Bowe Bergdahl release: US parties clash on Afghan deal

[ClutchClark]

Tweets from a guy in his platoon give some firsthand observations on how Berghdal's disappearance went down. It looks like a desertion to me, and it looks pre-meditated. He deserves his day in court, where he can speak for himself. I reserve my judgements until then.

Some have said this was a negotiation with terrorists. Whether yes or no, it was a negotiated prisoner exchange under articles of war. That much is lawful, and it got our soldier home, to face the music for what happened. You fight a war against a terrorist organization, if they capture anyone, you do not just turn your back on the POW's because the enemy are terrorists. That would be absurd. What you don't do is try to negotiate to end their acts of terror. Which would also be absurd. And of course that is what Obama wants to do next - negotiate some peace deal with the Taliban. People in high office seem to believe it will be important to the future of the Afghan government to have a peace deal with the Taliban.

They are wrong on that one. Flat wrong. Taliban have gone back on every promise they have ever made. And they publicly refuse to negotiate with the US or Afghan governments, in any case. The US should call it done with the release of Berghdal. There is nothing left to talk about with the Taliban. More to the point, if there is a need to talk to the people in charge, they need to be talking with the Pakistani ISI anyhow. No point in pretending at this late stage. If we are pulling out as publicly announced, the Taliban can just wait us out, and then drive on Kabul after we exit. Taliban don't need a thing from negotiations. Just sitting pretty, waiting for their moment, yeah?

How long before the US has to re-invade? Really, how long will it be?.

Yours is a very well written and thought provoking post.

Thanks.

[folium]

He is a likely deserter. To my recollection, at least 5 soldiers were killed while trying to find and "rescue" him. The Taliban is listed by USA as a terrorist organization and, therefore, violated its own "we don't negotiate with terrorists" policy. And, the probable deserter who directly/indirectly (pick one) caused the loss of 5 real hero's lives is now being given the treatment and presidential notoriety due only real heroes. Thank you, Mr.Obama.

"we don't negotiate with terrorists" is a neat little line but plain silly when things need to get done.

While it was gullible/ignorant US citizens who funded and armed PIRA's terrorist activities for many years, US politicians and Archbishop's stalled the extradition of convicted terrorists on the run, and even named a street corner after one murdering scumbag in NYC (see the sad tale of Joe Doherty), and then to cap it all, one "terrorist" leader with plenty of blood on his hands (including an innocent mother of 10) is feted in the White House (see image below).

But then again, at least PIRA had the nerve to start training FARC insurgents in Colombia all the neat little tricks they had perfected in murdering British soldiers, police and civilians. This ensured that pooping on the US doorstep and potentially putting US interests/assets in jeopardy was enough to end US support for these delightful folk and hasten the Peace Agreement.

And as previously stated if you want to resolve any conflict you have to involve all parties involved, however much you might loathe the murdering scum. If you don't any resolution is incomplete and thus temporary at best. Thus dealing with the Taliban is a part of any hope of a resolution in Afghan. It's probably all too little, too late and should have happened before the focus switched to the nonsense of Iraq in 2003. But having dealings with the Taliban might just mean that 3435 ISAF deaths have not been totally in vain.

Re the death of "true heroes" undertaking search missions for Bergdahl...wise up. Plenty of soldiers die for all sorts of messed up, sad reasons divorced from common sense and logic, let alone screw-up blue on blue scenarios (eg Blackhawks shot down over northern Iraq Aug 1994 or A10s strafing RRF soldiers in Feb 1991). That's the nature of the job. You do the job, do what you are asked to do and hope for the best. That's what you accept when you sign up. Unless some settlement is arrived at in Afghan every single ISAF death and maiming will have been in vain.

Bergdahl is a side show that merely supplies ammunition to political agendas. The greatest tragedy will be if no deal is achieved prior to the pull-out at the end of this year. No mother wants to hear that their son or daughter was killed or maimed because politicians couldn't work out what they were trying to achieve in the first place and secondly couldn't sort out the end game. Sacrifice needs to have a reason or there will be problems when a repeat performance is asked for. The bitter Vietnam legacy for the US was only lanced by the 1st Gulf War in 1990-91. The world cannot afford to have the US hugging the touchline for the next 17 years.

