BFly wrote:Deadman, go back to jerking off to Rachel Maddow and leave the rest of it to us.
My beef is the fact that his cowardice cost other troops lives looking for him. How would you like to be the families of the troops that died?
so you know his actions were cowardice based on ????. wandering off, which he did previously, is now officially cowardice in the bly legal lexicon?
i feel terrible for the family of any service man or woman killed in that stone age country where we had no business squandering blood and treasure. dying while searching for a fellow soldier, however flakey or troubled he may be, seems at least as noble as dying any other way over there.
Really Big Strong Guy: There are a plethora of psychopaths among us.
IMO, ALL Americans in captivity need to be returned/exchanged for. Then, and ONLY THEN, can their alleged miscues/misdeeds be dealt with and in an American court of law. Not the court of public opinion or any one "news" channel.
We have a long history celebrating some dubious achievements of mil folks. Remember the three soldiers captured by the Serbs, that Jesse Jackson rescued? O'Grady for getting shot down in his F-16? Shane Osbourne for giving the chinks a spy plane? Jessica whatshername for getting captured and rescued? Hell, President Bush just stopped showing up when he was a Guardsman. Just quit without telling anybody about it. Anybody seen George recently?
They all fundamentally screwed up. They all got book deals or better, and they all are not so respected by their inner circles.
Yes I Have Balls wrote:IMO, ALL Americans in captivity need to be returned/exchanged for. Then, and ONLY THEN, can their alleged miscues/misdeeds be dealt with and in an American court of law. Not the court of public opinion or any one "news" channel.
I'll ask again. Returned for how much and where do you come up with that number?
Yes I Have Balls wrote:IMO, ALL Americans in captivity need to be returned/exchanged for. Then, and ONLY THEN, can their alleged miscues/misdeeds be dealt with and in an American court of law. Not the court of public opinion or any one "news" channel.
I'll ask again. Returned for how much and where do you come up with that number?
Are you asking how much one American soldier's life is worth? I think in this case, it is certainly worth 5 detainees that would most likely be let go for nothing one Gitmo closes down.
What number are you referring to? I miss something?
Yes I Have Balls wrote:IMO, ALL Americans in captivity need to be returned/exchanged for. Then, and ONLY THEN, can their alleged miscues/misdeeds be dealt with and in an American court of law. Not the court of public opinion or any one "news" channel.
I'll ask again. Returned for how much and where do you come up with that number?
Are you asking how much one American soldier's life is worth? I think in this case, it is certainly worth 5 detainees that would most likely be let go for nothing one Gitmo closes down.
What number are you referring to? I miss something?
So you think 5 is certainly worth it? What makes that number acceptable but not, say, 4? Because the Taliban said so? It's concerning that there's no transparency into the factors that influenced that negotiation. Let's clarify that these weren't just any 5, they were the most senior 5 that were being held, and so you are negotiating not just for the risk they may pose being released but also the risk that was put to get them in the first place. Once you release the highest valued 5, the next 5 aren't the most senior anymore so does that mean future 1 American POW = 10 prisoners now? When there are no more left does this mean cash is an acceptable substitute?
When you apply a value to someone's life, you need to back it up with some legitimate rationale and my issue is that I think the rationale is BS.
kreator wrote:Once you release the highest valued 5, the next 5 aren't the most senior anymore so does that mean future 1 American POW = 10 prisoners now? When there are no more left does this mean cash is an acceptable substitute?
When you apply a value to someone's life, you need to back it up with some legitimate rationale and my issue is that I think the rationale is BS.
You don't know anything about prisoner exchange. Why pretend you do? The guy ultimately responsible for the deal plays for the other political team, you don't like him. So you decided this is a bad deal.
One of the downsides of the Internet is that it allows like-minded people to form communities, and sometimes those communities are stupid.
Yes I Have Balls wrote:IMO, ALL Americans in captivity need to be returned/exchanged for. Then, and ONLY THEN, can their alleged miscues/misdeeds be dealt with and in an American court of law. Not the court of public opinion or any one "news" channel.
I'll ask again. Returned for how much and where do you come up with that number?
Are you asking how much one American soldier's life is worth? I think in this case, it is certainly worth 5 detainees that would most likely be let go for nothing one Gitmo closes down.
What number are you referring to? I miss something?
So you think 5 is certainly worth it? What makes that number acceptable but not, say, 4? Because the Taliban said so? It's concerning that there's no transparency into the factors that influenced that negotiation. Let's clarify that these weren't just any 5, they were the most senior 5 that were being held, and so you are negotiating not just for the risk they may pose being released but also the risk that was put to get them in the first place. Once you release the highest valued 5, the next 5 aren't the most senior anymore so does that mean future 1 American POW = 10 prisoners now? When there are no more left does this mean cash is an acceptable substitute?
When you apply a value to someone's life, you need to back it up with some legitimate rationale and my issue is that I think the rationale is BS.
They aren't the 5 most senior being held, their worth in terms of power in their chain of command is negligible. You are just repeating the Bush Administration's lies back to me. 4 of the 5 "low rung" "Terrorists" surrendered with the majority of the rest of the Taliban at the very beginning of the war.
