Bergdahl scandal; a Veteran's perspective

Yes, I think that Bergdahl could be considered a deserter. He seemed to think that he was going to Afghanistan to help the people. We don't know what he was thinking when he left. There's an awful lot of speculation, but he will likely face a court martial. Yes, I think that his health was actually deteriorating. Afghanistan is a poor, poor country. They never have enough to eat and that can leave people very vulnerable to disease. Bergdahl appears to have lost a lot of weight.

We do not leave our soldiers behind. No exceptions.

The Taliban is not a terrorist organization. It is a military force that we have been fighting. We are leaving Afghanistan next year and will have to let every single Taliban go at that time. The 5 will be held in Qatar until we exit. At that time, they will return to their poverty stricken lives to eke out a miserable existence.

There's no scandal here; just a sensible exchange.

 

oh, guys, we've been arguing with one of the smartest JAG lawyer in the world...clearly a great speculator and oh so overly-educated in Military Law and Justice, that should he not only defend the traitor called Bergdahl, DOD should appoint him counsel to all tribunals
Hey, bud, you do know the difference between military law and constitutional law, eh.
How many cases of military actions have you defended at trial?
I have no use for Muslim sympathizers...........we can tell you really hate American's and the military.
Hey, how many years have you been practicing Military Law?
By description of the Rules of Conduct (he left his post in wartime), he is guilty of desertion. now, now, before you have a seizure, with the military ,you are guilty until proven innocent. That is the difference between Constitutional law.
But since you've spent years as a JAG and years in active service, you already knew that............

 

mea culpa.
I erroneously translated "did not confirm" to "denied".

As it happens, there were six deaths in the region in the 12 weeks or so after he was captured.

I have to agree that it seems reasonable to assume that on all combat missions after the fact that one of the objectives would be "keep an eye out for Bergdahl of signs of his location". Death in combat is a regular occurance and its quite clear that Bergdahl didn't cause those deaths, the ENEMY did.

That there is a claim that those deaths would not have occured if Bergdahl hadn't allegedly gone awol is nothing more than supposition and cannot be substantiated, especially in a highly dangerous combat zone. But I suppose that's the beauty of such a claim - optimum emotional reaction without a single fact required.

 

When I lived on the North Shore, my main longboard was a 9'0" HIC.
Loved it so much, I actually shipped it back to the mainland with me.
Years later, I sadly passed it onto a friend who was shipping out to tropical climes.

A bunch of us used to pass around this complete turd of an old longboard that we called, "Old Yeller".
It was a yellow beast that had been sold and resold, damaged, repaired, sold and resold some more, and somehow I became it's steward.

Old Yeller had a single fixed skeg, a huge one, and as ugly as it was, it caught waves like nothing else on Chun's Reef.
It was seriously ugly, but everybody wanted to trade for it out on the sets because it was such a pleasure to ride.

Good times.

 

IMO, only vets and active servicemen should be allowed in this thread as we are more familiar with military service and military justice. civilians are just not knowledgeable enough.
any others are just irrelevant. sorry to my friends in advance.

 

Jonsa,
The original post was anything BUT a right-wing partisan extremist offering.

Hard-left and hard-right schmucks have managed to TURN it into something resembling that, but remember, it was your choice.

You always have the choice to listen to the words of an independent free-thinker like myself (and a military Veteran at that), and then decide whether to keep an open mind and have an adult discussion
or
to resort to tired and stale partisan-political attacks.

Me, I enjoy adult conversations.
The internet is FULL of tired, stale, partisan-political nonsense.
I hate that this this website seems to thrive on it.

 

Oh, and by the way?

I believe in my heart of hearts that Bergdahl is going to freely admit that he deserted, and that he has contempt for the United States and his US Army team-mates.

It'll be his big F#%k-you to the people he held contempt for just over five years ago.
AND, he probably believes that he will get a Presidential pardon for his crimes.

Just my prediction.
We shall see how this pans out.

 

either you can't read very well or you're making stuff up, maybe both

show me where i claimed i served, you can't because i didn't say it, so stop being dishonest and worse

 

Your comments are illogical and, well, silly. Bergdahl is not a traitor. I don't see anything wrong with a soldier seeing the Afghani people as human beings. I see something wrong with the soldiers who don't see the Afghanis as human beings. That anybody would find the killing of a little girl anything but tragic bothers me.

You should read the Rolling Stone article on Bergdahl from a couple of years go. The unit he was in had quite a few problems with discipline. They didn't exactly conduct themselves honorably. No, Bergdahl didn't fit in too well.

All war is an atrocity..

 

A friend posted this interview on FB.
I watched it on his computer at his house this afternoon.

Interesting.
These combat Vets, all of them former team-mates of Bergdahl's, seem credible to me.

Hard-lefties, please do not attack me because the interview was apparently conducted on FoxNews (remember please that I do not watch television, and this interview was merely provided for viewing on FB).

Just watch and listen.
They seem credible to me.

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/06/145...-back-white-houses-swift-boat-smear-campaign/

Before I posted it, I screened it thoroughly on my own computer, and checked it for viruses.

There were none found.

 

That's great. He is what he is. He joined the military and was transformed by his experience, and his story will make a useful topic for discussion about American values.
And if he's suspected of a crime, he should be tried, but none of that affects the correctness of his return or excuse the disgusting anti-American spectacle we've seen coming from the right in their latest Obama derangement hysterics.

 

You have an odd perspective, Surfer Joe.