[ClutchClark]

He is a likely deserter. To my recollection, at least 5 soldiers were killed while trying to find and "rescue" him. The Taliban is listed by USA as a terrorist organization and, therefore, violated its own "we don't negotiate with terrorists" policy. And, the probable deserter who directly/indirectly (pick one) caused the loss of 5 real hero's lives is now being given the treatment and presidential notoriety due only real heroes. Thank you, Mr.Obama.

"we don't negotiate with terrorists" is a neat little line but plain silly when things need to get done.

While it was gullible/ignorant US citizens who funded and armed PIRA's terrorist activities for many years, US politicians and Archbishop's stalled the extradition of convicted terrorists on the run, and even named a street corner after one murdering scumbag in NYC (see the sad tale of Joe Doherty), and then to cap it all, one "terrorist" leader with plenty of blood on his hands (including an innocent mother of 10) is feted in the White House (see image below).

But then again, at least PIRA had the nerve to start training FARC insurgents in Colombia all the neat little tricks they had perfected in murdering British soldiers, police and civilians. This ensured that pooping on the US doorstep and potentially putting US interests/assets in jeopardy was enough to end US support for these delightful folk and hasten the Peace Agreement.

And as previously stated if you want to resolve any conflict you have to involve all parties involved, however much you might loathe the murdering scum. If you don't any resolution is incomplete and thus temporary at best. Thus dealing with the Taliban is a part of any hope of a resolution in Afghan. It's probably all too little, too late and should have happened before the focus switched to the nonsense of Iraq in 2003. But having dealings with the Taliban might just mean that 3435 ISAF deaths have not been totally in vain.

Re the death of "true heroes" undertaking search missions for Bergdahl...wise up. Plenty of soldiers die for all sorts of messed up, sad reasons divorced from common sense and logic, let alone screw-up blue on blue scenarios (eg Blackhawks shot down over northern Iraq Aug 1994 or A10s strafing RRF soldiers in Feb 1991). That's the nature of the job. You do the job, do what you are asked to do and hope for the best. That's what you accept when you sign up. Unless some settlement is arrived at in Afghan every single ISAF death and maiming will have been in vain.

Bergdahl is a side show that merely supplies ammunition to political agendas. The greatest tragedy will be if no deal is achieved prior to the pull-out at the end of this year. No mother wants to hear that their son or daughter was killed or maimed because politicians couldn't work out what they were trying to achieve in the first place and secondly couldn't sort out the end game. Sacrifice needs to have a reason or there will be problems when a repeat performance is asked for. The bitter Vietnam legacy for the US was only lanced by the 1st Gulf War in 1990-91. The world cannot afford to have the US hugging the touchline for the next 17 years.

I very much appreciate some of these recent contributions that offer such intelligent insight.

Unfortunately, Americans are so absorbed in their petty and destructive partisanship nowadays that the no longer see the big picture.

Thanks very much for your post .

[folium]

He is a likely deserter. To my recollection, at least 5 soldiers were killed while trying to find and "rescue" him. The Taliban is listed by USA as a terrorist organization and, therefore, violated its own "we don't negotiate with terrorists" policy. And, the probable deserter who directly/indirectly (pick one) caused the loss of 5 real hero's lives is now being given the treatment and presidential notoriety due only real heroes. Thank you, Mr.Obama.

"we don't negotiate with terrorists" is a neat little line but plain silly when things need to get done.

While it was gullible/ignorant US citizens who funded and armed PIRA's terrorist activities for many years, US politicians and Archbishop's stalled the extradition of convicted terrorists on the run, and even named a street corner after one murdering scumbag in NYC (see the sad tale of Joe Doherty), and then to cap it all, one "terrorist" leader with plenty of blood on his hands (including an innocent mother of 10) is feted in the White House (see image below).

But then again, at least PIRA had the nerve to start training FARC insurgents in Colombia all the neat little tricks they had perfected in murdering British soldiers, police and civilians. This ensured that pooping on the US doorstep and potentially putting US interests/assets in jeopardy was enough to end US support for these delightful folk and hasten the Peace Agreement.

