I want the Marine back, but at Mexico has some standing to detain him. He broke the law (Mexico’s), even though I don’t think intent was there. He definitely was not smuggling the weapons. What evidence do we have of this other than mere possession?
I hate to say it, but at least Mexico has a reason to hold the guy. Weapon and drug laws are similar- no element of intent is needed. Unfortunately.
It does differ from Bergdahl’s matter somewhat.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]Brett620 wrote:
I want the Marine back, but at Mexico has some standing to detain him. He broke the law (Mexico’s), even though I don’t think intent was there. He definitely was not smuggling the weapons. What evidence do we have of this other than mere possession?
I hate to say it, but at least Mexico has a reason to hold the guy. Weapon and drug laws are similar- no element of intent is needed. Unfortunately.
It does differ from Bergdahl’s matter somewhat. [/quote]
Sure, hold him, but not torture him, and is there confidence he can get a fair trial and justice?[/quote]
I agree. Ensure a fair and speedy trail, and if he’s found guilty, try to work with them to commute the sentence. But I think the president should address it publically. The more attention and scrutiny is brought to it, the more the Mexican government will be forced to do the right thing.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Got it.
Just trying to understand the criteria for bringing our people home.
Family background and personnel record?
Mufasa[/quote]
There is little pity for someone who went looking for trouble and found it. [/quote]
Is that your attitude toward American soldiers in general? After all, any soldier who volunteered after 9/11 is essentially looking for trouble. I don’t know how else to describe a war zone.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
It’s the quality of negotiation that is unnerving.
Giving up 5 senior level officials for one Gomer Pile is hardly negotiating, this is not the first screw up by Obama, and probably not the last. Had Obama given up one Taliban, it would be more easy to stomach. The Taliban got the first 5 picks in the NFL draft, we ended up with the guy who washes jock straps and smelly socks.
If you think these released Taliban are going to stay on the couch watching Wheel of Fortune for the remainder of their lives, I have a ticket on the High Speed Rail for you. [/quote]
I love it. You’ve never had a single angry shot fired at you by a foreign enemy and you’re calling Bergdahl Gomer Pyle. One American, in my mind anyways, is worth at least five Taliban members any day of the week, and I don’t care who he is as long as he isn’t some psychopathic serial killer.
The Armed Forces live by a code. Part of that code mandates that they bring EVERY AMERICAN back home, dead or alive, no matter what. If the guys in his platoon had a problem with that and they’re going to bitch and moan about it, fuck them. Where’s their honor? Where was their honor when they were slandering a comrade, a fellow fucking AMERICAN, who was in captivity for years?
There’s a lot of crazy, stupid pieces of shit in this country. And every single soldier who dies does so for them. And those soldiers fucking know it. So the only ones who deserve ANY criticism whatsoever are the ones who are bitching and moaning about this Bergdahl guy. He was an American soldier. Those who criticize the guy should be fucking ashamed of themselves, quite frankly. Those people should be embarrassed even further if they are levying accusations against Bergdahl and they’ve never even been in combat before. [/quote]
Where did you serve?[/quote]
I have several family members who are in the Armed Forces, including a cousin who was a SEAL. I’ve had several family members and friends killed in 9/11, and three relatives have died in war.[/quote]
Ah, so having family involvement trumps the actual service of his platoon-mates in your “honor book.” Gotcha.
[/quote]
And just where the fuck did you serve? What information are you or the others on here calling him a deserter privy to that the rest of us aren’t? Where the fuck does anyone on here get off criticizing this guy and his release?
Whether or not I’ve served is entirely irrelevant here. Do we even know for certain that the guy was a deserter? Are all the facts in yet? No, of course not. Was this guy the most deserving of release, out of all the American POW’s over there? Definitely not. But the fact is that he is still an American who hasn’t been found guilty of anything. And I don’t care who the fuck the American is, every single American that was sent overseas deserves to be brought back here, if for no other reason than to die in their home country and not on foreign soil.
Now, if you want to slam Obama for this release, fine. Have at it. But leave Bergdahl alone until all the facts are in.
Soooooo witness accounts of the multiple people who served, along with his letters and statements are not enough proof? Oh let me guess, he was a double agent. Fuck this Birddog. Deport him to Iraq to serve with his brethren.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Whether or not I’ve served is entirely irrelevant here. [/quote]
You may want to try and show some consistency in your arguments.
Is service relevant or not?
Does someone who has served have the right to criticize or not?
Does someone like you who has not served have that right or not vis-a-vis those who have?
You’re all over the map in a way that suits your own convenience.[/quote]
Whether or not I’ve served has no bearing on the matter. I’m not on here criticizing the actions of a POW who served in a forward area, only the actions of those who volunteered with the commitment to bring back every single American and then turned around and complained that all Americans meant ALL Americans. I’m also criticizing those who have never served and are critical of a soldier’s reaction in a war zone. Sure, I, too, am criticizing the actions of soldiers who served in a forward area. But my criticism is not about their actions during war, but their apparent reluctance to live up to a commitment that they made.
Since I generally live up to the commitments I make, I have very firm ground upon which to stand.
If someone who has served wants to criticize Bergdahl’s actions, fine. Go for it. But unless they are privy to information that no one else is privy to, the criticism should stop short of calling him an outright traitor or deserter. I think what Bergdahl probably did was he made a mistake that he couldn’t undo until he was already in enemy hands. Is that enough to warrant abandoning him in the middle of nowhere? Is that enough to absolve his platoon mates from the responsibility that they knowingly accepted?
[quote]Chushin wrote:
Let me see if I can be more explicit:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
I love it. You’ve never had a single angry shot fired at you by a foreign enemy and you’re calling Bergdahl Gomer Pyle.
[/quote]
And you’ve never had a shot fired at you, but feel it’s fine to say:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
If the guys in his platoon had a problem with that and they’re going to bitch and moan about it, fuck them.
[/quote]
Then
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Those people should be embarrassed even further if they are levying accusations against Bergdahl and they’ve never even been in combat before.
[/quote]
How embarrassed should you be for your comments about these combat vets, when you’ve never been in their shoes?
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Where the fuck does anyone on here get off criticizing this guy and his release?
[/quote]
I’d say the same thing about you and your comments about those brave men who served with honor.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Whether or not I’ve served is entirely irrelevant here. [/quote]
But service IS relevant when you want to rag on others?[/quote]
Ah, but you see, I HAVE been in their shoes. I HAVE sworn an oath that I had to uphold even when I didn’t want to. I HAVE made commitments that were not easy to keep, and I HAVE kept them.
That’s where I get off criticizing the vets who showed extreme reluctance to live up to their commitment. And yes, some of these commitments I’ve made have put my life in danger. Not to extent that war zone endanger one’s life, but I certainly have made commitments that put my life at risk, however small, and I lived up to those commitments. And I didn’t bitch and moan about it because that is what I signed up for and I knew it.
And I HAVE had shots fired at me, but that was part of a youthful indiscretion involving trespassing, cows, fireworks, and a few other things I don’t care to mention here.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Whether or not I’ve served has no bearing on the matter. I’m not on here criticizing the actions of a POW who served in a forward area, only the actions of those who volunteered with the commitment to bring back every single American and then turned around and complained that all Americans meant ALL Americans. I’m also criticizing those who have never served and are critical of a soldier’s reaction in a war zone. Sure, I, too, am criticizing the actions of soldiers who served in a forward area. But my criticism is not about their actions during war, but their apparent reluctance to live up to a commitment that they made.
Since I generally live up to the commitments I make, I have very firm ground upon which to stand.
[/quote]
I think that’s BS.
I’d like to see where his platoon mates said he shouldn’t have been brought back.
And no offense, but the commitments you make hardly involve risking your life.[/quote]
You’re right, I haven’t heard his platoon mates comment in that manner. I am criticizing those on here who have said as much.
You know nothing about the commitments I make.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Whether or not I’ve served is entirely irrelevant here. [/quote]
You may want to try and show some consistency in your arguments.
Is service relevant or not?
Does someone who has served have the right to criticize or not?
Does someone like you who has not served have that right or not vis-a-vis those who have?
You’re all over the map in a way that suits your own convenience.[/quote]
Whether or not I’ve served has no bearing on the matter. I’m not on here criticizing the actions of a POW who served in a forward area, only the actions of those who volunteered with the commitment to bring back every single American and then turned around and complained that all Americans meant ALL Americans. I’m also criticizing those who have never served and are critical of a soldier’s reaction in a war zone. Sure, I, too, am criticizing the actions of soldiers who served in a forward area. But my criticism is not about their actions during war, but their apparent reluctance to live up to a commitment that they made.
Since I generally live up to the commitments I make, I have very firm ground upon which to stand.
If someone who has served wants to criticize Bergdahl’s actions, fine. Go for it. But unless they are privy to information that no one else is privy to, the criticism should stop short of calling him an outright traitor or deserter. I think what Bergdahl probably did was he made a mistake that he couldn’t undo until he was already in enemy hands. Is that enough to warrant abandoning him in the middle of nowhere? Is that enough to absolve his platoon mates from the responsibility that they knowingly accepted?[/quote]
So, his previous history of leaving his post, his open remarks against the war, his sheer fucking stupidity trying to find the Taliban, were just simple mistakes he couldn’t undo ?
No, there is no absolution for his actions he willingly made. He is a grown man, he made his choices, for which he put more soldiers in harms way and possibly even killed.
You should not have to be told not to do stupid shit in a combat zone with a brutal enemy known for torture and beheading.
Do you have to be told that Coop ? Does someone have to tell YOU not to go off wandering looking for the enemy ? I am going to guess no, because you have common fucking sense. Let him go, let’s thin out the herd, let the human species get stronger.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
I think that’s BS.
[/quote]
You just don’t understand DB’s rules. You need to get with the program. If you haven’t served you can’t criticise someone who has for joining the Taliban. Joining the Taliban is a just an innocent “mistake” that any red blooded American could make. However you can criticise US soldiers for “not living up to their commitments.” It doesn’t matter that Bergdahl made a commitment to serve his country then broke that commitment, deserted and joined the Taliban. No, the real bad guys are the ones who complained about their friends getting killed trying to rescue Bergdahl. Anyway, DB knows all about commitment. Not like those psychopaths in Bergdahl’s battalion.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
I think that’s BS.
[/quote]
You just don’t understand DB’s rules. You need to get with the program. If you haven’t served you can’t criticise someone who has for joining the Taliban. Joining the Taliban is a just an innocent “mistake” that any red blooded American could make. However you can criticise US soldiers for “not living up to their commitments.” It doesn’t matter that Bergdahl made a commitment to serve his country then broke that commitment, deserted and joined the Taliban. No, the real bad guys are the ones who complained about their friends getting killed trying to rescue Bergdahl. Anyway, DB knows all about commitment. Not like those psychopaths in Bergdahl’s battalion.[/quote]
I couldn’t have said it better myself.