Bowe Bergdahl: Considering the Evidence before us

[Jarhead]

'Looks' like it? He looked ******* nuts to me.

maybe he is. 5 years in captivity can do that to someone.

But 5 years ago? Maybe.....but if you were in the military you would be aware of how much concentration is put into observing changes in behavior of men and women on the front.

After he went AWOL the first time, he underwent a full psychiatric analysis. That is SoP. Not just for just his safety....but for he safety of his entire base. If he were nuts back then, they would have known it and he would have been sent to Germany.

And if he went AWOL back then don't you think the Military would know it and if they knew it, why didn't them put him as AWOL and stop promoting him every couple of years? I mean, if he was nuts, you say they would have known it...yet they didnt know enough to say this guy was AWOL?

Doesn't make sense to me....???

BTW, you can be absolutely nuts, but still not be violent...

and I don't know if this guy was nuts, or just a conscientious objector, or was harassed by his fellow soldiers because he was a Muslim or father was a Muslim against the war, and had a breakdown, or he was an outright traitor....with intentions to hurt us all....?

None of us will know until evidence is tested before a court of law and this man has his trial....right now most of the so called "evidence" is just hearsay, with only one side, (ret. sgt evan Buetow) spreading the story to every news outlet that was 'arranged' for him to speak to....

No matter what, the phrase "served with honor and distinction" is reserved for those that do. One who goes AWOL is known as one who did NOT serve with honor.

No matter what, he was never a POW. He was a hostage. He was no different than a businessman who ignores the US directive to stay OUT OF a military zone if not directly involved in US government or military operations.

Should we trade criminals for businessmen who ignore the mandate and are captured due to their own selfish decisions?

Or will you ALSO not answer that question that I have asked no less than 5 times.

 

[Meathead]

No.....you do not have a unique perspective on the matter. You are a tool of epic proportions to think for a moment that you do.

In truth, the one being judged here is Barack Obama. Nobody would give a rat's ass or try to defend Bergdahl otherwise.

That is ridiculous. The need to speak up for him is brought on by the right's being so anti-Obama that they will go after a POW in this manner.....before the facts are known.

Not one liberal is "defending" Bergdahl. We are all reserving judgement. Something everyone should do. But you can't. You MUST politicize everything that Obama touches. Dishonest losers....the lot of you.

Agreed. You assholes are not defending Berdahl, you're defending Obama. Truth is you don't give a rat's ass about Bergdahl.

 

[Peach]

your point?

must be nice to be able to be critical of anyone in uniform while hiding in your basement.....i dont know what happened with this young man ...i do know at one time he was willing to step up and defend his country....more action than you have taken....btw...and then something went terribly wrong....

i do not expect to hear the truth from the government...we never have why expect it now...


pat tillman

My point? Is that there is evidence pointing to Bergdahl being a traitor, to disgracing the uniform he wore. My father served, Bones. Desert Storm. Just about everyone on my side of the family from WWII on served, Dead or Alive. So forgive me, but I have a very unique perspective on the matter.

My grandfather served in WWI, father WWII, at age 17, then Korea, then Vietnam. My older sister, a disabled Vet, died in a Vet hospital March, 2014. I have older cousins that served from Vietnam to Desert Storm. Your perspective is not as unique as you might think. It will take time to assess Bergdahl's mental state, now & in 2009. The photos, and Taliban video, show evidence of abuse. The extremists forget, he tried to ESCAPE, before they brand him a traitor; disgusting.

 

[PratchettFan]

Newsflash, genius, Bergdahl left his people behind. Honestly he should have suffered the same fate.

I don't give a damn what he did. I don't give a damn what you think. Just because you lack a sense of honor does not mean that I must as well. "Well, he did it first!" is a child's argument.

it is not about him "doing it first"

It is abut him knowing the dangers if he were to leave the safety of his post....yet doing it anyway.

In essence, he disobeyed the US directive to all Americans.....do not entire the military region unless it is to be part of a US Government operation or military operation.

