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

Classic

 

If my platoon went on a search for a missing Marine and one of my squad mates was killed in the process and I later found out that the Marine we were searching for is a deserter, why yes I would have some disdain for the deserter and probably wish that he is lying dead in a ditch somewhere. Call me unreasonable.

And yes I do have an extrodinairly amount of disdain for those responsible for the decision to go to Iraq.

 

Military don't leave soldier behind. Their policy. Firm policy. Deserted or not is irreverent.

Civilian (government) might disagree - politics, laws, diplomacy.

This exchange has both intermix.

Focus has been so much on the American POW - and the bigger pic is lost.

He wasn't even (this is starting to sink in a bit - hard to do with all the screaming around) the big fish here.

The big fish is US want out of there and looking at way to avoid that place going to hell (US leaving leave a big security void).

Peace with the Taliban is on the table and this deal is part of that.

Even if it doesn't result in the peace that's wanted with the Taliban, it doesn't matter - we are out of there. It's the Afghan problems to deal with.

The Taliban can have peace and be part of the government or they can fight another 10 years war with the government over there. Doesn't affect the US that much - we got other things to deal with.

(I can be completely wrong, but that is making a whole lot of sense to me at this point).

(side point - there is politics everywhere in this... from the Administration probably thinking how great they are, for getting a POW back home to the Right going nut on getting a deserter back home and releasing American killers).

 

As a marine it's not their job to judge, nor their job to ask why. It's their job to follow orders. If Marines want to judge order then it must have sucked seeing so many died women and children. I'm sure most will hide behind orders and don't disdain the military.

 

Stay classy.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/06/03/foxs-islamophobic-attack-on-the-facial-hair-of/199571

 

As a Marine we still are humans with emotions. When one of our buddies die we do ask questions whether internally or externally. When we specifically know the root cause of our buddy's death and it was a result of a selfish deserter then yes that feeling is even worse. The enemy is the enemy. We can cope with the enemy killing our comrades. It is the nature of war. However a buddy of yours being killed as a result of another Marine? Beteyal is harder to cope with.

 

Obviously true, but his point is that those people get paid to not have any emotion towards the orders except the emotions (patriotism) and orders (in this case, find person X) assigned.

What you're describing is the fundamental problem with humans being soldiers - it's not natural. But the military spends a lot of time and money to wash away that human side and install and non-human side. Essentially they are paying for people who will do things that others won't, and will interpret things in a way that others find inhumane.

It makes sense that losing a "friend" for a selfish teammate is painful, but it's something everyone signed up for on day 1. It's problematic, sure, but must be accepted.

 

That is a common misconception of the military at least the US military. There is a reason why we had access to chaplains, councilors and psychiatrists. There was a reason why we had post deployment health assessments and a reason why majority of that health assessment was concentraited on mental health.

 

If you don't subscribe to the conviction of 'innocent until proven guilty in a court of law', why are you fighting for the United States? That's kinda what we are all about. We also don't convict people of diminished mental capacity and allow accredited health professionals to make that determination. You can't do that by hearsay evidence.

 

Yes ... yes we do. If it were up to me I would put you in a re-education camp on the south side of Chicago and make you watch Tyler Perry movies and Brokeback Mountain on loop. You would have to wear Birkenstocks and ironic t-shirts. Then I would force you to marry a gay and convert to Islam after taking all of your freedom rifles.

If you don't comply only then would you become an enemy of the state ... Its only a matter of time, we are coming for you

You can't hide in your apocalypse bunker. We already know all about it.

 

Are you serious? The fact that someone needs access to these things more readily is evidence that there is a fundamental problem.

For example if I got a job where they had a chaplain, councillor and psychiatrist I would get the hell out of there. These are bandaids for a problem that's being created. Humans don't naturally need councillors and psychiatrists unless there is something that has disrupted them from a psychiatric perspective.

As for post deployment health assessment, it probably has just as much to do with monitoring the mental well being of someone who has access to weapons while being around other assets (soldiers, weapons, bases, etc). They certainly know what was can do to a person's mind, and they don't want that to bite them in the ass. They just want to get the job done.

A good place to look for clues that this thing is not humane is the mental health of US vets. I'm sure you know more about this than I do. I can certainly see what this environment does to veterans in my own country, and the military in my country is a cake walk compared to the war-loving united states. These are people who for the most part just go through the program, visit countries at war to provide logistic assistance or humanitarian aid, that type of stuff. Even those people have mental issues as evidenced by the pattern of abuse (domestic and otherwise) inherent in their community.

 

This is one messed up situation. There are valid arguments on both sides of the issue. There is clearly more going on than we know about though, regardless of what treeman says. I am going to reserve judgement until all the facts are in.

 

Wait...

This has blown your mind?

 

I understand completely but Berg didn't place IEDs. He didn't give intel, he wasn't even in Afghanistan. If soldiers felt the way your making out to be then why stand up for your President in 2003? Why continue doing something you know was wrong and getting soldiers killed? This seems like a double standard.

 

This.

 

Even if that means a substantial lose of American lives?

 

He was never classified as a POW. The entire past five years. Keep trying, sheep.

 

haven't you been reading this thread? By 'at any cost' GR meant 'only if the cost is right' and if you try figuring out what that cost is, GR says your being ridiculous.

Until then you should demand the facts be released to the public. Just out of curiosity, what information do you desire?

 

Well technically we have not been in war. We haven't made a declaration of war since WW2

 

Second Soldier Claims Bergdahl Was Feeding Taliban Intel On U.S. Forces



Via Mediaite:http://www.mediaite.com/tv/fmr-soldier-military-told-unit-to-not-tell-the-truth-about-bergdahl/

. . . Fuller concluded by corroborating the claims of Bergdahl’s former team leader, Sgt. Evan Buetow, who told CNN on Tuesday that the Taliban’s attacks became more directed after Bergdahl was captured.

“The ambushes we use, the certain tactics we use, the Taliban was picking up on those things,” Fuller said. “You could tell it was from somebody on the inside that had that info.”