I am quite surprised that no one has brought up the subject of Bergdahl's release trade. Having a son in Afghanistan right now, this is very near and dear to me. I'm interested in what you all have to say.

I'm all ears.

Speak up.

Poorly handled by the administration, but it was the correct thing to do. They should have realized the controversy over his desertion and not made a big hoopla out of his release - that was a PR blunder. But as for releasing the 5 Taliban POWs - they would have to be released eventually anyways, since Gitmo sooner or later will have to be closed (or at least the prisoners who have been there for over ten years now will have to be returned at some point). Unless there are some sort of civilian charges that can be brought against them, with the US pulling out of Afghanistan thier continued jailing by the US can't be justified. So if we can get one of ours back for 5 of thiers, so be it. But now that Bergdahl is back - he will have to face the music for his desertion.

I think back to the execution of Pvt. Eddie Slovik. Slovik’s offense: desertion in wartime. This scum deserves the same fate as he committed the very same offense.

That's my thought on the topic... he should not ever be allowed to roam free. The lives of everyone on that post were trusted to him when he was on guard duty and walked away without being releaved.

He was a deserter, a traitor.

Please bare with me, I'm tired after a long, busy 12 hour shift and it is my bedtime. But.. Isn't it written somewhere that deserters of the military, such as this, are to be executed?

I spent my half hour break reading this. Yes, I read and comprehended all 7 pages in 30 minutes. Bowe Bergdahl: America's Last Prisoner of War by Michael Hastings | Politics News | Rolling Stone (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/americas-last-prisoner-of-war-20120607)

Exactly... Outside of a theater of combat, you are AWOL until its been 30 days THEN you become a deserter. In a combat zone you are a deserter the moment you walk away. THere are no excuses... no need to "intend to stay away" like the talking idiots at the white house and in some of the media have been saying.

I'll try to look up and see if I can't find the Military code that specifies that.

As far as what Rolling Potatoes prints.....they have their own agenda to push.

Smoothy, read the Rolling Stone article I linked. From my understanding he was in a theater of combat and he specifically stated that he was going to walk away. He even asked what could happen to him if he did.

It does feel good, however, to know that his town will not be celebrating his release after all.

Yes...everything I have heard so far indicated he had every intent to leave as evidencesd by his note, and apparently this was only news to the Administration(in which case they were stupid)....or they were flat out telling lies to everyone. Neither situation is acceptible.

I also am glad to hear that town changed its mind.....but they should never have even planned that party in the first place. It couldn't have been news to them either.

� 885. Art. 85. Desertion

(a) Any member of the armed forces who-
(1) without authority goes or remains absent from his unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to remain away therefrom permanently; (2) quits his unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to avoid hazardous duty or to shirk important service; or (3) without being regularly separated from one of the armed forces enlists or accepts an appointment in the same or another one of the armed forces without fully disclosing the fact that he has not been regularly separated, or enters any foreign armed service except when authorized by the United States;
is guilty of desertion.

(b) Any commissioned officer of the armed forces who, after tender of his resignation and before notice of its acceptance, quits his post or proper duties without leave and with intent to remain away therefrom permanently is guilty of desertion. (c) Any person found guilty of desertion or attempt to desert shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct, but if the desertion or attempt to desert occurs at any other time, by such punishment, other than death, as a court-martial may direct.



Punitive Articles of the UCMJ (ArmyStudyGuide.com) (http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_topics/military_justice/punitive-articles-of-the-.shtml)

So now the question goes to POTUS. Isn't he to give a 30-day notice that he is planning on releasing these prisoners, yet the decision was made within a few hours without notifying the congress or senate.

Please dumb it down for me. I try to keep up with politics, but I don't have the time to sit down and really listen enough for this to sink in.

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/chess-play-793481.html

No, he should not get a hero's welcome back hoopla/parade, and yes, he was a deserter and should get whatever punishment that merits. I remember hearing he is in poor health (?), but too bad. What oh what was he thinking and how far did he think he would be able to go (to Pakistan?) when he walked away from his platoon?

No, he should not get a hero's welcome back hoopla/parade, and yes, he was a deserter and should get whatever punishment that merits. I remember hearing he is in poor health (?), but too bad. What oh what was he thinking and how far did he think he would be able to go (to Pakistan?) when he walked away from his platoon?

Honestly Carol, that was not the response I was expecting from you, but I totally and completely agree.

Honestly Carol, that was not the response I was expecting from you, but I totally and completely agree.
And I am totally pi$$ed about the WH PR.

On my post I stated that at least 5 soldiers died in the attempts to find/rescue him. Last night I heard a tally as high as 14 .

IBD also asks : How many Americans lost their lives in the pursuit and capture of these jihadists? How many Afghan and American deaths were they responsible for? How many more will die as the result of their release and their likely return to the battlefield?
Obama Swaps Taliban Terrorists For Possible Deserter Bowe Bergdahl - Investors.com (http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/060214-703053-gitmo-taliban-prisoner-swap-bowe-bergdahl.htm)

No one but me has addressed the question: was trading 5 Taliban the right thing to do to get Bergdahl back, regardless of his desertion? Never mind whether it was good or bad for PR, or why the administration failed to inform Congress - would you have made the same trade?

