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-l...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.

[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-l...b_5447806.html

Two 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.

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. 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!

[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!

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