What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

American held hostage by al Qaeda appeals to Obama... (1 Viewer)

Ghost Rider said:
timschochet said:
So Bergdahl tried to escape several times and was tortured. I'm starting to wonder if he really deserted in the first place?
Click to expand...
Everyone from his unit (at least six men, as far as I know) who has spoken out in the last week or so has said there is no question he deserted. Are you calling them all liars? What would they have to gain by lying? What is their motive?
Click to expand...
I dunno. I don't want to call them liars. On the other hand, the Swift Boat guys did lie about Kerry...
 
Ghost Rider said:
timschochet said:
So Bergdahl tried to escape several times and was tortured. I'm starting to wonder if he really deserted in the first place?
Click to expand...
Everyone from his unit (at least six men, as far as I know) who has spoken out in the last week or so has said there is no question he deserted. Are you calling them all liars? What would they have to gain by lying? What is their motive?
Click to expand...
How would they know? And if he was so horrible before he left them unprotected that night that they "knew him", why did they allow it?
 
timschochet said:
Ghost Rider said:
timschochet said:
So Bergdahl tried to escape several times and was tortured. I'm starting to wonder if he really deserted in the first place?
Click to expand...
Everyone from his unit (at least six men, as far as I know) who has spoken out in the last week or so has said there is no question he deserted. Are you calling them all liars? What would they have to gain by lying? What is their motive?
Click to expand...
I dunno. I don't want to call them liars. On the other hand, the Swift Boat guys did lie about Kerry...
Click to expand...
What does this have to do with Kerry?

 
timschochet said:
Ghost Rider said:
timschochet said:
So Bergdahl tried to escape several times and was tortured. I'm starting to wonder if he really deserted in the first place?
Click to expand...
Everyone from his unit (at least six men, as far as I know) who has spoken out in the last week or so has said there is no question he deserted. Are you calling them all liars? What would they have to gain by lying? What is their motive?
Click to expand...
I dunno. I don't want to call them liars. On the other hand, the Swift Boat guys did lie about Kerry...
Click to expand...
That has nothing to do with this.

Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Ghost Rider said:
timschochet said:
So Bergdahl tried to escape several times and was tortured. I'm starting to wonder if he really deserted in the first place?
Click to expand...
Everyone from his unit (at least six men, as far as I know) who has spoken out in the last week or so has said there is no question he deserted. Are you calling them all liars? What would they have to gain by lying? What is their motive?
Click to expand...
How would they know? And if he was so horrible before he left them unprotected that night that they "knew him", why did they allow it?
Click to expand...
Allow what? Him to leave?

 
Ghost Rider said:
timschochet said:
So Bergdahl tried to escape several times and was tortured. I'm starting to wonder if he really deserted in the first place?
Click to expand...
Everyone from his unit (at least six men, as far as I know) who has spoken out in the last week or so has said there is no question he deserted. Are you calling them all liars? What would they have to gain by lying? What is their motive?
Click to expand...
:goodposting:

Exactly. The people who were there stated without question, the guy walked away from his post. Or Tim, do you believe the bad guys took him and then went back and folded his uniform up and left his gun and gear because they were concerned about the uniform getting wrinkled?

This guy is naïve and was a free-spirit and didn't like his job (at least according to his correspondence to his parents). Frankly he reminds me of one of those people who keep dangerous animals as pets and then are shocked when they kill them, He wanted an adventure and probably believed he could just go out and talk to these guys and it would be cool, Maybe that is too much of a leap--maybe he was just simply walking around outside the camp daydreaming and he got taken. However to believe this you have to discount several other statements that people saw him wandering through a village prior to being captured.

All that being said, I say let the investigation tell the tale before fingers are pointed or perhaps release the findings of the initial investigation (which I believe are sealed--maybe I am wrong about that).

 
Just think what would have happened if he didn't desert. Oh wait, nothing.

Sorry, I feel the same way about people who get captured while hiking in Afghanistan

You get what you deserve

 
Ghost Rider said:
timschochet said:
So Bergdahl tried to escape several times and was tortured. I'm starting to wonder if he really deserted in the first place?
Click to expand...
Everyone from his unit (at least six men, as far as I know) who has spoken out in the last week or so has said there is no question he deserted. Are you calling them all liars? What would they have to gain by lying? What is their motive?
Click to expand...
He left base on a couple of occasions before and came back. How would anyone know if this time would have been any different?

Also, people keep saying he left his post, like he was on guard duty at the time. I can't find the link, but I remember reading that he was found to be missing when someone went to get him to go to his post. Not the biggest distinction in the world, but it is an important one.