And as previously stated if you want to resolve any conflict you have to involve all parties involved, however much you might loathe the murdering scum. If you don't any resolution is incomplete and thus temporary at best. Thus dealing with the Taliban is a part of any hope of a resolution in Afghan. It's probably all too little, too late and should have happened before the focus switched to the nonsense of Iraq in 2003. But having dealings with the Taliban might just mean that 3435 ISAF deaths have not been totally in vain.

Re the death of "true heroes" undertaking search missions for Bergdahl...wise up. Plenty of soldiers die for all sorts of messed up, sad reasons divorced from common sense and logic, let alone screw-up blue on blue scenarios (eg Blackhawks shot down over northern Iraq Aug 1994 or A10s strafing RRF soldiers in Feb 1991). That's the nature of the job. You do the job, do what you are asked to do and hope for the best. That's what you accept when you sign up. Unless some settlement is arrived at in Afghan every single ISAF death and maiming will have been in vain.

Bergdahl is a side show that merely supplies ammunition to political agendas. The greatest tragedy will be if no deal is achieved prior to the pull-out at the end of this year. No mother wants to hear that their son or daughter was killed or maimed because politicians couldn't work out what they were trying to achieve in the first place and secondly couldn't sort out the end game. Sacrifice needs to have a reason or there will be problems when a repeat performance is asked for. The bitter Vietnam legacy for the US was only lanced by the 1st Gulf War in 1990-91. The world cannot afford to have the US hugging the touchline for the next 17 years.

I very much appreciate some of these recent contributions that offer such intelligent insight.

Unfortunately, Americans are so absorbed in their petty and destructive partisanship nowadays that the no longer see the big picture.

Thanks very much for your post .

The only praise that is due is to those currently putting their proverbials on the line to bail out the politicians and their inept handling of the Afghan shambles almost since inception.

Just today I have been conversing with an old buddy now on his 5th tour there, this time pulling a 12 month tour right up until the pull out in December working with the US forces in E. Afghan. As an RE EOD he knows all about when shiite happens, but his standpoint was that while the military can hold the circle and minimize the fall-out, the politicians have to do a deal to make sure that all this grief means something.

Whether Bergdahl went AWOL or did whatever it took to stay alive over the last 5 years, a court-martial will determine. The bigger, far more important picture is that the 3435 dead and some 25,000 wounded members of ISAF are not consigned to the out tray of history and that their and their families suffering turns out to have been without reason or result. As previously stated a paralyzed US would be the last thing any non-Russian/Chinese would wish for over the next couple of decades.

[snarky66]

One of the most heinous aspects of this entire Fiasco is that the White House altered the official transcript of Bob Berghdahl's comments while standing next to obama. This is exactly the type of underhanded despicable acts that the obama regime pull on a daily basis. And I would love it if any of you liberals could prove me wrong. Get the transcript and compare it to his actual words. But most likely that will not fit with your constant spinning that obama is a great man. Which is patently absurd.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[jaideeguy]

I don't know and [we] may never know all the details, but it seems that whoever negotiated the release of 5 man eating sharks in exchange for one tiny turncoat minnow needs to have his head examined and take a course in basic negotiations.

Lost a lot of faith in my man Mr O the last few days.

[Chicog]

Again: This is to try and bring the Taleban to the table to get them to negotiate some kind of power sharing agreement when the US pulls out. I think it's doomed, but it is worth trying.

Once they are back in country they'll probably go back to throwing acid in schoolgirls faces and bumming little boys. That's Afghanistan's problem, not the West.

The whole Afghani expedition has been a screw up from the start.

Try and see the bigger picture.

[Johpa]

I don't know and [we] may never know all the details, but it seems that whoever negotiated the release of 5 man eating sharks in exchange for one tiny turncoat minnow needs to have his head examined and take a course in basic negotiations.

Lost a lot of faith in my man Mr O the last few days.

Oh please, the US is attempting to bring the Taliban into political negotiations to end the violence and that is a good thing. At their most basic roots, the Taliban are Pathan/Pashtun nationalists. They fight against foreign occupiers: they fought against the ancient Greeks, they fought against the Imperial British, they fought against the invading Soviets, and they have been fighting against the occupying Americans for the past decade. The idea that the Pathans can never be trusted is just racist drivel. Most certainly there are large elements of Pashtun culture that are far removed, if not downright antithetical to western culture. But there are some aspects of Pashtunwali, their ethical code of conduct, which are admirable given the harsh world of the Hindu Kush.

