Some reports said he might not even be able to speak English after five years of captivity. Politics aside- do you think you would forget how to speak in five years? That is a long time but still I am doubtful.
Some reports said he might not even be able to speak English after five years of captivity. Politics aside- do you think you would forget how to speak in five years? That is a long time but still I am doubtful.
typical libtard wrote:
But Boooooosh!! And Ronnie!!!!!!! They did the same things!
Reagan and Bush supplied Hezbollah with weapons via Iran.
They should have injected the Talibans with heroin every day until they were full blown addicts and then dropped them "home."
OR shot them up 6 months ago with some isotope or something that would give them cancer in a few years.
As soon as we have another Republican in the Whitehouse, we'll invade Afghanistan all over the freaking again...
Partisan morons, please stop. Let's focus on the issue at hand.
I dont see how ANYONE defends the way this had been handled.
Yes, I'm all for bringing back American POWs. I might even be for brining back an American POW who was a deserter (assuming they'd be charged). However, I can't believe how the President's administration has handled this.
I heard Obama's PR lady today say stuff along the lines of "It was years ago. We don't know the circumstances of his disappearance."
My response. That's unacceptable.
1) WHY IN GOD'S NAME DID WE GIVING UP 4 TALIBAN COMMANDERS IF WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE ARE GETTING IN RETURN? Common sense says it should 100% be certain what led to his disappearance before we negotiate. We are going to give up a ton of prisoners to get back ...... a deserter or traitor? you don't know? How can that be?
2) It seems we do know what happened - well anyone with a brain knows - as the people in his unit have spoken out.
I have one more question.
3) Have we ever negotiated with terrorists before? If not, that's an AWFUL PRECEDENT to be setting. AWFUl.I might consider it for a freaking hero,not a deserter.
I feel for him and his father. No one joins the armhy looking to be a deserter. But you simply can't walk off your job thinking the enemy will embrace you.
Love how Hagel is telling us to wait until the facts come out. What??? They made this deal without knowing the facts???
As for feeling for the father and son treasonist afghan sympathizers Rojo. How do you feel about the parents of the many dead soldiers that went searching for this traitor?
Rojo ... let's focus on the loaded word "commanders". What does that mean in a widely distributed world like Afghanistan? Nothing. The Taliban does not have a hierarchical command structure like western military. They are local tribal leaders that maybe have some followers or not? By calling these guys "commanders" it makes it much worse than it is. So it is 5 Taliban philosophy followers. What difference does that make in a country with hundreds of these guys around? Nothing.
Sorry, but the societal structure in Afghanistan cannot be equated in our western experience. And words like commander just muddle things.
werwe wrote:
Mooner wrote:You really think we are getting the whole story about this? Come on. Haven't you yet become aware that the government and the mainstream media is always telling us lies big and small?
Quick! Develop some type of conspiracy theory!
I agree with Mooner. There's much more to this story than meets the eye. Always question, rarely believe.
rojo wrote:
3) Have we ever negotiated with terrorists before? If not, that's an AWFUL PRECEDENT to be setting. AWFUl.I might consider it for a freaking hero,not a deserter.
We have always negotiated with our enemies -- terrorists or otherwise.
Sometimes we give them all sorts of things -- weapons, oil, cash, you name it. Even GW Bush was negotiating with the Taliban about some oil pipeline or another at one point.
Treadstoned wrote:
Love how Hagel is telling us to wait until the facts come out. What??? They made this deal without knowing the facts???
Of course they knew the facts. He was telling YOU to wait until YOU get all the facts before judging things.
run with the wom wrote:
Rojo ... let's focus on the loaded word "commanders". What does that mean in a widely distributed world like Afghanistan? Nothing. The Taliban does not have a hierarchical command structure like western military. They are local tribal leaders that maybe have some followers or not? By calling these guys "commanders" it makes it much worse than it is. So it is 5 Taliban philosophy followers. What difference does that make in a country with hundreds of these guys around? Nothing.
