American POW freed in prisoner swap. And the GOP doesn't like it.....

Show that straw man who's boss!

Another straw man fighting with you? Get him!

Where do all of these straw men come from and what do they want?

Good to know, not a bad take so long as you don't look to the government for help in the event of a terrorist strike...because, you know, that would be pretty hypocritical.

Yeah, those straw men and their clown shows, legendary.

 

lots of democrats have complained. Remember that apology given to Dianne Feinstein?

 

"My kind"? WTF are you babbling about? Are you trying to suggest that because I don't support this really stupid trade that I'm part of a right wing conspiracy? Do you even know how stupid that sounds? NVM don't answer that, I don't want to know.

The point is that I'm not the one trying to make this a partisan issue.....you know, because it's not one. What's funny about this all is that if Bush was president I'm sure some Republican lapdog would be accusing me of being part of some leftist conspiracy. Partisan idiots are all essentially the same no matter which side they are on.

 

He probably meant white people. mc mark is a notorious racist, and he probably assumes that you are white since you disagree with him.

 

Ah, fair enough, I didn't realize I was going back and forth with Donald Sterling. I guess it makes sense why he was being so irrational.

 

FYI LIBERALS......our enemies are laughing at us now. Hope that makes you happy

 

Honestly, it's not their fault. It might be annoying that some people on this board are blindly defending the president's indefensible actions, but he acted alone. It's not the Democrat's fault, they said no to this deal when they heard about it.

 

The fact that some of them are still defending him is laughable. Harry Reid is still in that group, which speaks to where the democrat base is on the matter. You have the senator from California upset, but shes only upset at them for not including her.

 

You mean, the people who insist on complying with a bedrock principle of our republic? Yes, we would be the ones who rightly are reserving judgement on this man's guilt until there is at least an investigation and, more desirable, a trial.

 

It isn't that you aren't allowed to have an opinion, it is that this man shouldn't be labeled a "deserter" or "traitor" until he has been convicted. If the evidence is as clear and compelling as you seem to think, the case should be a slam dunk. Until then, such labels are nothing more than speculation.

 

Frankly, I don't give a ****.

As I said, if they are murders, they should have been tried and executed long ago. If they aren't they shouldn't be detained. I draw the line at punishment for crimes people have committed, not what they might commit in the future.

These people are not my enemy. I do not know them, I have never met them, I know nothing about them other than what is "reported". I have learned in my years to not trust anything "reported" because EVERYONE has an agenda.

Human beings?

Well I am not a liberal so I am not sure what that rant was all about.

If they kill someone in the future, I will be sad for the victims and their families. Hopefully, it will help open some eyes that the United States can't dictate its will on the entire world without there being consequences. Maybe then we can get a real government and not the trash system we have now.

 

And has for decades, see Iran-Contra.

 

"Bergdahl walked off base" is a fact.

"Bergdahl deserted" is an opinion based on the previous fact.

"Desertion is tantamount to treason" is a fact.

Any conclusion drawn from a combination of fact and opinion is opinion.

These are neutral statements, like my previous post, but feel free to launch ad hominem attacks. It's a free country.

Why did Bergdahl leave his post? There is an email in which he laments the war he is involved in, and eye witness accounts that he walked away. The combination of these had been used to draw an opinion that he went rogue, no wait, he was captured, uh I mean he wanted to join the Taliban.

You can't judge intention yet because there is more to the story that hasn't been explored yet.

What does the doctor say? Did he suffer multiple concussions or PTSD? What about hallucinations? Was he on drugs? What does Bergdahl have to say in his own defense?

Who gives a F, hang the snitch! Amirite!?

Speaking in absolutes hurts your ethos, damages your argument, and is destructive to debate. These are not facts, it's my opinion. See how that works?

 

If that's the case, what a missed opportunity. Clockwork with each sides holding various leverage.

 

You are also forgetting that with PFC Lynch there were five other US soldiers captured and they weren't freed until after Baghdad had fallen. The US Military never launched a Special Forces operation to rescue them. Also in the Blackhawk Down incident Pilot Michael Durant was held for 11 days by Aidid in Mogadishu and was freed through negotiation rather than through a rescue mission. As far as I know none of those soldiers were considered deserters, traitors or having served with less than honor yet the US Military didn't undertake risky missions to get them back.

As far as whether the Senate Intelligence would have agreed to it I really don't know. This whole thing seems fishy to me but I'm also willing to admit this is a situation where the facts are still coming out. My own speculation is that this is part of a larger strategy regarding getting the Taliban to the negotiation table in Afghanistan.

 

Great post.

 

wrong. it is based off the fact that he told others he wanted to wonder the mountains and that he mailed his most valuable possessions home a few days before. It is also based off the testimony of the locals and the communications intercepted by the military. It is also based off the emails he sent homing expressing his disappoint in the US military and his letter he left saying he denounced his citizenship. It is also based off the items that were taken (bottles of water, knife, diary).

yes you can. There will always be pieces of the story missing.

nobody has argued not giving him a trial.

 

Yes. This is nothing new. I've pointed out to the consternation of Republicans that the modern president who is considered the most pacifist and weak, Carter, attempted a military rescue of hostages from Iran while the modern president considered the most hawkish, Reagan, gave arms in exchange for hostages.

Also as I just mentioned in my last post negotiations where carried out with Mohammed Farah Aidid to free Chief Warrant Officer Durant after the Blackhawk Down incident. Besides that during the Sunni Awakening the US negotiated with Sunni tribesman who had been considered terrorists to convince to switch sides.

The truth is that the US has negotiated, continues too and will in the future negotiate with terrorists to free prisoners and for other reasons. This isn't a partisan thing as Admins. of both parties have done it.

Not saying this was a good idea in this situation but the outrage that this is unprecedented isn't justified.

 

And it is still only opinion and will continue to be only opinion until Bergdahl is convicted by a court of law, not the court of public opinion.