Sure. I also think that Bergdahl should have been rescued, but the price should be one Taliban soldier, a low-ranked one.
A Taliban soldier, a low-level one at that, is worth as much as an American? That’s what you’re telling us?
[quote=“Terr, post:577, topic:689840”]
Who gives a flying fuck what the veterans think? So many of them are ultra right wing low information voters who watch Fox and listen to Hate Radio. I don’t give a fuck if 100% of veterans oppose it, it was still the right thing to do.
As an American deserter, yes.
How about an American that may or may not be a deserter and has had no chance to explain his actions or face his accusers?
Gotta love it. When useful, people in this thread have emphasized the veterans’ opinions. But when they differ from yours, who “gives a flying fuck” what the veterans think?
When all the members of his platoon that are asked tell me he is a deserter? Still one. Maybe two. Low-ranking Taliban. Definitely not five high-ranking enemy combatants.
You know what, iiandyiiii, do you accept that there is a limit to the price one can pay for a POW? You do? Then deciding what that price is is a legitimate question - which is what the whole broohaha is about. So spare me the fake indignation.
And then what? You are already satisfied, apparently, that this guy deserves whatever happens to him. At the hands of the Taliban? So, whatever they do to this guy, after he has no more usefulness to them, you are cool with that?
Yes, otherwise there is a built in incentive to kidnap more entry level troops in exchange for high ranking Taliban terrorists who in turn pose a threat to more entry level troops.
Sure, there’s a limit. And that price doesn’t depend at all on allegations, insinuations, alleged notes, and the like. It doesn’t matter at all that he is accused of desertion by his fellow soldiers. Not a single tiny little bit. Not one iota.
That’s duty, and that’s commitment. Duty and commitment to my fellow American servicemembers. My duty, commitment, and dedication to bringing them home are not contingent on them not being accused of a crime.
I don’t expect you to understand. General Dempsey and General McChrystal understand.
Would you have been willing to trade him for any price Taliban demanded? No? Ok - if so, then what? You are already satisfied, apparently, that this guy deserves whatever happens to him. At the hands of the Taliban? So, whatever they do to this guy, after he has no more usefulness to them, you are cool with that?
Apparently a huge majority of US military veterans don’t understand either.
Your cite does not show this at all. Not one iota. You are incorrect.
Do you still, after all this time, really not understand my argument? If so, just let me know and I’ll explain it again.
According to that poll, 6% of the veterans sympathize with Bergdahl. Apparently 94% do not. Do you think if his fellow platoon mates didn’t stand up and point fingers, the numbers would be the same? Do you seriously think that a poll asking veterans whether they sympathized with a POW that was captured in combat would EVER show only 6% sympathizing?
‘Sympathize’ doesn’t have anything to do with this discussion. How is this relevant?
“Sympathize” affects the price. But keep pretending that it doesn’t. If that makes you feel better.
It doesn’t. Duty and commitment don’t depend on sympathy.
I don’t expect you to understand. General Dempsey and McChrystal do.
Of course. Whatever makes you feel better.
LOL. Since you’ve resorted to childishness, I take it we’re ready to move on.
God I love you Terr. Even with a topic like this you can still make me smile.
I think that’s why our friendship has endured for so long.