Sorry, but the societal structure in Afghanistan cannot be equated in our western experience. And words like commander just muddle things.
Rubbish - these five were considered "forever prisoners, i.e., the captives who were designated for indefinite detention or possible trial by an Obama Task Force in January 2010. Anyone who really cares about this issue would have researched these guys to know that they are not "local tribal leaders." I would post their "credentials" here but know many of you don't really care how bad these terrorists are. These are the creme de la creme of the Taliban terrorists. To release them now for a deserter is mind-boggling.
Smell the coffee wrote:
Treadstoned wrote:Love how Hagel is telling us to wait until the facts come out. What??? They made this deal without knowing the facts???
Of course they knew the facts. He was telling YOU to wait until YOU get all the facts before judging things.
Thanks, that's even worse
Treadstoned wrote:
Smell the coffee wrote:Of course they knew the facts. He was telling YOU to wait until YOU get all the facts before judging things.
Thanks, that's even worse
Don't be so naive.
Burley Burt wrote:
Congratulations, Mr. President! And identical congrats to your sorcerer’s apprentice, National Security Adviser Susan Rice. By trying to sell him as an American hero, you’ve turned a deserter already despised by soldiers in the know into quite possibly the most-hated individual soldier in the history of our military.
I have never witnessed such outrage from our troops.
Exhibit A: Ms. Rice. In one of the most tone-deaf statements in White House history (we’re making a lot of history here), the national-security advisor, on a Sunday talk show, described Bergdahl as having served “with honor and distinction.” Those serving in uniform and those of us who served previously were already stirred up, but that jaw-dropper drove us into jihad mode.
But pity Ms. Rice. Like the president she serves, she’s a victim of her class. Nobody in the inner circle of Team Obama has served in uniform. It shows. That bit about serving with “honor and distinction” is the sort of perfunctory catch-phrase politicians briefly don as electoral armor. (“At this point in your speech, ma’am, devote one sentence to how much you honor the troops.”)
I actually believe that Ms. Rice was kind of sincere, in her spectacularly oblivious way. In the best Manchurian Candidate manner, she said what she had been programmed to say by her political culture, then she was blindsided by the firestorm she ignited by scratching two flinty words together. At least she didn’t blame Bergdahl’s desertion on a video.
The president, too, appears stunned. He has so little understanding of (or interest in) the values and traditions of our troops that he and his advisers really believed that those in uniform would erupt into public joy at the news of Bergdahl’s release — as D.C. frat kids did when Osama bin Laden’s death was trumpeted.
Both President Obama and Ms. Rice seem to think that the crime of desertion in wartime is kind of like skipping class. They have no idea of how great a sin desertion in the face of the enemy is to those in our military. The only worse sin is to side actively with the enemy and kill your brothers in arms. This is not sleeping in on Monday morning and ducking Gender Studies 101.
But compassion, please! The president and all the president’s men and women are not alone. Our media elite — where it’s a rare bird who bothered to serve in uniform — instantly became experts on military justice. Of earnest mien and blithe assumption, one talking head after another announced that “we always try to rescue our troops, even deserters.”
Uh, no. “Save the deserter” is a recent battle cry of the politically indoctrinated brass. For much of our history, we did make some efforts to track down deserters in wartime. Then we shot or hanged them. Or, if we were in good spirits, we merely used a branding iron to burn a large D into their cheeks or foreheads. Even as we grew more enlightened, desertion brought serious time in a military prison. At hard labor.
This is a fundamental culture clash. Team Obama and its base cannot comprehend the values still cherished by those young Americans “so dumb” they joined the Army instead of going to prep school and then to Harvard. Values such as duty, honor, country, physical courage, and loyalty to your brothers and sisters in arms have no place in Obama World. (Military people don’t necessarily all like each other, but they know they can depend on each other in battle — the sacred trust Bergdahl violated.)