If I went there anyway to conduct business and I were held hostage....would you expect the US government to compromise national security for my release?

Yes.

 

[Care4all]

maybe he is. 5 years in captivity can do that to someone.

But 5 years ago? Maybe.....but if you were in the military you would be aware of how much concentration is put into observing changes in behavior of men and women on the front.

After he went AWOL the first time, he underwent a full psychiatric analysis. That is SoP. Not just for just his safety....but for he safety of his entire base. If he were nuts back then, they would have known it and he would have been sent to Germany.

And if he went AWOL back then don't you think the Military would know it and if they knew it, why didn't them put him as AWOL and stop promoting him every couple of years? I mean, if he was nuts, you say they would have known it...yet they didnt know enough to say this guy was AWOL?

Doesn't make sense to me....???

BTW, you can be absolutely nuts, but still not be violent...

and I don't know if this guy was nuts, or just a conscientious objector, or was harassed by his fellow soldiers because he was a Muslim or father was a Muslim against the war, and had a breakdown, or he was an outright traitor....with intentions to hurt us all....?

None of us will know until evidence is tested before a court of law and this man has his trial....right now most of the so called "evidence" is just hearsay, with only one side, (ret. sgt evan Buetow) spreading the story to every news outlet that was 'arranged' for him to speak to....

No matter what, the phrase "served with honor and distinction" is reserved for those that do. One who goes AWOL is known as one who did NOT serve with honor.

No matter what, he was never a POW. He was a hostage. He was no different than a businessman who ignores the US directive to stay OUT OF a military zone if not directly involved in US government or military operations.

Should we trade criminals for businessmen who ignore the mandate and are captured due to their own selfish decisions?

Or will you ALSO not answer that question that I have asked no less than 5 times.

Is a person AWOL if he has NOT been classified as AWOL? Or has he been classified as AWOL and I missed it?

It's just that you are saying he was NOT a pow but a hostage....and how does one come to that determination if Bergdahl had not been classified as AWOL YET? (Unless he has been labeled such by the Military?)

I mean, in my mind he was a hostage if he was declared by the Military as AWOL, but was a POW if he had NOT been classified as Awol...technically speaking....

And if this man's service time WAS honorable until he had his breakdown on warring, or until he decided to go awol if that is determined, then his service is considered honorable....at least until he is classified as dishonorable by the Military....

 

[LoneLaugher]

In truth, the one being judged here is Barack Obama. Nobody would give a rat's ass or try to defend Bergdahl otherwise.

That is ridiculous. The need to speak up for him is brought on by the right's being so anti-Obama that they will go after a POW in this manner.....before the facts are known.

Not one liberal is "defending" Bergdahl. We are all reserving judgement. Something everyone should do. But you can't. You MUST politicize everything that Obama touches. Dishonest losers....the lot of you.

At least one democrat who admits he is not here to think but to blindly defend the obama no matter what.

^^^

Be honest......and tell me what I said that admitted to that pile of shit?

One....I am not a Democrat.
Two...I admitted nothing.
Three...I don't blindly defend President Obama. I challenge you to prove otherwise.


Want to try? Got it in you?

 

[LoneLaugher]

In truth, the one being judged here is Barack Obama. Nobody would give a rat's ass or try to defend Bergdahl otherwise.

That is ridiculous. The need to speak up for him is brought on by the right's being so anti-Obama that they will go after a POW in this manner.....before the facts are known.

Not one liberal is "defending" Bergdahl. We are all reserving judgement. Something everyone should do. But you can't. You MUST politicize everything that Obama touches. Dishonest losers....the lot of you.

Last time. He was not a POW.

That is reserved for active military who are captured while deployed.

Once a soldier goes AWOL, he or she is no longer considered "deployed". He or she does not have the title NOR THE SUGBSEQUENT BENEFITS of being a POW.

He or she becomes a hostage.

He or she is no different than ANY AMERICAN who disobeyed a US government directive and enters a military region while not being part of a US government or US military operation.

If I went there tomorrow as a businessman and was taken hostage.....even though the US government gave me a directive not to......

