I would also be interested to know whether Obama mentioned the fact he was releasing these terrorists back into circulation to the other Western leaders who are supposed to be allies with ? especially the Uk ?

I can also imagine the outcry from the USA if Cameron had done something similar yet I can't recall Cameron or any of the other NATO leaders saying anything about this ? WHY ?

Personally, I would have had real problems with money being given to the Taliban, but getting rid of Gitmo prisoners seems like a good idea.

If they are going to go out and kill more civilians and Americans - which is likely according to the statistics - how would that be a "good idea"?

Credo-

In what upside down world is the value of money greater than the power of a mind to lead and to kill and to maim and to invoke dark ideas, seed misogyny, and magnify evil? You suggest money being given to the Taliban crosses some moral or intellectual line but releasing the darkest architects of Sharia madness is "a good idea?" These men where by all accounts, Afghan and ISAF, murderers long before 2001. Are ideas like your's really formed on the same planet that formed mine?

CREDO- your assertion is just indefensible, from any point of view. I've already considered your options; you cannot improve your position on this point.

My world isn't upside down. We didn't release the prisoners to the Taliban. The were released to a third country. There are conditions to that release.

Giving money directly to the Taliban is an entirely different matter.

Personally, I would have had real problems with money being given to the Taliban, but getting rid of Gitmo prisoners seems like a good idea.

If they are going to go out and kill more civilians and Americans - which is likely according to the statistics - how would that be a "good idea"?

Credo-

In what upside down world is the value of money greater than the power of a mind to lead and to kill and to maim and to invoke dark ideas, seed misogyny, and magnify evil? You suggest money being given to the Taliban crosses some moral or intellectual line but releasing the darkest architects of Sharia madness is "a good idea?" These men where by all accounts, Afghan and ISAF, murderers long before 2001. Are ideas like your's really formed on the same planet that formed mine?

CREDO- your assertion is just indefensible, from any point of view. I've already considered your options; you cannot improve your position on this point.

My world isn't upside down. We didn't release the prisoners to the Taliban. The were released to a third country. There are conditions to that release.

Giving money directly to the Taliban is an entirely different matter.

Why do you feel that paying a ransom would be worse?

As I understand it, the prisoners will be held temporarily by a third party. I wouldn't be awfully surprised if their term there

will be rather convenient, and less than shocked if they would be released prior to the agreed upon time.

hmmm, I wonder how many Taliban prisoners are worth swapping out, for the US to get wikiman-julian assange?

U.S. could contract out the job to the Talibans' world wide network to nick him for them.

They seem pretty efficient in that field.

He'd be worth more than 5, surely...

Personally, I would have had real problems with money being given to the Taliban, but getting rid of Gitmo prisoners seems like a good idea.

If they are going to go out and kill more civilians and Americans - which is likely according to the statistics - how would that be a "good idea"?

Credo-

In what upside down world is the value of money greater than the power of a mind to lead and to kill and to maim and to invoke dark ideas, seed misogyny, and magnify evil? You suggest money being given to the Taliban crosses some moral or intellectual line but releasing the darkest architects of Sharia madness is "a good idea?" These men where by all accounts, Afghan and ISAF, murderers long before 2001. Are ideas like your's really formed on the same planet that formed mine?

CREDO- your assertion is just indefensible, from any point of view. I've already considered your options; you cannot improve your position on this point.

My world isn't upside down. We didn't release the prisoners to the Taliban. The were released to a third country. There are conditions to that release.

Giving money directly to the Taliban is an entirely different matter.

Ok, the upside down comment was not polite. Sorry. I prefer polite. But we have released them. Period! I have lived and worked in the Middle East, Afghanistan, etc., ad nauseum, for a long, long time- they are released. They are already reintegrated into their organization. I could go on but what's the point? There's hardly a case where a released jihadi has not returned to war on the west, excepting a few through SA reeducation centers, perhaps.

I'd much prefer to give millions to the Taliban directly, had I to choose. A few million for any clown far less dangerous. Your position can't be "giving money is negotiating" because your giving them something far more valuable than money with the release of the murderers. Besides, it's abundantly clear that the US is aware for years we are transferring vast sums of wealth to the Taliban via rebuilding and infrastructure monies missing. This is no small affair as it's funding both sides of the war- all sides of the war!

