Americans split on prisoner swap of Taliban for U.S. soldier

[spookyturtle 9,465]

i was a soldier once. I understood what that meant. It means my unit and my country will do everything possible to get me back,, but i would not expect them to swap the leadership of the enemy for me or my son.

The fact he was a deserter adds to that somewhat. I am still in favor of trying to get him back, how about 1 or 2 low level enemy.

I will tell you something many might not know. This emboldened our enemy. Did you see the comment ' Get out of Afghanistan and don't come back". Those guys don't respect good will gestures. They saw what we did as weakness, and it gave morale to our enemy.

I asked sincerely. And I do agree with what you said. It will embolden the enemy. We gave up some top shelf prisoners, no doubt. They don't have any respect for us and they get to come back and fight us again another day. That's the kind of trade you'd expect if they kidnapped the Secretary of State or Defense, not a deserter.

[UncleBeer 244]

Hmmmm: When I look at this poll, I see that a clear plurality of those polled thought this was a bad trade. Not sure how you turned this into "Americans split on prisoner swap", as this poll says they're not.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I wonder how many of the swapped Taliban were in this meeting with the Gipper at the White House back in the 80's. Or maybe these are just their fathers.

[Karee 4,190]

I wonder how many of the swapped Taliban were in this meeting with the Gipper at the White House back in the 80's. Or maybe these are just their fathers.

So you're part of the "two wrongs make a right crowd" Good to know. I figured as much. Nixon was all bout bugging his opponents conversations, so I guess if Obama does the same thing, it's ok?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

So you're part of the "two wrongs make a right crowd" Good to know. I figured as much. Nixon was all bout bugging his opponents conversations, so I guess if Obama does the same thing, it's ok?

I'm not convinced that anything wrong happened when our soldier was brought home. Unlike others, I am not falling for the Republican propaganda here.

http://time.com/2809612/bowe-bergdahl-obama-taliban/

[Karee 4,190]

I'm not convinced that anything wrong happened when our soldier was brought home. Unlike others, I am not falling for the Republican propaganda here.

http://time.com/2809612/bowe-bergdahl-obama-taliban/

Of course you're not convinced anything wrong happened here. You're a die hard Obama fan and refuse to view anything objectively when it comes to him or his administration. That makes any opinions you have on this subject suspect, right off the bat. Obama could have traded Osama bin Laden (if he were still alive) for this soldier and you would find a way to justify it as the right thing to do. You blind loyalty is truly amazing in it's consistency.

[JohnR! 5,495]

What if it was your son?

+100.

I have been asking this same question all along. How would you feel if this soldier were your son, or brother?

[Karee 4,190]

+100.

I have been asking this same question all along. How would you feel if this soldier were your son, or brother?

Probably not a good idea for the president of the United States to be making military decisions using the above criteria. If he did that, there would never be any soldiers in harms way.

[UncleBeer 244]

Probably not a good idea for the president of the United States to be making military decisions using the above criteria. If he did that, there would never be any soldiers in harms way.

+1,000.

[Pooky 3,784]

I'm not convinced that anything wrong happened when our soldier was brought home. Unlike others, I am not falling for the Republican propaganda here.

http://time.com/2809612/bowe-bergdahl-obama-taliban/

It is not partisan politics to understand that the President violated a law that he signed only last year. He may have not agreed with a part of it and acted on that, but that will soon enough end up in the Supreme Court, of that I have no doubt. You can rely on the GOP hammer on this for the next ... oh, six months (almost to the day).

To the average US serviceman and, for that matter, any Allied serviceman, the problems are twofold.

First, they want to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, whether Sgt. Bergdahl is, in fact, a deserter. The non-disclosure agreements signed by his company, the relentless innuendo about their being "psychopaths" and lacking discipline, dripping out from those associated with this Administration, all contribute to lowering morale and eroding their confidence that this Administration supports its service personnel. Because, from what I hear, there is little doubt that his release is a political distraction. That and even if he is found not to have deserted, he has been tainted as such and his reputation is irreparably damaged. The handling of this whole affair has been shockingly awful.