I wouldn't have traded a moldy loaf of bread for him.

The moldy loaf of bread has far more value and use.

No one but me has addressed the question: was trading 5 Taliban the right thing to do to get Bergdahl back, regardless of his desertion? Never mind whether it was good or bad for PR, or why the administration failed to inform Congress - would you have made the same trade?
I addressed it in my posting on this subject.

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/chess-play-793481.html

In my view ,this was a 'wag the dog' deflection gone bad.

I wouldn't have traded a moldy loaf of bread for him.

The moldy loaf of bread has far more value and use.

So you would have condemned him without trial. Seems par for the course.

So you would have condemned him without trial. Seems par for the course.

He walked off guard duty in a combat zone (that warrants the death penalty under UCMJ code)... left his weapon behind.. as well as a note that he was leaving. He convicted himself.

Also keep in mind he was NOT euqal in value to 5 Taliban commanders. He was a grunt with less than a years service.

and here's a blast from the past circa August 2010 .....

A captured American soldier is training Taliban fighters bomb-making and ambush skills, according to one of his captors and Afghan intelligence officials.
Private Bowe Bergdahl disappeared in June 2009 while based in eastern Afghanistan and is thought to be the only U.S. serviceman in captivity.
The 24-year-old has converted to Islam and now has the Muslim name Abdullah, one of his captors told The Sunday Times.
Bowe Bergdahl: Taliban claim captured U.S. solider is teaching fighters bomb-making skills | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1305184/Bowe-Bergdahl-Taliban-claim-captured-U-S-solider-teaching-fighters-bomb-making-skills.html)

and here's a blast from the past circa August 2010 .....

A captured American soldier is training Taliban fighters bomb-making and ambush skills, according to one of his captors and Afghan intelligence officials.
Private Bowe Bergdahl disappeared in June 2009 while based in eastern Afghanistan and is thought to be the only U.S. serviceman in captivity.
The 24-year-old has converted to Islam and now has the Muslim name Abdullah, one of his captors told The Sunday Times.
Bowe Bergdahl: Taliban claim captured U.S. solider is teaching fighters bomb-making skills | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1305184/Bowe-Bergdahl-Taliban-claim-captured-U-S-solider-teaching-fighters-bomb-making-skills.html)
And that article ends with--

Most of the skills he taught us we already knew,' he said. 'Some of my comrades think he's pretending to be a Muslim to save himself so they wouldn't behead him.'

A coward through and through?

His old man is doing a very convincing act pretending to be Muslim too.

His old man is doing a very convincing act pretending to be Muslim too.
I figure him as Amish or from the duck-hunter TV show. Give the dad a can of beer and a rifle and there ya go! ZZ Top was never called Muslim.

Has anyone thought that President Drone may have some means of keeping track of these "commanders?" The GPS trackers for the guns from Fast and Furious are still available, I hear.

Doubt it... that would take brains and an actual thought process. Both are something this administration lacks.

I figure him as Amish or from the duck-hunter TV show. Give the dad a can of beer and a rifle and there ya go! ZZ Top was never called Muslim.

did you hear his comments at the White House Rose Garden ? He spoke flawless Pashto.

did you hear his comments at the White House Rose Garden ? He spoke flawless Pashto.
Sporting a long, bushy beard that [Bob Bergdahl] refused to trim since his son went missing in 2009, Bob Bergdahl spoke Pashto, Afghanistan's main language, and also a few words of Arabic at the White House press conference announcing his son's release...

In a Rolling Stone magazine article last year, Mr Bergdahl said he kept in contact with a Taliban source who claimed to know where his son was.

He also said he had learned a great deal about Afghan politics. He learned to speak a few words of Pashto and Arabic so he could record a 2011 video message to his son's captors.


Read more: Bob Bergdahl learned Pashto, grew beard and adopted liberal views after son's capture | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2646764/Bearded-Pashto-speaking-father-Bowe-Bergdahl-fire-tweeting-Taliban-spokesman-God-repay-death-Afghan-child.html#ixzz33uJe1nYq)

and my son speaks Urdu what conclusions should I draw from that? This choice may be sensible since his son appears to have forgotten how to speak english, a form of taliban brainwashing no doubt

Except that speech specialists... say it takes significantly longer than five years for a person to lose their native language.

and here's a blast from the past circa August 2010 .....

A captured American soldier is training Taliban fighters bomb-making and ambush skills, according to one of his captors and Afghan intelligence officials.
Private Bowe Bergdahl disappeared in June 2009 while based in eastern Afghanistan and is thought to be the only U.S. serviceman in captivity.
The 24-year-old has converted to Islam and now has the Muslim name Abdullah, one of his captors told The Sunday Times.
Bowe Bergdahl: Taliban claim captured U.S. solider is teaching fighters bomb-making skills | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1305184/Bowe-Bergdahl-Taliban-claim-captured-U-S-solider-teaching-fighters-bomb-making-skills.html)

How did he get the rank of Sargeant? He was a private, how many times did
Obama promote him?