 
Ghost Rider said:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Ghost Rider said:
timschochet said:
So Bergdahl tried to escape several times and was tortured. I'm starting to wonder if he really deserted in the first place?
Click to expand...
Everyone from his unit (at least six men, as far as I know) who has spoken out in the last week or so has said there is no question he deserted. Are you calling them all liars? What would they have to gain by lying? What is their motive?
Click to expand...
How would they know? And if he was so horrible before he left them unprotected that night that they "knew him", why did they allow it?
Click to expand...
Allow what? Him to leave?
Click to expand...
Allowed him to be in a position to betray them...

"Any of us would have died for him while he was with us, and then for him to just leave us like that, it was a very big betrayal."

Isn't that sense of "betrayal" along with their past interactions what is informing their strong opinions? Which of course while a much better informed opinion that I could have, it is not the same as knowing.

 
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Ghost Rider said:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Ghost Rider said:
timschochet said:
So Bergdahl tried to escape several times and was tortured. I'm starting to wonder if he really deserted in the first place?
Click to expand...
Everyone from his unit (at least six men, as far as I know) who has spoken out in the last week or so has said there is no question he deserted. Are you calling them all liars? What would they have to gain by lying? What is their motive?
Click to expand...
How would they know? And if he was so horrible before he left them unprotected that night that they "knew him", why did they allow it?
Click to expand...
Allow what? Him to leave?
Click to expand...
Allowed him to be in a position to betray them...

"Any of us would have died for him while he was with us, and then for him to just leave us like that, it was a very big betrayal."

Isn't that sense of "betrayal" along with their past interactions what is informing their strong opinions? Which of course while a much better informed opinion that I could have, it is not the same as knowing.
Click to expand...
:confused:

 
Kevrunner said:
He clearly deserted, he was tortured after he deserted most likely. I just can't understand anyone defending the actual trade, other then the deserter's family and friends. I respect everyone's opinion, this is just mine.
Click to expand...
The war in Afghanistan is winding down. I know that not everybody agrees me on this, but I think that we're therefore obliged to release our remaining Taliban prisoners. (Taliban only, not AQ -- those guys get to stay in Gitmo until AQ forms a nation-state and negotiates the terms of their surrender with the US). In other words, we were going to release these five guys anyway. Instead of getting nothing for them, we get an American serviceman back. Granted, this is a guy who should probably be court-martialed, but that's fine. It's good to get Bergdhal back if for no other reason than to ensure that the military justice system runs its course.

Does that make sense? I have no love for Bergdahl, but I still think this was a reasonable trade.

 
IvanKaramazov said:
Kevrunner said:
He clearly deserted, he was tortured after he deserted most likely. I just can't understand anyone defending the actual trade, other then the deserter's family and friends. I respect everyone's opinion, this is just mine.
Click to expand...
The war in Afghanistan is winding down. I know that not everybody agrees me on this, but I think that we're therefore obliged to release our remaining Taliban prisoners. (Taliban only, not AQ -- those guys get to stay in Gitmo until AQ forms a nation-state and negotiates the terms of their surrender with the US). In other words, we were going to release these five guys anyway. Instead of getting nothing for them, we get an American serviceman back. Granted, this is a guy who should probably be court-martialed, but that's fine. It's good to get Bergdhal back if for no other reason than to ensure that the military justice system runs its course.

Does that make sense? I have no love for Bergdahl, but I still think this was a reasonable trade.
Click to expand...
I am glad you entirely agree with me.

 
jonessed said:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Ghost Rider said:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
Ghost Rider said:
timschochet said:
So Bergdahl tried to escape several times and was tortured. I'm starting to wonder if he really deserted in the first place?
Click to expand...
Everyone from his unit (at least six men, as far as I know) who has spoken out in the last week or so has said there is no question he deserted. Are you calling them all liars? What would they have to gain by lying? What is their motive?
Click to expand...
How would they know? And if he was so horrible before he left them unprotected that night that they "knew him", why did they allow it?
Click to expand...
Allow what? Him to leave?
Click to expand...
Allowed him to be in a position to betray them...

"Any of us would have died for him while he was with us, and then for him to just leave us like that, it was a very big betrayal."

Isn't that sense of "betrayal" along with their past interactions what is informing their strong opinions? Which of course while a much better informed opinion that I could have, it is not the same as knowing.
Click to expand...
:confused:
Click to expand...
Lets try again.

These guys are expressing their strong opinions on what happened. That is not a lie. Promoting these opinions no matter how much informed by experiences from being there before and after to undeniable facts on the other hand is wrong. They might be 100% correct in their assessment, but unless I missed it none of them were witnesses to the capture so they don't know.

Or if you prefer add "know" to the list words (established, proof, etc.) that aren't understood in this tread.

