The Bowe Bergdahl Trade

[Sombeech]

OK fine, I'll do it, I'll start the thread. Hell I can't escape hearing about this damned story.

Last week or so, I'm pulling up to a convenience store and my wife notices the front page of the newspaper displaying Bowe Bergdahl's picture. She says "oh did you hear about that Idaho solder who was finally freed after 5 years of being a Taliban prisoner of war?"

Emotional sighs of relief as the feels were touched. Wow did that story turn out to be completely not as first thought....

So anyways it's amazing the amount of crap on this dude, and just strange stuff all around with how the deal went down.

GO.

[ahansen60]

As much as we all love to see a captive soldier come home, it was definitely not worth giving up such high value detainees. They must think we're fools to believe these guys won't get back into the fight now that they're released.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

[Byron]

The trade should never have been made...he should have been left there swim in the sewer he dove into. If there were any way to get him back, say trading for a bag of Oreo cookies, then he should have been tried and shot for treason. I certainly believe in having our soldiers backs...but he turned his on us, so later dude...good luck with the goat herding thing.

Our President should be impeached and imprisoned. He (more like his puppet masters) were just looking for a way to get rid of those guys. They don't care about our safety...they probably reckon we deserve anything we get. I know that sounds harsh, but there is NOTHING I've heard to justify this.

I think those controlling the Executive Branch are truly sick people.

[Iceaxe]

You do not negotiate with terrorists.... end of story.

And on a side note I noticed it only took North Korea five days to figure out how to tap into the Bergdahl money stream as they have now snatched an American tourist. I expect this will become much more common.

Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

[Scott P]

The trade should have never been made. Trading an alleged deserter (he hasn't been tried in a military court yet, so alleged should still be used) for high level Taliban members isn't a good trade.

On the other hand this is just the beginning and there is probably more to the trade than meets the eye.

The Afghanistan war is scheduled to end in 2016. I don't think 2016 is a coincidence since it will leave the mess to the next administration. (Either way, the democrats blaming Bush and the Republicans blaming Obama will occur when the mess happens).

International law, which the United States helped write says that prisoners of war must be released after wars have ended. The US is headed for a real mess and a lose lose situation. If the US says the Guantanamo prisoners are classified as prisoners of war, then legally the US must release them. If the Guantanamo prisoners are classified as criminal prisoners, then they have been held without trial for 12-13 years.

I doubt either the timing of the release of Bergdahl or the choosing of 2016 for troop withdrawal is a coincidence. The Begdahl situation is likely going to be small compared to the controversy that will happen in 2016.

I'm guessing the most likely situation is that the United States (whatever administration is in power) will claim that the war in Afghanistan isn't a single war, but is part of a global war on terror, thus the war isn't ended even though we left Afghanistan and the prisoners don't have to be released and are still prisoners of war.

Anyway, maybe the United States should rethink the strategy on taking prisoners. I imagine in the future, than unless much intelligence is to be gained, terrorists will be killed outright rather than taken prisoner.

[Iceaxe]

The whole reason the Gitmo prison exists is to circumvent US law. I don't see why our government would suddenly worry about following the law after flaunting it for the past decade. Gitmo was another brilliant government idea that never should have happened.... Hmmmm.... I'm noticing a trend here.


Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

[hank moon]

So anyways it's amazing the amount of crap on this dude,

We would all be amazed at the crap revealed by a microscope trained on the lives of just about anyone (especially ourselves). That's because most of us live in bubbles of our own making, creating the stories we like about ourselves and the world while suppressing the other stuff (reality)

[hank moon]

You do not negotiate with terrorists.... end of story.

Let's see if I can remember this correctly: Ronald Reagan not only agreed to pay ransom for 66 Americans being held hostage in the Mideast (Iran). It's believed he negotiated for Iran to hold the hostages until just after he was inaugurated as president. And then because he couldn't give Iran what they wanted (arms) he laundered the weapons through Central America... about which his underlings, working in the basement of the White House, then lied to Congress. But not before shredding some evidence and concealing other evidence in their underwear (Fawn Hall). After which the chief operative said Reagan knew everything.