As for the idea that 6 Americans died in the search for Bergdahl, well that is a bit fuzzy. Many of those deaths were from IEDs along roadways which would have killed folks regardless of the purpose of the mission, and missions would have been continuing with or without the capture. And for the next several months after Bergdahl's capture, I would guess that all missions included the missive to keep an eye and ear out for news about the missing American. But for the families and friends and fellow soldiers of the fallen, it is probably easier to continue to wave the American flag, continue to be patriotic, and then to blame the senseless deaths of the fallen upon a perceived deserter rather than the pathetic American strategy in Afghanistan.

[Somtamnication]

Hero? Deserter? Well, his hometown has already canceled the welcome home party. 5 years with those monkeys is punishment enough, isn't it?

[Ulysses G.]

As for the idea that 6 Americans died in the search for Bergdahl, well that is a bit fuzzy. Many of those deaths were from IEDs along roadways which would have killed folks regardless of the purpose of the mission, and missions would have been continuing with or without the capture.

The men from Bergdahl's unit feel that he instructed the Taliban on tactics to make those IEDs more effective. They say that the IEDS were not very effective until he deserted and became much more so pretty much instantly. Giving away information that harmed his fellow soldiers would mean that he was a turncoat for sure and would make him responsible for many, many American deaths.

[pmarlin]

Haven't read the rest of the thread since my last post - so apologies if you've seen this already.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/10870318/Bowe-Bergdahl-a-deserter-who-cost-soldiers-lives-say-US-army-comrades.html

This deserter caused the death of six men who went out looking for him.

First of all, you cannot declare him a deserter. Only a military court can make that determination. Currently, he can only be rightfully identified as a soldier that was missing in action and reported to have been suffering from some type of stress disorder and talking crazily about walking from his post to India. It appears no action was taken to protect him from himself or to protect others in his unit by his superiors taking action on his mental condition.

It is the responsibility of the military to attempt rescue of their fellow soldiers and its a volunteer military and every one of those soldiers understood enlisting could place them in harms way. They also understood that if they were MIA that their fellow brothers-in-arms would risk their own lives to search and attempt rescue of them. Unfortunately, some of those brave soldiers lost their lives attempting to rescue one of their own.

That is the fact of the matter. All you are full of is conjecture and armchair QB'ing based on intel that you cannot even validate.

There are those who are lead through life by their emotions and then there are those who "lead" by using their intelligence. See where this is going? The US is a nation of laws and we don't just rely on them when it is convenient.

UCMJ, military court has noting to do with duty status. You leave your place of duty for more than 24 hrs. you are AWOL Absent With Out Leave. More than 30 days your are declared a deserter. In war you leave your post you are a deserter. Duty status determination is up to the Unit Commander. What complicates this is that he was captured soon after he quit his post. According to some news reports he was never classified as a POW so who knows what his duty status was.

[ClutchClark]

First of all, you cannot declare him a deserter. Only a military court can make that determination. Currently, he can only be rightfully identified as a soldier that was missing in action and reported to have been suffering from some type of stress disorder and talking crazily about walking from his post to India. It appears no action was taken to protect him from himself or to protect others in his unit by his superiors taking action on his mental condition.

It is the responsibility of the military to attempt rescue of their fellow soldiers and its a volunteer military and every one of those soldiers understood enlisting could place them in harms way. They also understood that if they were MIA that their fellow brothers-in-arms would risk their own lives to search and attempt rescue of them. Unfortunately, some of those brave soldiers lost their lives attempting to rescue one of their own.

That is the fact of the matter. All you are full of is conjecture and armchair QB'ing based on intel that you cannot even validate.

There are those who are lead through life by their emotions and then there are those who "lead" by using their intelligence. See where this is going? The US is a nation of laws and we don't just rely on them when it is convenient.

UCMJ, military court has noting to do with duty status. You leave your place of duty for more than 24 hrs. you are AWOL Absent With Out Leave. More than 30 days your are declared a deserter. In war you leave your post you are a deserter. Duty status determination is up to the Unit Commander. What complicates this is that he was captured soon after he quit his post. According to some news reports he was never classified as a POW so who knows what his duty status was.

