) Any member of the armed forces who--

(1) without authority goes or remains absent from his unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to remain away therefrom permanently;

(2) quits his unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to avoid hazardous duty or to shirk important service; or

(3) without being regularly separated from one of the armed forces enlists or accepts an appointment in the same or another on of the armed forces without fully disclosing the fact that he has not been regularly separated, or enters any foreign armed service except when authorized by the United States is guilty of desertion.

(b) Any commissioned officer of the armed forces who, after tender of his resignation and before notice of its acceptance, quits his post or proper duties without leave and with intent to remain away therefrom permanently is guilty of desertion.

(c) Any person found guilty of desertion or attempt to desert shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct, but if the desertion or attempt to desert occurs at any other time, by such punishment, other than death, as a court-martial may direct.

Note: For specific details concerning this offense, including elements of proof, maximum punishments, and detailed explanation, see Punitive Articles of the UCMJ.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Some how desertion does not seem to me to cover captured by the enemy during a walk-about when off duty. Walk-abouts he had a histoy of returning from.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Yes, we are a nation of laws but military law is not the same. Maybe you should read the UCMJ. During time of war the death penalty is still an option. During bootcamp you are taught that should you desert you can be shot on sight without any trial or court martial.

Ah, just what WAR did the USA declare since the 1940's?

 

[Moonbeam]

You're mixing your delusions, dude. No one is alleging WMDs in Afghanistan. We started a war there because that country's leadership supported the group that murdered several thousand Americans. Google 9-11.

Why do you think a general example applies to a particular case?

 

[werepossum]

Ah, just what WAR did the USA declare since the 1940's?

SCOTUS has ruled that Congress authorizing military force against another nation is effectively declaring war.

Why do you think a general example applies to a particular case?

Your general example fits only one conflict; we're discussing one particular case in another conflict.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Ah, just what WAR did the USA declare since the 1940's?

It covers all combat duty as well.

 

[Nebor]

Yea and then they could put that in their commercials.

The NAVY, the only job in America that will execute you if you quit.

That should really help their recruitment efforts.

I didn't say he should be executed. And recruiting across all services has been exceeding 100% of mission since the economic downturn. Still going strong.

 

[ivwshane]

I didn't say he should be executed. And recruiting across all services has been exceeding 100% of mission since the economic downturn. Still going strong.

Gotta love government handouts! And military service gives out the biggest piece!

 

[Londo_Jowo]

So is working for the government is considered a handout as well?

 

[ivwshane]

So is working for the government is considered a handout as well?

According to the "government is too big" righties, yes! I guess your handout is different, well because...donuts!

 

[Londo_Jowo]

According to the "government is too big" righties, yes! I guess your handout is different, well because...donuts!

I don't work for the government, been a civilian since November of 1990. Though I do have some stocks (AAPL, IBM) that are doing well that I purchased with reenlistment bonuses (2 X $16k, 1982/1986) and severance pay ($20k) that was offered to those with over 12 years of service but got out before 20 years of service.

 

[Nebor]

Gotta love government handouts! And military service gives out the biggest piece!

*shrug* I'm a big government, socially liberal guy. Out of all the people on the government dole, military members are putting in the most work and taking on the most risk in exchange for their "biggest piece."

 

[unokitty]

I think you are more interested in reverting back to the dark ages. You appear to lack any humanity.

Bowe Bergdahl to face desertion charges: Why the White House is embarrassed

According to allegations, Bergdahl abandoned his outpost in June 2009 to avoid "hazardous duty or important service," which are grounds for charges of desertion under the Uniform Military Code of Justice, or UCMJ, as NBC News reported. According to one senior official who spoke with NBC News, Bergdahl allegedly abandoned his post "in the middle of a combat zone, potentially putting the lives of his fellows soldiers at risk."

...While Bergdahl has not yet been charged, defense and military officials have said it is likely authorities will take into account the five years he spent in captivity. As such, he would most likely leave the Army with a "less than honorable discharge." If charged, he may also be denied as much as $300,000 in back pay and bonuses, and reduced in rank to at least Private First Class...

The news comes as an embarrassment to the White House, which as Hot Air reported, "cough[ed] up five big fish for one deserter."

The White House, which arranged for the prisoner swap in May, was criticized at the time for "negotiating with terrorists." Some Republican lawmakers, as well as others in Bergdahl's unit, objected to the trade on the grounds that Bergdahl had deserted.

The Government Accounting Office also issued a report last August which concluded that the administration did in fact violate the law...

You are welcome to believe the Obama Administration’s line that Bergdahl served with "distinction and honor." You are also welcome to think that he should get a few hundred thousand dollars for walking out on his platoon.

But this old dog soldier thinks that anyone that abandons their platoon needs to he held accountable.

The reality is that in an article 15 or in a court martial proceeding, Bergdahl would have the opportunity to present his side of the story.

What's wrong with that?

If he is found guilty, likely the Army won't do much more than cut him loose with a 'less than honorable' discharge.

Hold Bergdahl accountable for his actions?

Isn't that expected of every soldier?

Uno

 

[cabri]

Pure propaganda.

Radio intercepts apparently carry no weight with you.

 

[Moonbeam]

Radio intercepts apparently carry no weight with you.

Reports of radio intercepts apparently carry weight with you. Have you heard and verified them and are sure they weren't invented or doctored or any number of other things.

 

[werepossum]

Gotta love government handouts! And military service gives out the biggest piece!

It truly boggles my mind that you feel the military, which uniformly features the lowest pay, greatest hazard, greatest family disruption, and greatest loss of freedom of any possible job could ever be considered a handout.

Bowe Bergdahl to face desertion charges: Why the White House is embarrassed
You are welcome to believe the Obama Administration’s line that Bergdahl served with "distinction and honor." You are also welcome to think that he should get a few hundred thousand dollars for walking out on his platoon.

But this old dog soldier thinks that anyone that abandons their platoon needs to he held accountable.

The reality is that in an article 15 or in a court martial proceeding, Bergdahl would have the opportunity to present his side of the story.

What's wrong with that?

If he is found guilty, likely the Army won't do much more than cut him loose with a 'less than honorable' discharge.

Hold Bergdahl accountable for his actions?

Isn't that expected of every soldier?

Uno

Well said, and thank you for your service.

 

[rudeguy]

Reports of radio intercepts apparently carry weight with you. Have you heard and verified them and are sure they weren't invented or doctored or any number of other things.

Have you inspected and verified there weren't WMD's in Iraq? Are you sure the reports weren't invented or doctored or any number of other things?

 

[ivwshane]

*shrug* I'm a big government, socially liberal guy. Out of all the people on the government dole, military members are putting in the most work and taking on the most risk in exchange for their "biggest piece."

Hmm let's see, there are about 2.7 million people in the armed services, of those 1.4 are on active duty and about, exactly what percentage see any combat? Less than a million served at least one tour of duty in Afghanistan in a 13 year span with a peak troop level of about 200k and 100k in Afghanistan and Iraq respectively.

So no, they aren't putting in the most work or the most risk. However that's all besides the point and it wasn't meant as a knock on military people but more of a commentary of our current economic situation and an explanation why enlistment's might be up.