Bergdahl deal disgraceful

  • Follow Letters

Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is being treated as a hero, and I assume most people are glad for his release by the Taliban. This is purely a political move on the part of the Obama administration, and to those who give only a passing nod to things, it probably will make the administration look good and on top of things!

In the first instance, Bergdahl is anything but heroic. There are a lot of questions surrounding his “captivity,” and I sincerely hope Congress will take these questions on in due time. To begin, Bergdahl didn’t appear to be a good soldier or a good citizen, and disparaged the Army he served in and the country he served. He reportedly expressed sympathy for the Taliban!

Those such as myself who have spent considerable time in uniform will know that he is a deserter in every sense of the word. He quit his post in the presence of an armed enemy intent on taking the lives of his comrades in any way possible!

My belief is that he intentionally turned himself over to the Taliban, or at least went where he knew they would find him.

As for the Obama administration, it intentionally broke the law by negotiating with terrorists, and the terrorists won by obtaining the release of five of their most ruthless and capable commanders, who soon will be back in the killing fields doing their work!

By negotiating with terrorists, the Obama administration now has set a price on the head of every American, particularly those who wear the uniform!

If you are a terrorist, capture an American and negotiate his or her release, apparently you surely will get what you want!

This is certainly one way for President Obama to fulfill his promise to close down the Guantanamo facility! Put the inmates back in the field!

Comments (93) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
ymnbde
9802
Points
ymnbde 06/10/14 - 06:02 am
16
1
how do you make the VA scandal disappear?

replace it with another scandal
these guys are good...
the perfect mixture of arsonists
and firefighters

corgimom
32627
Points
corgimom 06/10/14 - 06:46 am
3
21
We negotiated with North

We negotiated with North Vietnam for the release of American POW's, remember?

I guess Robert Smock's idea is that if an American soldier is captured, we should abandon them and let them die.

How quickly people forget their American history.

corgimom
32627
Points
corgimom 06/10/14 - 06:48 am
2
17
But then they should make

But then they should make that clear to all the American military.

"We don't negotiate with terrorists, so if you're captured, you'll live in captivity forever and die a prisoner, because the American government will abandon you."

Oh yeah, that would go over well.

jack234
727
Points
jack234 06/10/14 - 07:08 am
3
19
If he is a traitor, bring him

If he is a traitor, bring him home and let him stand trial. What's the big deal? But, we don't leave a soldier behind because of conjecture. What if his fellow soldiers bullied him and he felt uncomfortable. There might be two sides to this story. What's the risk? There are 10,000 terrorists, 5 more won't make that much difference. Oh, and we shouldn't negotiate because of fear of more captured soldiers - give me a break - they have always tried to capture story. We don't let the enemy dictate our policy.

bubba2014
464
Points
bubba2014 06/10/14 - 07:17 am
16
2
"How quickly people forget
Unpublished

"How quickly people forget their American history."
"How quickly" folks come to the defense of the empty suit in the whitehouse. We do not trade from deserters.

Yeah, tell the all "American military" that if you desert you will be left.

Riverman1
84265
Points
Riverman1 06/10/14 - 07:26 am
15
2
Beyond Deserting

He went beyond deserting when he went over to the enemy. That's being a traitor by any logic. He should get life in prison.

YeCats
10815
Points
YeCats 06/10/14 - 07:34 am
15
1
Not a bad deal.

Five of theirs for one of theirs.

deestafford
27790
Points
deestafford 06/10/14 - 07:41 am
13
1
This was really the beginning of Obama's...

This was really the beginning of Obama's concentrated push to close Gitmo and nothing more.

As far as trading these high ranking Taliban leaders and they not being important--assume Gen Patton and Gen MacArthur had been captured in WWII. If the enemy gave them back don't you think they would return to the battlefield and continue destroying the enemy.

These five were perhaps the most dangerous prisoners in Gitmo.

We have hundreds and maybe thousands of civilians from engineers to school teachers teaching female students in Afghanistan. What will happen to them now that Obama has put a target on their backs and he has made it clear that we are cutting and running.

Obama and his sickopant supporters are saying you always have prisoner exchanges at the end of a war. That in a nutshell captures some of the ignorance and stupidity of this administration---WE DO NOT DECIDE WHEN THE WAR IS OVER! It is over when the enemy declares he is not at war with us. The Islamists are saying they are out to kill Americans and want to destroy the West.

We may not be at war with them in Obama's mind but they are at war with us. Why or why don't we believe the enemy?

