1 He asked around in his company of men what would happen if he took his weapon or if he took his night vision glasses and was told it would be a violation.
He often expressed opinions of the war he was fighting was BS in emails to his own family
3 He premeditated leaving the base by taking supplies with him … it was no spur of the moment decision.
He took a knife and a compass.
What if this whole thing has not been completely thought out to what those five men will do to get even for being held captive in Guantanamo Bay.
What can keep five men that look like the released prisoners from taking there place in prison in Qatar? They have men, women and boys willing to strap on suicide vest and kill themselves, right?
Why not five men that look like these released prisoners taking their place as they resume their war on Afghanistan and the year left for US troops involvement:
I’d agree with that Mr. Plant, there is certainly a heap of bad blood to be overcome and this one little blip means very little by itself. But who knows how these things cogitate exactly in the mind of the undecided Afghan if this were to signal a broader change in policy?
If you want to have less enemies, show them that you are both powerful and merciful. Done the first, now try the second.
It hasn’t helped the Israelis and the Palestinians.
I believe they will think we are a bunch of wimp pushovers.
I don’t think there are undecided Afghans. There is too much religion involved.
Taliban shoots little girls because they go to school. We build schools. Not much to cogitate there.
That they couldn’t contact Congress because it was a limited time offer? It’s not reasonable at all.
yes, but as has been pointed out, the chances of trying a POW that the President personally paid for with the release of 5 terrorists is pretty slim. It would make the President look like a complete fool.
It would justify the cost of losing 6 people trying to rescue him. It might soften the act of releasing 5 dangerous terrorists if it was done legally. But these weren’t soldiers released in time of war, they were people responsible for crimes against their own countrymen. So whoever releases them takes full responsibility as well as any legal problems involved with breaking laws regarding their release.
again, They repeated what he said to them. Nobody mentioned any love or hate for him personally. There is no opinion involved here.
As has already been pointed out -it makes America look “merciful”
You don’t know what the current mindset of these men is - what if (and it’s a bit Clancy-esque) they have been influenced towards being less “terroristic” - couldn’t it then be a good thing to be releasing them where they can do some “good”?
We let 5 people go who were being illegally/unconstitutionally (in my opinion, of course, not the SCOTUS or the rest of the US Government) detained without trial and got an American back as a bonus. Good for everyone involved.
I’m sure the odds of these men who no doubt think they’ve been held unjustly for over a decade positively changing their opinion about terrorism are really high. There’s no way that they’ll vow revenge and in a year when they’re free to speak to their countrymen (well, the ones they didn’t commit war crimes against) redouble their efforts to spread the sort of hate that encourages terrorism. :rolleyes:
Limited time offers are a real thing that sometimes exist. Sometimes there are actual time considerations. Maybe this was one of them.
Or maybe Obama secretly wants to save a fellow traitor because he’s a secret muslim terrorist and so he hid it from Congress, which after all, is filled with honest and fine patriots committed to working with President Obama to make the world a better place.
Who cares? This doesn’t change the calculus as to whether we should try and get him out.
Right – this was Obama’s decision, and Obama’s responsibility. I’m not sure if the trade was a good one, maybe it was foolish. But whether this is so has absolutely nothing to do with what Bergdahl is accused of, nor does it have anything to do with whether soldiers tragically died trying to find him.
“No opinion involved”. Of course… because that’s how human minds and memories work.
That’s quite the spin on reality. They did not consult Congress on the swap but implied Congress was aware of it because the idea of doing so was floated by them. The WH said it didn’t have time to brief Congress.
[Quote:]
(Obama: We Consulted Congress About Possibility Of Prisoner Swap - TPM – Talking Points Memo) “We have consulted with Congress for quite some time about the possibility that we might need to execute a prisoner exchange in order to recover Sgt. [Bowe] Bergdahl,” Obama said in a press conference in Warsaw, Poland. “We saw an opportunity. We were concerned about Sgt. Bergdahl’s health. We had the cooperation of the Qataris to execute and exchange, and we seized that opportunity. And the process was truncated because we did not want to miss that window.” Bolding mine.
So the WH thinks it’s OK to take the time to make deals with terrorists and broker an agreement with Qatar but are too busy to include Congress and operate within the law.
According to friend Bricker, the President operated within his legal power.
But, unlike the accusations of desertion, at least these might be reasonable things to criticize the President for. This veteran is very relieved that the President didn’t take any accusations into account with regards to any attempts to recover an American soldier taken captive.
Hey Mods: there’s so much idiocy in this thread that it really needs its own Pit thread. But two where only one is needed seems kinda silly too. How about moving this one to the Pit?
“In response to those of you interested in my personal judgments about the recovery of SGT Bowe Bergdahl, the questions about this particular soldier’s conduct are separate from our effort to recover ANY U.S. service member in enemy captivity. This was likely the last, best opportunity to free him. As for the circumstances of his capture, when he is able to provide them, we’ll learn the facts. Like any American, he is innocent until proven guilty. Our Army’s leaders will not look away from misconduct if it occurred. In the meantime, we will continue to care for him and his family. Finally, I want to thank those who for almost five years worked to find him, prepared to rescue him, and ultimately put themselves at risk to recover him.”
Again: “the questions about this particular soldier’s conduct are separate from our effort to recover ANY U.S. service member in enemy captivity”.