You seem angry.
Is this so, or is it just my perception?

I have studied psychology for many years, and I am fairly intuitive.
Is there some deep-seated hatred going on here?

 

Firstly, I responded the OP in a reasonable fashion, pointing out what I felt were inaccuracies or partisan responses.

Your self assessment of being a free thinker who can calmly and unemotionally distill the essense of this situation struck me as disengenous when you followed that statement on with a number of others that I construed as purely partisan perspectives.

I am always willing to discuss things maturely and intelligently. You comments about this community being inhabited by entrenched partisan parrots who seem incapable of engaging in anything other than pernious parroting of partisan propaganda, while ignoring facts, common sense and appear devoid of comprehending the effects of human nature on human events, are lamentably accurate. (be it right or left or upside down).

OTOH, when confronted by partisan bumpersticker spewing mindless parroting I am more than willing to respond by calling that entrenchment utensil a spade.

 

The trade is wrong on a category level. You just do not trade a foot-soldier for five four star generals. Look for other options, period.

 

I predict Bengdahl will admit to unauthorized absence and not desertion. In order to meet Article 85, Bengdahl would have intent to remain away from the unit permanently. From his military record, he has a history of UA but always returns to his post. And there is no evidence in his circumstances to suggest he would not return.

Personally, I think the Army made a mistake in allowing Bengdalh to complete his assignment in Afghanistan. That does not mean he was a bad soldier, but clearly, his superior officers should have witnessed the severe psychological changes in him that others in his unit did.

 

What the soldiers who served with him said, which is what started all of this:


[video=youtube;npZGicNpUWc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpag e&v=npZGicNpUWc[/video]

 

Although this is a response ot Jonsa, this is my response to your OP.

Your post was a partisan attack. Your first premise is that President Obama should be impeached for his action to swap 5 Taliban leaders tfor one U.S. soldier. I would also state that this was not the first "offense" that you think President Obama should be impeached. Second, you actions to Sgt Gengdalh. You are presuming him guilty until proven innocent based on tabloid and internet stories. That is not all the facts to the case and Sgt Bengdahl should have at least a fair trial before being judged. Third was your mumbo jumbo about who and what you are. On the internet, no one cares and no one wants to know. Fourth, you stated the Pentagon should do the "right" thing by charging this guy. There is no other options for you even if the facts do not meet your political ideology.

Despite at your attempt of being "independent," you are citing what is being talked about in far right wing radio and internet. That is not being an independent thinker, it is being a propagandist to the nth degree.

 

Alwayssa, Jonsa,
You simply have it all wrong.

I predict that if I started a new thread extolling the virtues of free love with hairy-legged hippie chicks, while smoking a bong (both activities are ones that I highly approved of, by the way) you would think that I was just the greatest fellow, and not at all a reich-winger.

I predict also that if I revealed that I enjoy certain films starring Tim Robbins and/or Susan Sarandon, and that my band does quite a few Neil Young songs, you would begin to suspect that I was some sort of lefty-liberal type of guy.

If the very first posting you ever viewed from me was one wherein I declared my undying love for Janeane Garofalo (I DO find her exceedingly attractive and funny, and if I were younger, and single, I would love to have sex with her), you just might believe that I was a lifelong Democrat voter.

The fact of the matter is, I posted honest observations and sentiments that are decidedly unpopular with Obama supporters, and you feel it convenient to brand me a jack-booted Tea Party loyalist.

Life isn't all about convenient little boxes, friends.
Not everybody fits into this box or that box.

Open your mind a little.
Very few people fit neatly into the left-or-right cookie cutter shapes.
Would you agree with that, or does it HAVE to be one or the other?

 

And by the way,
Are Diane Feinstein's latest remarks regarding all this partisan attacks?

She is beating up your President pretty good.

(Granted, the woman is just trying to hold onto her seat at the big table, but still…. Funny, right?)

 

Turn in your secret decoder ring and map to the tree club house. You've been identified as a right winger and if you are not for them, you are against them.

 

then you are being less than truthful about your extensive knowledge of the military processes. So you admit to having no practical knowledge about how the military justice system works, yet you run through this thread denouncing the military process as if you have first hand knowledge. Talk about being dishonest.....
I'll say it one more time, you should not spout a superior attitude about anything military. You have no knowledge at all about the military. You pull a couple of statements from the UCMJ without knowing the trial/tribunal rules for such an event. and you don't know the difference between AWOL and desertion.
At least now you are admitting it.
You know nothing about this, you are spouting misrepresentations and falsely implying that you "know" these things.

 

I would agree with what is highlighted in bold. But that does not dissuade the fact that what you wrote about Sgt Bengdalh is a regurgitating of RW radio and internet talk. This stuff was being spoken from day one despite the lack of evidence and facts.

 

She is doing what other politicians do, CYOA. And that is all. The same for Sen McCain who was first for it and then against it. It is simply politics and that is all.

BTW, the President is your President as well, but not that you would admit that little fact. Would you?

 

military system is different than civilian courts. If you are brought up on charges, in the military, it is upon you to prove your innocence. It is not incumbent upon the prosecution to prove the charges, they've already been leveled. Face it, if you are there, they have you unless you can PROVE your innocence.
There is no 5th amendment Rights in the military.
You do not have Constitutional protections OR due process as described by law. The military is a law unto itself.
How would I know this? I had a problem with false authority while in service. 2 EO masts and 1 captain's mast.

 

Yes you will.