And the GOP is going insane over a prisoner swap?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-lichtenstein/ransom-for-hostages-have-_b_5447806.html

[hank moon]

I think those controlling the Executive Branch are truly sick people.


Ha Ha...yes, WE are

Consent of the governed and all that...

<wink>

[cchoc]

I'm hoping they implanted tracking devices in the Taliban dudes and then in a year, drone strikes. :naughty:

[Sombeech]

If either of these 5 end up killing Americans within a year, Obama is going to be upset when he hears about it on the news.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Byron]

We would all be amazed at the crap revealed by a microscope trained on the lives of just about anyone (especially ourselves). That's because most of us live in bubbles of our own making, creating the stories we like about ourselves and the world while suppressing the other stuff (reality)Sure Hank...if you're like, smoking weed all day long.

[Byron]

Let's see if I can remember this correctly: Ronald Reagan not only agreed to pay ransom for 66 Americans being held hostage in the Mideast (Iran). It's believed he negotiated for Iran to hold the hostages until just after he was inaugurated as president. And then because he couldn't give Iran what they wanted (arms) he laundered the weapons through Central America... about which his underlings, working in the basement of the White House, then lied to Congress. But not before shredding some evidence and concealing other evidence in their underwear (Fawn Hall). After which the chief operative said Reagan knew everything.


And the GOP is going insane over a prisoner swap?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-lichtenstein/ransom-for-hostages-have-_b_5447806.htmlTwo wrongs don't make a right.

[Byron]

I'm hoping they implanted tracking devices in the Taliban dudes and then in a year, drone strikes. :naughty:Wouldn't that be somethin'? Obama takes out the entire Taliban command in a master stroke...Yea Obama!!!

[Iceaxe]

Let's see if I can remember this correctly: Ronald Reagan not only agreed to pay ransom for 66 Americans being held hostage in the Mideast (Iran).

Big difference.... or small difference depending on your view, but Iran is a recognized country subject to international law, trade and sanctions and not a terrorist organization.

Not saying what Reagan did was right, just pointing out the two are not the same thing on many different levels.


Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

[Scott P]

Two wrongs don't make a right.

It's been a lot more than two wrongs. The US has been supporting and arming terrorist ever since the beginning of the Cold War (and sometimes before that). We claim not to negotiate with terrorist, but apparently arming and supporting them is OK.

From a historical standpoint, Reagan was the worse in this regard, though every single administration since the beginning of the cold war has been arming and supporting terrorist. We even dedicated a space shuttle (Columbia) to the Afghan terrorists. Form Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, etc., the US has been involved in supporting terrorist. Israel is a touchy subject now days, but everyone seems to forget that what is now Israel was responsible for terrible terrorist acts against the British (i.e. the bombing of the King David Hotel) and other countries and one of the reasons it was created in 1947 was because of a negotiation with terrorist to end bombings.

Even before the Cold War, the United States initially supported Nazi Germany, though that didn't last long.

We have supported dictatorships and terrorists since the Cold War as long as the repercussions have been considered to be minimal. September 11 2001 proved that the repercussions (we initial supported and armed the terrorist who became Al Qaeda and the Taliban) aren't always so minimal.

Apparently we still haven't learned our lesson though. We're currently supporting terrorist in Syria. :angryfire: I wouldn't trust Ukraine to keep weapons out of terrorist hands either, and we're contemplating arming them as well.

[Byron]

Nice post, Scott! I gotta tell ya though, I'm not concerned about what the CIA or the KGB were doing in central Africa in 1974. This was a super crappy deal that makes no sense at all. In fact, it reeks like shit.

[Iceaxe]

How this negotiation should have been handled.... show up at the drop off point, take charge of the prisoner (Bergdahl), walk toward the helicopter as if you are going to board, then execute the prisoner with a shot to the temple, right in front of the Taliban. The terrorists would have a nanosecond to process what had just happened before the a Special Forces team shot them all except for one. Simultaneously, you show a live feed to the 5 terrorists waiting to be released. Of course, the terrorists would know right away this would mean their own deaths. They would than be executed one-by-one with a knife to the throat, as is their custom.

