I just noticed something

[TemplarKormac]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

 

[TheOldSchool]

Like I said to you earlier; when he's released I'll start the most exciting thread ever about it

 

[blackhawk]

With respects to Bowe Bergdahl I will just point out if he had not left his post he would not have been left behind.

 

[tinydancer]

These men never got to come home to their families and grow old with them.

Staff Sergeant Clayton Bowen, 29, (left) and Private First Class Morris Walker, 23, (right) were killed in an IED explosion on August 18, 2009. They were looking for Bergdahl when they died


'Bowe Bergdahl deserted and Americans lost their lives searching for him' | Mail Online

 

[tinydancer]

He walked off. He left his guard post. Nobody knows if he defected or he's a traitor or he was kidnapped.

'What I do know is he was there to protect us and instead he decided to defer from America and go and do his own thing.

'I don't know why he decided to do that, but we spend so much of our resources and some of those resources were soldiers' lives.'


- Former Private First Class Jose Baggett


'Bowe Bergdahl deserted and Americans lost their lives searching for him' | Mail Online

 

[TheOldSchool]

 

[auditor0007]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

It's a funny thing to say one person is guilty of desertion while five others are war criminals when not a single one of them have had one single day in court to answer to any charges brought against them.

Just looking at the information available on Bergdahl, I see him more as being mentally ill than being a deserter. If the reports of what he said prior to leaving his post are true, why was he not sent for a psychological evaluation immediately? Klinger is only funny on MASH. When Klinger shows up in your unit, you've got a problem and it needs to be addressed immediately. This was a complete failure on the part or his commanding officers.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I now believe the POW-MIA want nothing to do with Bergdahl now. I have a sneaking suspicion that they don't support traitors.

 

[Freewill]

What we have here is just another case of Obama apparently doing a good thing and expecting all his flying monkeys to back him, which they obviously have done.

Yes, we don't leave one of ours behind. It is good he was released unharmed. The unfortunate part is because of those released others may die. So in effect we traded him for someone else's life. His alleged misconduct also apparently cost the life of his brothers in arms.

So 5 or so have died because of him already and it can only be assumed more will die because of the swap and the left wing flying monkeys have absolutely no problem with that body count.

As for Obama he got it wrong once again, our marine in Mexico is the one he should have got released.

 

[SmedlyButler]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

You talk like you've got enough facts to convict him of desertion and treason. I don't have near enough info to even come close to those judgements. Where'd you get those, other than the USMB rumor mill. And please remember men in war are subject to all sorts of torments and stress, their actions are not always rational. Do we blame the vets who come back with PTSD and do all sorts of crazy shit? Let's wait and get the whole story if we can. Anti-Obama people in these forums shouldn't let that influence their judgement of an American soldier held 5 years by the enemy.

Some of you anti-Obama types might take a cue from the Israelis. This gives you an idea of the value they put on their warriors. (I've posted this 3 times, I think it's worth it.)

On 18 October 2011 captured IDF tank gunner Gilad Shalit, captured by the Palestinian militant organization Hamas in 2006, was released in exchange for 1027 Palestinian prisoners held in Israel. The released prisoners were responsible for the deaths of 569 Israeli civilians.

 

[NYcarbineer]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

Why are you NOT ignoring the guy in Mexico? That's your double standard.

 

[tinydancer]

No man or woman should ever be left behind but he should not be regarded as a hero and that pathological liar Susan Rice was out there gushing about his honorable service on the Sunday talk shows.

She makes me want to bazooka barf every time she opens her lying mouth.

 

[TheOldSchool]

What we have here is just another case of Obama apparently doing a good thing and expecting all his flying monkeys to back him, which they obviously have done.

Yes, we don't leave one of ours behind. It is good he was released unharmed. The unfortunate part is because of those released others may die. So in effect we traded him for someone else's life. His alleged misconduct also apparently cost the life of his brothers in arms.

So 5 or so have died because of him already and it can only be assumed more will die because of the swap and the left wing flying monkeys have absolutely no problem with that body count.

As for Obama he got it wrong once again, our marine in Mexico is the one he should have got released.

When he gets released your propagandists will find a reason for you to hate Obama about it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

It's a funny thing to say one person is guilty of desertion while five others are war criminals when not a single one of them have had one single day in court to answer to any charges brought against them.

Just looking at the information available on Bergdahl, I see him more as being mentally ill than being a deserter. If the reports of what he said prior to leaving his post are true, why was he not sent for a psychological evaluation immediately? Klinger is only funny on MASH. When Klinger shows up in your unit, you've got a problem and it needs to be addressed immediately. This was a complete failure on the part or his commanding officers.

One is a traitor, the others are murderers. Am I to glean from this response that you are defending these terrorists? And Bergdahl?

He was seen walking away under his own power from his encampment. Normally, disillusionment is not attributable to a psychological disorder. Some would attribute it to having some sort of a conscience. Two of his platoon mates went on Megyn Kelly's show and bluntly said he deserted them. Col. David Hunt was on Hannity afterwards saying that he prepared himself (food, water, clothes and etc.) to defect.

Think of the sources what you may, but I will remind you that Col. David Hunt has 29 years of operational experience in the field. Also your assessment doesn't trump the experiences of those who were serving with Bergdahl at the time he deserted. Berghdahl will get his trial. Those terrorists don't get one under our Constitution, they aren't even American citizens.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You people are certain Bergdahl is guilty and certain the guy in Mexico is innocent.

The bliss of certainty. Is that similar to the bliss of ignorance?