Would you want 5 hard criminals freed for my release?

An AWOL soldier is deemed the same.

Know your facts before you criticize those you disagree with.

What was his rank when captured?
What is his rank today?

 

[hazlnut]

The left won't consider it as they hate our nation. They hate that there's a concept of a nation and we don't get with the taliban, and have butt sex.


This is as far as I can get with the far lefts thinking on this.

The Christian equivalent is of the Taliban is right here in America--Tea Party Christian Right.

All the far-right cares about is their hatred of the black president.

 

[Meathead]

The left won't consider it as they hate our nation. They hate that there's a concept of a nation and we don't get with the taliban, and have butt sex.


This is as far as I can get with the far lefts thinking on this.

The Christian equivalent is of the Taliban is right here in America--Tea Party Christian Right.

All the far-right cares about is their hatred of the black president.

Clearly a default position. Shows you what a clusterfuck this Bergdahl issue has become.

 

[Unkotare]

That is ridiculous. The need to speak up for him is brought on by the right's being so anti-Obama that they will go after a POW in this manner.....before the facts are known.

Not one liberal is "defending" Bergdahl. We are all reserving judgement. Something everyone should do. But you can't. You MUST politicize everything that Obama touches. Dishonest losers....the lot of you.

At least one democrat who admits he is not here to think but to blindly defend the obama no matter what.

^^^

And ironically....admits it while trying to deny it.

How pathetic is that?

Par for the course.

 

[Unkotare]

The left won't consider it as they hate our nation. They hate that there's a concept of a nation and we don't get with the taliban, and have butt sex.


This is as far as I can get with the far lefts thinking on this.

The Christian equivalent is of the Taliban is right here in America--Tea Party Christian Right.

All the far-right cares about is their hatred of the black president.

Your absurd hyperbole and outright lie has failed to change the subject. Go back for more DNC training.

 

[PratchettFan]

And if he went AWOL back then don't you think the Military would know it and if they knew it, why didn't them put him as AWOL and stop promoting him every couple of years? I mean, if he was nuts, you say they would have known it...yet they didnt know enough to say this guy was AWOL?

Doesn't make sense to me....???

BTW, you can be absolutely nuts, but still not be violent...

and I don't know if this guy was nuts, or just a conscientious objector, or was harassed by his fellow soldiers because he was a Muslim or father was a Muslim against the war, and had a breakdown, or he was an outright traitor....with intentions to hurt us all....?

None of us will know until evidence is tested before a court of law and this man has his trial....right now most of the so called "evidence" is just hearsay, with only one side, (ret. sgt evan Buetow) spreading the story to every news outlet that was 'arranged' for him to speak to....

No matter what, the phrase "served with honor and distinction" is reserved for those that do. One who goes AWOL is known as one who did NOT serve with honor.

No matter what, he was never a POW. He was a hostage. He was no different than a businessman who ignores the US directive to stay OUT OF a military zone if not directly involved in US government or military operations.

Should we trade criminals for businessmen who ignore the mandate and are captured due to their own selfish decisions?

Or will you ALSO not answer that question that I have asked no less than 5 times.

Is a person AWOL if he has NOT been classified as AWOL? Or has he been classified as AWOL and I missed it?

It's just that you are saying he was NOT a pow but a hostage....and how does one come to that determination if Bergdahl had not been classified as AWOL YET? (Unless he has been labeled such by the Military?)

I mean, in my mind he was a hostage if he was declared by the Military as AWOL, but was a POW if he had NOT been classified as Awol...technically speaking....

And if this man's service time WAS honorable until he had his breakdown on warring, or until he decided to go awol if that is determined, then his service is considered honorable....at least until he is classified as dishonorable by the Military....

If we wish to be technical on definitions, and apparently we do, then there have been no US POWs since Japan surrendered. Only the Congress can declare war and they have not done so since 1941. No war, no POWs.

 

[Rocko]

What if Bergdahl simply suffered from a mental breakdown?