You are incorrect. You are not automatically a deserter, you can be charged with desertion but the final determination is up to the findings of a Court-Martial and the accused is allowed representation and the right to provide evidence in their own support. For instance, being captured by the enemy and held as a POW is legitimate grounds for why a soldier remained absent from their base. Understand?

You just want vigilante justice based on rumor and that is not the way the US Justice System works... And thats why I am glad to be American.

The US military interviewed villagers who saw Bergdahl wander out of the compound on the day he disappeared, they said he looked confused and dazed. Obviously, a soldier "of sound mind" would not wander out of a forward operating base directly into hostile territory. According to reports from fellow soldiers, Bergdahl had allegedly spoken of walking to India in the preceding days.

Have you heard of PTSD?

Apparently, you do not feel that a US Soldier is allowed to suffer from PTSD and if they do then you feel they should be punished for suffering from it.

You are like those hippies that spit on returning Vets from Vietnam.

[ClutchClark]

As for the idea that 6 Americans died in the search for Bergdahl, well that is a bit fuzzy. Many of those deaths were from IEDs along roadways which would have killed folks regardless of the purpose of the mission, and missions would have been continuing with or without the capture.

The men from Bergdahl's unit feel that he instructed the Taliban on tactics to make those IEDs more effective. They say that the IEDS were not very effective until he deserted and became much more so pretty much instantly. Giving away information that harmed his fellow soldiers would mean that he was a turncoat for sure and would make him responsible for many, many American deaths.

Bergdahl enlisted in the Fall 2008.

He was captured July 2009.

He was trained as an Infantryman.

Do you really think a Bergdahl, a green soldier with less than one year experience could teach the Taliban soldiers tricks to making IED's? The Taliban that had victoriously defeated Russian Invasion attempts for a decade?

Hatred for Obama causes people to lose any small amount of sanity they may have been born with.

[ClutchClark]

You are like those hippies that spit on returning Vets from Vietnam.

The hippies were spitting on honorable soldiers. He is spitting on a deserter and possible collaborator that is likely responsible for American deaths. There is a big difference.

Yep, and those hippies called soldiers baby Killers without any proof either.

The only thing you are missing is the long hair and the tye-dye.

But the venim and hatred is the same.

[Ulysses G.]

Do you really think a Bergdahl, a green soldier with less than one year experience could teach the Taliban soldiers tricks to making IED's? T

Yes I do. He likely listened to his infantry fellow soldiers discussing the mistakes the Taliban were making and passed them along. That is the kind of things that soldiers talk about. It is not rocket science.

[Johpa]

The men from Bergdahl's unit feel that he instructed the Taliban on tactics to make those IEDs more effective. They say that the IEDS were not very effective until he deserted and became much more so pretty much instantly. Giving away information that harmed his fellow soldiers would mean that he was a turncoat for sure and would make him responsible for many, many American deaths.

If that allegation were proven true then we would indeed by dealing with something far more significant than desertion. All the more reason to get him back in a trade and debrief him

To see just highly convoluted this can become, I highly recommend watching the fictional Israeli TV series "Prisoners of War", the subtitled version which can be found on ROKU in the US. This series was the basis for the popular US TV series "Homeland".

[Ulysses G.]

Yep, and those hippies called soldiers baby Killers without any proof either.

There is PLENTY of proof that he deserted. The collaborator part has not been confirmed yet.

[jaideeguy]

The men from Bergdahl's unit feel that he instructed the Taliban on tactics to make those IEDs more effective. They say that the IEDS were not very effective until he deserted and became much more so pretty much instantly. Giving away information that harmed his fellow soldiers would mean that he was a turncoat for sure and would make him responsible for many, many American deaths.

If that allegation were proven true then we would indeed by dealing with something far more significant than desertion. All the more reason to get him back in a trade and debrief him

To see just highly convoluted this can become, I highly recommend watching the fictional Israeli TV series "Prisoners of War", the subtitled version which can be found on ROKU in the US. This series was the basis for the popular US TV series "Homeland".

This whole story seems to be developing into an episode of 'Homeland'. The physical resemblance of Bowe is so close to a younger Brodie and his parents look so much like Brodie and his wife. Lets just hope that they don't let him bet involved in politics.

[uhhh ohhh]

Almost anything written on this subject is going to draw the wrath from one side or another. There have been some well written and objective posts that I appreciate, however some things do bother me and at the risk of sounding one sided here they are.

It does appear this guy deserted his post and let the appropriate justice take its course but I put a strong emphasis on "APPROPRIATE!" I don't care if he was drunk, on drugs or the details of his child hood eventually show he was not breast fed. I don't want spin on either side....just the truth which should be open for all U.S. citizens to see.

Susan Rice: "Bergdahl served with honor and distinction." REALLY? Could I get a few examples? I don't want a script written by either side. Let the facts come out. An investigation of Benghazi shows they didn't even interview people on the ground. Can we get some feedback by the people who served with Bergdahl? They're already trying to be silenced and discredited by the administration Why?

Susan Rice: "....he was an America prisoner of war captured on the battlefield." If Bergdahl voluntarily left his post he voluntarily put himself at risk as well as other military personnel. I'm not happy about that. But, Susan's Sunday Spin, appears to make it sound like this guy was the first one off the boat at Normandy. I doubt he deserves the recognition of "CAPTURED ON THE BATTLEFIELD."

Finally, and I'm not clear about this, but I briefly heard some records are being sealed (?) for how long.....5......10 years? Why? Can we get the facts out.....especially knowing that this has been the most transparent administration in the history of the United States!

P.S. I'm not too happy with five extremely dangerous terrorist being released under the guise of a prisoner release program at the end of a war......CALL ME CRAZY! Could someone please tell the Taliban that the war is almost over? THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL?

[Credo]

The guy probably walked away from his post because he had to take a crap.

[webfact]

RELATED:

Bowe Bergdahl: Town cancels welcome for freed US soldier

HALLEY: -- A welcoming party in the home town of a US soldier freed from Afghan captivity has been cancelled, amid suspicions that he deserted his post.

Organisers said the event in Hailey, Idaho, was cancelled for safety reasons, because of a large increase in the number of expected attendees.

Bowe Bergdahl was released on Saturday after five years in Taliban captivity.

Several commentators and soldiers have branded him a deserter and called for him to be punished.

Full story: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-27707791


-- BBC 2014-06-05

[Scott]

Off-topic, inflammatory and troll posts have been deleted along with replies.

Stay on the topic.

[Scott]

Inflammatory posts deleted.

[pmarlin]

First of all, you cannot declare him a deserter. Only a military court can make that determination. Currently, he can only be rightfully identified as a soldier that was missing in action and reported to have been suffering from some type of stress disorder and talking crazily about walking from his post to India. It appears no action was taken to protect him from himself or to protect others in his unit by his superiors taking action on his mental condition.

It is the responsibility of the military to attempt rescue of their fellow soldiers and its a volunteer military and every one of those soldiers understood enlisting could place them in harms way. They also understood that if they were MIA that their fellow brothers-in-arms would risk their own lives to search and attempt rescue of them. Unfortunately, some of those brave soldiers lost their lives attempting to rescue one of their own.

That is the fact of the matter. All you are full of is conjecture and armchair QB'ing based on intel that you cannot even validate.

There are those who are lead through life by their emotions and then there are those who "lead" by using their intelligence. See where this is going? The US is a nation of laws and we don't just rely on them when it is convenient.

UCMJ, military court has noting to do with duty status. You leave your place of duty for more than 24 hrs. you are AWOL Absent With Out Leave. More than 30 days your are declared a deserter. In war you leave your post you are a deserter. Duty status determination is up to the Unit Commander. What complicates this is that he was captured soon after he quit his post. According to some news reports he was never classified as a POW so who knows what his duty status was.

You are incorrect. You are not automatically a deserter, you can be charged with desertion but the final determination is up to the findings of a Court-Martial and the accused is allowed representation and the right to provide evidence in their own support. For instance, being captured by the enemy and held as a POW is legitimate grounds for why a soldier remained absent from their base. Understand?

You just want vigilante justice based on rumor and that is not the way the US Justice System works... And thats why I am glad to be American.

The US military interviewed villagers who saw Bergdahl wander out of the compound on the day he disappeared, they said he looked confused and dazed. Obviously, a soldier "of sound mind" would not wander out of a forward operating base directly into hostile territory. According to reports from fellow soldiers, Bergdahl had allegedly spoken of walking to India in the preceding days.

Have you heard of PTSD?

Apparently, you do not feel that a US Soldier is allowed to suffer from PTSD and if they do then you feel they should be punished for suffering from it.

You are like those hippies that spit on returning Vets from Vietnam.

Duty status and being convicted of a violation of the UCMJ (Uniform Code Of Military Justice) are two different things. Unit commanders determine duty status and upon return to duty from AWOL or desertion then charges are pressed if approved by the chain of command. No mater what it is considered bad time which the soldier has to make up. While in the Awol or desertion status all pay and allowance stops.

By the way what is your military background? Mine is retired US Army with 30 years active duty including 4 years as a First Sergeant and 7 years as a Command Sergeant Major. My last assignment was at the Brigade level.

[chuckd]

First of all, you cannot declare him a deserter. Only a military court can make that determination. Currently, he can only be rightfully identified as a soldier that was missing in action and reported to have been suffering from some type of stress disorder and talking crazily about walking from his post to India. It appears no action was taken to protect him from himself or to protect others in his unit by his superiors taking action on his mental condition.

It is the responsibility of the military to attempt rescue of their fellow soldiers and its a volunteer military and every one of those soldiers understood enlisting could place them in harms way. They also understood that if they were MIA that their fellow brothers-in-arms would risk their own lives to search and attempt rescue of them. Unfortunately, some of those brave soldiers lost their lives attempting to rescue one of their own.

That is the fact of the matter. All you are full of is conjecture and armchair QB'ing based on intel that you cannot even validate.

There are those who are lead through life by their emotions and then there are those who "lead" by using their intelligence. See where this is going? The US is a nation of laws and we don't just rely on them when it is convenient.

UCMJ, military court has noting to do with duty status. You leave your place of duty for more than 24 hrs. you are AWOL Absent With Out Leave. More than 30 days your are declared a deserter. In war you leave your post you are a deserter. Duty status determination is up to the Unit Commander. What complicates this is that he was captured soon after he quit his post. According to some news reports he was never classified as a POW so who knows what his duty status was.

You are incorrect. You are not automatically a deserter, you can be charged with desertion but the final determination is up to the findings of a Court-Martial and the accused is allowed representation and the right to provide evidence in their own support. For instance, being captured by the enemy and held as a POW is legitimate grounds for why a soldier remained absent from their base. Understand?

You just want vigilante justice based on rumor and that is not the way the US Justice System works... And thats why I am glad to be American.

The US military interviewed villagers who saw Bergdahl wander out of the compound on the day he disappeared, they said he looked confused and dazed. Obviously, a soldier "of sound mind" would not wander out of a forward operating base directly into hostile territory. According to reports from fellow soldiers, Bergdahl had allegedly spoken of walking to India in the preceding days.

Have you heard of PTSD?

Apparently, you do not feel that a US Soldier is allowed to suffer from PTSD and if they do then you feel they should be punished for suffering from it.

You are like those hippies that spit on returning Vets from Vietnam.

Duty status and being convicted of a violation of the UCMJ (Uniform Code Of Military Justice) are two different things. Unit commanders determine duty status and upon return to duty from AWOL or desertion then charges are pressed if approved by the chain of command. No mater what it is considered bad time which the soldier has to make up. While in the Awol or desertion status all pay and allowance stops.

By the way what is your military background? Mine is retired US Army with 30 years active duty including 4 years as a First Sergeant and 7 years as a Command Sergeant Major. My last assignment was at the Brigade level.

pmarlin:

Very well said. Though I doubt you will get an answer to your question.

CSM is quite an achievement.

[Chicog]

By the way what is your military background? Mine is retired US Army with 30 years active duty including 4 years as a First Sergeant and 7 years as a Command Sergeant Major. My last assignment was at the Brigade level.