 
IvanKaramazov said:
Kevrunner said:
He clearly deserted, he was tortured after he deserted most likely. I just can't understand anyone defending the actual trade, other then the deserter's family and friends. I respect everyone's opinion, this is just mine.
Click to expand...
The war in Afghanistan is winding down. I know that not everybody agrees me on this, but I think that we're therefore obliged to release our remaining Taliban prisoners. (Taliban only, not AQ -- those guys get to stay in Gitmo until AQ forms a nation-state and negotiates the terms of their surrender with the US). In other words, we were going to release these five guys anyway. Instead of getting nothing for them, we get an American serviceman back. Granted, this is a guy who should probably be court-martialed, but that's fine. It's good to get Bergdhal back if for no other reason than to ensure that the military justice system runs its course.

Does that make sense? I have no love for Bergdahl, but I still think this was a reasonable trade.
Click to expand...
If we're obligated to release the Taliban prisoners, aren't they obligated to release ours also? No reason for the trade and bad press if we trusted them to release their prisoners anyway. If they couldn't be trusted to release their prisoners, why would we release theirs?

 
IvanKaramazov said:
Kevrunner said:
He clearly deserted, he was tortured after he deserted most likely. I just can't understand anyone defending the actual trade, other then the deserter's family and friends. I respect everyone's opinion, this is just mine.
Click to expand...
The war in Afghanistan is winding down. I know that not everybody agrees me on this, but I think that we're therefore obliged to release our remaining Taliban prisoners. (Taliban only, not AQ -- those guys get to stay in Gitmo until AQ forms a nation-state and negotiates the terms of their surrender with the US). In other words, we were going to release these five guys anyway. Instead of getting nothing for them, we get an American serviceman back. Granted, this is a guy who should probably be court-martialed, but that's fine. It's good to get Bergdhal back if for no other reason than to ensure that the military justice system runs its course.

Does that make sense? I have no love for Bergdahl, but I still think this was a reasonable trade.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure about the "obliged to release Taliban prisoners" part. Are the Taliban a recognized nation-state, or are they a non-government-sponsored terrorist group, similar to AQ? If the latter, then I'm not sure I see the difference.

Edit: bleachercreacher raises a good point as well. Ultimately, I'm not saying the trade was wrong or a bad idea, as I don't know enough about the details, but I think the argument "we got something for guys we were going to drop to waivers anyway" isn't a strong argument.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IvanKaramazov said:
Kevrunner said:
He clearly deserted, he was tortured after he deserted most likely. I just can't understand anyone defending the actual trade, other then the deserter's family and friends. I respect everyone's opinion, this is just mine.
Click to expand...
The war in Afghanistan is winding down. I know that not everybody agrees me on this, but I think that we're therefore obliged to release our remaining Taliban prisoners. (Taliban only, not AQ -- those guys get to stay in Gitmo until AQ forms a nation-state and negotiates the terms of their surrender with the US). In other words, we were going to release these five guys anyway. Instead of getting nothing for them, we get an American serviceman back. Granted, this is a guy who should probably be court-martialed, but that's fine. It's good to get Bergdhal back if for no other reason than to ensure that the military justice system runs its course.

Does that make sense? I have no love for Bergdahl, but I still think this was a reasonable trade.
Click to expand...
I just wish we didn't give these guys back until all hostilities have ceased.

 
Ultimately, making the trade may have been okay to do but I don't believe how it went down is okay at all!

To not inform the 8 members of congress because you couldn't trust them to keep it quiet is :bs:

 
the new admin spin as to why they didn't inform congress is that they weren't quite sure what time it was going to happen

Sen. **** Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2-ranked Democrat, presented the timeline as an explanation for why President Barack Obama didn't inform Congress 30 days before the deal. Republicans and some Democrats have sharply criticized the president for failing to notify them and claim he broke the law. Obama says he acted legally.

"They knew a day ahead of time the transfer was going to take place," Durbin told reporters in the Capitol, where military officials briefed the Senate Armed Services Committee behind closed doors. "They knew an hour ahead of time where it was going to take place."
Click to expand...
and its now all Chuck Hagels fault

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel – not President Obama – executed the administration’s final call to proceed with the prisoner exchange of five ranking Taliban detainees for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, administration officials told Congress today in a classified briefing today.

“They indicated [it was] Secretary Hagel [who made the final call],” House Armed Services Chairman Buck McKeon, R-California, told reporters following the briefing Monday evening.
Click to expand...
 
Bowe Bergdahl Refuses To Speak To His Parents: ReportWASHINGTON -- Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl has refused to see his parents or talk to them on the phone since he was released from captivity in Pakistan, the Wall Street Journal is reporting.

Bergdahl had been held captive by the Haqqani Network for five years before he was released to U.S. Special Forces in May as part of a prisoner swap. Under that deal, Bergdahl was set free in exchange for the release of five Taliban detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Bergdahl's parents stood next to President Barack Obama during his announcement of Bergdahl's release -- Berdahl's father sporting a long beard he began growing when his son went missing in 2009.

