Maybe McCain thinks one American life is worth the sacrifice. Wow, this article says he was traded for five. I swear I had heard/read two before. I do appreciate him voicing his opinion on this:
But one broad Republican concern that McCain does not share is the legality of President Barack Obama’s actions. Several senior Republicans have complained that Obama broke the law by not notifying Congress of his actions to free Bergdahl — but this is not a sentiment shared by McCain, a former prisoner of war in Vietnam.
“I may be a little bit of a departure here from the normal Republican,” he said. “I don’t think that Congress should be legislating that kind of constraint on the commander in chief.”
I think we are getting away from the fact that the legitimacy of Guantanamo is an issue here as well. Obama pledged to close it down - he pussied out as soon as Congresspeople started complaining that some of the detainees would be in prisons on American soil. Every day that Guantanamo remains open undermines our position as the standard bearer of freedom and democracy and due process. There is really no legitimate right to continue to detain these men - if there ever was one. They are not being prosecuted - just held. If we have evidence against them - it should be presented and judged by a court or hell, I'd even support a military tribunal at this point. The problem is that there is not evidence against many of these men that would withstand judicial scrutiny. We have no right to hold them indefinitely. I had read somewhere that these 5 had been scheduled to be released 2 years ago. I think this point is getting lost in this discussion.
I think we are getting away from the fact that the legitimacy of Guantanamo is an issue here as well. Obama pledged to close it down - he pussied out as soon as Congresspeople started complaining that some of the detainees would be in prisons on American soil. Every day that Guantanamo remains open undermines our position as the standard bearer of freedom and democracy and due process. There is really no legitimate right to continue to detain these men - if there ever was one. They are not being prosecuted - just held. If we have evidence against them - it should be presented and judged by a court or hell, I'd even support a military tribunal at this point. The problem is that there is not evidence against many of these men that would withstand judicial scrutiny. We have no right to hold them indefinitely. I had read somewhere that these 5 had been scheduled to be released 2 years ago. I think this point is getting lost in this discussion.
Do you have a link?
Nope. I'm looking. I'm willing to retract the statement altogether though as my position is that either the detainees should be promptly tried or released. Since the issue with trying detainees is that there is not enough evidence to convict then any reasonable prosecutor should withdraw the charges.
Smearing the soldier's name? No, dude, look, I think even Stan agrees that there is a 90% chance this guy deliberately and willfully left post on his own accord, taking great care to avoid being stopped. He left behind his uniform, sent his possessions back to the states, and peaced out.
So no, I don't feel icky at all for "smearing" this guy's name.
Honestly, I don't even believe he wanted to come home. If that was his end goal, there are a dozen better ways I can think of accomplishing that.
I haven't given credence to anything that comes out of John McCain's mouth since I realized Sarah Palin was irredeemably a fucking nutcase.
For the record, I don't think I have a problem with the exchange. What I would have a problem with is him not facing a trial if there is evidence to even a small bit of what is being alleged.
plus six people died looking for this guy did he deserve it it's ridiculous...leave no man behind thinking. he may have chosen to leave them behind.
I think it takes enormous hubris to get all hot and bothered by a "deserter" when we (with a few VERY narrow exceptions) don't know the first goddamn thing about what it is like to fight in combat, much less combat in Afghanistan, which my lay-person-mind can only vaguely understand as "fucked up." I will not get on the rhetoric bandwagon with the deserter v. hero bullshit. The man was a soldier and a POW. Those things are not debatable. Attempting a determination of whether his actions were justified or not (especially since we have only the most superficial understanding of even what the fuck happened, to whom, and when) is more than I have the authority to comment on. And even if I were interested in trying to piece together or intellectually understand some kind of sequence of events in terms of his leaving his squad (I don't know if that's the right word), I think I'd be using extremely tempered vocabulary in terms of discussing what he "deserved" or what kind of person he must be or even whether what he did was justified or not. I simply cannot conceive of the mental and emotional trauma these men and women are enduring. And considering the condition that many of them are coming back in, I think the only thing I am qualified to say about the way they deal with the trauma is, "Thank God that's not me."
So frankly, I think the apparent debate about whether he was "worth" getting back is pretty disgusting given the "privilege" most of us exist in when it comes to the trauma of combat.
the desert part of the reaction to somebody else is coming up to thread. of course I think he deserves to live, that is just ridiculous commentary on your part, quite frankly.t it was pretty well known pretty quickly that he deserted...that was the issue. should so many resources have been extended because he deserted? I don't know. obviously my emotional side kind of says no, but that's not entirely rational and come from a place where I have family that were POWs or friends murdered in a tent next to them because I decide to drive a bayonet through them in a time of war while they were sleeping. so you can call me disgusting I give no shits as of this coming from a very visceral place for me based on that. .can't help it...not this soon after hearing all the stories coming out. so yes he deserves to live and also to be court martialed from what I'm hearing.
