AURaptor 1,128 Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 Based on the facts you mean ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NC1406 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 Unless he was kidnapped, your post is idiotic. Bergdahl deserves due process. He deserves military due process. That can be much different than civilian due process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 After months to think about it, Bergdahl has concocted a story saying he was just trying to help his comrades. Total BS from a traitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,513 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 Based on the facts you mean ? Yeah, the "facts" as determined by the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,128 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 Based on the facts you mean ? Yeah, the "facts" as determined by the media. Feel free to present your mother jones based facts, or what ever, as best you can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,513 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 Based on the facts you mean ? Yeah, the "facts" as determined by the media. Feel free to present your mother jones based facts, or what ever, as best you can. I'll just wait for the army investigation. I have no compulsion to jump to conclusions or rush to judgement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,128 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 A Pentagon investigation in 2010 concluded that Bergdahl walked away from his unit.[30][31][32] Bergdahl wrote e-mails to his parents in which he reported having become disillusioned with the war effort and bothered by the treatment of Afghans by American soldiers. He said in his e-mail he was ashamed to be American.[21] Some sources say he left an explanatory note before leaving, thoug Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 A Pentagon investigation in 2010 concluded that Bergdahl walked away from his unit.[30][31][32] Bergdahl wrote e-mails to his parents in which he reported having become disillusioned with the war effort and bothered by the treatment of Afghans by American soldiers. He said in his e-mail he was ashamed to be American.[21] Some sources say he left an explanatory note before leaving, thoug no one is denying Bergdahl is a deserter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,128 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 Where is the rush to judgment? He's a deserter who was returned by a ridiculous swap of five terrorists to one, and that was well over year ago. Why is this taking so long? Everyone knows all the facts. Obama is stalling this investigation, delaying this decision for purely political purpose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 Where is the rush to judgment? He's a deserter who was returned by a ridiculous swap of five terrorists to one, and that was well over year ago. Why is this taking so long? Everyone knows all the facts. Obama is stalling this investigation, delaying this decision for purely political purpose Your tin foil hat is on way too tight.The article 32 hearing just happened in Sept. I would expect the General Court Martial to commence after the first of the year. He's being charged with article 99 misbehavior before the enemy, a much more serious charge than desertion. How again is Obama maniputating this case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,128 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 Where is the rush to judgment? He's a deserter who was returned by a ridiculous swap of five terrorists to one, and that was well over year ago. Why is this taking so long? Everyone knows all the facts. Obama is stalling this investigation, delaying this decision for purely political purpose Your tin foil hat is on way too tight.The article 32 hearing just happened in Sept. I would expect the General Court Martial to commence after the first of the year. He's being charged with article 99 misbehavior before the enemy, a much more serious charge than desertion. How again is Obama maniputating this case? No tin foil hat here - May 31, 2014 - President Barack Obama announces the release of Bowe Bergdahl. In exchange for Bergdahl's release, five detainees at Guantanamo Bay will be released to Qatar. Sept 1, 2015 - Article 32 hearing JUST happened ? 15 months after his release, and 5 years after it was known he deserted, gee... I guess there's nothing to see here, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 Where is the rush to judgment? He's a deserter who was returned by a ridiculous swap of five terrorists to one, and that was well over year ago. Why is this taking so long? Everyone knows all the facts. Obama is stalling this investigation, delaying this decision for purely political purpose Your tin foil hat is on way too tight.The article 32 hearing just happened in Sept. I would expect the General Court Martial to commence after the first of the year. He's being charged with article 99 misbehavior before the enemy, a much more serious charge than desertion. How again is Obama maniputating this case? No tin foil hat here - May 31, 2014 - President Barack Obama announces the release of Bowe Bergdahl. In exchange for Bergdahl's release, five detainees at Guantanamo Bay will be released to Qatar. Sept 1, 2015 - Article 32 hearing JUST happened ? 