Army Clears Bowe Bergdahl of Misconduct. Really?

[HenryBHough]

Please, folks, let's not judge Bergdahl until the polls are complete, analyzed, and Our Kenyan President has announced what the verdict will be when a trial is conducted and completed. Even after His decision it would be polite to wait until the court or tribunal or whatever, mouths His verdict.

Civility here, please.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

TK has already convicted him because he saw stuff on telly.
There's no "if" in his mind.

Too much political agenda on this one. It will go away...........Not for Justice, but for Face Saving measures.

Exactly.
Unfortunately for Bergdahl, the moment Obama was perceived to have any involvement in his release he was doomed - irregardless of the facts.

Correct.

The OP and others on the partisan right aren't interested in the facts, and certainly not justice for Bergdahl; they're interested only in contriving a perceived political weapon to use against the president.

 

[daveman]

Sorry, the question is not what Bergdahl went through. Rather, it is a the question and consequences of his actions. It is at this point I find the testimony of his fellow soldiers in arms instead of those who demand legitimacy and respect because they spent a couple of years as low-level flunkies in the military.

I do not suffer low-level flunkies gladly.

What testimony? I'm not aware of any trial or any oath being taken by anyone regarding Bergdahl's actions PRIOR to Pvt Bergdahl leaving his post since they certainly couldn't testify to anything he did after he was gone.

I normally limit myself to things like ditzy and the like, but **** off! The asshole deserted his unit and almost doubtless soldiers died trying to find his sorry ass. I don't give a rat's ass what he did after that.

How did 6 die after Bowe Bergdahl's disappearance? - CNN.com

Some soldiers have gone so far as to say the six died while searching for Bergdahl. Others say he is indirectly to blame -- after Bergdahl vanished, essentially every operation became a mission to find their lost colleague in one way or another, they say.
"I can't really say I blame Bergdahl to the fullest extent," former Staff Sgt. Justin Gerleve, Bergdahl's squad leader, told CNN last week, "but if he wouldn't have deserted us, these soldiers very well could have been in a different place at a different time, rather than the place at the time of their death."

Interviews with soldiers familiar with the specific missions in which the six died suggest the charge is complicated -- but not without merit given how much the 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment became focused on "PR" -- personnel recovery -- after Bergdahl vanished from his guard post on June 30, 2009.

"The fact of the matter is, when those soldiers were killed, they would not have been where they were at if Bergdahl had not have left," said former Sgt. Evan Buetow, Bergdahl's former team leader. "Bergdahl leaving changed the mission."

Those charges were repeated by a noncommissioned officer who requested anonymity because he is still in the Army, one who described himself as a two-time voter for President Obama, lest anyone think his comments were political in any way.
"If Bergdahl hadn't left it's entirely plausible that they wouldn't have had those follow-on missions or been where they were," said the NCO, who served in the 501st.​

 

[daveman]

I didn't misread anything at all.

The new conservative right is fundamentally anti-American at its core.

Want some evidence?

Which political movement in this country routinely talks about loving the US Constitution but always talks about numerous amendments to change it?

Which political movement in this country routinely talks about secession?

Which political movement in this country routinely talks about revolution and/or civil war?

Which political party had a candidate on the national ballot who disparaged large segments of America and the citizenship of millions of Americans by claiming she was in the REAL America when she attended a rally of like-minded thinkers?

Which political movement in this country essentially has control of AM radio and basically uses that medium to undermine the gov't at every turn by fanning the flames of fear and mistrust? (In an earlier time, this would be referred to as sedition)

It's the modern-day conservative movement.

News flash: Not liking Obama is not the same as not liking America.

Obama is not the nation. You can love one and hate the other. Progressives do.

I didn't mention Obama.

Then you're full of shit. Conservatives love America. Conservatives oppose what progressives want to do to America. Your "fundamental transformation" has the USSR circa 1964 as its business model.

 

[1776]

Obama being the shitbag he is told the Army to sweep the scumbag under the carpet, plus he agrees with that piece of shit being against the war because he is too.

 

[daveman]

Too much political agenda on this one. It will go away...........Not for Justice, but for Face Saving measures.