President Obama did this to himself (and to Bergdahl). This beautifully educated man, who never tires of letting us know how much smarter he is than the rest of us, never stopped to consider that our troops and their families might have been offended by their commander-in-chief staging a love-fest at the White House to celebrate trading five top terrorists for one deserter and featuring not the families of those soldiers (at least six of them) who died in the efforts to find and free Bergdahl, but, instead, giving a starring role on the international stage to Pa Taliban, parent of a deserter and a creature of dubious sympathies (that beard on pops ain’t a tribute to ZZ Top). How do you say “outrageous insult to our vets” in Pashto?
Nor, during the recent VA scandal, had the president troubled himself to host the families of survivors of those vets who died awaiting care. No, the warmest attention our president has ever paid to a “military family” was to Mr. and Mrs. Bergdahl.
(I will refrain from criticism of the bumptious attempts to cool the flames of this political conflagration by Secretary Hagel: I never pick on the weak.)
What is to be done? Behind the outrage triggered by Team Obama’s combination of cynicism and obliviousness (Bergdahl was so ill we had to set those terrorists free immediately, without notifying Congress, but now he’s chugging power shakes in a military hospital . . . and all this just happened to come at the peak of the VA scandal . . . ), military members don’t really want to lynch Bergdahl. But they want justice.
Our military leaders need to rediscover their moral courage and honor our traditions, our regulations, and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. We need a fresh, unprejudiced 15-6 investigation (the military equivalent of a grand jury). We already know, as the military has known since the first 24 hours after Bergdahl abandoned his post, that sufficient evidence exists for a court-martial, but it’s important to do this by the numbers.
Home run, sir. Round the bases. I'll be at the plate to greet you with a high five.
Resending old terrorist commanders after twelve years sounds like a very smart way to create a power clash with the new generation of taliban leaders. Chaos will surely break out within the organisation. Just imagine what would happened if congressmen from twelve years ago were reinstated without the new ones removed...
Also, after twelve years the NSA surely has got these guys voices on tape backward and forwards and up and down - they'll never again in their lifes be able to pick up a telephone to make a single call without computer surveillance pinpointing them down to the yard.
At least half of them will be dead by drone strike within the year methinks...
Peter Andersson wrote:
Resending old terrorist commanders after twelve years sounds like a very smart way to create a power clash with the new generation of taliban leaders. Chaos will surely break out within the organisation. Just imagine what would happened if congressmen from twelve years ago were reinstated without the new ones removed...
Also, after twelve years the NSA surely has got these guys voices on tape backward and forwards and up and down - they'll never again in their lifes be able to pick up a telephone to make a single call without computer surveillance pinpointing them down to the yard.
At least half of them will be dead by drone strike within the year methinks...
We will be able to pinpoint them down to the yard by computer surveillance? Why can't we do the same to pinpoint down to the yard those terrorists who killed the four in the Benghazi attack? How come we have never arrested or killed anyone involved with that terrorist attack except the video producer?
rojo wrote:
Yes, I'm all for bringing back American POWs. I might even be for brining back an American POW who was a deserter (assuming they'd be charged).
You acknowledge he should be tried.
rojo wrote:
Common sense says it should 100% be certain what led to his disappearance before we negotiate. We are going to give up a ton of prisoners to get back ...... a deserter or traitor? you don't know? How can that be?
You assume he is guilty before trial.
Burly Burt wrote:
We will be able to pinpoint them down to the yard by computer surveillance? Why can't we do the same to pinpoint down to the yard those terrorists who killed the four in the Benghazi attack? How come we have never arrested or killed anyone involved with that terrorist attack except the video producer?
Maybe because we don't know who they are?
Maybe the Liberal Media is saying "hero" and the Conservative Media is saying "deserter" and the truth is neither.
Nobody here knows the whole story. Most just have a gut reaction based on the particular brand of media they tend to rely on for their "news".
Dig deeper, you might learn something.
if you think cnn is that biased..you paranoid