15 months after his release, and 5 years after it was known he deserted, gee... I guess there's nothing to see here, huh? 15 months is not a long time. Calm down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,128 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 I'm very calm. But in light of Obama having broken the law to get this deserter , it makes perfect sense that he'd want , politically, to drag this out and get it well off the front burner and out of the press. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 I'm very calm. But in light of Obama having broken the law to get this deserter , it makes perfect sense that he'd want , politically, to drag this out and get it well off the front burner and out of the press. Don't care on the Obama side. We got one of our Soldiers out of enemy hands and he'll face trial for his violation of the UCMJ. Go petition Congress to take action on Obama. I doubt you'll get very far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,128 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 I'm very calm. But in light of Obama having broken the law to get this deserter , it makes perfect sense that he'd want , politically, to drag this out and get it well off the front burner and out of the press. Don't care on the Obama side. We got one of our Soldiers out of enemy hands and he'll face trial for his violation of the UCMJ. Go petition Congress to take action on Obama. I doubt you'll get very far. And it only took the lives of 6 other soldiers and then trading away 5 terrorists to get back 1 deserter. But you don't care on the Obama side, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 I'm very calm. But in light of Obama having broken the law to get this deserter , it makes perfect sense that he'd want , politically, to drag this out and get it well off the front burner and out of the press. Don't care on the Obama side. We got one of our Soldiers out of enemy hands and he'll face trial for his violation of the UCMJ. Go petition Congress to take action on Obama. I doubt you'll get very far. And it only took the lives of 6 other soldiers and then trading away 5 terrorists to get back 1 deserter. But you don't care on the Obama side, huh? Nope, don't care. There is no proof the Soldiers died looking for Bergdahl. If they did, it's unfortunate but it's the cost of war. Certainly you're not clueless enough to know this is the first case of Soldiers dying looking for someone missing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,128 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 Nope, don't care. There is no proof the Soldiers died looking for Bergdahl. If they did, it's unfortunate but it's the cost of war. Certainly you're not clueless enough to know this is the first case of Soldiers dying looking for someone missing? Those 6 didn't die out of boredom, or catch a cold. You can play the game as to what specifically they were doing when they were killed. But IMO, it's far more than 'unfortunate' that 6 others had to die because this 1 piece of s*** ran off . It's the cost of idiotic bureaucratic b.s. is what it is, not ' war '. That's not who we are. That doesn't reflect our values. Not one damn bit. But, he said, the reason he and his colleagues are angry is that too often that summer, the purpose of their patrols into dangerous areas was not ordinary wartime work like reconnaissance, maintaining a security presence, or humanitarian projects, but rather “to go look for this guy.” http://crooksandliars.com/2014/06/were-six-soldiers-really-killed-because Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 General Dahl, the lead investigator, testified that there was no evidence any Soldier died looking for Bergdahl. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/19/us/bowe-bergdahl-should-not-be-imprisoned-army-investigator-says.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=2 So now you are concerned with combat deaths? I bet you werent 10 years ago... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,128 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 General Dahl, the lead investigator, testified that there was no evidence any Soldier died looking for Bergdahl. http://www.nytimes.c...odayspaper&_r=2 So now you are concerned with combat deaths? I bet you werent 10 years ago... You'd lose that bet. But, as we know all about you , you don't care when it comes to those who died looking for deserters. " Unfortunate " is how you put it, right ? Log books which don't specifically spell out what mission soldiers were going out on , so when a soldier claims it was well known they were going out looking for Bowe, I'll believe him. Saying there is " no evidence " only means the army covered its tracks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 General Dahl, the lead investigator, testified that there was no evidence any Soldier died looking for Bergdahl. http://www.nytimes.c...odayspaper&_r=2 So now you are concerned with combat deaths? I bet you werent 10 years ago... You'd lose that bet. But, as we know all about you , you don't care when it comes to those who died looking for deserters. " Unfortunate " is how you put it, right ? Log books which don't specifically spell out what mission soldiers were going out on , so when a soldier claims it was well known they were going out looking for Bowe, I'll believe him. Saying there is " no evidence " only means the army covered its tracks. That's not what I said and you know it. You are just being a turd. I said I didn't care on the Obama side. Nice try at one of your lame attempt at deflection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.