"Fazl is the only one of the five to face accusations of explicit war crimes and they are, indeed, extremely serious. One would also want to say that Wasiq was deputy head of an agency which carried out torture – except that torture has always been carried out by Afghan intelligence whoever has been in charge and, indeed, this has been no bar to close cooperation with it by the U.S. and other countries since 2001. There is no or little evidence of criminal wrong-doing against the other three men."
What I meant was, doesn't it seem silly to argue over which President is responsible for how many deaths in Iraq/Afghanistan? When in reality, we should be a little bit more angry about which group of NeoCons and high-ranking elected politicians used American fear, anger and rabid "patriotism" over the 9/11 bombings to hoodwink us to going to war in the first place.
That's what I was getting at.
Which shows your a weak bellied faggot. You should not care, your not getting drafted.
Just saw this as I was just getting accustomed to ignoring your posts.
I didn't have to get drafted. I volunteered to serve my country and was active duty, stationed in Saudi during Operation Desert Storm.
What I meant was, doesn't it seem silly to argue over which President is responsible for how many deaths in Iraq/Afghanistan? When in reality, we should be a little bit more angry about which group of NeoCons and high-ranking elected politicians used American fear, anger and rabid "patriotism" over the 9/11 bombings to hoodwink us to going to war in the first place.
That's what I was getting at.
Which shows your a weak bellied faggot. You should not care, your not getting drafted.
Just saw this as I was just getting accustomed to ignoring your posts.
I didn't have to get drafted. I volunteered to serve my country and was active duty, stationed in Saudi during Operation Desert Storm.
Thank you for your service. No what happened to make you a pussy?
"God forbid we tell the savages to go fuck themselves." Batboy
Now we are getting "reports" from the Lib media that Berdahl was "bullied" by his comrades in one ear and that he was tortured,starved and put in a cage by the Taliban, while Administration whores call the men in his unit psychopaths and keep using the term Swift Boating.
This I think is to go together to once again do the Liberal trick of making what is unacceptable excusable, just as they tried to do with the idea that an American should be held responsible for the actions of Jawa animals overseas for making a video and exercising free speech. The idea that he should have been punished for it.
"God forbid we tell the savages to go fuck themselves." Batboy
If he really walked away from his unit all measures should have been taken to ensure that he was returned to the US to suffer the indignity that other vets of foreign wars are subjected to.
WildGorillaMan wrote:Enthusiasm combined with no skill whatsoever can sometimes carry the day.
DARTH wrote:Brandon Friedman, deputy assistant secretary for public affairs for the Department of Housing and Urban Development
"Here's the thing about Bergdahl and the Jump-to-Conclusions mats: What if his platoon was long on psychopaths and short on leadership? (1/5)"
Since he doesn't have a national security/defense job administration, and was tweeting, it sounds like he was speaking as a former infantry officer, not as an administration official.
One of the downsides of the Internet is that it allows like-minded people to form communities, and sometimes those communities are stupid.
DARTH wrote:Brandon Friedman, deputy assistant secretary for public affairs for the Department of Housing and Urban Development
"Here's the thing about Bergdahl and the Jump-to-Conclusions mats: What if his platoon was long on psychopaths and short on leadership? (1/5)"
Since he doesn't have a national security/defense job administration, and was tweeting, it sounds like he was speaking as a former infantry officer, not as an administration official.
When you work for the administration, everything you say on twitter is speaking as an administration official.
Especially with this kind of bio on your twitter account at the time you made the tweet (since changed because of criticism):
There's a reason that large companies and government agencies have public affairs offices, but it's not the PA people's fault if you ignore them. For him to criticize others for a lack of professionalism and discipline is ironic, to say the least.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule
DT, completely agree this guy was a dumbass, but it still looks like his intention was to speak for himself. I still think it's clearly different than the administration pulling something like Clinton did when they started tarring Lewinsky before the troof came out.
One of the downsides of the Internet is that it allows like-minded people to form communities, and sometimes those communities are stupid.
Grandpa's Spells wrote:DT, completely agree this guy was a dumbass, but it still looks like his intention was to speak for himself. I still think it's clearly different than the administration pulling something like Clinton did when they started tarring Lewinsky before the troof came out.
I agree that the Lewinsky thing was more serious (for one thing, the tarring was very effective in that case). However, PA undersecretaries should be the last people to ever make mistakes like this. I have a hard time imagining another administration which wouldn't have already asked for his resignation.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule
From just a perspective on having worked on a large staff, i am amazed nobody did their homework in the administration on Bob Bergdahl and his social media output, let alone talk to the guy. I have no love for Mr Obama, and he is a fool to have thought this deal would be greeted with anything other than pushback, but his staff, who are amateurs in every sense of the word, let him down by letting letting the president get bushwacked by a dad who prays in Pashto in the Rose Garden. Maybe am wrong here but even the President can't have thought this was a good idea.
Set aside the concept of trading a known deserter for 5 TB, trotting out Tokyo Rice on the morning, shows, and changing their spin 3 times, the Rose Garden optic was incredibly unprofessional and just dumb.
"Start slowly, then ease off". Tortuga Golden Striders Running Club, Pensacola 1984.
"But even snake wrestling beats life in the cube, for me at least. In measured doses."-Lex