I admit I haven't listened to the R responses so I am unaware of smearing, unless desertion allegations are smears. I don't thinkthis is similar to Vietnam. I think hehearing from some of his colleagues saying he deserted, even when they were basically under a gag order, males it different. Unless maybe yo Kerry's testimony? Even that is a stretch.
All I know is my special forces (army) cousin who normally never says a word about anything like this is really angry.
I really don't know very many people in the military who aren't pissed. All of the ones I know think he deserted. Maybe one or two is okay with the exchange. The rest are ripshit pissed.
All I know is my special forces (army) cousin who normally never says a word about anything like this is really angry.
yes, I am most acquainted with special forces people, and they are not happy.
They all also believe he likely deserted and will face a court martial. And pretty much all of them have been deployed to Afghanistan and other areas at one point or another, so I don't think they are smearing this guy because they don't know anything about what he's been through.
I've also heard that his heath was deteriorating, which is why they decided to get him out ASAP and get him to Germany. And that he's having trouble remembering English, which... I don't even know. Is that from being out of practice, from severe mental trauma due to torture, from the Taliban trying to reprogram him?
I know this is from page 1 but I'm just finally getting a chance to read through this thread. I would expect someone who is a native and fluent speaker of English and has been for 20+ years to not forget how to speak English without some sort of mental trauma. That would not be in line with anything I know about language and the brain. But I also haven't checked to see exactly how his English may have deteriorated.
Post by secretlyevil on Jun 3, 2014 17:22:55 GMT -5
So my dentist was streaming Fox News (oh joy!). This was the topic and they were playing pieces of military people interviews from across all the networks. Pretty much said the same thing, not a hero, deserter at the best, traitor at the worst.
All I know is my special forces (army) cousin who normally never says a word about anything like this is really angry.
I really don't know very many people in the military who aren't pissed. All of the ones I know think he deserted. Maybe one or two is okay with the exchange. The rest are ripshit pissed.
Huh. My H hasn't mentioned anything about it.
Then again, our conversations these days are about "hey, do we have orders yet?" Nope. Nevermind that we should be moving in less than a month now.
Oh, and about the coup in Thailand b/c that kind of matters to us.
I really don't know very many people in the military who aren't pissed. All of the ones I know think he deserted. Maybe one or two is okay with the exchange. The rest are ripshit pissed.
Huh. My H hasn't mentioned anything about it.
Then again, our conversations these days are about "hey, do we have orders yet?" Nope. Nevermind that we should be moving in less than a month now.
Oh, and about the coup in Thailand b/c that kind of matters to us.
The coup in Thailand has confused me. But admittedly, now that the kids are out of school, I'm not getting my evening dose of carpool NPR.
Post by irishbride2 on Jun 3, 2014 17:29:03 GMT -5
yeah usually his response is "I can't talk about it" or "Its not my place to say." But not this time!
I personally am not educated enough on the topic to know either way. But it does give me pause to hear him react that way. I generally respect is opinion on topics he can/does discuss and he isn't one to be reactive or jump to conclusions.
If someone goes off the deep end when they're on active duty, how would that person's colleagues react?
Generally supportive. I've spent time in a military psych ward, and it was amazing to see the visits from their coworkers and how much they were trying to help people with resources.
If someone goes off the deep end when they're on active duty, how would that person's colleagues react?
So you're presuming he had a mental break and we're just assuming he's a traitor because service members have no time for that.
But to answer the general question, it would depend on personality and the unit. I would assume the chain of command would take steps to direct that service member to mental health services and some time with a chaplain. I know there is a whole process for what happens when one notes behavior they deem odd or contrary to their usual state of mine. I'm not sure what that is.
But I've never heard anyone who had an issue being referred to as a traitor.
If someone goes off the deep end when they're on active duty, how would that person's colleagues react?
Generally supportive. I've spent time in a military psych ward, and it was amazing to see the visits from their coworkers and how much they were trying to help people with resources.
I think the general consensus in the military is that a mental break can happen to anyone. So there's a lot of sensitivity and care for anyone who might be suffering from one.
So you're presuming he had a mental break and we're just assuming he's a traitor because service members have no time for that.
I was just asking a general question, because the closest I've ever gotten to the military was dating a hot airman for a brief second. I'm trying to understand why the military community is reacting so strongly to this when he was just released and there hasn't been much time to process the situation.
The diversity of views on mental health in the military probably are similar to views across the general US.
I will say it's improving. 7 years ago I was referred to a chaplain and ignored after. Now I have an internal psychiatrist and regularly approved visits with a psychologist, and I feel comfortable talking with coworkers about it. My PCM took my initial complaints extremely seriously just based on some initial screenings at a routine visit.