I did three tours of 'Nam. ***

*** Cheltenham, Beckenham and Chippenham.

[ClutchClark]

First of all, you cannot declare him a deserter. Only a military court can make that determination. Currently, he can only be rightfully identified as a soldier that was missing in action and reported to have been suffering from some type of stress disorder and talking crazily about walking from his post to India. It appears no action was taken to protect him from himself or to protect others in his unit by his superiors taking action on his mental condition.

It is the responsibility of the military to attempt rescue of their fellow soldiers and its a volunteer military and every one of those soldiers understood enlisting could place them in harms way. They also understood that if they were MIA that their fellow brothers-in-arms would risk their own lives to search and attempt rescue of them. Unfortunately, some of those brave soldiers lost their lives attempting to rescue one of their own.

That is the fact of the matter. All you are full of is conjecture and armchair QB'ing based on intel that you cannot even validate.

There are those who are lead through life by their emotions and then there are those who "lead" by using their intelligence. See where this is going? The US is a nation of laws and we don't just rely on them when it is convenient.

UCMJ, military court has noting to do with duty status. You leave your place of duty for more than 24 hrs. you are AWOL Absent With Out Leave. More than 30 days your are declared a deserter. In war you leave your post you are a deserter. Duty status determination is up to the Unit Commander. What complicates this is that he was captured soon after he quit his post. According to some news reports he was never classified as a POW so who knows what his duty status was.

You are incorrect. You are not automatically a deserter, you can be charged with desertion but the final determination is up to the findings of a Court-Martial and the accused is allowed representation and the right to provide evidence in their own support. For instance, being captured by the enemy and held as a POW is legitimate grounds for why a soldier remained absent from their base. Understand?

You just want vigilante justice based on rumor and that is not the way the US Justice System works... And thats why I am glad to be American.

The US military interviewed villagers who saw Bergdahl wander out of the compound on the day he disappeared, they said he looked confused and dazed. Obviously, a soldier "of sound mind" would not wander out of a forward operating base directly into hostile territory. According to reports from fellow soldiers, Bergdahl had allegedly spoken of walking to India in the preceding days.

Have you heard of PTSD?

Apparently, you do not feel that a US Soldier is allowed to suffer from PTSD and if they do then you feel they should be punished for suffering from it.

You are like those hippies that spit on returning Vets from Vietnam.

Duty status and being convicted of a violation of the UCMJ (Uniform Code Of Military Justice) are two different things. Unit commanders determine duty status and upon return to duty from AWOL or desertion then charges are pressed if approved by the chain of command. No mater what it is considered bad time which the soldier has to make up. While in the Awol or desertion status all pay and allowance stops.

By the way what is your military background? Mine is retired US Army with 30 years active duty including 4 years as a First Sergeant and 7 years as a Command Sergeant Major. My last assignment was at the Brigade level.

I am getting my information from a retired JAG but given your experience I will say its possible I did not understand him correctly, although this is a great chance for you to provide your expertise.

Unit commanders determine Duty Status?

What was Bergdahls status?

Doesn't a soldier have the right to request a Court-Martial?

Doesn't a soldier have the right to appeal a decision made by his CO ?

In other words, it is my understanding that the CO does not have the final authority.

You speak of Duty status of AWOL or Desertion.

Where does POW fit in there?

Is it not true POW's continue to receive pay and allowance while they are POW's?

Bergdahl has received two advancements while being held captive.

Were those advancements because his Duty Status was not determined to be AWOL or a Deserter.

Have you seen some cases of PTSD?

Thanks for your expertise on this matter.

[snarky66]

His hometown cancelled the celebrations when they found out he had simply laid down his weapon and walked away from his unit asking locals to be put in contact with the Taliban. He did this voluntarily. He is a deserter. What part of this do you liberals not understand? Others on this forum have suggested he is a traitor. A a courts martial will decide that issue.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[snarky66]

So last night Chuck Hagel goes on television and repeats the same lie that rice told. He said that Beau berghbahl served "honorably". So it appears that anyone who works for Obama is expected to go out and lie with a straight face. This is the so-called administration.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think Bergdahl was promoted to sergeant AFTER he defected.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Ulysses G.]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think Bergdahl was promoted to sergeant AFTER he defected.

Correct. He was a private, but automatically upgraded every year, because he was "serving" in a war zone.