That is how you deal with terrorists!

:cool2:

[Wasatch Rebel]

Well, most of the time, when we supported terrorists it was in our own interests (against repressive governments) to do so. Negotiating with them is not the same thing. Negotiating is like paying a ransom to a kidnapper...when you do it, you don't stop kidnapping, you get more of it.

[Byron]

How this negotiation should have been handled.... show up at the drop off point, take charge of the prisoner (Bergdahl), walk toward the helicopter as if you are going to board, then execute the prisoner with a shot to the temple, right in front of the Taliban. The terrorists would have a nanosecond to process what had just happened before the a Special Forces team shot them all except for one. Simultaneously, you show a live feed to the 5 terrorists waiting to be released. Of course, the terrorists would know right away this would mean their own deaths. They would than be executed one-by-one with a knife to the throat, as is their custom.

That is how you deal with terrorists!

:cool2:Yeah man...pull a Keyser Soze on 'em!

[Byron]

.https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT-3y-eCTm1wjGsd_-dpuAco5W0Av7zRI0hm5JWUW9mT01OZLlM

[ahansen60]

How this negotiation should have been handled.... show up at the drop off point, take charge of the prisoner (Bergdahl), walk toward the helicopter as if you are going to board, then execute the prisoner with a shot to the temple, right in front of the Taliban. The terrorists would have a nanosecond to process what had just happened before the a Special Forces team shot them all except for one. Simultaneously, you show a live feed to the 5 terrorists waiting to be released. Of course, the terrorists would know right away this would mean their own deaths. They would than be executed one-by-one with a knife to the throat, as is their custom.

That is how you deal with terrorists!

:cool2:
Wow, really? Believe me I am no fan of this trade, but that kind of barbaric attitude is no better than they are. The fact that America actually values human life is the thing that separates us from them.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

[Iceaxe]

Wow, really? Believe me I am no fan of this trade, but that kind of barbaric attitude is no better than they are. The fact that America actually values human life is the thing that separates us from them.

Do you want to win?

The US lost the moral high ground the day the first detainee arrived and was held illegally at Gitmo. Actually we lost it well before then when we happily handed Taliban prisoners over to less civilized nations to be tortured for our gain. After all that shotting a couple known terrorists is where you want to draw the line?



Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

[ahansen60]

No it was the part about shooting Bowe.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

[Iceaxe]

No it was the part about shooting Bowe.

Got it. :2thumbs: Shooting a deserter is where you draw the line.

[ahansen60]

Got it. :2thumbs: Shooting a deserter is where you draw the line.
I definitely draw the line before shooting an American citizen that hasn't even been convicted of anything yet. He very well may be a deserter, but we don't just go around shooting people that we suspect of something. Even if he is a deserter, is death the appropriate punishment?

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

[Scott P]

Even if he is a deserter, is death the appropriate punishment?

In the military, desertion is indeed a capital offence. I don't think anyone has actually been executed for it since WWII though.


Well, most of the time, when we supported terrorists it was in our own interests (against repressive governments) to do so.

Why is it moral to support terrorist for our own interest?

We've even help overthrow democracies in order to install monarchies and dictatorships (i.e. the Iran coup d'dtat) in 1953. This was done because the Iranian government wanted to nationalize their oil companies so that Iranians would share more profits from it's own oil. Before that Britain was just taking it freely and only gave Iran ~17%. So, Britain and the US overthrew the democracy in order to create BP (same company the caused the Gulf of Mexico oil spill). This backfired on us with the Iranian revolution of 1979. It's true that this is in the past, but this is only one example of where we have overthrown even democracies in our own interest.