Despite the White House hailing Bergdahl's release as a victory, the matter became embroiled in controversy as lawmakers complained they weren't given sufficient notice of the planned swap and warned of national security risks of releasing leading Taliban figures. In the meantime, former members of Bergdahl's platoon tagged him as a deserter perhaps not worthy of being rescued.

Bergdhal returned to active duty on Monday after finishing his therapy at a military hospital in San Antonio.
Click to expand...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/15/bowe-bergdahl-parents_n_5587916.html?cps=gravity

Well that's odd.

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Bowe Bergdahl Refuses To Speak To His Parents: ReportWASHINGTON -- Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl has refused to see his parents or talk to them on the phone since he was released from captivity in Pakistan, the Wall Street Journal is reporting.

Bergdahl had been held captive by the Haqqani Network for five years before he was released to U.S. Special Forces in May as part of a prisoner swap. Under that deal, Bergdahl was set free in exchange for the release of five Taliban detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Bergdahl's parents stood next to President Barack Obama during his announcement of Bergdahl's release -- Berdahl's father sporting a long beard he began growing when his son went missing in 2009.

Despite the White House hailing Bergdahl's release as a victory, the matter became embroiled in controversy as lawmakers complained they weren't given sufficient notice of the planned swap and warned of national security risks of releasing leading Taliban figures. In the meantime, former members of Bergdahl's platoon tagged him as a deserter perhaps not worthy of being rescued.

Bergdhal returned to active duty on Monday after finishing his therapy at a military hospital in San Antonio.
Click to expand...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/15/bowe-bergdahl-parents_n_5587916.html?cps=gravity

Well that's odd.
Click to expand...
Not quite as odd as your obsession with Benghazi.

 
jamny said:
Mario Kart said:
http://news.yahoo.com/american-imprisoned-cuba-says-goodbye-family-040429077.html?vp=1

Sad
Click to expand...
The statement from Gross' lawyer came as an Associated Press investigation found the Obama administration deployed young people to the island to stir political dissent under the guise of civic and health programs, putting those foreigners in danger
Click to expand...
what's this?
Click to expand...
I am not sure, but it may cause Tim to downgrade Obama's foreign policy grade from an A++++ to just an A+++.

 
jon_mx said:
jamny said:
Mario Kart said:
http://news.yahoo.com/american-imprisoned-cuba-says-goodbye-family-040429077.html?vp=1

Sad
Click to expand...
The statement from Gross' lawyer came as an Associated Press investigation found the Obama administration deployed young people to the island to stir political dissent under the guise of civic and health programs, putting those foreigners in danger
Click to expand...
what's this?
Click to expand...
I am not sure, but it may cause Tim to downgrade Obama's foreign policy grade from an A++++ to just an A+++.
Click to expand...
You don't strike me as the kind of guy who would be opposed to efforts to destabilize communist regimes. Or do you just reserve your praise for overt military efforts to oust dictators?

 
Widbil83 said:
Hey where did all the Bergdahlguys go in here?
Click to expand...
If you have a beef it should be with the military. They promoted him twice while he was captured, denied he went AWOL, or that he did anything wrong.

Me? I'm just glad I live in a country which tries to take care of its soldiers even the ones republicans don't like.

 
Fennis said:
Widbil83 said:
Hey where did all the Bergdahlguys go in here?
Click to expand...
If you have a beef it should be with the military. They promoted him twice while he was captured, denied he went AWOL, or that he did anything wrong.

Me? I'm just glad I live in a country which tries to take care of its soldiers even the ones republicans don't like.
Click to expand...
As opposed to the ones democrats don't like (i.e all the rest of them)

 
Max Power said:
This was a long time coming. I still hate the trade, but the follow through was correct at least.
Click to expand...
What was the follow-through again?

Because the right or wrong or good or bad of the trade aside, the use of this as some political tool or as some promotion in the Rose Garden and afterwards is even more baffling. This administration seems completely at odds with reality sometimes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
tommyboy said:
Susan Rice: Bowe Bergdahl served with "honor and distinction" http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/unraveling_794412.html …
Click to expand...
What gets me about this in retrospect is not only that Rice will basically say anything that she is asked or told to say, but that she personally went on tv news shows to talk about this as though it were a foreign policy or political victory of some kind. This merited our Nationa Security Advisor's involvement and being out front?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Dr. Octopus
The Top 155 Songs by American Artists According to 5 Middle-Aged Idiots
11 12 13
Replies
639
Views
29K
otb2huffing
O
D
Servicemember killed in Yemen, others wounded
Replies
15
Views
1K
badmojo1006
badmojo1006
D
Bin Laden Documents
Replies
5
Views
708
beer 30
beer 30

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top