Why is that very plausible possibility being all but totally ignored or dismissed?

He could have suffered a mental breakdown, but there's no evidence to suggest he did.

No evidence? MOST of the evidence suggests he did. jesus christ.

Enlighten me [MENTION=18701]NYcarbineer[/MENTION] what evidence suggest he had a mental breakdown?
Him leaving his platoon may be explained by him having a nerves breakdown, but I don't know of any evidence that he had one.

 

[NYcarbineer]

maybe he is. 5 years in captivity can do that to someone.

But 5 years ago? Maybe.....but if you were in the military you would be aware of how much concentration is put into observing changes in behavior of men and women on the front.

After he went AWOL the first time, he underwent a full psychiatric analysis. That is SoP. Not just for just his safety....but for he safety of his entire base. If he were nuts back then, they would have known it and he would have been sent to Germany.

And if he went AWOL back then don't you think the Military would know it and if they knew it, why didn't them put him as AWOL and stop promoting him every couple of years? I mean, if he was nuts, you say they would have known it...yet they didnt know enough to say this guy was AWOL?

Doesn't make sense to me....???

BTW, you can be absolutely nuts, but still not be violent...

and I don't know if this guy was nuts, or just a conscientious objector, or was harassed by his fellow soldiers because he was a Muslim or father was a Muslim against the war, and had a breakdown, or he was an outright traitor....with intentions to hurt us all....?

None of us will know until evidence is tested before a court of law and this man has his trial....right now most of the so called "evidence" is just hearsay, with only one side, (ret. sgt evan Buetow) spreading the story to every news outlet that was 'arranged' for him to speak to....

No matter what, the phrase "served with honor and distinction" is reserved for those that do. One who goes AWOL is known as one who did NOT serve with honor.

No matter what, he was never a POW. He was a hostage. He was no different than a businessman who ignores the US directive to stay OUT OF a military zone if not directly involved in US government or military operations.

Should we trade criminals for businessmen who ignore the mandate and are captured due to their own selfish decisions?

Or will you ALSO not answer that question that I have asked no less than 5 times.

Bush was AWOL from the Guard.

 

[MikeK]

your point?

must be nice to be able to be critical of anyone in uniform while hiding in your basement.....i dont know what happened with this young man ...i do know at one time he was willing to step up and defend his country....more action than you have taken....btw...and then something went terribly wrong....

i do not expect to hear the truth from the government...we never have why expect it now...


pat tillman

My most immediate consideration in Bergdahl's situation is the fact that he did join the Army, which, even if he did so because he couldn't find a decent job, impllies some level of patriotic motivation. But based on all I've been hearing and reading about this fellow strongly suggests he is intellectually curious, a thinker, and one who is capable of abstract reasoning. As such, and considering how completely unjustifiable our actions in the Middle East have been, it is entirely possible this man underwent an epiphany of some kind, some form of ptsd which caused him to just walk away from something he was no longer emotionally capable of dealing with.

I would give anything to be among those who get to de-brief Bowe Bergdahl. It will be fascinating.

 

[LoneLaugher]

That is ridiculous. The need to speak up for him is brought on by the right's being so anti-Obama that they will go after a POW in this manner.....before the facts are known.

Not one liberal is "defending" Bergdahl. We are all reserving judgement. Something everyone should do. But you can't. You MUST politicize everything that Obama touches. Dishonest losers....the lot of you.

Last time. He was not a POW.

That is reserved for active military who are captured while deployed.

Once a soldier goes AWOL, he or she is no longer considered "deployed". He or she does not have the title NOR THE SUGBSEQUENT BENEFITS of being a POW.

He or she becomes a hostage.

He or she is no different than ANY AMERICAN who disobeyed a US government directive and enters a military region while not being part of a US government or US military operation.

If I went there tomorrow as a businessman and was taken hostage.....even though the US government gave me a directive not to......

Would you want 5 hard criminals freed for my release?

An AWOL soldier is deemed the same.

Know your facts before you criticize those you disagree with.

What was his rank when captured?
What is his rank today?