Carter, Reagan, and Bush Sr. called the predecessors of Al Qaeda and the Taliban to be "Freedom Fighters". Reagan and Bush Sr especially (it started at the end of the Carter administration) armed and supported Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Meanwhile, and while we were supporting them, they were doing things like beheadings, throwing acid in women's faces that weren't completely covered, etc. We didn't condemn anything they did until September 11 2001. Also, shortly after September 11, there were only two countries that recognized the Taliban as the rightful rulers of Afghanistan. Those two countries were Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Do you want to know what countries we stepped up in arming? The same ones that claimed that the Taliban were the rightful rulers of Afghanistan.

Anyway, almost none of these brutal dictatorships, regimes, and terrorist groups manufacture there own arms. The United States and Russia do, with Europe being a distant third place. By a huge margin, it's the United States and Russia (or both) that has armed or is arming all these brutal regimes around the world.

[Iceaxe]

In the military, desertion is indeed a capital offence. I don't think anyone has actually been executed for it since WWII though.

FWIW: 21,000 American soldiers were given varying sentences for desertion during World War II, including 49 death sentences. Death is still the maximum penalty for desertion during time of war. January 31, 1945 was the date of the last American executed for desertion.

It's interesting to note that we actually won that war and it only took us 4 years. :nod:

[oldno7]

.....

[Scott P]

And the beating of the drums of war again:

http://news.yahoo.com/video/obama-taking-nap-iraq-violence-162854442.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-iraq-isis-al-qaida-war-2014-6

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/archaic-rules-enforced-al-qaeda-152800460.html (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/archaic-rules-enforced-al-qaeda-152800460.html)

Here Are The Archaic Rules Enforced By The Al-Qaeda Offshoot Taking Over Iraqi Cities

Earlier this week, roughly 800 insurgents — many of them linked to the extremist al-Qaeda offshoot ISIS — took over (http://www.businessinsider.com/430m-looted-from-mosuls-central-bank-2014-6) the country's second-largest city, Mosul, after 30,000 (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/11/mosul-isis-gunmen-middle-east-states) Iraqi troops fled.

Iraqi officials in Baghdad conceded that the fighters commandeered military arsenal, released hundreds of prisoners from jail, and seized up to $430 million from the city's central bank.

They have told (https://twitter.com/RuwaydaMustafah/status/476978055144300544) people in Mosul to return to work and have asked the more than 500,000 people who fled to come back. But that seems unlikely given the extremists group's draconian rules, which have been enforced with brutal (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/06/11/isis-the-group-too-extreme-for-al-qaida-that-is-taking-over-iraq/) punishments across northern Syria.

The following map is from Institute for the Study of War (http://www.understandingwar.org/) is an up-to-date depiction under ISIS control.

View gallery
.
http://l2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/_hokodJ6ZOg2SrzcwunOUA--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTE1MA--/http://globalfinance.zenfs.com/en_us/Finance/US_AFTP_SILICONALLEY_H_LIVE/Here_Are_The_Archaic_Rules-49ade1396716e66c4e18cc9e99886161
Institute for the Study of War
Journalist Jenan Mousa (https://twitter.com/jenanmoussa) translated highlights from the new rules set forth by the ISIS in the Nineveh (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ninawa/@35.6489845,42.9946419,7z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x154d64a0e85095bf:0x48de7ec9c3a33 efc)province the northwest of Iraq:

ISIS has published its first set of new rules for the province of #Nineveh (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Nineveh&src=hash). In following tweets I will translate highlights. (1/11) @akhbar (https://twitter.com/akhbar)

— Jenan Moussa (@jenanmoussa) June 12, 2014 (https://twitter.com/jenanmoussa/statuses/477040103148118016) • "For women, dress decently and wear wide clothes. Only go out if needed." • " Our position on Shrines and graves is clear. All to be destroyed basically." • " Gatherings, carrying flags (other than that of Islamic State) and carrying guns is not allowed. God ordered us to stay united." • " For the police, soldiers and other Kafir institutions, you can repent. We opened special places that will allow you to repent." • " No drugs, no alcohol and no cigarettes allowed." • " We warn tribal leaders and Sheikhs not to "work with government and be traitors." • " We ask all Muslims to perform prayers on time in the mosques." • " Money we took from Safavid government is now public. Only Imam of Muslims can spend it. Anyone who steals hand will be cut." • " For those asking who are you? We are soldiers of Islam and took on our responsibility to bring back glory of the Islamic Caliphate." • "People you tried secular rulings (Republic, Baathist, Safavides) and it pained you. Now it is time for Islamic State Imam Abu Bakr El Qurashi.(Here are (https://twitter.com/jenanmoussa/statuses/477042935821631490)the documents in Arabic.)

ISIS, with fighters about 75 miles from the capital, is now threatening (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/10894769/ISIS-release-video-urging-fighters-to-march-on-Baghdad.html) to march on Baghdad despite being badly outmannned by Iraqi army forces. The Kurds are also involved (http://www.businessinsider.com/r-iraq-kurds-seize-kirkuk-sunni-militants-surge-toward-baghdad-2014-12), capturing the coveted city of Kirkuk in northeast Iraq.

Importantly, any successful campaign by ISIS will ultimately require the people to allow it.

ISIS does not have the manpower to repeatedly take & hold multiple major urban centres in #Iraq (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Iraq&src=hash). Instead, ISIS appears to represent.. (1/2)
-------------------

[Iceaxe]

A group of 800 defeated an army of 30,000?!? The Iraqis deserve to lose their country to extremist if that news report is true.

Cowards! If you won't fight for your freedom you don't deserve to be free.

Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

[Don]

Bergdahl might very well be a douche bag, but he’s our douche bag and that’s for the military investigation and possibly a court martial to decide. I wasn’t there; I’m not the investigator, not the prosecutor, nor the judge, so I’m ok with innocent until proven guilty. That’s a pretty basic tenant of how our justice system works.

In the mean time (and in the words of President Obama) “The United States has always had a pretty sacred rule, and that is we don’t leave our men or women in uniform behind. We still get an American soldier back if he’s held in captivity. Period. Full stop. We don’t condition that.”

I don’t give a f*ck who the soldier is. He’s ours and we go get him. It’s who we are. It’s how we define ourselves. I’ve known plenty of douche bags in my time in the Army. Plenty of slackers, fakers, liars, thieves, violent abusive alcoholic f*cks, even one or two that worked the system but were still considered deserters (the worst of the worst) by their peers. But I’d be fine with this trade for any one of them.

Speaking of the trade, the Taliban Five (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban_five) were released into the custody of Qatar, there are movement restrictions; they’re not allowed to leave Qatar for 1 year. And you’d have to be pretty na

[Iceaxe]

Two comments...

what happened to the US and "we don't negotiate with terrorists"?

You can't have it both ways. In the end this will cost more lives.

As for Gitmo, how about we just hand the terrorists over to someone that doesn't hold the US pussy point of view as we have in the past. Same as we did with Saddam, that solved our Saddam problems in a simple manner.

Tap'n on my Galaxy G3

[Don]

Are the Taliban of Afghanistan 'terrorists' or are they 'enemy combatants'? (Same question should be applied to each of the Guantanamo prisoners, now that I think about it.)
The NVA and Viet Cong used similar tactics during their insurgency operations against US soldiers, were they 'terrorists'? We negotiated prisoner exchanges with them. Should we have? Was that considered 'negotiating with terrorists'. Should we have just left American prisoners in Vietnam (http://www.nampows.org/nampowslist.html) because we don't negotiate?
Modern use of the 'terrorist' label by the US doesn't care about the definition of the word, doesn't take into account the tactics used by the person or persons opposing us, it simply defines anyone violently opposed to the US as a terrorist. That's an oversimplification. That oversimplifying and over-use of the word 'terrorist' has put us in the position of negotiating with people we said we wouldn't negotiate with.

And yeah, I'm good with handing Guantanamo prisoners over to the custody of countries who agree to take them. Qatar comes to mind as a possible location...