Bergdahl needed to be brought back for his court-martial. Everything they're saying about him was said about John McCain in VietNam. Supposedly Bergdahl's father sucked up to the Terrorists to keep his kid alive. I'd do the same for mine.

The horrible part is that the Marine in Mexico will have to wait on the next White House scandal to be released as a distraction. The good news is it should only be a few more weeks.

good question ;he received field promotions while a captive.. strange indeed since the emperor and the military I'm sure was aware of the questionable circumstances regarding his capture.

perhaps he was a CIA sleeper sent to inflitrate with an unlikely story

The CIA doesn't hire dim bulbs like him.

Amid the dim bulbs of the CIA how could you tell the difference, these are the guys who didn't see 9/11 coming, who couldn't find Bin Laden, who got themselves killed in Benghazi

Clete... the reason the CIA didn't see it coming is because the FBI and the NSA were legally PREVENTED from talking to each other or exchanging data due to a law enacted under Bill Clinton. That prevented the entire picture from forming so to speak.

That's not something I say... that's what the 9/11 commission concluded.

The only idiots in the CIA or NSA are presidential appointments.....all the rest have some very high hurdles to meet to get hired. (I'm not talking contractors....but direct employees).

Still waiting for the official record of the soldiers performance before he allegedly deserted and if he was such a lousy screw up why he wasn't sent home.

one thing for sure .... the emperor will have him locked away for "medical reasons " for the balance of his reign.
“Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is just days into what could be months or years of recovery.”
It Could Be Years Until Sgt. Bergdahl Makes It Home - TIME (http://time.com/2822819/bowe-bergdahl/)

The question about his health, it’s a controversy. Why, then, also given his background and everything that we are finding from people who served with him and people who have covered this story and letters that he’s written home — why would Susan Rice be sent out, Susan Rice, be sent out repeatedly to say he served honorably and really push that as one the fundamental reasons behind this swap?
MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski: Why Would Susan Rice Repeatedly Say Bergdahl Served Honorably? | Video | RealClearPolitics (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/06/04/msnbcs_mika_brzezinski_why_would_susan_rice_be_sen t_out_repeatedly_to_say_bergdahl_served_honorably. html)
The false narratives about his poor health, and his heroic record were all manufactured to serve cover for the real reason for the Berghdal swap . The emperor did not care about getting him released as much he wanted to get the Taliban 5 released as an opening salvo in his effort to close Gitmo.
What the Bergdahl Story is Really About: Gitmo - NBC News (http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/what-bergdahl-story-really-about-gitmo-n123391)

I'm convinced that the emperor also paid a ransom on top of the release too. He used Qatar as the middleman in the exchange .... the same Qatar that gave Stingers to the Taliban that were supposed to go to the anti QDaffy rebels in Libya.
How the Taliban got their hands on modern US missiles | New York Post (http://nypost.com/2014/06/08/how-the-taliban-got-their-hands-on-modern-us-missiles/)

Moves to free detainees from the US military prison in Guantanamo Bay are gathering pace as the administration works to close the notorious jail, a top US official said Thursday.“There are a significant number of transfers in the pipeline at various stages and I think you’re going to be seeing substantial progress this year,” the senior administration official said, amid a furor over the release of five Taliban prisoners for a captured US soldier in Afghanistan.
US sees 2014 progress in freeing Guantanamo inmates (http://news.yahoo.com/us-sees-2014-progress-freeing-guantanamo-inmates-202254008.html)

How many bribes will it take to clear out the prisoners?

Still waiting for the official record of the soldiers performance before he allegedly deserted and if he was such a lousy screw up why he wasn't sent home.
The Slimes, sinking to new lows today ,reported that it wasn't Bergdahl ....it was his platoon that was F'd up.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/08/us/us-soldier-bowe-bergdahl-case-highlights-a-unit-known-for-troubles.html?ref=world&_r=0

How many bribes will it take to clear out the prisoners?

There are what, 155 left? At 5 per distraction, I don't think the country can survive getting them all out.

Tal... you didn't give Bush or Cheney that same benefit of the doubt.

Bush and Cheney have nothing to do with this issue so why bring them in it?

So... A deserter who left a WRITTEN confession to his crime (which he did do) can't be accused according to Democrats... But ANY repobulican can be... its all part and parcel of the same left wing smear campaign.

I'll wait until that's confirmed if you don't mind. Hey if he deserves military justice, he will get it.

He deserves a bullet to the head... and he doesn't deserve a pardon from the criminal in chief either.

He has a right to due process. Bet that's in the constitution.

Even the Afghans are wondering why they got thrown under the bus (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/09/us/politics/bowe-bergdahl.html?_r=1).

Not deserters on the battlefield, they don't have a right to due process. Particuilarly AFTER they leave a signed confession like that piece of white trash did.

