Washington Post: Bowe Bergdahl Faces Charges of Desertion

[JSt0rm]

Then why didn't he invite some guys who didn't abandon their post?

He does that too. Lots of medals and things are given out on the white house lawn. Its all pageantry to condition us to feel good about our warlike nature.

 

[rudeguy]

Im not trying to change your thread. In the free flow of conversation I asked a poster a direct question. He doesnt have to answer it and this little exchange has done more to derail the thread then my initial question.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2426587

 

[Jhhnn]

Then why didn't he invite some guys who didn't abandon their post?

So lame. It's because they had been held prisoner for 5 years. Duh.

 

[Jhhnn]

Come on man...at least try to educate yourself before opening your mouth.

http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2...gdahls-platoon-undercut-his-emerging-defense/

He wrote a goodbye email to his mom and dad
He left his weapon and gear behind

That's not evidence. That's speculation based on testimony by people with axes to grind.

Stuff like this is a demonstration of why Righties don't think straight & are easily led to false conclusions. It's called motivated reasoning. Simulated rationality, to be more precise.

 

[cabri]

That's not evidence. That's speculation based on testimony by people with axes to grind.

Stuff like this is a demonstration of why Righties don't think straight & are easily led to false conclusions. It's called motivated reasoning. Simulated rationality, to be more precise.

It is evidence; it does exist.



He did write the letter.
He did mail stuff back home.
He knew that the unit was rotating back and he could get there faster by vehicle instead of "on Foot"
He knew he could file complaints about the system using facilities that existed at the base.
He did leave all his equipment behind.

The above are facts and/or physical evidence.

How it is interpreted is a different matter.
For the naive or with blinders; it does not matter - his self serving statements

 

[touchstone]

I enjoy your rhetoric and BS bravado.:hmm:

this is a kid that knew what he was doing and now is making up lies to CYA.
He knowingly put people in danger and you want to forgive him.:thumbsdown:

Hm, well my point was to convey what i think you deserve for excusing real criminals, pederasts and murderers on a mass scale, while targeting young service members who f up in another country and spend years imprisoned by the enemy. You can't even imagine the sh*t that kids been through and you're foaming at the mouth for a lynching.

 

[cabri]

Hm, well my point was to convey what i think you deserve for excusing real criminals, pederasts and murderers on a mass scale, while targeting young service members who f up in another country and spend years imprisoned by the enemy. You can't even imagine the sh*t that kids been through and you're foaming at the mouth for a lynching.

That kid/grown adult deliberately chose to execute his actions.

And you want to feel sorry for his choices.

He knew who he was trying to link up with and what they were capable of.

He had no value to them.

 

[Jhhnn]

That kid/grown adult deliberately chose to execute his actions.

And you want to feel sorry for his choices.

He's paid dearly for that.

He knew who he was trying to link up with and what they were capable of.

That's an enormous leap of Faith. It's merely what you want to believe.

He had no value to them.

If that were true they'd have killed him.

 

[rudeguy]

He's paid dearly for that.



That's an enormous leap of Faith. It's merely what you want to believe.



If that were true they'd have killed him.

should he be given his backpay?

 

[JSt0rm]

should he be given his backpay?

That would depend on the results of his court martial.

 

[rudeguy]

That would depend on the results of his court martial.

You condone denying an innocent man pay he earned while a POW?

Interesting.

 

[HomerJS]

Find it odd people wanting to excoriate Bergdahl before his trial yet give Gen. Petraeus a pass.

 

[rudeguy]

Find it odd people wanting to excoriate Bergdahl before his trial yet give Gen. Petraeus a pass.

Your logic is on par with your usual idiocy.

 

[JSt0rm]

You condone denying an innocent man pay he earned while a POW?

Interesting.

You guys love to fight all day long... My purpose in life is not to wake up and go write stuff like the above in p&n all day. I prefer...

 

[Jhhnn]

should he be given his backpay?

You condone denying an innocent man pay he earned while a POW?

Interesting.

Just playing Gotcha, huh? And not very well, either.

If Bergdahl is convicted, he won't be innocent.

Therefore, the Army may invoke penalties. Doesn't look like they intend to fuck him any harder than he has been, for the most part.

I have a feeling that the money is way down on the list of what he wants from this. He'd likely be very happy to just walk away with any sort of discharge.

 

[rudeguy]

Just playing Gotcha, huh? And not very well, either.

If Bergdahl is convicted, he won't be innocent.

Therefore, the Army may invoke penalties. Doesn't look like they intend to fuck him any harder than he has been, for the most part.

I have a feeling that the money is way down on the list of what he wants from this. He'd likely be very happy to just walk away with any sort of discharge.

Weren't you the one who would only believe proven facts? Now conjecture is ok?

 

[dphantom]

should he be given his backpay?

yes but in his courts martial, one of the penalties besides life in prison with no parole would be forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

 

[rudeguy]

yes but in his courts martial, one of the penalties besides life in prison with no parole would be forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

are you familiar with how this usually works? I'm asking because I have no idea:

Would a "POW" normally receive backpay immediately or does that have to go through some type of approval process?

 

[cabri]

are you familiar with how this usually works? I'm asking because I have no idea:

Would a "POW" normally receive backpay immediately or does that have to go through some type of approval process?

I would expect that the backpay has to be approved - paperwork completed.

Also, given the circumstances (from the beginning of the incident) there would have been flags on his records
The "promotions" were automatic based on time in grade.

 

[rudeguy]

I would expect that the backpay has to be approved - paperwork completed.

Also, given the circumstances (from the beginning of the incident) there would have been flags on his records
The "promotions" were automatic based on time in grade.

OK that makes sense. Maybe that's what had me thinking the backpay would be automatic.

 

[Angry Irishman]

My opinion....and it's not an expert opinion by any means. I have sat in a courts marshal for similar charges and have witnessed the outcome. My guess is he won't get off with nothing but his sentence will be light.

This situation/case is incredibly politically charged. It has been since it was personally arranged by the POTUS for arguably political reasons. This will sway the outcome to some degree although his jury will be soldiers who likely have precharged notions of his guilt. Human nature....

He will get credit/leniency for 5 years of alleged torture, he will not serve a life term in prison, he will get a light smack with no back pay and dishonorably discharged.

That's my guess....That said, I'm not betting the family jewels on this outcome.

Also, my opinion, he's a nut job who should have never entered into any armed service. What he did is a horrible act, something that would be better understood if you've served in a combat environment. Yea, I know it's all heresay but at this point it's pretty obvious he didn't serve with honor and distinction. Even his lawyer is playing the AWOL vs. Deserter card now in an attempt to reduce punishment so he's certainly not going for the not guilty play.

 

[Jhhnn]

Weren't you the one who would only believe proven facts? Now conjecture is ok?

I offer conjecture as conjecture- "I have a feeling" & "he likely". Those are obviously not intended as assertions of fact.

It's not like saying "He knew who he was trying to link up with and what they were capable of." That's conjecture presented as fact, an entirely different thing.

 

[rudeguy]

I offer conjecture as conjecture- "I have a feeling" & "he likely". Those are obviously not intended as assertions of fact.

It's not like saying "He knew who he was trying to link up with and what they were capable of." That's conjecture presented as fact, an entirely different thing.

Ok that made me laugh :thumbsup:

 

[ivwshane]

Ok that made me laugh :thumbsup:

Why because it's true or because you laugh at things you don't understand?

 

[rudeguy]

Why because it's true or because you laugh at things you don't understand?

Because it made me think of him naked.