Secondly, every serviceman in Afghanistan and everywhere else that the Taliban and Al Qaeda have a reach knows they have just become more of a target. Capture a soldier, trade them for 5, 10, or even 100 prisoners. The precedent set here is most dangerous. And the effect on morale is just the same as the first concern - not good.

The US knew where Sgt. Bergdahl was being held and had reliable on-the-ground intelligence about the situation. On a number of occasions, a rescue operation was considered and rejected. On what grounds is unconfirmed, but the suspicion is that he was considered a deserter and not worth the possible additional loss of life. An armed rescue mission would have been the way to retrieve Sgt. Bergdahl, in the eyes of the US Armed Forces. Servicemen know that they are putting their life on the line and are fully prepared to do so, especially if it means bringing one of their own home.

The trade off here will be to wait and see whether these 5 Taliban return to killing, terrorizing and kidnapping, or whether Afghanistan makes progress toward peace. If the latter comes to pass, this trade may come to be seen as worth it, deserter or not. On the other hand, if more people die as a result of this trade, if more US servicemen get captured for trading, this will be seen as a very, very bad deal.

Comparing President Obama's actions to those of President Reagan is a distraction. The "he did it, so why can't we?" line of reasoning misses one important fact. The scandal and subsequent fallout of the Iran-Contra affair seriously damaged the Reagan presidency. Do they think this President should get off without the same level of investigation and, if he or his Administration is found to have violated the law, consequence?

If the President is seen as not following the law, a law he signed, then why should anyone else?

Edited June 8, 2014 by Pooky

[UncleBeer 244]

You can rely on the GOP hammer on this for the next ... oh, six months (almost to the day).

I so wish that were true. The only thing establishment GOP seems to get excited about these days is attacking tea party candidates.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Hmmmm: When I look at this poll, I see that a clear plurality of those polled thought this was a bad trade. Not sure how you turned this into "Americans split on prisoner swap", as this poll says they're not.

It's the new common core liberal math

I wonder how many of the swapped Taliban were in this meeting with the Gipper at the White House back in the 80's. Or maybe these are just their fathers.

A. Bush's fault . can also be "conjure up any conservative in history that even remotely did anything similar to what is going on today. It makes it ok.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

So you're part of the "two wrongs make a right crowd" Good to know. I figured as much. Nixon was all bout bugging his opponents conversations, so I guess if Obama does the same thing, it's ok?

You just don't understand. Because Reagan talked with some people who dressed like they did , who we were not at War with, and who had not sworn to kill us, it makes it OK So I guess that makes anyone who did business with the Japanese 34 years prior to WW2 a traitor right ?

You know they don't even believe their own nonsense when they have to pull- A. Bush's fault . can also be "conjure up any conservative in history that even remotely did anything similar to what is going on today. It makes it ok.

They just to embarrassed to admit the emperor was not naked

When "the Obama is our Savior crowd" has nothing left to defend him with expect "A" or an Insult, and maybe the odd face palm or two

[JohnR! 5,495]

Probably not a good idea for the president of the United States to be making military decisions using the above criteria. If he did that, there would never be any soldiers in harms way.

I agree, and that is why so far all we have is pure speculation. We can speculate ad nauseam on this issue and the reasons behind the actions of the administration, and that is all there is to be had: guesses and pure, sheer, unadulterated speculation. It's like watching a hamster running the wheel...

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

I agree, and that is why so far all we have is pure speculation. We can speculate ad nauseam on this issue and the reasons behind the actions of the administration, and that is all there is to be had: guesses and pure, sheer, unadulterated speculation. It's like watching a hamster running the wheel...

Speculation -: ideas or guesses about something that is not known

We have a lot more than speculation

We know for a fact Obama broke the law

We know for a fact that these 5 Taliban leaders were high in the organization

We know for a act they had committed many atrocities and murdered 1000;s

We have the internal Army investigation that concluded Bergdahl left his post

We have countless testimony of his fellow soldiers

We have intercepted Radio traffic indicating he was looking for the Taliban