Traitor Bergdahl released

POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Tuesday, September 27, 2016 05:28
VIEWED: 18284
PAGE 4 of 18

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, June 3, 2014 1:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

I'm completely pwning you Chris, and you know it.

Okay, let's examine your pwnfest.

Traitor? Available facts cannot conclusively determine this.
Dirtbag? This is not a fact but a judgement of his character based on limited information.
Hero? No one but you posited that; any celebration on his behalf is a homecoming one, not hero-related.
Peeps that died searching for him? Look to those that ordered & coordinated the failed searches. If you should ever lose YOUR mind (like, more than you have already) and walk out into nowhere would it be YOUR fault if someone got killed looking for YOU? Aren't you USUALLY consumed with personal responsibility? Legality? If he was insane on some level, you still wanna go there? Of course you do. Doggie with a bone.

Out of four points, 3 confirmed kills & one wounded.

JONGSSTRAW

Tuesday, June 3, 2014 1:45 AM

Buona fortuna Senor Quixote. Fight the windmills. You can't do anything about it. Congress ain't gonna do anything about it.

AURAPTOR

Tuesday, June 3, 2014 1:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Byte - it's a hell entirely of his own making. So no,I'll not let it go. The gorram press ( well thankfully, not all ) wants to treat this guy as a POW, and he's absolutely NOTHING OF THE SORT.

His choice to walk off the base? Sure. Whatever led to that choice? Not necessarily. Whatever happened to him in the Taliban's control? Not remotely.

He was US soldier and a prisoner of an enemy. However he got there, that makes him a POW.

Maybe not a hero. But a POW. And it sounds to me like he's suffered for it.

Best case scenario - for him - is that he was astronomically naive. Even so, his own actions put other lives in danger, diverted manpower and focus on other missions, just because he felt a need to commune w/ the enemy.

Generally , these guys kill Americans first, and then ask questions. I assume they saw some value in this guy, and sure enough, at the very least, they got 5 of their top commanders out of Gitmo.

( Which Barry has reminded us, again, that he plans on closing. Just as soon as he figures out a way to be President enough to actually make that happen. )

My guess is that they got LOTS of intel from this guy. From his comments BEFORE he was captured, I doubt much of it was via torture. If any at all.

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, June 3, 2014 1:50 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
From his comments BEFORE he was captured, I doubt much of it was via torture. If any at all.

Maybe they didn't torture him at all. Maybe they only waterboarded him...

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, June 3, 2014 2:20 AM

Quote:
just because he felt a need to commune w/ the enemy.

Again, you don't know that.

Nothing he's quoted saying, even the most anti-american and America is wrong parts of it, he doesn't then go on to say that he thinks the taliban is RIGHT.

We have to go on only what we know has been said, not speculation and jumping to conclusions.

Quote:
Best case scenario - for him - is that he was astronomically naive.

That's actually exactly the impression I'm getting.

AURAPTOR

Tuesday, June 3, 2014 3:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
From his comments BEFORE he was captured, I doubt much of it was via torture. If any at all.
Maybe they didn't torture him at all. Maybe they only waterboarded him...

To them, that's called a BATH. So no, they probably didn't do that either.

AURAPTOR

Tuesday, June 3, 2014 3:57 AM

PFC Matthew Michael Martinek
Staff Sgt. Kurt Robert Curtiss
SSG Clayton Bowen,
PFC Morris Walker
SSG Michael Murphrey
2LT Darryn Andrews

All died looking for this sorry sack of go-se, who decided to walk off his post, and go join up w/ the other side.

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, June 3, 2014 4:15 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
All died looking for this sorry sack of go-se,

Regrettable losses, but if he was seen walking off, and the idea was that he deserted, why go look for him? Who's the genius that thought it was worth sending man after man to die in the process of retrieving a man that apparently left of his own free will?

Quote:
who decided to walk off his post, and go join up w/ the other side.

It seems he wanted NO side to me...
And before THIS comes up, here's a good comment on it:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/05/31/1303494/-GOP-Hero-Reagan-Gave
-Iran-1-500-Missiles-for-Hostages-Obama-Trades-Five-Guys-GOP-Heads-Explode?detail=email

Quote:
In 1985, while Iran and Iraq were at war, Iran made a secret request to buy weapons from the United States. McFarlane sought President Reagan's approval, in spite of the embargo against selling arms to Iran. McFarlane explained that the sale of arms would not only improve U.S. relations with Iran, but might in turn lead to improved relations with Lebanon, increasing U.S. influence in the troubled Middle East. Reagan was driven by a different obsession. He had become frustrated at his inability to secure the release of the seven American hostages being held by Iranian terrorists in Lebanon. As president, Reagan felt that "he had the duty to bring those Americans home."

The arms-for-hostages proposal divided the administration. Longtime policy adversaries Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger and Secretary of State George Shultz opposed the deal, but Reagan, McFarlane and CIA director William Casey supported it. With the backing of the president, the plan progressed. By the time the sales were discovered, more than 1,500 missiles had been shipped to Iran. Three hostages had been released, only to be replaced with three more, in what Secretary of State George Shultz called "a hostage bazaar."

So GOP lawmakers are apoplectic about Obama not giving Congress the 30-day notice required by law before transferring any detainee from Guantanamo Bay, men who have mostly been detained without charge?

But will raise President Reagan upon a pillar, a man who sold Iran over 1,500 missiles for the release of U.S. hostages?

I have one response: shut up and sit down. Class is in session.

WHOZIT

Tuesday, June 3, 2014 5:00 AM

Even CNN and MSNBC have this story as the headline on their websites, and even "Rollingstone mag is makling a big deal out of this...wow.

If Jon Stewart condems Barry it's over...all over.

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, June 3, 2014 5:19 AM

What basically pisses me off is that when Presidents go and do what they want without 'proper authorization' straying into the illegal/immoral, they can be lauded for it. An individual deciding his world is full of shit & bailing becomes this 'traitor' thing. Peeps like Rappy have no real idea of anything they're talking about, no sense of history, balance or justice. It's all about 'THE ENEMY'. The enemy defines a weak man or boy. Left dolts as well. When it's all about victory for you & yours, it's also about loss for them & theirs.
See how that divide & conquer thing works so well?
So many peeps here should be fast friends, but we wind up being virtual enemies due to being herded into choices not of our own making. Politics is a religion. It's our real life, TODAY Matrix.
Praise Reagan, praise Obama, enter the Left OR Right jihad.

NO INDEPENDENT THOUGHT
THIS IS YOUR GOD
SLEEP

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE