Politicstreasonbenedictarnoldturncoat

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 07:07 AM

Its well after the Election

Why hasn't the Army released the Bergdahl report?.

My personal belief is it makes the Administration look really really bad.

If it was good news Obama would have done an end zone dance

Any thoughts? And if he DID help the enemy should he be prosecuted?

If Obama knew he Deserted should HE be prosecuted?
8 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
We traded 5 high level detainees for a traitor
7 (88%)
Bergdahl was a legit POW
0 (0%)
Leave Britney alone!
1 (13%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

43 replies, 3523 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 43 replies Author Time Post
Reply Its well after the Election (Original post)
Gunslinger201 Dec 2014 OP
graham4anything4HC45 Dec 2014 #1
Gunslinger201 Dec 2014 #2
graham4anything4HC45 Dec 2014 #4
Winston Dec 2014 #13
ol geezer Dec 2014 #15
fools_gold Dec 2014 #33
ol geezer Dec 2014 #34
fools_gold Dec 2014 #35
ol geezer Dec 2014 #36
fools_gold Dec 2014 #37
ConservativeDemocrat Dec 2014 #39
fools_gold Dec 2014 #41
ConservativeDemocrat Dec 2014 #43
Banshee 3 Actual Dec 2014 #3
graham4anything4HC45 Dec 2014 #5
Banshee 3 Actual Dec 2014 #6
graham4anything4HC45 Dec 2014 #7
Banshee 3 Actual Dec 2014 #9
graham4anything4HC45 Dec 2014 #11
Banshee 3 Actual Dec 2014 #12
rampartb Dec 2014 #8
Gunslinger201 Dec 2014 #10
theblueboar Dec 2014 #14
ol geezer Dec 2014 #16
Gunslinger201 Dec 2014 #17
ol geezer Dec 2014 #19
Gunslinger201 Dec 2014 #24
ol geezer Dec 2014 #27
JoePolitics Dec 2014 #23
Gunslinger201 Dec 2014 #25
JoePolitics Dec 2014 #26
Gunslinger201 Dec 2014 #28
Nephrite Dec 2014 #42
JoePolitics Dec 2014 #18
Gunslinger201 Dec 2014 #20
JoePolitics Dec 2014 #21
Gunslinger201 Dec 2014 #29
waltervink Dec 2014 #30
JoePolitics Dec 2014 #31
Gunslinger201 Dec 2014 #32
ProudNYSTaxPayer Dec 2014 #22
LaughingGull Dec 2014 #38
Gunslinger201 Dec 2014 #40

Response to Gunslinger201 (Original post)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 07:31 AM

1. Amazing that when a hostage is released, one blames Obama

and when a hostage is killed one blames Obama

How about the other side don't take hostages as bargaining chips?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything4HC45 (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 07:34 AM

2. Also if he did Desert

Why did we trade anybody for him?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 07:44 AM

4. They had to be freed anyhow, under the Geneva act

Being that Gitmo was closing, there are rules and they were given to the same country that the others from Gitmo have been.

So why not get something in return?

Why are we holding prisoners? As we are leaving, those prisoners, by law, have to be released.

And a week before this happened, Johnny McCain was going on and on that something had to be done for him. So we did.

One realizes, that Ross Perot's sole purpose in stopping Bush41 in 1988 was because of a grudge Ross held about some men that were missing in action (it went back a long way)
(but it was the reason he ran, and the reason he actually never wanted to be President, just stop Bush41 (but not the Bush politics as he fully supported W in 2000 and 2004).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything4HC45 (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 09:12 AM

13. The protections of the Geneva conventions do not apply to non-uniformed combatants.

They could have been executed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Winston (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 10:17 AM

15. The Geneva Conventions applies to everyone.

Saying the Geneva Conventions did not apply to non-uniformed combatants, is some bullshit the neo-cons came up with to excuse their excesses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ol geezer (Reply #15)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 12:07 PM

33. No, they don't

Show me the text supporting your assertion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fools_gold (Reply #33)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 12:13 PM

34. You can Google the Geneva Conventions documents just as well as I can.

Besides, even If I did point out the pertinent areas, you would find some reason to say they didn't mean what they said they said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ol geezer (Reply #34)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 12:16 PM

35. So, you can't back your assertion?

That's OK, we understand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fools_gold (Reply #35)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 12:20 PM

36. I don't have to.

You are afraid to look.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ol geezer (Reply #36)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 12:54 PM

37. Your assertion is false

by default.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fools_gold (Reply #37)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 01:27 PM

39. You are correct that the Conventions do not apply to non-protected combattants

However, the Taliban somewhat quality as protected. They were known as the "black turbans" in Afghanistan, which so far as the Geneva Conventions are concerned, is a "fixed distinguished sign recognizable at a distance".

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ConservativeDemocrat (Reply #39)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 04:27 PM

41. That is correct, and my point was

that ol geezer's assertion of "The Geneva Conventions applies to everyone." is still false.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fools_gold (Reply #41)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 06:06 PM

43. Well, in truth, it has always applied only to its signatories

...of which the U.S. is one. They limit *our* behavior, not necessarily those of our enemies.

And while it is true that Geneva Conventions do not mention unprotected combatants, in truth the Taliban is much more like NAZI Germany, than it is like al-Qae'ida. They wear fixed distinct signs recognizable at a distance,bear their arms openly, and have a command structure. So any argument that we shouldn't be treating any we manage to take into custody as protected-combatants (i.e. POWs), seems strained at best.

We traded prisoners with the NAZIs all during WW2, and the NAZIs presented a far greater real threat to the existence of this country than the Taliban ever has. Bergdahl isn't exactly my idea of an ideal serviceman, but there is a greater principle at stake here. We bring our people home.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything4HC45 (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 07:40 AM

3. Hostage ? or Deserter?

My Money is on Deserter thats one

Secondly if you are going to trade for a friggen Deserter PFC why give up the TOP 5 prisoners you have in exchange

5 who are back in the fight again


Imagine trading a Rommel, Kesselring, Student, Model, von Rundtstedt for a Slovik

Imagine trading a Grant, Peck, Wayne, Gable, Flynn for a Pauley Shore

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Banshee 3 Actual (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 07:50 AM

5. Under the rules, all were about to be released from Gitmo anyhow and they are

now in the same country the others are in, and they are not free by any means.
Just out of Gitmo.

but let's blame the President.


It's like almost to a person everyone thinks Abraham Lincoln was the best President, and
look at all the prisoners he released and gave pardons and amnesty too.
Should Lincoln not have freed those prisoners?
I may have my doubts, but, as my vote was my proxy and I would have voted for Lincoln
twice if I could have, anything Lincoln did during his short term,was 100% okay with me.
Wish he had a chance to serve the full 8 years.

Same with President Obama and the other Presidents I have championed over the years
(not all those I voted for, but the ones I championed).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything4HC45 (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 07:53 AM

6. Yes I do blame him for this stupidity You blame Bush for things, I can Blame Obama

You dont get it and never will understand

You don't trade the top5 prisoners you have for someone like Bergdahl

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Banshee 3 Actual (Reply #6)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 08:10 AM

7. No, the top AQ guys #1, 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11 were all either killed or captured

KSM would be #3 and he has not been released.
Bin Laden is #1 and President Obama got him, unlike Bush who let him flee (along with
3000 other AQ and Taliban in the mountains of Tora Bora

But many #2s after were killed, so the ones captured and in Gitmo were not the Top 5 AQ by any means, and legally and morally, they would have been released in short time anyhow
(and again, are now not free, but in the same place they would have been as the law of war states.)

amazing how the President gets blamed for Bush's folly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything4HC45 (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 08:29 AM

9. He was traded for TALIBAN not AQ , Einstein...

Jesus can you ever get facts correct?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/01/us/bowe-bergdahl-american-soldier-is-freed-by-taliban.html?_r=0

The lone American prisoner of war from the Afghan conflict, captured by insurgents nearly five years ago, has been released to American forces in exchange for five Taliban detainees held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, Obama administration officials said Saturday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Banshee 3 Actual (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 08:31 AM

11. The Taliban are not on the terrorist list. So that is why we can negotiate with them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything4HC45 (Reply #11)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 08:36 AM

12. You really don't comprehend do you? facts mean nothing to you, you just invent as you go

You aren't even Honest enough to admit you made a mistake in who the 5 prisoners were members of


Sad

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Original post)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 08:24 AM

8. i'm willing to let the army decide

and to allow them all the time they need to decide,

as you say, the election is over, so why the rush?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rampartb (Reply #8)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 08:31 AM

10. Because the investigation is complete

It's sitting on some Generals Desk "under review"

I interpret that to mean

Hoo boy! This is bad

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Original post)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 09:45 AM

14. Priorities. The GOP top priority

 

is to eliminate the excise tax on medical device makers.

Thats what America voted for!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to theblueboar (Reply #14)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 10:21 AM

16. That and to make Obama a one term President - twice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ol geezer (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 10:43 AM

17. Is his 2nd term worth

The damage he's done to the Democrat Party?

2 record midterm losses in the House,

losing the Senate

A 25 yr (estimated) slog to get the south out of Republican Control?

Obama is the best thing to happen to Republicans since Ronald Reagan

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Reply #17)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:08 AM

19. Damage Obama has done to the Democratic parry?

The DLC party leadership picked Obama because he was to Right of Center. Then ran him using an idea from the Republican playbook, of running candidates from the Center, then going hard Right once in office. You know, like Bush the Lesser did twice?
The Democratic party anymore, is nothing more than a little more honest, Left wing of the Republican party.