 

[NYcarbineer]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

It's a funny thing to say one person is guilty of desertion while five others are war criminals when not a single one of them have had one single day in court to answer to any charges brought against them.

Just looking at the information available on Bergdahl, I see him more as being mentally ill than being a deserter. If the reports of what he said prior to leaving his post are true, why was he not sent for a psychological evaluation immediately? Klinger is only funny on MASH. When Klinger shows up in your unit, you've got a problem and it needs to be addressed immediately. This was a complete failure on the part or his commanding officers.

One is a traitor, the others are murderers. Am I to glean from this response that you are defending these terrorists? And Bergdahl?

He was seen walking away under his own power from his encampment. Normally, disillusionment is not attributable to a psychological disorder. Some would attribute it to having some sort of a conscience. Two of his platoon mates went on Megyn Kelly's show and bluntly said he deserted them. Col. David Hunt was on Hannity afterwards saying that he prepared himself (food, water, clothes and etc.) to defect.

Think of the sources what you may, but I will remind you that Col. David Hunt has 29 years of operational experience in the field. Also your assessment doesn't trump the experiences of those who were serving with Bergdahl at the time he deserted. Berghdahl will get his trial. Those terrorists don't get one under our Constitution, they aren't even American citizens.

The Nazis got trials.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

How about we let the military do their investigation before we decide what Bergdahl is or is not?

 

[TheOldSchool]

How about we let the military do their investigation before we decide what Bergdahl is or is not?

Nah. We can get another 10 - 12 threads out of this.

 

[tinydancer]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

You talk like you've got enough facts to convict him of desertion and treason. I don't have near enough info to even come close to those judgements. Where'd you get those, other than the USMB rumor mill. And please remember men in war are subject to all sorts of torments and stress, their actions are not always rational. Do we blame the vets who come back with PTSD and do all sorts of crazy shit? Let's wait and get the whole story if we can. Anti-Obama people in these forums shouldn't let that influence their judgement of an American soldier held 5 years by the enemy.

Some of you anti-Obama types might take a cue from the Israelis. This gives you an idea of the value they put on their warriors. (I've posted this 3 times, I think it's worth it.)

On 18 October 2011 captured IDF tank gunner Gilad Shalit, captured by the Palestinian militant organization Hamas in 2006, was released in exchange for 1027 Palestinian prisoners held in Israel. The released prisoners were responsible for the deaths of 569 Israeli civilians.

USMB rumor mill? Bite me.

His own battalion and former supervisor are the ones that are front and center against him. Even starting the petition at the WH.

The Facebook page 'Bowe Bergdahl is NOT a hero!' has 5,400 members and bears a picture of the six paratroopers who lost their lives while looking for their captured comrade.

A White House petition to punish Bergdahl for being absent without leave (AWOL) has nearly 2,000 online signatures.

These critics say that even after five years of Taliban captivity, Bergdahl gets to come home to his family - but six of his comrades never made it back alive.

'I was pissed off then and I am even more so now with everything going on,' Mr Vierkant said.


'Bowe Bergdahl deserted and Americans lost their lives searching for him' | Mail Online

 

[TemplarKormac]

With all of this controversy over Bowe Bergdahl swirling around, I've heard people saying that we shouldn't leave him behind. Well, no, I agree to a point. But when the man you're fighting for is guilty of desertion, of aiding and abetting the enemy; you cannot in good conscience release 5 dangerous war criminals for another criminal. Let's face it. Bergdahl is no hero. Not one iota. He abandoned his comrades, and in doing so got a number of them killed in a search mission on his behalf. He should be court martialed under Article 85 of the UCMJ for desertion.

But what I've also noticed here is that a certain few have accused Republicans of "wanting to leave a soldier behind." All while Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi sits in a Mexican jail being tortured and beaten. So, why is it in one instance that people wish to leave a soldier behind while another sits and waits in jail for his country to come to his aid? Why are liberals ignoring Tahmooressi? What I've noticed here is a double standard. Our president is willing to fight for a traitor, but not for a loyal soldier who fought for his country sitting in a jail in Mexico. I'm glad Bergdahl is back home, but why did the president negotiate for his release and not that of Tahmooressi? What the heck is going on here?

You talk like you've got enough facts to convict him of desertion and treason. I don't have near enough info to even come close to those judgements. Where'd you get those, other than the USMB rumor mill. And please remember men in war are subject to all sorts of torments and stress, their actions are not always rational. Do we blame the vets who come back with PTSD and do all sorts of crazy shit? Let's wait and get the whole story if we can. Anti-Obama people in these forums shouldn't let that influence their judgement of an American soldier held 5 years by the enemy.

Some of you anti-Obama types might take a cue from the Israelis. This gives you an idea of the value they put on their warriors. (I've posted this 3 times, I think it's worth it.)

On 18 October 2011 captured IDF tank gunner Gilad Shalit, captured by the Palestinian militant organization Hamas in 2006, was released in exchange for 1027 Palestinian prisoners held in Israel. The released prisoners were responsible for the deaths of 569 Israeli civilians.

I know of Gilad Shalit well. But he has zilch to do with this subject. He didn't desert his country in a time of war. Bergdahl did. You can't blame everything on PTSD, Smed. And I don't participate in rumor mills. I have a Colonel and two platoon mates who insist he deserted. Yeah, I never make assertions absent any refutatory evidence.

No, it's quite clear what Bergdahl is. A traitor. It is also strange his platoon mates were forced to sign non disclosure agreements in relation to Bergdahl's disappearance.