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

Yes.

Sure, but that opinion isn't solely based on the fact that he walked off base, there are many more facts included.

Yes.

Okay....what about conclusions drawn from a combination of facts?

There was no ad hominem attack in the comment you quoted. I suggest you brush up on your logical fallacies if you want to throw their names around.

The act was desertion which there is sufficient evidence of IMO, defection hasn't yet been proven. They are two separate things. He could be guilty of both, but we know he was guilty of one.

I can't say for certain that his intention was defection, but there is sufficient evidence to prove desertion.

You talk out against opinions based on evidence yet feel free to run free with baseless speculation like that?

Ignoring the facts in favor of baseless speculation isn't really the way anyone should approach this. Why not just suggest that he was kidnapped by a UFO while doing PT?

Ignoring first hand testimony in favor of baseless speculation hurts your ethos, damages your argument, and is destructuve for debate.

Let's stick to facts.
1. He was viewed as a deserter by the military.
2. The trade was almost universally rejected as a terrible idea when it was first brought up in 2011.
3. The president violated a law he signed by cutting the congress out of the picture before unilaterally going forward with the trade.

Those are all facts, and they are indisputable.

 

No it would still only be opinion even then. Just because some strangers find the evidence compelling does not make something fact. You can pass judgement on someone GR without needing the opinions of total strangers (a jury). It is not immoral. What some strangers think of the evidence should have no bearing on how you see the evidence.

 

Except that juries are privy to WAY more information than the general public. Are you really saying that the decision of a jury is no different from the opinion of a guy who read about the case in the newspaper?

 

not necessarily.

 

Please explain how this works.

 

information at a trial is often made public.

 

Yeah, in some cases juries get far less evidence than the public.

 

You are confusing opinions with fact, I mean fact with opinion. I mean, yea, well... it's not fact until it's ... wait, fact doesn't matter because fact is opinion based... no. I give up.

(you probably know well that what we see, our memory, our recall of our memory, our interpretation of it... is all biased... thus, there is a reason why personal recounts are so unreliable and isn't at all trusted in the field of Science (and slowly but surely making it ways into the courtroom) --- this is why fact is not fact when human is involved in telling the story. It's just a story and always will be. "Fact" finding and arguments in court help make it more reliable but we all know the conclusion is hardly ever agreed upon by all - and I would bet, with something so emotional and political as this, whatever the outcome of the this POW trial, it won't settle it. It's an official end and if he is found not a deserter, there is little hope that the Right would accept that. If he is found to be a deserter, peace might settle in... until the next "OMG, this is so fking wrong" moment.)

Great post BTW.

 

The whole Jessica Lynch story was feel good deliberate lying propaganda fed to the media and the American people by the military. The original story was she was stabbed and shot and not captured till she ran out of ammo. The nice little blonde girl !!! fighting like Davy Crokett at the Alamo.

I forgot it was so brazen until it was recounted this week on TV. The truck ran off the road and they were then captured with no resistance by the Iraqis.

 

Yeah the DOD and the pentagon constantly lie about things like that, which is why it's better to trust the actual soldiers.....same as in this story.

 

Not true, when it comes to guilt and innocence of crimes, the only opinions that matter are those of the twelve men and women who serve on the jury in the trial.

 

Check yourself *******

I have never made a racist statement in D&D in 15 years.

 

treeman is the most unpleasant poster in D&D.

 

You have to consider that these guys all think their lives have been ruined by the reverse racism that happened after the Civil Rights Act of 1964..

 

What did you say 16 years ago?

 

What do GOP threads and Lin threads have in common?

41 pages in five days... by insecure fanatics trying to defend the biggest liability from moving forward.

A piece of news arrives, of which the validity and complexity is not fully known and full picture unclear, yet so many posters are quick to choose a side and fill their hearts with vitriol for their own emotional convictions. These posters are armchair internet self-proclaimed topical experts for their own biases.

Monkeys flinging poo indeed.

 

The fact that you are labeling this a "GOP thread" shows that you are nothing more than those you speak against in this post.

 

This kind of BS happens in the military so often.

 

Kinda missing your logic there in the second half of your reply. For the first part, there's "GOP doesn't like it..." in the thread title and OP opens up with links GOP comments?

 

all about Gitmo:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...d_this_has_all_been_about_emptying_gitmo.html