The deaths of 8 soldiers attributed to POW Bergdahl is false

[Fern]

Taliban Prisoners would have to be released soon anyway

So we're supposed to take the word of some lefty blogger etc?

And this story is now moving in the direction of some earlier speculation that Obama used to this swap as cover for his real objective: Releasing these prisoners. And it makes even more sense after learning the enemy initially wanted only $1 million for Bergdahl's release. (Is $1M a lot? IDK, how much would we pay to capture even one terrorist as high ranking as these guys? How many millions in reward money do we offer for info leading to capture of such high level terrorists?).

I find it political theater of the absurd for Obama to think he can just declare the 'war' over. I think the other side has an equal vote, or veto, on that idea.

Fern

 

[Fern]

You all realize that Bush released 600 Gitmo terrorists detainees right? He released one who was responsible for a terroristic act after release as well. Look up my friends, look it up.

WTH is your point?

The left/Democrats/progressive went crazy over holding those terrorists at GITMO. Bush had to screen those held and release any we lacked substantial reason for holding.

The 5 Obama just released have all been ruled highly dangerous.

The fact that some of 600 turned out to be dangerous argues that these 5 shouldn't have been released.

Fern

 

[Oldgamer]

So we're supposed to take the word of some lefty blogger etc?

Oh you mean like the Daily Caller you keep linking who clearly is a right wing news source? Pot, Kettle, black much?

And this story is now moving in the direction of some earlier speculation that Obama used to this swap as cover for his real objective: Releasing these prisoners. And it makes even more sense after learning the enemy initially wanted only $1 million for Bergdahl's release. (Is $1M a lot? IDK, how much would we pay to capture even one terrorist as high ranking as these guys? How many millions in reward money do we offer for info leading to capture of such high level terrorists?).

I find it political theater of the absurd for Obama to think he can just declare the 'war' over. I think the other side has an equal vote, or veto, on that idea.

I find it political theatre when the GOP and people like you who follow them swallow every "made up scandal" that is put out there. You and the GOP think our own American Soldier wasn't worth 5 detainees? You are not an American sir, but a subversive.

Fern

I am so glad that there are more that see reason and see this crap for what it is, made up scandal propaganda. You and your GOP are going to lose big time in 2016 mark my words.

 

[Oldgamer]

WTH is your point?

The left/Democrats/progressive went crazy over holding those terrorists at GITMO. Bush had to screen those held and release any we lacked substantial reason for holding.

The 5 Obama just released have all been ruled highly dangerous.

The fact that some of 600 turned out to be dangerous argues that these 5 shouldn't have been released.

Fern

What are you just incapable of reading or comprehending that these 5 were going to be released anyway?? That just seems to go right over your head. The war is at an end, it is the normal process to start releasing detainees. This was the right time and chance to get one of our own back. We got something for the swap, we got NOTHING for the 600 that Bush released.

 

[Fern]

Oh you mean like the Daily Caller you keep linking who clearly is a right wing news source? Pot, Kettle, black much?

WTH are you talking about? I "keep linking" the Daily Caller? You're just making stuff up now.

What are you just incapable of reading or comprehending that these 5 were going to be released anyway?? That just seems to go right over your head. The war is at an end, it is the normal process to start releasing detainees.

WTF?

Some guy postulates that they would be released anyway and you take it for God's honest truth?

The war is not at an end; we will have troops there until 2016. You don't normally release POWs until the war IS freaking over. And there's no way at this time to know that the 'war' will be declared over in 2016. And again, the other side has a veto over that decision.

There's been little normal in this so far. If you want to apply the standard rules of war then I demand those terrorist be shot dead because they were captured out of uniform. That's the rule in the GC.

Fern

 

[Oldgamer]

WTH are you talking about? I "keep linking" the Daily Caller? You're just making stuff up now.



WTF?

Some guy postulates that they would be released anyway and you take it for God's honest truth?

The war is not at an end; we will have troops there until 2016. You don't normally release POWs until the war IS freaking over. And there's no way at this time to know that the 'war' will be declared over in 2016. And again, the other side has a veto over that decision.

There's been little normal in this so far. If you want to apply the standard rules of war then I demand those terrorist be shot dead because they were captured out of uniform. That's the rule in the GC.

Fern

No Fern your an idiot, and remain so. You are hopeless just like the current GOP, looking for a scandal anywhere you can.

There is no more point in me even debating with you, (if you can call this a debate), because you live in your bubble and nothing gets through.

/done

 

[ivwshane]

Yawn....

http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...bergdahl-swap-that-must-be-destroyed-20140605

 

[Moonbeam]

I must be unusual because I have no idea what the truth is about any of this.

I am sure the millions who completely understand the situation will have pity on you.

 

[WelshBloke]

I must be unusual because I have no idea what the truth is about any of this.

I agree with that but it seems to be distasteful in the extreme for the press to vilify this guy so badly.

He was serving in a war zone and then got taken as a POW for many years.

This smacks more of people spitting on returning Vietnam vets than anything else. People don't like a political decision so they attack the little guy.

 

[Zebo]

lol, the spin machine is in full wash cycle trying to control the damage to this criminal administration.

FACT - soldiers died looking for the deserter that obama unlawfully freed 5 of the most dangerous terrorist for. That is an act of treason and is punishable by impeachment.

Thre is no facts in any of your statement.

1. He was never convicted or even charged with desertion.
2. Taliban has never been classified as a terrorist org even as USA fought them 14 years. Obama released PoWs.
3. GL with that.

Even if what you say about Brgdahl deserting is found to be true we bring our troops home then find out. In US you are innocent until proven guilty. Then beyond that doctors will have to decide if he was of right mind or a victim of PTSD and should have never been in theater at all. He certainly didnt look all there to me in videos i saw. To me it's disgusting the ppl are jumping all over this damaged kid with no proof.

