# Dear Bowe Bergdahl **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [January 21, 2017, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681 "2017-01-21T01:57:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/21 "2017-01-23T16:26:56Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > Ok point by point. Thank you for the clarification. I haven’t really followed the story, because Bergdahl is unimportant. I did though, sense the shifting tides of Conservative opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/22 "2017-01-23T16:42:26Z")
It doesn’t matter that he was a deserter. It’s up to us to decide what should be done with Bergdahl, not the Taliban. Leaving him in their hands was not an option. Does Bergdahl need to serve more time in prison? What exactly would be the point of that? Yeah, yeah, so some other dumb-ass kid doesn’t wander off into the boonies of Afghanistan? Bergdahl is/was mentally unstable, and he paid a very steep price for his folly. How exactly do we gain from keeping this loser in jail for another couple of decades? I guess keeping in jail means we’ll have one less homeless mentally ill guy sleeping under an overpass, so we’ll have that going for us. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/23 "2017-01-23T16:58:14Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > It doesn’t matter that he was a deserter. Sure it matters. If he deserted, we don’t want him or need him, except to punish him for deserting. Getting him back isn’t worth five terrorists. > [@](#): > > Bergdahl is/was mentally unstable, and he paid a very steep price for his folly. How exactly do we gain from keeping this loser in jail for another couple of decades? It would have been better if Obama had left him with the Taliban, true - we don’t gain much by his return. However, now that we do have him back, we can at least punish him to send the message that deserting in the face of the enemy isn’t acceptable even for the mentally unstable. But you are correct that we don’t gain much by this deal - five terrorists go free in return for one traitor who we have to keep imprisoned for the next few decades. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/24 "2017-01-23T17:06:11Z")
It is traditional for Presidents and others with pardoning/etc. capability to wait until the legal proceedings are completed.\* You can’t really commute the sentence of someone who has not been sentenced nor pardon someone found not guilty. Bergdahl’s court martial starts next month. Therefore it would be the norm for the PotuS after that is finished to consider the issue. - Always exceptions of course. E.g., Ford pardoning Nixon. And look at how poorly that was received. (We just watched a PBS show on the 76 election and this was brought up repeatedly.) ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/25 "2017-01-23T17:09:12Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > Ok point by point. > > While Bergdahl was missing very few outside of the military knew the backstory. Since the Army wanted him back regardless and the circumstances of his desertion were not proven in a court of law it was not released. It was an open secret in the military and widely discussed in military forums. So civilians saw Bergdahl carried on the missing and captured rolls and said “Why isn’t Obama doing something to rescue our boy?” Most in the military were saying, “Fuck that traitor.” It was only after his release that the story became widely known. > > There was no rescue mission. Obama exchanged 5 terrorists for 1 traitor. > > Bergdahl is not in prison. He is out free awaiting trial and still getting his full salary and benefits as an active duty soldier. People are angry (in particular vets and soldiers) that it is taking a very long time for him to go to trial. > > Bad guy or good guy? Civilian conservatives who didn’t know the full story first thought he was a good guy who was captured and now know he was a deserter. I remember long discussions on this board about Bergdahl when the issue first came up. This veteran, and many of my fellow vets, were very glad that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the President didn’t treat Bergdahl differently than any other missing soldier based on allegations and accusations – the military’s obligation to get our folks home doesn’t change just because someone is accused of a crime, even if they are accused with strong evidence, and thankfully our President and JC Chairman didn’t bow to the criticism of this kind. This says nothing about whether or not he should be prosecuted or convicted – if the evidence is strong enough, and he is not successfully able to defend himself, than he certainly should be. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/26 "2017-01-23T17:13:53Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > It doesn’t matter that he was a deserter. It’s up to us to decide what should be done with Bergdahl, not the Taliban. Leaving him in their hands was not an option. > > Does Bergdahl need to serve more time in prison? What exactly would be the point of that? Yeah, yeah, so some other dumb-ass kid doesn’t wander off into the boonies of Afghanistan? > > Bergdahl is/was mentally unstable, and he paid a very steep price for his folly. How exactly do we gain from keeping this loser in jail for another couple of decades? I guess keeping in jail means we’ll have one less homeless mentally ill guy sleeping under an overpass, so we’ll have that going for us. I await your detailed report of his mental status from your forensic examination. If you are in fact just pulling that out of your ass be assured his legal team is on top of that aspect of the case. What do we gain by putting anyone in jail? In this case it’s punishment for a crime he committed and justice for those killed, wounded, and put at risk trying to find him. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Bredin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/96bed5/32.png) [@John\_Bredin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Bredin)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/27 "2017-01-23T17:43:09Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > If he deserted, we don’t want him or need him, except to punish him for deserting. Getting him back isn’t worth five terrorists. … It would have been better if Obama had left him with the Taliban, true - we don’t gain much by his return. So if our enemies capture one of our troops but (a) manage to do it without witnesses, and (b) engage in a PR campaign that he voluntarily went to them, you’d be good with leaving that soldier in enemy hands?! :smack: No, I’m not saying that’s Bergdahl, I’m saying “let the enemy keep deserters” would be a bad policy – an enemy has strong incentives (PR, their morale, our morale) to claim that a U.S. soldier joined them whether or not he did – and I’m glad the government didn’t follow such a policy. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/28 "2017-01-23T18:02:25Z")
You seem to be assuming that the only evidence that Bergdahl deserted is the Taliban claiming that. I don’t think this is remotely correct. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/29 "2017-01-23T18:05:26Z")
> [@John\_Bredin](#): > > So if our enemies capture one of our troops but (a) manage to do it without witnesses, and (b) engage in a PR campaign that he voluntarily went to them, you’d be good with leaving that soldier in enemy hands?! :smack: If there is an investigation that shows he deserted of his own will, and if the soldier in question lies about the circumstances of his desertion, then I would not trade him for five terrorists. > [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > You seem to be assuming that the only evidence that Bergdahl deserted is the Taliban claiming that. I don’t think this is remotely correct. This. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/30 "2017-01-23T18:19:11Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > If there is an investigation that shows he deserted of his own will, and if the soldier in question lies about the circumstances of his desertion, then I would not trade him for five terrorists. I agree – if this is proven in a court of law. But an investigation, not in a court, with no defense presented? No. That’s contrary to the obligation of the military and the country to its service men and women, based on my understanding of the UCMJ, the oath I took, and the words of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs at the time. Emotionally, I might feel similarly to your position, but I’d be _violating the spirit of the oath I took_ if I advocated for the same position you do on this. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/31 "2017-01-23T18:33:22Z")
I doubt if this is correct. Refusing to pay a high price for someone who got himself into a predicament due to his own desertion is not the same thing as imposing a legal penalty. You shouldn’t need fair trials and guilty verdicts before deciding not to sacrifice for a guy in that situation, and I doubt if any sort of oath contradicts this. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/32 "2017-01-23T18:36:15Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > You seem to be assuming that the only evidence that Bergdahl deserted is the Taliban claiming that. I don’t think this is remotely correct. There’s a difference between deserting and defecting. He has been charged with desertion, not defecting to the Taliban. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/33 "2017-01-23T18:40:17Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > There’s a difference between deserting and defecting. He has been charged with desertion, not defecting to the Taliban. Semantics. There is no crime called “defecting” in the UCMJ. Defecting would just be the political motivation for desertion. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/34 "2017-01-23T18:40:21Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I doubt if this is correct. > > Refusing to pay a high price for someone who got himself into a predicament due to his own desertion is not the same thing as imposing a legal penalty. You shouldn’t need fair trials and guilty verdicts before deciding not to sacrifice for a guy in that situation, and I doubt if any sort of oath contradicts this. Those are all allegations, whatever the evidence – without an opportunity to defend himself in a court, the military shouldn’t be treating them as any more than allegations and accusations. Such allegations should be (and, thankfully, were) immaterial to any efforts to get him released. [General Dempsey put it best](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowe_Bergdahl#Circumstances_of_Bergdahl.27s_disappearance): “The questions about this particular soldier’s conduct are separate from our effort to recover ANY U.S. service member in enemy captivity” and that the military will investigate how Bergdahl was captured. “Like any American, he is innocent until proven guilty.