Hello...... [MENTION=22181]Jarhead[/MENTION]

Helloooooooooo!

 

[Care4all]

maybe he is. 5 years in captivity can do that to someone.

But 5 years ago? Maybe.....but if you were in the military you would be aware of how much concentration is put into observing changes in behavior of men and women on the front.

After he went AWOL the first time, he underwent a full psychiatric analysis. That is SoP. Not just for just his safety....but for he safety of his entire base. If he were nuts back then, they would have known it and he would have been sent to Germany.

And if he went AWOL back then don't you think the Military would know it and if they knew it, why didn't them put him as AWOL and stop promoting him every couple of years? I mean, if he was nuts, you say they would have known it...yet they didnt know enough to say this guy was AWOL?

Doesn't make sense to me....???

BTW, you can be absolutely nuts, but still not be violent...

and I don't know if this guy was nuts, or just a conscientious objector, or was harassed by his fellow soldiers because he was a Muslim or father was a Muslim against the war, and had a breakdown, or he was an outright traitor....with intentions to hurt us all....?

None of us will know until evidence is tested before a court of law and this man has his trial....right now most of the so called "evidence" is just hearsay, with only one side, (ret. sgt evan Buetow) spreading the story to every news outlet that was 'arranged' for him to speak to....

No matter what, the phrase "served with honor and distinction" is reserved for those that do. One who goes AWOL is known as one who did NOT serve with honor.

No matter what, he was never a POW. He was a hostage. He was no different than a businessman who ignores the US directive to stay OUT OF a military zone if not directly involved in US government or military operations.

Should we trade criminals for businessmen who ignore the mandate and are captured due to their own selfish decisions?

Or will you ALSO not answer that question that I have asked no less than 5 times.

you are WRONG on him not being a POW though

prisoner of war





noun a person who is captured and held by an enemy during war, especially a member of the armed forces. Abbreviation: POW

HE WAS a POW. period.

To be a ''hostage'' if held captive, is when those holding the hostage are not at war with us....

 

[TemplarKormac]

He was not a POW, not even the Pentagon classified him as one.

— After disappearing in eastern Afghanistan in June 2009, Bergdahl was listed by the Pentagon on July 1, 2009, as “duty status whereabouts unknown.” Two days later his status was changed to “missing/captured,” and it did not change again prior to his release.

Bergdahl Never Listed By Pentagon As Prisoner Of War « CBS DC

 

[The T]

He was not a POW, not even the Pentagon classified him as one.

— After disappearing in eastern Afghanistan in June 2009, Bergdahl was listed by the Pentagon on July 1, 2009, as “duty status whereabouts unknown.” Two days later his status was changed to “missing/captured,” and it did not change again prior to his release.

Bergdahl Never Listed By Pentagon As Prisoner Of War « CBS DC

Whoopsies!

 

[Pete7469]

I am going to post this on all the Bergdal threads. It needs to be read.

I was there in AFG at Kandahar AFB in June of 2009. The whole theater was abuzz about the "missing soldier", and indeed there was a lot of sudden changes in operation tempo.

As rumors go, the stories varied widely.

The story I heard most consistently was that he was "misled" off post. "Tricked" by some local nationals to sneak away in order to score some alcohol.

That was pretty much all I knew up until the moonbat messiah sold us out and gave up 5 dangerous sociopaths in exchange for this dipshit. The stories that have come out from the people in the bunkers with this dipshit paint an even worse picture, but the most glaringly consistent aspect is that the dipshit voluntarily left a secure area to do something he shouldn't have been doing.

Turns out it was another "introverted" bed wetter. YES, ANOTHER GODDAMNED LIBERAL with no friends. Too ******* arrogant of course to consider some introspection, he blamed the people around him for his social failure.

Now as far as the bed wetters are allowed to "think", the dipshit is somehow a hero. The moonbat messiah made a great decision on by putting a price on the lives of US military personnel.

That's because he saved one of "their own", another sniveling, spoiled, self absorbed anti-American douchebag who should have been aborted.