I leave it to my colleagues to decide; I'd prefer to send them millions $ and instead of dye packs have gps beacons that had inbound JDAms tracking them as soon as lift off. Yes, I would have done just this even at th cost of this fools life, and the video of the handoff proves this was feasible. Pay the money and blow up the entire province if necessary. Next time they will kill our soldiers or fear the consequences, but they would not be capturing or parading them like this crap again! I want them to fear us as untrustworthy and unstable. I want them to actually fear having their world turned to glass.

I wonder if some even have a clue who the enemy is; they loathe weakness (unless it's twice a month payday and then they either have the lady boy they hire come in or the young man they rape for the night- here they prefer weakness!)

In America, and other countries, it is long known people can run entire mafia ops from jail. These guys are not in jail. In all likely hood these guys will he put in villas, in an area protecting them, and keeping them local- for a while. They have visitors, computers cell phones, shopping, etc. they are free! The US will be assured how restrained they are. Lowe level, maybe mid, agents will monitor the clowns. It will be boring but the phone taps will surprisingly reflect a return to normalcy. Their carriers will conduct everything. Always has been this way for eons. And US will lose interest or ability to monitor.

If you think these barbarians are still pulling triggers you fortunately know little about horror. The true horror is from those who don't touch the guns any longer. The true danger from those who inspire, who motivate, who's sheer existence gives vital substance to the "cause." No, these guys are free!

Qatar has already said they will be free to come and go as they please, but must not leave the country for one year

However, they will not be watched or monitored by Qatari officials. Their families have come, or are coming, to join them in free accommodations provided by some nice benefactor.

Now, put yourself in their shoes for a moment.

You have been in Guantanamo for several years and you are flexing your wings in a relatively free environment.

You know nobody is watching you and you are homesick.

You have killed innumerable numbers of people in the name of your faith, broken many laws and even become a law unto yourself...and you're going to let a little thing get in your way like crossing a border into another of the Emirates so you can fly home?

I ain't buying that bridge.

They certainly don't seem to be slumming it since their release according to this article.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2651535/Taliban-leaders-released-Bergdahl-deal-staying-five-star-villas-families-Qatar.html

I wonder if the released prisoner is being treated to such luxury ?

Off-topic post removed.

They certainly don't seem to be slumming it since their release according to this article.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2651535/Taliban-leaders-released-Bergdahl-deal-staying-five-star-villas-families-Qatar.html

I wonder if the released prisoner is being treated to such luxury ?

Sadly, the powers-that-be have somehow decided to block your link to the Daily Mail.

With all that talk about terrorists they must have thought the article was about some red shirts.

They certainly don't seem to be slumming it since their release according to this article.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2651535/Taliban-leaders-released-Bergdahl-deal-staying-five-star-villas-families-Qatar.html

I wonder if the released prisoner is being treated to such luxury ?

Sadly, the powers-that-be have somehow decided to block your link to the Daily Mail.

With all that talk about terrorists they must have thought the article was about some red shirts.

Really Chuck, you don't know why the Mail was blocked? You need to read some other threads.

You know, since posting here, I have been eating up the news feeds and I am correct- this exchange is a resounding victory for the Taliban. Maybe you don't like the us; maybe you don't think we should be there; maybe you don't think the argument that holding people, uncharged, is legally defensible... Maybe some believe all of these things. No matter, my assertion that it is outrageous can be based solely on the horrific crimes these people committed even before the Us led invasion.

I was there. I was in the admin buildings. I was in the palace for long periods of time. Every day I saw the bullet holes in the walls were entire families were murdered-repeatedly; in the Presidential Palace. These people are the antithesis of anything approaching just and upright. It's not a morally equivalent practice. Gosh, it's not even straight Islam that's the threat of their return. It's this sick blend of tribal, regional, religious, and naked power that kills, enslaves, and subjugates their own peoples. Don't think for a moment that this is just a commander in chief making an unpopular but constitutionally legal prison exchange. This gives direct aid and comfort to the enemy. Go read the regional news feeds, even in English, and you will see the enemy is substantially aided. Vast protests of the USA Intel and military communities needed to be silenced to make this happen. All right minded people protested it.

Arjunadawn

Giving money directly to the Taliban is an entirely different matter.

I don't see how money is any worse than trading high level terrorists, but a lot of people think that money was part of the bargain, but is being hushed up. However, there is no way to confirm that it is true at this time.