 

[feralkid]

lol, the spin machine is in full wash cycle trying to control the damage to this criminal administration.

FACT - soldiers died looking for the deserter that obama unlawfully freed 5 of the most dangerous terrorist for. That is an act of treason and is punishable by impeachment.

Are you a misinformed, ignorant twit every day, or just most days?

 

[spidey07]

Thre is no facts in any of your statement.

1. He was never convicted or even charged with desertion.
2. Taliban has never been classified as a terrorist org even as USA fought them 14 years. Obama released PoWs.
3. GL with that.

Even if what you say about Brgdahl deserting is found to be true we bring our troops home then find out. In US you are innocent until proven guilty. Then beyond that doctors will have to decide if he was of right mind or a victim of PTSD and should have never been in theater at all. He certainly didnt look all there to me in videos i saw. To me it's disgusting the ppl are jumping all over this damaged kid with no proof.

Why do you continue with your lies? No proof? Multiple accounts from his squad mates, eye witness accounts of him looking for taliban, radio reports, etc. Are you just not following this story at all or what?

Taliban is classified terrorist organization - why do you keep trying to spin your lies?

What I posted is hard fact and cannot be disputed, especially not by your lies.

 

[spacejamz]

In US you are innocent until proven guilty.

Tell George Zimmerman that....typical liberal hypocrisy again....

 

[thraashman]

Why do you continue with your lies? No proof? Multiple accounts from his squad mates, eye witness accounts of him looking for taliban, radio reports, etc. Are you just not following this story at all or what?

Taliban is classified terrorist organization - why do you keep trying to spin your lies?

What I posted is hard fact and cannot be disputed, especially not by your lies.

You are like seriously mentally ill I think.
Also, much like with everything else you ever post, you are wrong about the Taliban being classified as a terrorist organization. The only country that has classified the Taliban as terrorist is Russia. Do you ever get tired of being proven wrong in P&N? Because it happens like every time you post.

 

[Brovane]

Why do you continue with your lies? No proof? Multiple accounts from his squad mates, eye witness accounts of him looking for taliban, radio reports, etc. Are you just not following this story at all or what?

.

So are you saying he was already court-martialed and convicted of desertion? That is news to me.

 

[cabri]

So are you saying he was already court-martialed and convicted of desertion? That is news to me.

1) A deserter can not be court martialed until back in custody.

2) Given the political hay that Obama has made, he will have a court of inquiry and worst case get a discharge.

 

[Brovane]

1) A deserter can not be court martialed until back in custody.

2) Given the political hay that Obama has made, he will have a court of inquiry and worst case get a discharge.

So how can people call him a deserter if he has never been court martialed or convicted of the offense?

 

[thraashman]

So how can people call him a deserter if he has never been court martialed or convicted of the offense?

The same way people can claim a huge problem with voter fraud, or that Citizens United was a good ruling, or that passing laws to attack women's rights protects them. Lies, lots and lots of lies.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Now, this deserter is being accused of converting to Islam and declaring jihad against America.

 

[Brovane]

Now, this deserter is being accused of converting to Islam and declaring jihad against America.

Of course, because it has become political theater now.

 

[cabri]

So are you saying he was already court-martialed and convicted of desertion? That is news to me.

1) A deserter can not be court martialed until back in custody.

2) Given the political hay that Obama has made, he will have a court of inquiry and worst case get a discharge.

So how can people call him a deserter if he has never been court martialed or convicted of the offense?

He can still have deserted without having been court martialed for it.

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/justicelawlegislation/a/awoldesertion.htm

Desertion

The offense of desertion, under Article 85 carries a much greater punishment than the offense of AWOL, under Article 86. Many people believe that if one is absent without authority for 30 days or more, the offense changes from AWOL to desertion, but that's not quite true.
The primary difference between the two offenses is "intent to remain away permanently," or if the purpose of the absence is to shirk "important duty," (such as a combat deployment).
If one intends to return to "military control" someday, one is guilty of AWOL, not desertion, even if they were away for 50 years. Conversely, if a person was absent for just one minute, and then captured, he could be convicted of desertion, if the prosecution could prove that the member intended to remain away from the military permanently.
If the intent of the absence was to "shirk important duty," such as a combat deployment, then the "intent to remain away permanently" to support a charge of desertion is not necessary. However, Such services as drill, target practice, maneuvers, and practice marches are not ordinarily "important duty." "Important duty" may include such duty as hazardous duty, duty in a combat zone, certain ship deployments, etc. Whether a duty is hazardous or a service is important depends upon the circumstances of the particular case, and is a question of fact for the court-martial to decide.

 

[spidey07]

So how can people call him a deserter if he has never been court martialed or convicted of the offense?

Eyewitness accounts of his squadmates, radio communication interception, situation reports of his captivity.

That's how you can call him a deserter because it's a fact.

 

[thraashman]

Eyewitness accounts of his squadmates, radio communication interception, situation reports of his captivity.

That's how you can call him a deserter because it's a fact.

Just like it's a fact that we've designated the Taliban as a terrorist organization as you claimed earlier? You and facts don't seem to get along too well.

 

[fskimospy]

He can still have deserted without having been court martialed for it.

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/justicelawlegislation/a/awoldesertion.htm

You are reading that wrong. It is saying what the requirements are to be charged with an offense, not convicted.

 

[Brovane]

He can still have deserted without having been court martialed for it.

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/justicelawlegislation/a/awoldesertion.htm

To my knowledge the US military has never designated Bergdahl as a deserter. They could designate him as a deserter but they never did.