Exactly.
Unfortunately for Bergdahl, the moment Obama was perceived to have any involvement in his release he was doomed - irregardless of the facts.

Correct.

The OP and others on the partisan right aren't interested in the facts, and certainly not justice for Bergdahl; they're interested only in contriving a perceived political weapon to use against the president.

TRANSLATION:

 

[Mustang]

I normally limit myself to things like ditzy and the like, but **** off! The asshole deserted his unit and almost doubtless soldiers died trying to find his sorry ass. I don't give a rat's ass what he did after that.

YOU don't KNOW what the **** you're talking about, pure and simple.

Soldiers die. Actually, they get killed. I thought everyone knew that. They go on missions. Those missions are dangerous. Chances are even if those missions weren't specifically put together to look for Pvt Bergdahl, they STILL looked for him just like they would look for ANY American who had disappeared 'in country.'

The soldiers were killed because they enlisted and they followed orders. Everyone knows it's going to happen. They just hope it won't happen to them.

And it doesn't surprise me one goddamn bit that you "don't give a rat's ass what he did after that" because I don't think most conservatives give a shit about Sgt Bergdahl one way or the other. He's just yet one more avenue with which to launch an attack on Obama. He's just a pawn in the conservative lovefest with hating Obama. As for me, I'm not motivated by defending Obama at all. I'm just glad that an American soldier that was a POW for five years is now home. Hopefully he's getting the care he needs, and he can salvage something of a life for himself in his remaining years as long as he doesn't have to associate with uberpatriotic supercitizens like yourself who think they're keeping America's shores safe by going to the beach on the weekend.

OK, you've left reason behind and become a complete prick. Bergdahl was and is a complete loser who never served his country or his fellow comrades. The truth is you wouldn't give a rat's ass about Bergdahl if it weren't for colossal **** up in letting five terrorists go for a bonafide deserter.

Bergdahl DID serve. He volunteered, trained, and went overseas into a war zone while you did God knows what. Hell, I'll bite. What DID you do? Tell everyone what your contribution to the war effort was.

As for the five so-called terrorist that we had so much evidence against that we couldn't even be bothered to put them on trial and then send them to prison, I don't give a shit about them. No doubt the pictures we've seen of them were 10 years old. They were in Gitmo for a decade and are probably a shadow of their former selves, but what difference does it make? I would rather have Sgt Bergdahl back home and them over there then the other way around. Besides, those five are going to go back and find what? That the new leadership is going to willingly step aside for them? LOL! Fat chance for that! Hell, they'll be lucky if they're not taken out some night and shot for one of two reasons, if not both, aside from the fact that the new guys in charge have no intention of stepping aside for them. One reason is because their former comrades will probably assume they betrayed them to one extent or another while they were in our custody. It wouldn't even surprise me if the US released some kind of Psy Ops info into the general population about intelligence information those five provided to the US, whether it's true or not, just so we can sew discord within their group. And the other reason is because life is cheap over there. Hell, they kill each other all the time. As for us, we leave no one behind. That includes Sgt Bergdahl whether you and the rest of you antiAmerican conservatives like it or not.

 

[idb]

YOU don't KNOW what the **** you're talking about, pure and simple.

Soldiers die. Actually, they get killed. I thought everyone knew that. They go on missions. Those missions are dangerous. Chances are even if those missions weren't specifically put together to look for Pvt Bergdahl, they STILL looked for him just like they would look for ANY American who had disappeared 'in country.'

The soldiers were killed because they enlisted and they followed orders. Everyone knows it's going to happen. They just hope it won't happen to them.

And it doesn't surprise me one goddamn bit that you "don't give a rat's ass what he did after that" because I don't think most conservatives give a shit about Sgt Bergdahl one way or the other. He's just yet one more avenue with which to launch an attack on Obama. He's just a pawn in the conservative lovefest with hating Obama. As for me, I'm not motivated by defending Obama at all. I'm just glad that an American soldier that was a POW for five years is now home. Hopefully he's getting the care he needs, and he can salvage something of a life for himself in his remaining years as long as he doesn't have to associate with uberpatriotic supercitizens like yourself who think they're keeping America's shores safe by going to the beach on the weekend.