Obama flat-out broke the law. How many complaints do we have on TVF about people in power not being accountable to the law? What is a corrupt country? If we don't have the rule of law, how are we any better than some corrupt 3rd world country?

Never in my life have I seen an official in the US break the law and not pay the penalty. It's a bedrock of security and freedom for the people.

This totally stinks up the place and I'm ashamed of it.

Reagan broke the law but had Ollie North take the fall.

I don't like Obama but he does some things right and this is one of them.

Maybe he did it to get the heat off the VA or for some other self motivated reason as all politicians seem to do but the fact is an american soldier has been returned home safely.

Ends justify the means.

"...some of my best friends or black, therefore," and "...no disrespect intended but..." Or "I don't like Obama but..." These are the filler qualifiers that arguably stifle opposition to what's said next. Like an amulet, they're included to somehow make the speaker have a greater weight then his position should merit.

History has an odd nature in the modern era; it seems exponential, really. A similar phenomena exists in some "law" regarding the double of computer processing every year or so. A consequence of this is that in your life time, indeed sooner, you will see the historical consequences of Obama's blunder, a betrayal actually. In fact, I assert, for the first time in history a people can be born and within their life time watch the entire dissolution of an empire, which previously took generations. Obama is keenly aware he expedites the clock. Therefore, I assert it won't be long before the blowback from this begins.

By the way, if you find my position diametrically opposed to yours (I do), it should be noted I assert Obama's actions (in a previous post) are Machiavellian and in your summation you state "the end justifies the means." In that single conclusion you proof my point and negate your own. This is... Macheavelli.

Btw. A representative government whereby it's considered good leadership that "the end justifies the means" is downright despotic. You may not be ashamed but you may wish to retract that.

Bergdahl may have been a real s*** bird, but I still feel sorry for him. He has no idea what kind of hurricane is about to hit when he gets home.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/08/us/after-release-from-taliban-bowe-bergdahl-suffers-from-skin-and-gum-disorders-but-is-physically-sound.html?emc=edit_th_20140608&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=66496725&_r=0

Did you see this article on the page you linked?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/08/us/us-soldier-bowe-bergdahl-case-highlights-a-unit-known-for-troubles.html?action=click&contentCollection=U.S.&region=Footer&module=MoreInSection&pgtype=article

Quite interesting, too.

Did you see this article on the page you linked?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/08/us/us-soldier-bowe-bergdahl-case-highlights-a-unit-known-for-troubles.html?action=click&contentCollection=U.S.&region=Footer&module=MoreInSection&pgtype=article

Quite interesting, too.

Plus this narative, a quote from the article below. Why on earth are military deploying nut cases like this in the first place

"can I cut off the face of the first Taliban I kill and wear it like a mask"

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/wall-street-journal/comrades-torn-by-bergdahl-conversion-from-rambo-to-afghans-friend/story-fnay3ubk-1226947662001

Getting tired of reading post from those who don't have a clue what AWOL or desertion is. Like some one saying you have to be convicted by a court to be a deserter. Not true. Here is a link that may clarify this for some of you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desertion

Turns out the Taliban were not the ones holding bergdahl.

The Haqqani network were. When the deal was proposed in 2012 the Haqqani wanted cash for bergdahl. obama nixed that deal.

Misdirection.

Getting tired of reading post from those who don't have a clue what AWOL or desertion is. Like some one saying you have to be convicted by a court to be a deserter. Not true. Here is a link that may clarify this for some of you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desertion

So please clarify...are POW/MIA's considered Deserters?

Thanks for your insight.

Obama flat-out broke the law. How many complaints do we have on TVF about people in power not being accountable to the law? What is a corrupt country? If we don't have the rule of law, how are we any better than some corrupt 3rd world country?

Never in my life have I seen an official in the US break the law and not pay the penalty. It's a bedrock of security and freedom for the people.

This totally stinks up the place and I'm ashamed of it.

Reagan broke the law but had Ollie North take the fall.

I don't like Obama but he does some things right and this is one of them.

Maybe he did it to get the heat off the VA or for some other self motivated reason as all politicians seem to do but the fact is an american soldier has been returned home safely.

Ends justify the means.

"...some of my best friends or black, therefore," and "...no disrespect intended but..." Or "I don't like Obama but..." These are the filler qualifiers that arguably stifle opposition to what's said next. Like an amulet, they're included to somehow make the speaker have a greater weight then his position should merit.