RMSHEFF
16036
Points
RMSHEFF 06/10/14 - 07:47 am
18
2
Corgimon & Jack234

If we had captured Osama Bin Laden would you have supported trading him for Bergdahl ? Using your reasoning the answer would have to be YES.
It was a bad trade for America, Obama speciality !

deestafford
27790
Points
deestafford 06/10/14 - 07:50 am
14
2
Obama violated the National Defense Authorization Act of 2014...

Obama violate the National Defense Authorization Act of 2014 when he released those five. The act call for more than notification of Congress which he claims he did three years ago. The act was passed by voice vote in the House and by 84-14 in the Senate.

It requires:

1. A detailed statement of the basis for the transfer or release of detainees.

2. An explanation of why the transfer or release is in the nation security interest of the United States.

3. A description of actions taken to mitigate the risks of re-engagement by the personnel to be transferred or released.

4. A copy of any (review board) findings related to the individual(s).

5. A description of the evaluation of the conditions in the country to which the detainee(s) is being transferred.

So, you can see Obama has once again thumbed his nose at the laws of the country...what else is new?

Riverman1
84265
Points
Riverman1 06/10/14 - 07:53 am
14
2
Taliban Gave Final Instructions

I still wonder about those last instructions the Taliban man was giving Bergdahl as he sat in the truck. He's also not talking to his family. It's all kind of eerie. He needs to be watched carefully for decades and the best place to do that is in prison where he belongs.

Sophisticated
212
Points
Sophisticated 06/10/14 - 08:08 am
3
16
McCain claims " Taliban Dream

McCain claims " Taliban Dream Team" responsible for 9/11

This is the point where you realize that this particular case of BergGhazi Fever just might not be curable.

First of all, I wouldn't release these men," McCain told CNN host Candy Crowley. "Ever?" Crowley wondered. "Not these men," McCain insisted. " They were judged time after time during their confinement in Guantanamo, they were evaluated and judged as too great a risk to release. That was the judgement made." Crowley pointed out McCain had supported a prisoner exchange with the Taliban to save Bergdahl earlier this year. Republican McCain,however, insisted that the president had chosen the wrong prisoners, but refused to say exactly which detainees he would have selected. Second of all, I believe we should keep these people because they're hardcore jihadists who're responsible for 9/11, "McCain continued. " Of course, nobody wants to release people who're responsible for 9/11, and these people that are release that were Taliban governors worked hand - in - glove with al Qaeda." Uh, they're responsible for what? Oh, Lordy. Look, if you have read the 9/11 Commission Report - which I have- and if you have read the book " Against All Enemies" by our then Chief counter - terrorism Official under both Pres. Clinton and Pres. George W. Bush( the worst president ever) Richard Clarke - which I have- or if you have read " Imperial Hubris", the Profile of Osama Bin Laden by the former head of the CIA's " Bin Laden Group" Michael Shuever - which I have - you would have to know that members if the Taliban were not involving either in plotting or carrying out the 9/11 attack. No ask yourself in this day and time can you believe anything a Republican utter. I think not. They're transforming from the 'Party of No' to the 'Party of lies'

jaymai
389
Points
jaymai 06/10/14 - 08:13 am
3
15
Sometimes to win freedom from

Sometimes to win freedom from terrorists you have to give up much more than they deserve. My divorce settlement is written proof of that. In the end, it was worth it.

Bizkit
31644
Points
Bizkit 06/10/14 - 08:30 am
10
1
Soph but so is the Dem

Soph but so is the Dem party-bone fide liars. Speaking of Al qaeda they have the longest US prisoner held in captivity in Pakistan= Warren Weinstein.
The Taliban and the war in Afghanistan is the war Obama argued was the one we should be fighting. So you disagree with Obama?
I think they should have made some deal or just gone in and retrieved Bergdahl, but according to every Rep and Dem intelligence committee members all agreed we should never release the Gitmo five. The only person was unilaterally Obama-so if these guys kill Americans all the blood is on his hand-unilaterally-settled science-period.

deestafford
27790
Points
deestafford 06/10/14 - 08:30 am
10
1
We gained nothing from this deal....

We gained nothing from this deal but humiliation. Obama and his team seem to put desertion in the same category as skipping class.

I know of no soldier with whom I have ever served nor any of those in Bergdahl's platoon who if they were captured would be willing to be traded for these five.

I would not have traded Audie Murphy, America's most decorated WWII hero, for these five.

As much as I hate Gen Sherman and his actions I agree with what he did during the War For Southern Independence when he was raping Georgia. He was offered a prisoner swap of the yankee soldiers held in Andersonville for the Confederate prisoners held by the yankees. Sherman said it did not benefit him tactically to train soldiers who would return to battle against him for the sick and infirm at Andersonville. (Before the yankee sympathizers start hollering about how bad the conditions in Andersonville were, the conditions in the yankee prison in Elmira, NY were worst.)