OK, you've left reason behind and become a complete prick. Bergdahl was and is a complete loser who never served his country or his fellow comrades. The truth is you wouldn't give a rat's ass about Bergdahl if it weren't for colossal **** up in letting five terrorists go for a bonafide deserter.

Bergdahl DID serve. He volunteered, trained, and went overseas into a war zone while you did God knows what. Hell, I'll bite. What DID you do? Tell everyone what your contribution to the war effort was.

As for the five so-called terrorist that we had so much evidence against that we couldn't even be bothered to put them on trial and then in prison, I don't give a shit about them. No doubt the pictures we've seen of them were 10 years old. They were in Gitmo for a decade and are probably a shadow of their former selves, but what difference does it make? I would rather have Sgt Bergdahl back home and them over there then the other way around. Besides, those five are going to go back and find what? That they new leadership is going to willingly step aside for them? LOL! Fat chance for that! Hell, they'll be lucky if they're not taken out some night and shot for one of two reasons if not both, aside from the fact that the new guys in charge have no intention of stepping aside. One reason is because their former comrades will probably assume they betrayed them to one extent or another. It wouldn't even surprise me if the US released some kind of Psy Ops info into the general area about intelligence information those five provided to the US whether it's true or not just so we can sew discord within their group. And the other reason is because life is cheap over there. Hell, they kill each other all the time. As for us, we leave no one behind. That includes Sgt Bergdahl whether you and the rest of you antiAmerican conservatives like it or not.

Weren't the five Taliban blokes due to be released in a few months anyway?

 

[Mustang]

OK, you've left reason behind and become a complete prick. Bergdahl was and is a complete loser who never served his country or his fellow comrades. The truth is you wouldn't give a rat's ass about Bergdahl if it weren't for colossal **** up in letting five terrorists go for a bonafide deserter.

Bergdahl DID serve. He volunteered, trained, and went overseas into a war zone while you did God knows what. Hell, I'll bite. What DID you do? Tell everyone what your contribution to the war effort was.

As for the five so-called terrorist that we had so much evidence against that we couldn't even be bothered to put them on trial and then in prison, I don't give a shit about them. No doubt the pictures we've seen of them were 10 years old. They were in Gitmo for a decade and are probably a shadow of their former selves, but what difference does it make? I would rather have Sgt Bergdahl back home and them over there then the other way around. Besides, those five are going to go back and find what? That they new leadership is going to willingly step aside for them? LOL! Fat chance for that! Hell, they'll be lucky if they're not taken out some night and shot for one of two reasons if not both, aside from the fact that the new guys in charge have no intention of stepping aside. One reason is because their former comrades will probably assume they betrayed them to one extent or another. It wouldn't even surprise me if the US released some kind of Psy Ops info into the general area about intelligence information those five provided to the US whether it's true or not just so we can sew discord within their group. And the other reason is because life is cheap over there. Hell, they kill each other all the time. As for us, we leave no one behind. That includes Sgt Bergdahl whether you and the rest of you antiAmerican conservatives like it or not.

Weren't the five Taliban blokes due to be released in a few months anyway?

I don't know. I know that Bush released hundreds without getting a POW back to my knowledge, and that never seemed to cause even as much as a ripple of water to threaten a rubber ducky in a baby's bassinet. Obama releases five, and all of a sudden it's a tidal wave of hysteria comin' ashore to threaten the entire nation.

I don't wonder why.

 

[idb]

Bergdahl DID serve. He volunteered, trained, and went overseas into a war zone while you did God knows what. Hell, I'll bite. What DID you do? Tell everyone what your contribution to the war effort was.