History has an odd nature in the modern era; it seems exponential, really. A similar phenomena exists in some "law" regarding the double of computer processing every year or so. A consequence of this is that in your life time, indeed sooner, you will see the historical consequences of Obama's blunder, a betrayal actually. In fact, I assert, for the first time in history a people can be born and within their life time watch the entire dissolution of an empire, which previously took generations. Obama is keenly aware he expedites the clock. Therefore, I assert it won't be long before the blowback from this begins.

By the way, if you find my position diametrically opposed to yours (I do), it should be noted I assert Obama's actions (in a previous post) are Machiavellian and in your summation you state "the end justifies the means." In that single conclusion you proof my point and negate your own. This is... Macheavelli.

Btw. A representative government whereby it's considered good leadership that "the end justifies the means" is downright despotic. You may not be ashamed but you may wish to retract that.

Listen, no disrespect, but I have read your post twice and I still have no idea what you are saying so If you say you are diametrically opposed to me then I will just have to take your word for it ;-)

War is ugly. Only one thing matters...to win. Its like a street fight. Machiavellian is defined as: cunning, scheming and unscrupulous. We better get rid of every military strategist that we have if we want to play by your rules.

Personally, I would have had real problems with money being given to the Taliban, but getting rid of Gitmo prisoners seems like a good idea.

If they are going to go out and kill more civilians and Americans - which is likely according to the statistics - how would that be a "good idea"?

Hold on, you mean that now the Taliban is going to start killing Americans? Weren't they already doing this?

And the answer is yes, they were already killing Americans. Now, if they think that American lives can be traded for their pals then instead of removing Americans heads from their shoulders, they will be motivated to keep them alive and in health to trade them.

I know I don't have to request a rebuttal, UG, somehow you always have one before I even press "Add Reply"

;-)

What?

Last time I knew the USA hadn't declared war on Afghanistan. Ergo there are no "POW" there.

MIA ? Maybe but there was no "action" that we know of.

What we know is that bergdahl denounced the United States & her Army. Packed & shipped his personal belongings home.

The one night he took off his uniform, laid down his weapon & deserted.

Is that simple enough for you?

It really should be. And the US Army should have spent no time looking for his sorry butt.

All the politicing and hyperventilating over this guy. He was a prisoner of war. The only POW in Afghanistan. He has been released. Did you think it would be OK for the US to abandon him there? Do you think he should be tried in the court of Republican opinion and then left in Afghanistan?

Credo, this is exactly the position many have taken on this thread and the other floating around on the same subject. Certain TV members have clearly stated as much.

Thats the very heart of this discussion.

The headline is bogus.

It should read 5 Taliban Generals traded for US hostage beau bergdahl who was being held by Haqqani network

What?

Last time I knew the USA hadn't declared war on Afghanistan. Ergo there are no "POW" there.

MIA ? Maybe but there was no "action" that we know of.

What we know is that bergdahl denounced the United States & her Army. Packed & shipped his personal belongings home.

The one night he took off his uniform, laid down his weapon & deserted.

Is that simple enough for you?

It really should be. And the US Army should have spent no time looking for his sorry butt.

I had actually asked that question to pmarlin, who has 30 years military experience and knows some things.

Do you have that kind of experience? Your posts don't really identify you as anything more than a guy who hates obama.

Looks like a few of the terrorists won't be able to enjoy the spoils of the hostage swap.

hehehe

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2655940/After-lull-US-drone-strikes-kill-13-Pakistan.html

Looks like a few of the terrorists won't be able to enjoy the spoils of the hostage swap.

hehehe

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2655940/After-lull-US-drone-strikes-kill-13-Pakistan.html

One thing can sure be saiid about Obama...he kicks a$$ and takes names in the war on terror.

Or more fitting the subject of Gitmo detainees. Obama, unlike his predecessor "takes no prisoners" !

Surprised a few of you libs are not screaming about "war crimes".

Surprised a few of you libs are not screaming about "war crimes".

Interestingly enough but its my Republican friends who are the most infuriated about Obamas Drone program.

Most Dems have said they like the fact drones are better than boots on the ground where US casualties would be part of the equation.

Besides, Pakistan gets so uptight when we have ground forces in their territory but drones they sort of look the other way. Or rather, give us permission for clandestine opps while being able to raise mock surprise and indignation for the benefit of their own populous.