IGX

powerlifter54 wrote: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.

Incredibly fairly stated. This was one of BO's hugest clunkers.

http://gawker.com/angry-conservatives-f ... 1586150981

so many lols

known deserter?

where can i find the trial transcript?

dead man walking wrote:known deserter?

where can i find the trial transcript?

You can find it right next to the accurate US Intel that substantiates the claim that the 5 Taliban traded for Bergdahl were akin to 4-star Generals in the terror fight vs. the USA.

dead man walking wrote:known deserter? where can i find the trial transcript?

It's on the same shelf as the WMD in Iraq report and the The first draft of the Pat Tillman investigation.

He was in the least U.A. .

But - "If one intends to return to "military control" someday, one is guilty of AWOL, not desertion, even if they were away for 50 years. Conversely, if a person was absent for just one minute, and then captured, he could be convicted of desertion, if the prosecution could prove that the member intended to remain away from the military permanently."

No one needs to jump to any conclusions to say he is a deserter.

But he must be an idiot to wander of alone into taliban country.I might do that if I was Batman or Superman ( or Rambo):

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.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCJVH1isVDA[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qHD3BGoRkQ[/youtube]

Eh, three "news" channels. Honestly, when was the last time all three "news" channels were taking similar lines on an issue as political as this one? The court of public opinion matters, like it or not. IMO, Tapper makes some great points in the second video.

I don't see any way this ends well for anybody because:
--the public will not know all the facts for decades, for good reason. Important facts being left out gives news outlets greater ability to fill in the blanks as they see fit.
--leaving Congress out of the loop limits the ability of Congressmembers to cover the decision
--this whole issue is connected with Guantanamo, which is still a hot button issue that just got higher profile
--the case is too high profile to sweep under the rug easily
--recidivism by the five freed detainees is a real risk (if one of them is linked with any attack that kills Americans, coalition forces or Afghan civilians; the court of public opinion will likely make it pretty clear it wasn't worth the price)
--"honor and distinction" have specific meanings in a military context. I'm in no position to say whether Rice misspoke or not (neither of us have the access she does), but it's one hell of a soundbite, which can't be ignored.
--Bergdahl may not be in the proper mental state to be a good witness, either in the short or longer term. This complicates everything.

Well, who was trying to spin that those guys weren't worth a fuck?

Obama should get assfucked for having clowns on his team, as well as the ongoing VA debacle.

Shafpocalypse Now wrote:Well, who was trying to spin that those guys weren't worth a fuck?

Obama should get assfucked for having clowns on his team, as well as the ongoing VA debacle.

He might like that.

Turdacious wrote:Profiles on the five prisoners exchanged for Bergdahl

Or, do you believe this source?

http://www.afghanistan-analysts.org/ber ... soner-swap

http://www.afghanistan-analysts.org/ber ... soner-swap

Good reporting.

Yes I Have Balls wrote:

Turdacious wrote:Profiles on the five prisoners exchanged for Bergdahl

Or, do you believe this source?

http://www.afghanistan-analysts.org/ber ... soner-swap

Since they're not classified, I don't believe that either of them presents the whole picture. Both sources present all five as relatively senior Taliban officials with important skill sets.

Turdacious wrote:

Yes I Have Balls wrote:

Turdacious wrote:Profiles on the five prisoners exchanged for Bergdahl

Or, do you believe this source?

http://www.afghanistan-analysts.org/ber ... soner-swap

Since they're not classified, I don't believe that either of them presents the whole picture. Both sources present all five as relatively senior Taliban officials with important skill sets.

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 US and other countries since 2001. There is no or little evidence of criminal wrong-doing against the other three men. Two while in office – Khairkhwa and Nuri – were known as moderates within the movement. It is also worth noting that Khairkhwa, Wasiq, Fazl and Nuri were taken to Guantanamo after they had ... surrendered peacefully ...

I guess we don't agree.

LOL, they are moderate war criminals and gave up peacefully. Peacefully at the point of a gun, I'd like to point out. But hey, let's give them a pass!

You retards are so fucking civilized and nuanced that you're barely fucking human beings.

Fuck the Taliban and their apologists. I'd like to remind some of you retards that the Taliban gave sanctuary to our enemies before during and after 911. When the USA came knocking and said give OBL and his gang of Al-Qaida goat fuckers, the Taliban said fuck off. They are enemies of the USA and a despite what the soft headed fags in the US government say, they are pack of terrorists and our enemies.

Yes I Have Balls wrote:

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 US and other countries since 2001. There is no or little evidence of criminal wrong-doing against the other three men. Two while in office – Khairkhwa and Nuri – were known as moderates within the movement. It is also worth noting that Khairkhwa, Wasiq, Fazl and Nuri were taken to Guantanamo after they had ... surrendered peacefully ...

I guess we don't agree.

Are you saying categorically that the other source isn't correct? Both are looking at it from publicly available sources, and neither has the whole picture. But I'll let you have your broken clock moment.

Batboy2/75 wrote: they are pack of terrorists. . . .

terrorists, you say.

they're fighting in their own country again foreign invaders. when they did this fighting against the soviet invaders, were they terrorists?

dead man walking wrote:

Batboy2/75 wrote: they are pack of terrorists. . . .

terrorists, you say.

they're fighting in their own country again foreign invaders. when they did this fighting against the soviet invaders, were they terrorists?