As for the five so-called terrorist that we had so much evidence against that we couldn't even be bothered to put them on trial and then in prison, I don't give a shit about them. No doubt the pictures we've seen of them were 10 years old. They were in Gitmo for a decade and are probably a shadow of their former selves, but what difference does it make? I would rather have Sgt Bergdahl back home and them over there then the other way around. Besides, those five are going to go back and find what? That they new leadership is going to willingly step aside for them? LOL! Fat chance for that! Hell, they'll be lucky if they're not taken out some night and shot for one of two reasons if not both, aside from the fact that the new guys in charge have no intention of stepping aside. One reason is because their former comrades will probably assume they betrayed them to one extent or another. It wouldn't even surprise me if the US released some kind of Psy Ops info into the general area about intelligence information those five provided to the US whether it's true or not just so we can sew discord within their group. And the other reason is because life is cheap over there. Hell, they kill each other all the time. As for us, we leave no one behind. That includes Sgt Bergdahl whether you and the rest of you antiAmerican conservatives like it or not.

Weren't the five Taliban blokes due to be released in a few months anyway?

I don't know. I know that Bush released hundreds without getting a POW back to my knowledge, and that never seemed to cause even as much as a ripple of water to threaten a rubber ducky in a baby's bassinet. Obama releases five, and all of a sudden it's a tidal wave of hysteria comin' ashore to threaten the entire nation.

I don't wonder why.

Further, as I understand it, these guys have never been found to have been involved in activities against the US.

 

[idb]

This is an interesting article

Will the U.S. have to close Guantanamo once the Afghanistan War is over? | PolitiFact

Some public officials and commentators have suggested that getting Bergdahl back may have been a good idea if the United States were forced to close Guantanamo once the last American troops leave Afghanistan, now slated for 2016. If the Taliban detainees were eventually approaching release anyway, the argument goes, the United States might as well get something in exchange while it can -- in this case, Bergdahl’s freedom.

We thought we’d take a closer look at what international law says about the closure of Guantanamo once the war in Afghanistan is over, particularly the question of whether the prison camp "must be closed," as Rivera put it. However, because international law is subject to varying interpretations, we won’t put any of the claims on the Truth-O-Meter.

Indeed, each of the experts we contacted began by noting that this question delved into murky territory, on several levels.

 

[Mustang]

Weren't the five Taliban blokes due to be released in a few months anyway?

I don't know. I know that Bush released hundreds without getting a POW back to my knowledge, and that never seemed to cause even as much as a ripple of water to threaten a rubber ducky in a baby's bassinet. Obama releases five, and all of a sudden it's a tidal wave of hysteria comin' ashore to threaten the entire nation.

I don't wonder why.

Further, as I understand it, these guys have never been found to have been involved in activities against the US.

My knowledge is limited in this area, but I heard a report that they were members of the Taliban. From what we were told some 13 years ago, we weren't attacked by the Taliban; we were attacked by al Qaeda. It just so happened that al Qaeda had refuge in Afghanistan which was governed like some kind of 13th century fiefdom BY the Taliban who allowed al Qaeda to operate within their borders and then refused to turn them over to the US gov't when Bush demanded that they do so.

When push comes to shove, there's probably little doubt that those five are sadistic bastards who lived at the top of a violent human society where the strong completely dominated the weak by brutal force and murder if and when they felt it was necessary, but I've never heard anyone say they conducted attacks against US citizens prior to the start of the war. Personally, I would hope that the gov't of Afghanistan will hunt these guys down with intelligence from us once they go back there or to Pakistan. We could wash our hands of the problem completely with plausible deniability. Of course, conservatives never thought of that.

 

[idb]

I don't know. I know that Bush released hundreds without getting a POW back to my knowledge, and that never seemed to cause even as much as a ripple of water to threaten a rubber ducky in a baby's bassinet. Obama releases five, and all of a sudden it's a tidal wave of hysteria comin' ashore to threaten the entire nation.

I don't wonder why.

Further, as I understand it, these guys have never been found to have been involved in activities against the US.

My knowledge is limited in this area, but I heard a report that they were members of the Taliban. From what we were told some 13 years ago, we weren't attacked by the Taliban; we were attacked by al Qaeda. It just so happened that al Qaeda had refuge in Afghanistan which was governed like some kind of 13th century fiefdom BY the Taliban who allowed al Qaeda to operate within their borders and then refused to turn them over to the US gov't when Bush demanded that they do so.