Never turn over prisoners who will return to the field of battle with the capability to kill you. Thirty percent of those we have turned loose from Gitmo have returned to battle. How many civilian and military Americans will die as a result of these five being put back on the field of battle by Obama? Only time will tell.

deestafford
27790
Points
deestafford 06/10/14 - 08:38 am
13
1
I guess Obama will have a press conference any day now...

I guess Obama will have a press conference any day now and in response to a question about the Bergdahl situation will say, "I didn't know anything about it until I read about it in the press and saw it on TV."

jaymai
389
Points
jaymai 06/10/14 - 08:38 am
2
9
Fox News contributor Charles

Fox News contributor Charles Krauthammer said Wednesday on “Special Report with Bret Baier” he would have made the same "difficult decision" to exchange Taliban Guantanamo detainees for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, noting that Western nations often have to agree to lopsided deals when negotiating with "barbarians."
“It's a difficult decision and I would not attack those who would have done otherwise,” said Krauthammer.

Krauthammer said that by doing so, the Obama administration has to realize the country will be exposed to “dangerous militants,” but it’s a concession the West has been forced to make before.

He said one example is Israel, which released over 1,000 Palestinian prisoners to free one of their soldiers.

“The reason is that we put a value on individual human life the way that the barbarians on the other end of the table don’t,” he said. “And that’s why we always end up with unequal swaps.” http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/06/04/krauthammer-unequal-trades-li...

Regarding charges that Obama violated the law by not informing Congress:
On Special Report, Charles Krauthammer defended President Obama’s power to release the detainees without telling Congress. He said the spirit of the law was to prevent the president from emptying Guantanamo.

Krauthammer said, “The one area where the president holds the upper hand in those disputes is in matters of war and peace, he’s commander in chief. And I think a prisoner exchange is in the province of the presidency.” http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/06/03/krauthammer-defends-obamas-right-re...

RMSHEFF
16036
Points
RMSHEFF 06/10/14 - 08:39 am
11
1
Bizkit

Good point. Almost everyone that has seen the intel, including most democrats say this was a BAD deal for America and should not have been done. Obama and those that worship Obama are the only ones defending this deal.

Bizkit
31644
Points
Bizkit 06/10/14 - 08:44 am
10
1
Jaymal you can't quote "Faux

Jaymal you can't quote "Faux News" because all progressives dismiss it as biased. You can't have it both ways to demonize Fox and then use it to support some posit. Looks foolish. Like I could quote Chris Matthews from MSNBC who thought it was a bad deal. So Fox vs MSNBC=neutralized.

jaymai
389
Points
jaymai 06/10/14 - 09:02 am
2
9
RMSHEFF wrote: "Obama and

RMSHEFF wrote: "Obama and those that worship Obama are the only ones defending this deal."

An inaccurate statement. See my post regarding Fox News' Krauthammer. There are of course others, but I don't think anyone can claim that Krauthammer "worships" Obama.

(I know what's next: "Well, that's only one! I betcha can't name 10 more that defend this deal and don't worship Obama!" sigh)

Bizkit: I quoted a Fox News source because if I had quoted any other source, conservatives here would have dismissed it as being liberally biased. However your logic for dismissing (not addressing or challenging) Krauthammer's (a conservative's) position, simply because, I, a progressive, quoted it, is hilarious, but I must say, original.

Bizkit
31644
Points
Bizkit 06/10/14 - 09:24 am
9
1
Jaymal, You must be new-it

Jaymal, You must be new-it isn't original. It's not my logic it is progressive logic-they always dismiss any posit from Fox-call it Faux news. So by their logic whatever anyone says on Fox is wrong or misinformation-so they would have to dismiss Charles. I know it's crazy but that is what you get from progressives. I use CNN, Fox, MSNBC, or NPR as sources-just trying to lay out how posters play this game. I didn't dismiss Charles opinion no more than Chris's-it's their opinions. So you have a conservative who agrees and a progressive who disagrees. Their opinions are just that-their opinions. I don't see how either have a "special place" as being correct or incorrect. It is just as hilarious as Chris (shivers up my leg) Mathews opinion it was a bad deal. I find it really hilarious that you believe that quoting Charles is some kind of jab or that it would trump others who disagree. Charles doesn't sit in on the Intelligence committee and I would listen to all the Dems and Reps on that committee who said the five Gitmo detainees shouldn't have been released. This is a unilateral decision of Obama-not conferring to the experts like he does with man-made global warming. He intentionally ignored the thirty day notice and ignored Congress because he knew they wouldn't agree.

jaymai
389
Points
jaymai 06/10/14 - 09:27 am
2
11
Bizkit: "So you have a

Bizkit:
"So you have a conservative who agrees and a progressive who disagrees. Their opinions are just that-their opinions. I don't see how either have a "special place" as being correct or incorrect."

