General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhere the fuck does a party, who nominated and supported AWOL Bush, get off on attacking Bergdahl?
Uncle Joe
(58,111 posts)Thanks for the thread, Drunken Irishman.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)One broadcaster brought it up and got fired. I am not sure they ever found out concretely that he was AWOL. Even if he wash''t, the Democrats should have fought that. From 2001 to 2008, it seemed the Democrats were afraid of Bush and Chaney for some reason.
NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)The same place the last president who released more than 500 detainees from Gitmo, (90% of whom returned to the battlefield) gets off.
phantom power
(25,966 posts)And not a moment before.
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)Cha
(295,899 posts)JeffHead
(1,186 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,573 posts)onenote
(42,374 posts)The President did the right thing to get Bergdahl back because that is what we do -- we get our people back, whether their service was good, bad or indifferent. What happens after we get them back in terms of responding to their performance in the service is a separate issue. The President acted without complying with the letter of the law of a statutory requirement that he had previously made clear he viewed as unconstitutional and not binding on him. No problem with that either. He made the trade for five Taliban that have been held in captivity for between 12 and 13 years and cannot conceivably be of intelligence value about the ongoings in Afghanistan after being isolated from the area for that period of time. Are they a risk? Given that they are being transferred to Qatar, a country with an interest in staying on our good side, that we are leaving Afghanistan in a relatively short period period, and that the risk of transferring these people has been vetted for a couple of years by military, foreign policy and intelligence officials, I'm have no reason to believe the risk is unacceptable.
Those are the arguments. No apologies for getting the guy back. No apologies for investigating the circumstances of his leaving his post and no apologies for taking whatever measures are warranted by the findings of that investigation. And no apologies for making the calculated decision to trade him for the five Taliban.
But talking about Chimpy's failure to show up for a period of his national guard reserve service? While nothing to be proud of and not something you want in a Chief Executive/Commander in Chief, most people would not regard it as remotely comparable to laying down your arms and leaving your post in a foreign theater of war.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)Last edited Tue Jun 3, 2014, 09:28 PM - Edit history (1)
is that he did his damn best to stay out of the jungles, while I had to go. It does compare. Chimpy was a coward with an ability to use his privilege and family clout to be consistently awol with no reprimands in his cleaned up records, coked up while serving in the military, unable to pass flight physicals and barely able to fly. That's comparable to this latest soldiers alleged desertion. The guy who was the worst POTUS in modern history was a total fuck up. The jury is still out on this latest soldier.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...zero integrity.
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,786 posts)951-Riverside
(7,234 posts)...Although during his Presidency nearly 3,000 died on 9/11 due to his inaction on intelligence and hundreds more died and continue to die due to inhaling ground zero dust that his administration declared safe. God only knows how many soldiers have died in Iraq, almost a million Iraqis have died in his war over lies.
F*CK BUSH!!!
[IMG][/IMG]
heaven05
(18,124 posts)that little girl is wise beyond her years. I see total mistrust in her expression and you know what? She was right to have it.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)Somebody might have died in Nam for that motherfucker's cowardice.
rickyhall
(4,889 posts)He most likely would not have been there at all. Seems to me if the French Foreign Legion (Rolling Stone) turned him then probably the Army should have done the same. If I remember right the FFL used to take men the Army wouldn't.
GoCubsGo
(32,061 posts)Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)!!
tooeyeten
(1,074 posts)Pure and simple.
Cha
(295,899 posts)Why The Five Taliban Detainees Had To Be Released Soon, No Matter What
http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/06/02/3443719/the-case-for-negotiating-for-bergdahls-release/
thanks for the OP, DI
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)fucked if you do! fucked if you don't! so fuck 'em!
i think our president is waking up to accepting this truth about the deranged gop. there is no rationalizing with the irrational.
hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)I mean who the hell leaves a military base when the entire country side is filled with people who want to shoot you?
So do you blame the kid if he's mentally ill?
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)and when first encountering huge lies and death in war, people can have a change of heart and experience trauma.
smallcat88
(426 posts)That's the only real motivation they've got these days.
All the outrage over 5 guys getting released - as opposed to the thousands of militants already over in the middle east? Yeah, big drop in the bucket there. But pretty much everything the Republicans do and say is motivated by hate and fear. That's all they've got, all they know.
Don't know the story yet on Bergdahl, but from what I've heard so far he sounds like a sensitive, and now very disillusioned, kid. Unfortunately, that makes him an easy target. He needs time to heal - and the rest of us need to knock the Republicans upside the head for not giving it to him.