Even the Afghans are wondering why they got thrown under the bus (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/09/us/politics/bowe-bergdahl.html?_r=1).
Because the emperor only cares about emptying GITMO ...and he don't care how ;or who is released . Lurch said there is no concern about the Taliban 5 going back to the battlefield because if they did ,they MAY get killed . What a dope !

Nothing was happening in Gitmo either so make 'em targets. We need practice. Maybe we get a few of their buddies too.

that's because the emperor refused to convene tribunals .

Lurch never said who he had to blow to get out of Vietnam after only 4 months into a ONE YEAR tour of duty...

That's the job of the military, and congress didn't want them tried in civilian courts if you remember, nor transferred to high security prisons, like so many before there remaining detainees. They can't even charge most of them turned over from outside US jurisdiction for a reward.

Military Tribunals and Presidential Power (http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/fismil.html)


In wartime, presidents are always tempted to expand their authority. But in doing so, they often reach beyond their constitutional mandate.
Although the use of military tribunals can be necessary and even effective in times of war, Louis Fisher contends that these courts present a grave danger to open government and the separation of powers. Citing the constitutional provision vesting Congress with the authority to create tribunals, Fisher addresses the threats posed by the dramatic expansion of presidential power in time of war—and the meek efforts of Congress and the judiciary to curb it.


Then we have the rules themselves

Presidential Military Order to Try Terrorists in Military Tribunals (http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/blpresidentorder.htm)

Supreme Court deals blow to Guantánamo prisoners challenging their detention - CSMonitor.com (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0611/Supreme-Court-deals-blow-to-Guantanamo-prisoners-challenging-their-detention)

Afghanistan Troop Withdrawal May Force Obama to Close Guantanamo | New Republic (http://www.newrepublic.com/article/118032/afghanistan-troop-withdrawal-may-force-obama-close-guantanamo)


For example, Khairullah Khairkhwa, one of the five men released last week's prisoner exchange, held several positions in the Taliban government between 1995 and 2001. He fled to Pakistan after the fall of the Taliban, was picked up near the border by the Pakistani police, and ultimately transferred into Americans custody. During his twelve-year stay at Guantánamo, Khairkhwa admitted Taliban involvement, but vehemently denied participating in terrorist activity; the U.S. has been unable to provide evidence showing otherwise............. "The government has said it must continue to hold some detainees because they are simply too dangerous to let go, but cannot be tried because the evidence against them is tainted. I have seen the evidence against some of these men, and it is not that it is 'tainted' but that it is so skimpy and unreliable, it would never hold up in court," said Wilner..............Regardless of the numbers, the legal argument remains the same. While at war, it is legal to imprison individuals that pose a potential threat on the battlefield. When the war ends, so ends the legality of their detention unless they are charged with a crime. There is no law that allows detention as a preventative manner.

Saying someone is dangerous, and proving it are two very different things.

completely disagree with Louis Fisher . This was not an expansion of Presidential power because as CIC in a declared war ,the President has always had such powers .
The New Republic has a point to a degree. We are not required to release prisoners while there is still hostilities ,so as long as we have troops in harms way there then the emperor is not required to close GITMO . 2nd ;almost all the detainees that can't be charged has been released already . The ones remaining are the ones that can and should face tribunal . As I already posted ;2 of them are wanted for war crimes by the UN.
The fact is that tribunals would've already been done if it wasn't for the fautly Hamden ,and Boumediene v. Bush decisions by SCOTUS .

It went WAY beyond just those 5, he relased another 12 secretly as reported by Reuters which can never be considered a conservative news organisation.

US Quietly Moves Detainees Out Of Secretive Afghanistan Prison (http://www.ibtimes.com/us-quietly-moves-detainees-out-secretive-afghanistan-prison-1600330)

US Quietly Moves Detainees Out Of Secretive Afghanistan Prison

By Reuters (http://www.ibtimes.com/reporters/reuters-reporter)
On June 13 2014 7:48 AM

(Reuters) - The Obama administration has quietly repatriated a dozen detainees from a small U.S. military prison in Afghanistan (http://www.reuters.com/places/afghanistan?lc=int_mb_1001), moving a modest step closer toward winding down the United States' controversial post-9/11 detainee system.
President Barack Obama (http://www.reuters.com/people/barack-obama?lc=int_mb_1001), in a letter to Congress released on Thursday, informed U.S. lawmakers that about 38 non-Afghan prisoners remained at the Parwan detention center outside of Kabul, down from around 50 a few months ago.
A U.S. defense official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that a Frenchman, a Kuwaiti and 10 Pakistani prisoners were sent back to their respective home countries at the end of May.
The remaining detainees include Yemeni, Tunisian and more Pakistani nationals, and a Russian who the United States is also considering trying in a military or civilian court.
The transfers, which are not publicly disclosed, underscore the challenges the Obama administration faces in shutting down Parwan and the larger U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (http://www.reuters.com/places/cuba?lc=int_mb_1001), which has been widely criticized by human rights groups since being populated in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.
Many of the detainees have not been charged with a crime, but the release of any military detainees has the potential to intensify the political backlash the Obama administration is facing over its handling of suspected militants captured in Afghanistan (http://www.reuters.com/places/afghanistan?lc=int_mb_1001) and elsewhere since 2001.
White House officials have sought to rebuff criticism of the decision last month to send five senior Taliban prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay to Qatar in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl, a U.S. soldier held by Taliban-linked militants in Pakistan (http://www.reuters.com/places/pakistan?lc=int_mb_1001).
The Obama administration is slowly moving to transfer some inmates out of Guantanamo Bay, where about 150 inmates remain. Obama has renewed promises to close the prison despite long-standing congressional opposition.
The non-Afghan prisoners at Parwan are the only detainees remaining in U.S. custody in Afghanistan after U.S. officials shifted hundreds of Afghan prisoners to Afghan government custody last year.
In February, U.S. officials were outraged when the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai released 65 of those prisoners, who Washington insisted were dangerous militants requiring at least further investigation.
The U.S. government considers some remaining non-Afghan prisoners at Parwan, like some at Guantanamo, too dangerous to be freed. Some of them have unclear links to the Afghan conflict, including a Yemeni arrested in Bangkok and secretly moved to Afghanistan.
The Parwan detainees' identities, and the transfer of some of them to other countries in the past, have remained largely a mystery to the public in the United States and Afghanistan.
Last month, the Defense Department provided U.S. lawmakers with a classified report on the identities of the detainees and their alleged militant ties.
Their fate takes on new importance as the end of the U.S. and NATO military mission in Afghanistan approaches. If the two countries can finalize a troop deal, Obama plans to leave just under 10,000 soldiers in Afghanistan after 2014 and withdraw almost all by the end of 2016.
It is unclear under what circumstances the prisoners transferred last month were repatriated.
Pakistani officials have said that returned detainees would be kept under surveillance to make sure they had no militant links. Prisoner advocates say at least some returned detainees were held in secret prisons in Pakistan (http://www.reuters.com/places/pakistan?lc=int_mb_1001) before being set free.

ah the responsibilities of Empire, it was ever so, what to do with political prisoners, what a great shame you no longer have the arena where they could fight it out, or the salt mines or the crucifix, or even the galleys. Such is the price of progress

political prisoners ? Nah these are prisoners captured in a war . They have no right to release until such time as the war comes to a conclusion.

Will the "war" in Afghanistan ever come to a conclusion?

Yes ,the emperor set a deadline to clock out . Then the Taliban prisoners could be released as long as we haven't determined that they should be charged and sent to trial/tribunal . The AQ prisoners ? That's a different story . They should all be subject to tribunal as pirates have always been handled .

It's already over Tom, you lost, simple as that, you stayed too long and you lost, at least you learned the lesson of Iraq and won't repeat it

What lesson was that ? If you leave before your work is done bad things are likely to follow ?

Exactly... a certain group of people didn't learn THAT lesson after Vietnam either...

There was no victory to be had in Iraq, just a regional destabilization, that cost trillions and many lives. Even more trillions, and lives to maintain. The lesson of Vietnam was stay the freak out of foreign countries. This western notion of dominance through military might has been disproved yet again in Iraq, and Afghanistan, and there is no winning in either unless we stop half stepping and send in a realforce and NOT just a small band of volunteers.

Surges are but a feel good, temporary quick fix, that is unsustainable over the long haul, in both reusing worn out troops and money. I say let these countries clean up their own mess because whatever side we take is the wrong one. That's how you got Saddam in the first place, and the Shah of Iran. Have you guys forgotten that too?

You may be satisfied with radical jihadistan AQ army taking over large sections of Iraq but I think it is a national security issue. Victory was had . All that we needed to do to finish the work was to renew the Status of Forces Agreement .(SOFA) But the emperor had already decided to bug out ;and his poodle Evita set up a convenient excuse to not renewing it .
Had we stayed ,the US would've had the assets in place to not only stop this AQ offensive ;but to prevent them from taking over the anti-Assad rebellion.

Malachi wanted full control of US forces we would have there and that's UNACCEPTABLE Tom. He has done nothing but purge the sunnis, and ISIS is NOT AQ! The sunnis are not ISIS.

Now the fool Malachi is begging for US troops. And you hawks want to get back involved with this tribal BS all over again? Backing shia's against sunni's is NOT victory, or a win for us no matter how scared you are of the boogey man ISIS faction. Iran is a shia state, just so you know since the ignorance of history and setting up western friendly states in the middle east seems to be lost on McCain and the rest of you warhawks.

Without a power sharing government by both sunni's and shia's you waste your time in Iraq, and better start getting foreign contractors the hell out. Malachi and his tactics have to go!!

and ISIS is NOT AQ! you're right . They broke off from AQ because AQ wasn't radical enough for them . But think about it . AQ's goal is the creation a califate in the Ummah. The modest goal of ISIS is to create a califate in the Levant.
You don't see any national interest there ? Well since you insist on putting every road block you can think of for the goal of national energy independence then you should consider it a major national security concern.

Funny how Malki was able to live with a SOFA arrangement in 2007 /2008? What changed ? Oh yeah ;we have a different POTUS ;one who made it quite clear to Malki that he was bugging the US out .
Given that change ,Malki had NO OTHER OPTION than to turn to Iran for security . Did you think that would come without a quid pro quo ?
The quid pro quo was the Shiafication of Iraq governance and the renaging of the revenue sharing deals that we brokered .
Yeah the Sunnis have a reason to be pissed . They helped us defeat the radical jihadists in Northern Iraq and now they are sold down the river. So it shouldn't be a suprise to you that they again align with jihadistan . Nor should it be a suprise to you that the emperor ;painted into a corner AGAIN , will make common cause with Iran to defeat ISIS .

Think about how stupid the emperor has been . When Sunni Jihadists are fighting in Syria against Iran backed Assad ;the emperor wants to arm them. Now that they are taking on Iran backed Maliki ,he will align with Iran to defeat the same Sunni Jihadists .

of course the emperor could drop a hashtag or 2 on them .
46152

of course the emperor could drop a hashtag or 2 on them .
\
I see that once again Tom you think that because the US established some sort of benchmark it should stand for all time, this is of couse in line with your eighteenth century thinking, but reality says things change. The ISIS crisis could not have been forseen, if you had established a government which wasn't such a missmash it might have had a chance to succeed, but once again the armed forces of Iraq have shown their heart is not in it and if people will not fight for themselves why should you tarnish your superman image by fighting for them?

I see that once again Tom you think that because the US established some sort of benchmark it should stand for all time
No not for all time .Just long enough. The French and Germans did not sign a peace treaty until 1963 . Almost 2 decades after the war ended . Imagine if Truman was the emperor and decided it was time to clock out of Europe in 1945-46. How different the continent would look today .

seriously Tom I doubt WWIII would have been fought in Europe. You stayed in Europe because the Soviets were expansionary and a definite threat, it had little to do with the war that had been won. What is happening in Iraq is different. You set up a government but the process has been highjacked by the Shiites, a predictable outcome since they are the majority population. But your idealistic approach lacked the wisdom of understanding the mind of the people, with no history of democracy they just drifted back to their old ways of suppressing and oppressing the opposition. An insurrection like ISIS can only gain strength when a population is oppressed, Bush's democratic utopia was not found or founded in Iraq. If Syria had not happened this would not have happened. Blame shiia Islam not Obama

You stayed in Europe because the Soviets were expansionary and a definite threat, it had little to do with the war that had been won
Yes the Soviet threat was there .Still ,the Elysée Treaty between 2 mortal enemies ( ending a century long enmity between Germany and France ) was a necessary post war reconciliation and it would not have happened if we did not nuture it .

Hmmm! force it more likely and the aftermath, the EU, like we really needed that.

What I see is that your meddling accounts for a lot of what is wrong in the world, I'm glad you stayed out of Syria and if Iraq falls as a consequence it will be because the people want it that way.

You have to get this in perspective, the Middle East will be fought over for centuries as it has in centuries past, why eludes us except to say the arabs are revolting, a many faceted truth

I already addressed the reason .Since our idiot leaders refuse to make a major push to energy independence ,then securing the world's energy supply is a national security concern. We cannot allow jihadistan to have a steady source of oil wealth to pay for their war against the non-Islamic world .

really, you have alturistic motives and all this time I thought it was about profit

I make no money from the oil industry . But every industry in American depends on a steady source of energy.

why use your own resources when yuo can profit from someoneelse

because you then become dependent on them .

as an example .... June 3 ,just days before the ISIS launched it's offensive in northern Iraq , Putin invited Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal to see him and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Sochi .The Saudi Press Agency then reported June 10 that Lavrov and al-Faisal had a follow-up phone conversation to discuss a" Syrian settlement".
I don't think it is a coincidence that the offensive launched shortly after the meeting . Because of the threat imposed by the attack ,the price of the Breton crude shot up to $113 /bbl. which is in both Russia and the Saudi's interest . Having the US attention diverted from Ukraine also is in the Russian interests ....And, it's in the Saudi's interest to weaken Iraq and by extension Iran.
Why do we want to do any business with any of these skunks ? Because of energy dependence.

It's another mistake by a former President resurrected again! 275 (Military Advisers) troops are being sent to aid the embassy in (Saigon) Baghdad.
Obama Sends Troops to Assist Iraq Embassy, Weighs Strikes - Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-17/iraq-airstrikes-carry-downside-as-obama-weighs-options.html)

Carter's Economy
Nixon's coverups
FDR's CCC

What's next? Grant's Reconstruction?

it's all part of our rapprochement with the 12'ers in Tehran . The quid pro quo for their assistance in putting down the ISIS threat will be recognition of the legitimacy of the Persian nuke. ( I still predict that the emperor will do a Nixonian visit to Tehran before leaving office. ) .

American intelligence on Iraq has eroded dramatically since Obama withdrew the last U.S. troops from the country at the end of 2011, according to the U.S. officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they aren’t authorized to discuss intelligence matters or internal policy discussions publicly.
Since then, they said, U.S. military and intelligence agencies increasingly have relied on the Iraqi military and government and on public sources for reporting on Sunni insurgent groups such as ISIL and Shiite militias, most of them backed by Iran. Many of the reports on Sunni groups, said two officials, have proved to be exaggerated, while those on Shiite forces and the role of Iran’s Quds Force and intelligence services in supporting them have been sketchy at best.

that was a predictable outcome of our cut and run .

Surely you didn't think you could leave an IraQ that wouldn't be influenced by Iran. The population of Iraq are majority shiite, certain things are obvious in a hostile world and one is where you form alliances. The conflict in Syria is shiite v sunni, the conflict in Iraq is now shiite v sunni, I predict Iraq will break up into states for each of its peoples, and the map of the middle east may be changed with a break up of Syria too. this is the only way to settle the conflict.

It doesn't suit the US to start a fight with Iran, they want to unravel from Afghanistan not be embroiled in a middle east war

It's another mistake by a former President resurrected again! (AGAIN)

Obama administration pushes banks to make home loans to people with weaker credit (Didn’t we do this already? It didn’t end well.) (http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org/2014/06/obama-administration-pushes-banks-to-make-home-loans-to-people-with-weaker-credit-didnt-we-do-this-already-i-didnt-end-well/)

AND... he was in it up to his armpits the first time around too... in the only court case anyone has ever found where he was ever in front of a judge in a courtroom.

The article is from April 2013. Here's the actual facts, no spin - just the actual source:
Remarks of Counselor to the Secretary of the Treasury for Housing Finance Policy Michael Stegman at the 2013 American Securitization Forum (ASF) (http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/tg1836.aspx)

Not nearly as nefarious as previously posted.

if the policy is to help people why wouldn't they want people to take the opportunities presented by a depressed housing market

You can be both strict in lending and fair. The problem was the banks had too many tricks and traps and in some cases were criminal in their greed. Had they been fair there would have been no mortgage crisis in the first place and people would have homes they could afford.

Goes back to the SEC allowing illegitimate and illegal derivative bundling practices, selling junk as blue chip on a global scale.

Proof Obama was involved in causing the housing disaster in 1995

Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank | Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse (http://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=10112)

Everything on the court docket case on that link showing Obama as being part of it... and this lead to banks being forced to give loans to people who weren't qualified to get them.

And this is a link for case law from a Lawschool that has it all. Not what an Obama Appointee is saying (meaning their job is at risk if Obama doesn't like what they say)

This is the root cause of everything that followed.

So going after the banks for criminal practice leads to forcing banks into MORE criminal practice? You just proved that banks have never been fair lenders to minorities.

Berghdal to Banks? Hmmm, not really sure how this connects.

You haven't been here to keep us on topic J. :D

You haven't been here to keep us on topic J. :D

Nope, been a little too busy working 60+ hours a week thanks to the changes in the healthcare system caused by Captain Clueless.

Berghdal to Banks? Hmmm, not really sure how this connects.This is Current Events, you can post anything you want anywhere, facts not required. :-)

This is Current Events, you can post anything you want anywhere, facts not required. :-)

Really interested in why you like stirring up the POO rather than having an intelligent discussion.

Oh, it's because you CAN'T have an intelligent discussion. Sorry, my bad.

Who peed in your cornflakes? :-)

http://static.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/MjAxMy02Y2QyMGVhYjk5ZTJmYjgw.png

Back to the subject then, if Bergdahl was your son would you want him freed from his captors and come home? Even if he were called all kinds of names with no proof? Of course you would. Would you care about freeing him in exchange for 5 captured enemies by Pakistani's for 5 grand a head 12 years ago? I doubt it mom.

Who peed in your cornflakes? :-)

http://static.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/MjAxMy02Y2QyMGVhYjk5ZTJmYjgw.png

That's okay Puddin. You don't have the capacity to value anyone's opinion but your own.

let's face it those pakistani's are likely to be more trouble to Pakistan than they are to anyoneelse, sort of poetic justice

Back to the subject then, if Bergdahl was your son would you want him freed from his captors and come home? Even if he were called all kinds of names with no proof? Of course you would. Would you care about freeing him in exchange for 5 captured enemies by Pakistani's for 5 grand a head 12 years ago? I doubt it mom.

No proof? Have you been hiding under a rock?

The emperor has to do what is in the best national interest . He cannot cloud his judgment with empathetic thoughts for the parents over the larger interests of the nation. Anyway you slice it ;that was a poor deal . It was only made because the emperor was determined to release them .

Why doesn't he just tell the truth ? The reason he made this deal is because he's looking for an exit out of Afghanistan that doesn't turn into the Massacre of Elphinstone's Army.

The reason he made this deal is because he's looking for an exit out of Afghanistan that doesn't turn into the Massacre of Elphinstone's Army.

These days they have the ability to pull the troops out with aircraft, and there is the ANA, so no massacre. The deal was done, I suspect, in the interests of dialogue becuase when they leave they don't want the war to continue. Pakistan has begun an offensive against militants which will force many over the border, pity they hadn't done it long ago but they know that with the US target out of the picture they need to be more proactive.

Ok they could have got a better deal, but they didn't

the Ruskies lost 5,000 just crossing a common border. An air lift out involves cooperation with Putin and leaving a lot of equipment behind . As you know ,the emperor is not really in speaking terms with Vladdy these days . That reset button is stuck on stupid.


Pakistan has begun an offensive against militants which will force many over the border, pity they hadn't done it long ago but they know that with the US target out of the picture they need to be more proactive.
Their ISI runs the Haqqani network so I doubt they are doing a major offensive against them. They will instead aim at targets that are a direct threat to the Pakis ;not the US or Afghanistan gvt. So any "successful " offensive will be of limited value.

Finally ,the idea of a Paki hammer and coalition forces anvil may have been successful when the coalition was at full strength . But the forces left are too small to prevent the escape of the militants through the porous Afghan border. In fact ,the Pakis left plenty of time before executing this offensive for the bulk of the jihadi's to escape.

Tom the americans always seem to leave equipment behind so sell the afghans those worn out recycled tanks and what's a few trucks anyway you are not giving away any secrets by leaving them, you forget the battleground has changed and the drone is on the frontline. It just takes logistics to get the men out and you are good at moving stuff around

I assure you that the emperor is looking for safe passage out ;and this type of ransom is right up his alley . The emperor also wants to empty Gitmo ;so expect to see more of these one sided deals.

you are just chuffed because someone looks like they got a better deal, you might try seeing it from a different view, these men are no longer your problem and you have yet to see whether they are anyone's problem afterall you get no marks for being caught when you are part of a terrorist organisation

these men are no longer your problemthey will get a heroes welcome and assume their place in the command structure . And yes they are our problem As we found out ;we can't assume that things that take place in the outlands of the world will not have a direct impact on us.

They spent ten years in detention in a place worse than the worst supermax prison and for the most part all they were doing was defending their country, Tom you really need to get some perspective, there are worse things that have not been prosectured

worse than the worst supermax prison it was Club GITMO . They were served good food and have gotten superior health care than our Vets get from the VA

I don't think any of that is accurate.

VA Gives Gitmo Terrorists Better Medical Care Than U.S. Veterans | Judicial Watch (http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2014/05/va-gives-gitmo-terrorists-better-medical-care-u-s-veterans/)

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=43686

Get more doctors for regular citizens especially vets, and close gitmo. DUH!! Naw, we can't process them to a regular supermax prison, we just can't do that!!!!!!!!!!!!

it was Club GITMO . They were served good food and have gotten superior health care than our Vets get from the VA

propaganda but if it is true you as nation need to hang your heads in shame and give back to those who gave it for you. I've seen the pictures, men in cages and legirons, in heavy clothing in a tropical place. If you think GITMO is humane you need to spend a lot of time in reflection.

Get more doctors for regular citizens especially vets

How? You planning on dictating which specialty a Med School grad takes? Or were you going to "reassign" specialists from EENT to head trauma and PTSD? That's the problem with all your schemes, Commissar. Individuals have no place in them.

medicine used to be a caring profession now it's just money so you want to get doctors into these places pay them

we can't process them
to a regular supermax prison, we just can't do that!!!!!!!!!!!!
They are illegal combatants not subject the civilian prosecution ..duh!! we can't have military tribunals ,we just can't do that!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The goal is to lock 'em up! The feds do it very well. IT WORKS, no matter the titles. They wouldn't be enemy combatants if you stop sending armies into their country.

But I don't expect you to acknowledge your(OUR) part in cause and effect.

so in other words we should not have invaded Afghanistan after 9-11 ?

Going after terrorists who attacked us was fine, until we ran to Iraq on dumb sh!t that has proved to be dumb sh1t as even Meagan Kelly on Fox says was some dumb sh1t right to Cheney's face.

I give her credit for doing it.

but we are talking about Taliban and AQ detainees ;not Iraqis . They've never been detained at GITMO .

We got the guy who attacked us and blew the taliban who harbored him to hell, mission over time to come home and move beyond this and let the afghans/pakistanis and any other tribe in between deal with their own sh1t.

AQ is an organization not an individual. They are as big a threat to us today as they were in 2001 . The Taliban is not destroyed .Where do you get that from ? What you are really saying is that we concede . Here's the leaders we captured . Please don't attack us again...

Tom what part of the Taliban fighting you in their own country do you not think is legitimate. Now their tactics are not open and they tend to get your troops killed but you deposed their government and they fight you, so drop this illegal combatants crap and recognise that you are holding them until the war is over. As to the foriegn fighters, they are criminals and should be tried as criminals, what is the problem?

When there is anarmistice at the conclusion of hostilities ,I'll consider your argument . So long as one there is a potential for one of these senior leaders of the Taliban to cost 1 more American life ,I oppose this trade. 2 of them should've been handed over to the International Court for war crimes they are wanted for . The rest should've remained in detention until the conclusion .

I think it is just sour grapes Tom besides you will soon have other things to think about if you do not already