Thank you for that profound bit of wisdom.

Pond Life
17682
Points
Pond Life 06/10/14 - 09:32 am
9
4
Let us mark this day. The
Unpublished

Let us mark this day. The first time jaymai dismisses something BECAUSE it came from FOX news, we will be there to remind him/her.

Pond Life
17682
Points
Pond Life 06/10/14 - 09:33 am
10
5
How do you defend the BLATANT
Unpublished

How do you defend the BLATANT violation of the law, that Obama himself, signed into law? That is an impeachable offense.

Bizkit
31644
Points
Bizkit 06/10/14 - 09:34 am
8
1
Glad to help-I could see you

Glad to help-I could see you were in need. Always glad to throw a life preserver to a drowning victim.

carcraft
26021
Points
carcraft 06/10/14 - 09:51 am
9
3
I am glad we got Bergdahl

I am glad we got Bergdahl back. If it were son I would want him back. The real issue fir me is Obama violating the law, again, and wanting to take a victory lap for deal that stinks. Now we nagotiated with the Haqqani network. This group is tied to the Pakistani intelligence service and help hide Bin Lauden. Good job Obama, 5 more Americans were killed by Al Quada that is on the run!

Bizkit
31644
Points
Bizkit 06/10/14 - 10:01 am
7
1
I think North Korea sees this

I think North Korea sees this as a good sign they can "negotiate" and get what they want as more Americans are now being captured and held captive in that country. I guess now a lot of Americans in foreign countries will have a bulls eye painted on their foreheads as a likely captive so they can negotiate.

jaymai
389
Points
jaymai 06/10/14 - 10:49 am
2
9
"Let us mark this day. The

"Let us mark this day. The first time jaymai dismisses something BECAUSE it came from FOX news, we will be there to remind him/her."

Unlike some people here, I don't "dismiss" or "agree" with something or form my opinions simply based on the source of the information, or my like or dislike for the president. I challenge anyone to find one post where I dismissed something just because it was from a particular news source. If that were the case, I would "dismiss" everything I read in the ACES. I quoted Krauthammer because I believe he defended his position factually. I have a lot of respect for him as a person and as a commentator. I don't blindly "dismiss" anyone because of who they are or work for or what their political ideology is. But I do believe one should back their points up with facts. I'm trying to learn, to grow, not just find people with whom I have an affinity. I know I'm in the minority here. I'm not trying to pile up the "thumbs ups".
Back to the subject at hand. I spent 23 years in the army and I know the Uniform Code of Military Justice has some very severe penalties for desertion. But these penalties do not include leaving the deserter in the hands of the enemy. That's a fact. I don't care what some civil war general did. There are people right now who for years have been recovering the remains of soldiers who died in Southeast Asia, some were heroes, some were not. We don't know. We didn't care. But now we do. Why? Because the president's name is Obama.

Bizkit
31644
Points
Bizkit 06/10/14 - 11:01 am
8
1
Don't conflate issues-people

Don't conflate issues-people want Bergdahl back (whether he is a hero or deserter is yet to be determined-and sadly both Bergdahl's family and those soldiers who have come out protesting he was a deserter have been receiving death threats from nutcase conservatives and progressives) but they question the deal Obama made unilaterally without consent from Congress. Getting him back didn't have to be contingent on releasing high level Gitmo detainees that both Rep and Dem emphatically disagreed. Obama has an ideological agenda and goal to empty and close Gitmo-that is a fact with impunity that he has stated numerous times. Obama intentionally bypassed both Dems and Rep and Congress. Bush started a lot of this crap (abuse of czars, executive orders, etc.) and progressives were correct to point out how wrong it was, now Obama is taking it to an all new level and it appears really hypocritical-even Obama's own words against Bush for doing thing he is now doing seems really hypocritical. Obama is going solo and is mad as a Hater =I really believe he is mentally ill with lots of evidence to support such a posit.

Bizkit
31644
Points
Bizkit 06/10/14 - 11:04 am
10
0
I think a lot of people can

I think a lot of people can defend their facts. Like the really big deal is that when Obama returned the detainees-he broke federal law that prohibits returning any assets (in this case actual terrorist) to a terrorist organization. He dealt with a terrorist organization and returned assets-which the Obama administration has been prosecuting these cases so it seems really hypocritical that Obama feels he can now unilaterally ignore any law any time.

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs