This was a publicity/PR stunt by the administration to get the publics attention away from all of the Obama scandals. Guess what?? It worked. Now we have a different scandal. The President illegally went behind the backs of congress to trade 5 of the most dangerous terrorists in the world for a kid who deserted. That's not including the 6 men in our military who were killed looking for this traitor. This kid will probably end up in Levinworth for a long time once he is court-martialed. So much for "We don't negotiate with terrorists huh? This move has put a big target on the back of every American that travels internationally. I'm a Desert Storm Veteran and am thoroughly disgusted with the decisions being made by the current administration!
Today's Poll: Should the U.S. have exchanged Taliban prisoners for soldier?
where you been, solyndra, mf global, govermentmotors, another few all fraudulant tax-rip offs obama style . another few doozies, selling guns in benghazi, got men got killed.. its gonna come out. . nsa scandal. vetrans scandal, irs scandal, "the obama way" scandal all the way .. whos investigating the investigators, eric holder?
A traitor? Did I miss something? Has Bergdahl already faced a court-martial? Has he been formally tried... or even charged with a crime (outside of the press, that is)?
We don't know, for a fact, what happened yet. We don't know that Bergdahl is a traitor, or any such thing. What ever happened to the "rule of law" here in the U.S.? Are people now to be charged as guilty, simply because popular opinion tells us that's the case (popular opinion led, primarily, by a handful of media reports and Fox "News" frothing)?
As for the prisoner swap, this is not, in fact, the first time this has been done, and it won't be the last time. As far as I'm concerned, Guantanamo should have been closed down *years* ago. There, again, we are holding prisoners without formal charge and without trial. As an American who believes in the rule of law, I've got a big problem with that fact -- and both political parties are guilty, in this regard. First of all, although I, personally, loathe the Taliban (a group of *our* making, by the way), The Taliban and Al Qaeda are not necessarily one and the same. You say that these guys are "the most dangerous terrorists in the world." How do you know? Again, no charges... no trial. Why do so many of the "don't trust the government or the media" types fall in line, when it comes to Gitmo?
If, in fact, these *are* the "most dangerous terrorists in the world" they should have been formally charged and executed -- or locked safely away in one of our top security prisons. We've done that with many known dangerous terrorists (Tim McVeigh, for instance... or Omar Abdel Rahman). If the prisoners at Gitmo are/were truly a danger, had we followed the "rule of law" by charging them with a crime and then bringing them to trial -- a guiding principle that has served the U.S. quite well since its beginning -- they wouldn't even have been available for such an exchange, had they been found guilty of said crimes.
As for me, I'm going to wait until all of the facts come out before I make a judgement on the Bergdahl matter.
"As for me, I'm going to wait until all of the facts come out before I make a judgement on the Bergdahl matter."
Wait for facts? Rule of law? Why waste time being so rational, Emma?
Everyone. Hysteria now!
Neither of the first two posts called for the abandonment of "rule of law". In fact, Sam specifically included court martial which requires a trial (at the very least, an Article 32 investigation). Every American soldier should be brought home, whether to a heroes welcome or due process.
"Everyone. Hysteria now.". Well put, Scott.
Years ago, right after he came up missing, Army Times talked about how it was reported that he just walked off and out of his compound.
No matter if he was going AWOL or deserting, if found guilty of having done either, he should receive a Dishonorable discharge so that he may not receive any VA benefits.
And if found guilty, he should do military prison time since men died trying to find him.
It is difficult to parse all the absolutes in situations pertaining to the War on Terror. These 3 clips from The West Wing are pretty thought provoking. You have to watch them in order.
"What ever happened to the "rule of law" here in the U.S.?"
When you join the Armed Services, you relinquish the rights you enjoyed as a civilian. You are now subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice which operates very differently. I'm not saying that he's is not entitled to due process - he is.
Have you ignored all the reports from his fellow soldiers that he left the base voluntarily shortly after denouncing the United States and stating that he is ashamed to be an American? Have you forgotten that at LEAST 12 US forces died while trying to "rescue" him? Don't you find it more than coincidental that Taliban rocket attacks on our troops became MUCH more accurate after he left?