[…] Our Army’s leaders will not look away from misconduct if it occurred.” ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/35 "2017-01-23T18:48:11Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Those are all allegations, whatever the evidence – without an opportunity to defend himself in a court, the military shouldn’t be treating them as any more than allegations and accusations. Such allegations should be (and, thankfully, were) immaterial to any efforts to get him released. OK, so we disagree. IMO you need a trial with opportunity to defend etc. if it’s about a court imposing penalties. If it’s about letting the guy suffer the consequences of his own misbehaving (instead of making other people suffer the consequences) then you don’t need these same standards. Of course, that doesn’t mean the army should act based on rumors or enemy propaganda, even in such cases. But if there’s reliable evidence on the subject - as there is here - then quibbling about legalities like the right to defend yourself is misplaced. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/36 "2017-01-23T18:51:48Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > OK, so we disagree. > > IMO you need a trial with opportunity to defend etc. if it’s about a court imposing penalties. If it’s about letting the guy suffer the consequences of his own misbehaving (instead of making other people suffer the consequences) then you don’t need these same standards. > > Of course, that doesn’t mean the army should act based on rumors or enemy propaganda, even in such cases. But if there’s reliable evidence on the subject - as there is here - then quibbling about legalities like the right to defend yourself is misplaced. But it’s “alleged misbehavior” until proven in a court of law. The military shouldn’t be treating any missing soldiers (and potential POWs) differently based on allegations of misbehavior, which (whatever the evidence) are just allegations until proven in a court of law. This is General Dempsey’s point – allegations, no matter the evidence, are completely immaterial to efforts to recover missing soldiers, _always_ – and I agree with him. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/37 "2017-01-23T18:53:38Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Those are all allegations, whatever the evidence – without an opportunity to defend himself in a court, the military shouldn’t be treating them as any more than allegations and accusations. Such allegations should be (and, thankfully, were) immaterial to any efforts to get him released. [General Dempsey put it best](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowe_Bergdahl#Circumstances_of_Bergdahl.27s_disappearance): > > “The questions about this particular soldier’s conduct are separate from our effort to recover ANY U.S. service member in enemy captivity” and that the military will investigate how Bergdahl was captured. “Like any American, he is innocent until proven guilty.[…] Our Army’s leaders will not look away from misconduct if it occurred.” I agreed in principle then and now. He needed to be returned. That doesn’t mean blinders have to be put on. His conduct and reason for being in the situation he was in needed to be part of the cost/benefit analysis. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/38 "2017-01-23T18:56:42Z")
I don’t think you need a legal conviction to decide that someone isn’t worth five terrorists. This was a battlefield, not a courtroom. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/39 "2017-01-23T18:56:54Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > I agreed in principle then and now. He needed to be returned. That doesn’t mean blinders have to be put on. His conduct and reason for being in the situation he was in needed to be part of the cost/benefit analysis. Such “conduct and reason for being in the situation” should be treated (and was treated) as entirely unknown, in terms of efforts to recover missing soldiers, as General Dempsey stated, since they were just allegations. Again, _allegations, no matter the evidence, are entirely immaterial to efforts to recover missing soldiers_. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2017, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681/40 "2017-01-23T19:08:01Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I don’t think you need a legal conviction to decide that someone isn’t worth five terrorists. This was a battlefield, not a courtroom. > > Regards, > Shodan That’s a different issue – maybe a missing soldier isn’t worth 5 terrorists. It’s a reasonable conversation to have, IMO. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dear-bowe-bergdahl/777681.md?page=3)