The Taliban was created by the Pakistan Intelligence service way after the USSR-Afghan war. Please, if you are going to argue about these things, at least know what the fuck you are talking about.

The Taliban gave aid and sanctuary to Al-Qaida; a world wide terrorist organization. Plus, many have pointed out that they were actually part of the Al-Qaida organization. They are terrorists.

Even then, the Taliban are allies of our sworn enemies. Fuck them, Fuck Al-Qaida and fuck the soft headed degenerate apologists in the West!

Stick with your day job of blowing truckers.

The only reason we even gave a shit about the Taliban and Afghanistan is they harbored Al Qaeda. They make some sort of promise to stop that shit, and we stop hunting them and leave AfPak to the Afs and Paks.

I guess we cared about drugs too, but nobody talks about that these days.

OBTW, fuck the Paks. They are the real problem. They got nukes.

Batboy2/75 wrote:

dead man walking wrote:

Batboy2/75 wrote: they are pack of terrorists. . . .

terrorists, you say.

they're fighting in their own country again foreign invaders. when they did this fighting against the soviet invaders, were they terrorists?

The Taliban was created by the Pakistan Intelligence service way after the USSR-Afghan war. Please, if you are going to argue about these things, at least know what the fuck you are talking about.

The Taliban gave aid and sanctuary to Al-Qaida; a world wide terrorist organization. Plus, many have pointed out that they were actually part of the Al-Qaida organization. They are terrorists.

Even then, the Taliban are allies of our sworn enemies. Fuck them, Fuck Al-Qaida and fuck the soft headed degenerate apologists in the West!

Stick with your day job of blowing truckers.

so do i believe batman's view of history or trust other sources, which write things like?

The Taliban movement traces its origin to the Pakistani-trained mujahideen in northern Pakistan, during the Soviet war in Afghanistan.

emphasis added

anyway, nice job with the final bit of invective. your mind mostly resembles a wind-blown desert hostile to all forms of life, but on occasion, a fresh bit of greenery peeps out.

Turdacious wrote:

Yes I Have Balls wrote:

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 US and other countries since 2001. There is no or little evidence of criminal wrong-doing against the other three men. Two while in office – Khairkhwa and Nuri – were known as moderates within the movement. It is also worth noting that Khairkhwa, Wasiq, Fazl and Nuri were taken to Guantanamo after they had ... surrendered peacefully ...

I guess we don't agree.

Are you saying categorically that the other source isn't correct?

I'm merely pointing out that when you post a link without comment (such as you did) it comes across (IMO) as you are pointing out the definitive truth.

Yes I Have Balls wrote:

Turdacious wrote:

Yes I Have Balls wrote:

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 US and other countries since 2001. There is no or little evidence of criminal wrong-doing against the other three men. Two while in office – Khairkhwa and Nuri – were known as moderates within the movement. It is also worth noting that Khairkhwa, Wasiq, Fazl and Nuri were taken to Guantanamo after they had ... surrendered peacefully ...

I guess we don't agree.

Are you saying categorically that the other source isn't correct?

I'm merely pointing out that when you post a link without comment (such as you did) it comes across (IMO) as you are pointing out the definitive truth.

The next sentence of my comment, which you selectively cut, puts it into context.

EDIT: your attitude toward the Afghan people seems a little ironic considering your listed location.

dead man walking wrote:

Batboy2/75 wrote:

dead man walking wrote:

Batboy2/75 wrote: they are pack of terrorists. . . .

terrorists, you say.

they're fighting in their own country again foreign invaders. when they did this fighting against the soviet invaders, were they terrorists?

The Taliban was created by the Pakistan Intelligence service way after the USSR-Afghan war. Please, if you are going to argue about these things, at least know what the fuck you are talking about.

The Taliban gave aid and sanctuary to Al-Qaida; a world wide terrorist organization. Plus, many have pointed out that they were actually part of the Al-Qaida organization. They are terrorists.

Even then, the Taliban are allies of our sworn enemies. Fuck them, Fuck Al-Qaida and fuck the soft headed degenerate apologists in the West!

Stick with your day job of blowing truckers.

so do i believe batman's view of history or trust other sources, which write things like?

The Taliban movement traces its origin to the Pakistani-trained mujahideen in northern Pakistan, during the Soviet war in Afghanistan.

emphasis added

anyway, nice job with the final bit of invective. your mind mostly resembles a wind-blown desert hostile to all forms of life, but on occasion, a fresh bit of greenery peeps out.

Everyone in the fucking country can be traced to the Mujahedeen you softheaded faggot. The Taliban was a creation of the Pakistani Intelligence service no matter how much you wish it to be otherwise. The Taliban were organized and trained and in many cases manned by Pakistanis volunteers from 1994 to 1999. They did this to stabilize (in Pakistan's favor) Afghanistan in the years AFTER the USSR was gone.

Continue on with your blithering idiot routine.

dead man walking wrote:

Batboy2/75 wrote: they are pack of terrorists. . . .

terrorists, you say.

they're fighting in their own country again foreign invaders. when they did this fighting against the soviet invaders, were they terrorists?

No, they were heroes then.