When push comes to shove, there's probably little doubt that those five are sadistic bastards who lived at the top of a violent human society where the strong completely dominated the weak by brutal force and murder if and when they felt it was necessary, but I've never heard anyone say they conducted attacks against US citizens prior to the start of the war. Personally, I would hope that the gov't of Afghanistan will hunt these guys down with intelligence from us once they go back there or to Pakistan. We could wash our hands of the problem completely with plausible deniability. Of course, conservatives never thought of that.

I don't think they're even classified as terrorists.

 

[Clementine]

As the Army continues to investigate whether Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is guilty of deserting his unit

Shame on you for resorting to picking on overweight kids (and using pictures to do it) since you are apparently unable to express yourself any other way.

Desertion is a serious matter and I am glad they are investigating that. As far as his actions during captivity, they only had his word and the word of his captors to come to that amazingly quick conclusion. Funny, how they are so expedient when it's something that supports the president's actions and so slow when it comes to things (Benghazi) that would make the president look bad. If they had determined that he was complicit with what the terrorists were doing, that would be another sign that Obama is sympathetic towards the radicals who commit acts of terror. Didn't really think they'd allow that.

What does it feel like to have such blind trust in government? I have never experienced that and never will.

 

[J.E.D]

This is what Bowehammed needs.

Did you just advocate for the execution of a US Service-member before any proceedings have happened at all?

Really?

Are you really that stupid?

Wow.

Stupid, cowardly, and unAmerican

 

[Mustang]

News flash: Not liking Obama is not the same as not liking America.

Obama is not the nation. You can love one and hate the other. Progressives do.

I didn't mention Obama.

Then you're full of shit. Conservatives love America. Conservatives oppose what progressives want to do to America. Your "fundamental transformation" has the USSR circa 1964 as its business model.

BULLSHIT! Conservatives love their IDEA of what America SHOULD be...but ONLY as long as they're RUNNING the gov't. That's it! Anything else but that equation brings out conservative contempt for America and everyone in it but themselves. Then you guys have a perpetual temper tantrum that lasts from the last election you lost until the next one you hope to win. And during that period of time (4 years in the case of the presidential election), you guys lash out at everything and everyone that is not a mirror image of the way you perceive yourself. Unfortunately, the rest of us are forced to put up with that childishness like a bunch of mature adults trapped in an auditorium with a group of recalcitrant children.

Then you wonder why you have a hard time getting more people and/or other groups to vote for your candidates? I'll tell you why. Your candidates spend SO much time pandering to this childishness just to keep the base energized that they never have a chance to reach out to anyone else. It just plain and simple turns everyone else off to hear this nonsense 24/7 for four years.

 

[eagle1462010]

[MENTION=43857]eagle1462010[/MENTION]

I'm here to bring you hope that you might yet have the public execution you pray for TK.
The article says that he is cleared of misconduct while captured.
It doesn't say that he's cleared of desertion.

Be patient...they might even bring back the punishment of hanging, drawing and quartering for your amusement.

If he deserts his post on the battlefield he should be lined up on a wall and shot.

Why do you hate American tradition and history of rule of law and right to a trial?

AWOL and Desertion in the US Military

Spare me. He was on an outpost in hostile territory, and in that region men die without a trial all the time. It's called War you dumb ass.

He swore an oath, and in that oath it doesn't say, "I don't like it here, I'm going to quit and run away." And leave your brothers and dishonor yourself and the oath of enlistment.

Men died trying to get him back because he walked off his post. They didn't get a trial.

 

[daveman]

I didn't mention Obama.

Then you're full of shit. Conservatives love America. Conservatives oppose what progressives want to do to America. Your "fundamental transformation" has the USSR circa 1964 as its business model.

BULLSHIT! Conservatives love their IDEA of what America SHOULD be...but ONLY as long as they're RUNNING the gov't. That's it! Anything else but that equation brings out conservative contempt for America and everyone in it but themselves. Then you guys have a perpetual temper tantrum that lasts from the last election you lost until the next one you hope to win. And during that period of time (4 years in the case of the presidential election), you guys lash out at everything and everyone that is not a mirror image of the way you perceive yourself. Unfortunately, the rest of us are forced to put up with that childishness like a bunch of mature adults trapped in an auditorium with a group of recalcitrant children.

Then you wonder why you have a hard time getting more people and/or other groups to vote for your candidates? I'll tell you why. Your candidates spend SO much time pandering to this childishness just to keep the base energized that they never have a chance to reach out to anyone else. It just plain and simple turns everyone else off to hear this nonsense 24/7 for four years.

I'd believe that horseshit, too, if all I knew about conservatives I learned from progressives.

Meanwhile, do you really expect us to believe the left sits nice and quiet and polite when the GOP has the White House?

Because that would be insane. Are you insane?

 

[Mustang]

Then you're full of shit. Conservatives love America. Conservatives oppose what progressives want to do to America. Your "fundamental transformation" has the USSR circa 1964 as its business model.

BULLSHIT! Conservatives love their IDEA of what America SHOULD be...but ONLY as long as they're RUNNING the gov't. That's it! Anything else but that equation brings out conservative contempt for America and everyone in it but themselves. Then you guys have a perpetual temper tantrum that lasts from the last election you lost until the next one you hope to win. And during that period of time (4 years in the case of the presidential election), you guys lash out at everything and everyone that is not a mirror image of the way you perceive yourself. Unfortunately, the rest of us are forced to put up with that childishness like a bunch of mature adults trapped in an auditorium with a group of recalcitrant children.

Then you wonder why you have a hard time getting more people and/or other groups to vote for your candidates? I'll tell you why. Your candidates spend SO much time pandering to this childishness just to keep the base energized that they never have a chance to reach out to anyone else. It just plain and simple turns everyone else off to hear this nonsense 24/7 for four years.

I'd believe that horseshit, too, if all I knew about conservatives I learned from progressives.

Meanwhile, do you really expect us to believe the left sits nice and quiet and polite when the GOP has the White House?

Because that would be insane. Are you insane?

No, I'm just observant.

The left (as you refer to them) is a relatively loosely-configured amalgam of sometimes single issue groups (in some respects like the right). But they aren't as visible, or as vocal, OR as powerful in terms of their visibility. Point of fact, they don't have as much visibility because the popular belief on the right that there's a liberal media that conservatives have to contend with is mostly a conservative myth and a red herring used by the right to dismiss any story they don't like.

For one thing, AM radio is almost wholly controlled by the right, and it's little more than a propaganda arm of the Republican Party and the conservative movement. The rest of the media is largely controlled by large corporations which means that they tend to serve corporate interests, not liberal interests. What makes conservatives think that the media is liberal is the fact that the mainstream media, which is generally fact-based in its approach, simply cannot mirror the approach of conservative outlets that seem to think that Op-Ed stories are the same thing as journalism. It's not. Therefore, when a story is written that doesn't take a conservative slant, conservatives like to say that it's biased against them. Facts aren't biased just because you don't like them.

But to answer your question, no, I don't think the left "sits nice and quiet and polite when the GOP has the White House". I just don't think that the left has the reach and the media influence of the right despite the popular misconception that the right likes to perpetuate because they like to be perceived as the underdog that's somehow clawing their way up from underneath to get their message out. Unless you think that the show "Democracy Now" is more widespread and influential than I do. Even MSNBC is perpetually in third place in the cable news wars. And it's the same thing whether Democrats are in power, or Republican are.

 

[Camp]

[MENTION=43857]eagle1462010[/MENTION]

If he deserts his post on the battlefield he should be lined up on a wall and shot.

Why do you hate American tradition and history of rule of law and right to a trial?

AWOL and Desertion in the US Military

Spare me. He was on an outpost in hostile territory, and in that region men die without a trial all the time. It's called War you dumb ass.

He swore an oath, and in that oath it doesn't say, "I don't like it here, I'm going to quit and run away." And leave your brothers and dishonor yourself and the oath of enlistment.

Men died trying to get him back because he walked off his post. They didn't get a trial.

The POW/MIA Logo in your avatar appears out of place. Just doesn't fit with the comments.