What about his father's anti American tweets and his quoting the Koran at the White House?
As far as the prisoner exchange, even Diane Feinstein is saying that obama broke the law by not consulting with congress prior to it happening.
I don't know why the word hysteria is being used. Because people are discussing the various aspect of this peculiar turn of events? If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, is it hysteria to consider the possibility that it might be a duck?
Guess what Emma? I agree 100% with everything you wrote. :>)
If he is guilty of what you say, Bob then it'll come to light and he'll have to answer for that. As for the ones released in exchange, we were holding them without charge, that's always been wrong and is not made right by who they are. Plain and simple. We should bring all of our service people home from Afghanistan, right damn now. I believe very little of what the press reports anymore. I don't trust the administration or the military either. We may never learn the truth here. Lots of folks jumped up and down calling Snowden a traitor and Manning too. I say Thanks to both. They didn't cause people to be killed, the administration and the military did that.
Dave, I'll agree to this extent: The detainees at Gitmo should have been formally charged and tried in a military court.
Regardless, to release them to rejoin the terrorism effort against ant non-Muslims was a HUGE mistake, and unprecedented.
I've no doubt that Bergdahl will face a Courts Martial eventually. It amazes me though that obama is not trying to extract the hole he dug for himself - he's just digging it deeper with all the "volunteer hero" comments regardless of the mountains of evidence to the contrary.
Did you ever think you would hear Feinstein denounce a move that obama made?!?!?!
Transcript of Jay Carney on June 21, 2013:
Q Jay, going to back to Afghanistan, the Taliban has offered to release Bowe Bergdahl in exchange for five members of the Taliban who are currently being held at Guantanamo Bay. Is this something that the administration is considering? Is this something that the President would agree to?
MR. CARNEY: What I can tell you is that the main dialogue that we support is the dialogue between Afghans -- between the Taliban and the Afghan government. However, there are some issues that we would like to discuss with the Taliban directly, and this includes the safe return of Sergeant Bergdahl, who has been gone for far too long........
...As we have long said, however, we would not make any decisions about transfer of any detainees without consulting with Congress and without doing so in accordance with U.S. law.
Q So you haven’t ruled it out?
MR. CARNEY: I’m simply saying that -- first of all, you have to separate the two issues. We are focused on the return -- the safe and immediate return of Sergeant Bergdahl, and we continue to use the tools at our disposal to help bring that about.
We also expect the Taliban to raise the issue of their detainees in discussions that we have with them if those discussions take place. And at this time we’ve made no decisions about the transfer of detainees. And in accordance with law, we would be consulting with Congress should we make any decisions about that. So we remain committed to the closure of Guantanamo Bay, as you know. But separate from that on these specific issues about individual detainees, that would be a process that is done in accordance with law.
The outrage from Congress over Obama circumventing the Constitution is total hypocrisy. Yes, it looks as though he did. They also do it all the time. 2 wrongs don't make a right and it just makes me feel ill they way the whole den of vipers operates. I love the city of Washington, lived there for 4 years and lived 2 hours away for another 10. Much to see and do, but as for the center of our government - blech!
everybody calm down..... rule of law ? rule of law is a thing of the past.. the president of the united states has the legal authority to kill who ever he feels is an enemy combatant. doesn't matter if you are an American or not. doesn't matter where in the world you are.
so if this birddog guy is what his former comrades say he is, then the president can declare him an enemy combatant, deploy one of his drones and kill him. see? no rule of law.....
Quote I read the other day "Obama has become the President that Nixon dreamed of being"
Bottom line: If the guy walked off his post he is a deserter according to the UCMJ. I cannot see 10 people in his platoon making up stories about the guy just for grins. But hey the truth will come out...and people will still try to defend the guy. Here's one for ya...How come the president didn't order a drone strike on the "fab 5" right after they de-planed in Qatar?