And Obama is on the record that Ronald Reagan is an idol of his. Look it up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ol geezer (Reply #19)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:17 AM

24. Obama is a little left of


Che Guavara

But you did make me laugh

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Reply #24)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:24 AM

27. Just because you think so, does not make it so.

Obama is a little to the Left of Hillary. Hillary is a card carrying DINO. Both are to the Right of Center. You should be happy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Reply #17)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:14 AM

23. In 2006, Bush and the GOP controlled the White House, the Senate, and the House ...

... by Jan 2009, the GOP controlled none of those.

In 2016, the Dems will again control all three.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePolitics (Reply #23)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:19 AM

25. And Nancy Pelosi

Will be Speaker again

And Tiny Tim will walk,

I Believe I believe I believe

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Reply #25)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:22 AM

26. There won;t be a GOP President in 2016.

The GOP does well in mid-terms only.

Presidential elections have increased turn out, and the Dems do much better.

The Demographics are what they are. And the GOP out-reach to minorities and women, is a joke.

Enjoy the next two years of Obama doing what he wants, and the GOP Congress spinning in circles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePolitics (Reply #26)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:26 AM

28. Hope you got somebody besides Hillary

Wait a Minute

Biden should be the successor, right?

What's he poll at? Oh yeah 16%

Can you say McGovern Landslide Loss?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to theblueboar (Reply #14)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 05:16 PM

42. Must have been a hell of a policy discussion on that one

when it was slipped into the ACA....Let's tax the disabled and infirm....Brilliant! the voters will just adore it!

I wonder if the revenue gain from taxing pacemakers, wheelchairs and artificial hips is enough to offset the hit the politicians are taking on that one.

I suppose we could pretend that when the cost of manufacture goes up, the price of the product remains the same...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Original post)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:06 AM

18. Bergdalzzziiii!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePolitics (Reply #18)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:10 AM

20. Aren't you even curious?

His Platoon Mates believe he trained the Taliban in our tactics to help them attack us

I want to read that report. Not DiFi trying to screw over good people at CIA

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Reply #20)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:12 AM

21. I'm very very concerned.

This is absolutely one of the most critical things we should be focused on .... especially if it stops folks from looking into the CIA use of torture, a great intelligence gathering technique, about which, Bush knew nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePolitics (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:30 AM

29. Old news

The DOJ has already looked into this

DiFi cherry picked stuff to put in a BS report but they needed something to get Gruber off page 1

Cheney was right to call it a Crap report....none of the ex CIA Directors will endorse it because it stinks to high heaven

It's gonna blow up in ya'lls faces

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Reply #29)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:33 AM

30. No ex-CIA director will endorse it

 

because they're all guilty of war crimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Reply #29)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:37 AM

31. Cheney is a sociopath.

Gruber? Bwahahahahaha! No one cares about that in the least, except maybe Fox and Friends.

Bush and Cheney allowed 9/11, and then responded by invading the wrong country, and then torturing people to get them to make connections between Saddam and Al Qaeda where none existed.

That will be one of the huge failures that the Bush administration will be remembered for.

Worst economic collapse since the great depression. Worst terrorist attack. Worst foreign policy decision by invading and occupying Iraq. And, implementing a torture program that runs directly against the Constitution and all international law.

That's the legacy that is going to hang around the neck of the right wing for decades.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePolitics (Reply #31)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:45 AM

32. LIHOP/MIHOP!!!!!

It's Bush, hes an evil genius, no he's an idiot!

Well which is it?

I'll bet the next President is an R and nobody is prosecuted for enhanced interrogation

Just as nobody will be prosecuted in the current administration for killing US Citizens by Drone

Fortunes of War

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Original post)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 11:13 AM

22. I am of the personal belief that this was actually a CIA decision

I believe that we wanted to release one or all of those men for reasons unknown to the public and Bergdahl was the excuse. Just hypotheticals to follow.

Is it beyond the scope that we turned one of the five into a double agent? We made promises to take care of him and his family in return for his spying on them for us?

Is it beyond the scope that we implanted trackers into one or all of them to keep tabs on exactly were they are and who they are meeting with to gather intel? I know it is some spy movie crap, but that doesn't mean it isn't a possibility.

Is it beyond the scope that we couldn't kill them in captivity without an avalanche of backlash but in two years when they are back in the middle east we can much more discreetly end their days?

There are dozens more than I could come up with, but I think you understand my point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Original post)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 01:06 PM

38. When I first read the first option...

I thought it said: We traded 7 high level detainees for a tractor

I was going to comment on the fact that if it was a John Deer tractor, it was worth it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LaughingGull (Reply #38)

Thu Dec 11, 2014, 02:03 PM

40. Better have been a REAL John Deere

And not one of those ones with the Tecumseh Engines

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicstreasonbenedictarnoldturncoat