Was it really wise to exchange a deserter for five Gitmo terrorists?

[bilby]

It is doublethink beyond the dreams of Orwell that five POWs who were captured in their own home country, fighting against an invading foreign force, can be described as 'Terrorists'.

Surely to be a terrorist, one must engage in violent acts against a civilian population, with the intent to change policy through fear of further attacks. The Gitmo prisoners may be 'Prisoners of War'; but they are not 'Terrorists' by any reasonable definition of the word.

 

[Ford]

Why did he do this? What possible benefit does it bring him?

There is the possibility, of course, that he did it knowing it would not benefit him. That the instant the deal was announced, the right wing nut jobs (who claim to love our military) would find a way to leverage this against him, paint him as "palling around with terrorists" again, and maybe even call for impeachment, but he did it anyway because bringing back a POW is worth a little political damage.

If we're going to be a bit more cynical, it is because Obama is concerned about his legacy. He wants to be the President that ended two wars, and leaving one POW behind will tarnish that legacy. I think this is the reason, and I wouldn't be surprised to see an effort to (rightly) empty Gitmo by the end of 2016 as well. That's five inmates down, about a buck fifty to go. As of last month, 77 of them have been cleared for release. If we can cut loose five of the worst, then the case for holding onto the ones we can let go becomes considerably weaker.

This is a good thing.

As far as the five who are being released, they are allegedly senior Taliban guys. Not Al Qaeda. Bad guys? Certainly. But bad guys who have spent a very long time in prison and we can't really justify holding them indefinitely just because they're bad guys.

Regarding the POW returning to the US, whatever crimes he might have committed by leaving his post are properly dealt with under the UCMJ. If there is punishment to be meted out, it should be done by our military, not by the Taliban.

 

[Derec]

Prisoner exchange has a long history in military conflicts.

Usually not for deserters and usually 1:1 for similar ranks. From what I have heard these five are high ranking Taliban exchanged for a mere NCO. Not a good deal, not even if he were in good standing and not gone walkabout to "start a new life" and "see what's behind those mountains".

Releasing x terrorists for every American solider furthermore makes it lucrative to kidnap American soldiers.

 

[SLD]

The right wing blogosphere and talk radio show hosts are apoplectic, especially here in Talabama land. It's a knee jerk reaction, anything Obama does short of killing Bin Laden they have to find fault and disagree just for fuck's sake. But it is absurd. These guys were never involved in any attacks against the US. They were being kept because of they would likely have attacked coalition forces if returned. But we are leaving before they get back there. Duh! Why the fuck would we keep them and house them beyond the end of this year? Throw them away anyways. And we get a captured soldier back to boot. Good deal! Of course down here the right wingers are just as apoplectic about getting this guy back becase he's a deserter. Who gives a fuck how he gets captured? Drive this through your fucking heads, morons: WE DO NOT LEAVE SOLDIERS BEHIND! We will always work to find you and secure your release, despite your wrongdoing.

Bergdahl most likely is guilty of desertion. He should be court martialed and drummed out of the military. He left his post and soldiers died trying to find him. He should spend a long time in Fort Leavenworth, but he probably won't.

The right wing is so idiotic in this country. Saint Ronnie Reagan traded arms for hostages. Bush negotiated with terrorists amd called it a Diplomatic coup, both in Libya and in Iraq. Hell, how do you think we got control of the violence in Iraq?!?! We cut a deal you fucking morons!! Furthermore, W himself released over 500 people from Gitmo - in exchange for no one! And one of those fucktards is a prime suspect in the attack on Benghazi. These people know this shit. They haven't forgotten. They just don't care what Obama does, for them it is all wrong.

SLD

 

[Tom Sawyer]

And one of those fucktards is a prime suspect in the attack on Benghazi.

OK, if you're going to come in here and claim that Hillary Clinton was once a prisoner at Gitmo, you're going to need to back it up with something other than an unsupported assertion.

 

[SLD]

And one of those fucktards is a prime suspect in the attack on Benghazi.

OK, if you're going to come in here and claim that Hillary Clinton was once a prisoner at Gitmo, you're going to need to back it up with something other than an unsupported assertion.

She is an escaped Gitmo detainee and really a muslim terrorist. I bet she was born overseas too. Where's her birth certificate?

SLD

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The right wing blogosphere and talk radio show hosts are apoplectic, especially here in Talabama land. It's a knee jerk reaction, anything Obama does short of killing Bin Laden they have to find fault and disagree just for fuck's sake.

Actually that isn't true. They criticized for Obama allegedly taking all the credit for the bin Laden shooting.

 

[Playball40]

The right wing blogosphere and talk radio show hosts are apoplectic, especially here in Talabama land. It's a knee jerk reaction, anything Obama does short of killing Bin Laden they have to find fault and disagree just for fuck's sake. But it is absurd. These guys were never involved in any attacks against the US. They were being kept because of they would likely have attacked coalition forces if returned. But we are leaving before they get back there. Duh! Why the fuck would we keep them and house them beyond the end of this year? Throw them away anyways. And we get a captured soldier back to boot. Good deal! Of course down here the right wingers are just as apoplectic about getting this guy back becase he's a deserter. Who gives a fuck how he gets captured? Drive this through your fucking heads, morons: WE DO NOT LEAVE SOLDIERS BEHIND! We will always work to find you and secure your release, despite your wrongdoing.

Bergdahl most likely is guilty of desertion. He should be court martialed and drummed out of the military. He left his post and soldiers died trying to find him. He should spend a long time in Fort Leavenworth, but he probably won't.

The right wing is so idiotic in this country. Saint Ronnie Reagan traded arms for hostages. Bush negotiated with terrorists amd called it a Diplomatic coup, both in Libya and in Iraq. Hell, how do you think we got control of the violence in Iraq?!?! We cut a deal you fucking morons!! Furthermore, W himself released over 500 people from Gitmo - in exchange for no one! And one of those fucktards is a prime suspect in the attack on Benghazi. These people know this shit. They haven't forgotten. They just don't care what Obama does, for them it is all wrong.

SLD

Didn't you know, it was actually BUSH that got Bin Laden killed!

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Prisoner exchange has a long history in military conflicts.

Usually not for deserters and usually 1:1 for similar ranks. From what I have heard these five are high ranking Taliban exchanged for a mere NCO. Not a good deal, not even if he were in good standing and not gone walkabout to "start a new life" and "see what's behind those mountains".

Releasing x terrorists for every American solider furthermore makes it lucrative to kidnap American soldiers.

Here's an organization you should join: http://www.pow-miafamilies.org/ I'm sure they would like to hear your opinion.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Ya, as others have said, if he's a deserter then you try him for desertion after you get him back. What you don't do is come up with reasons to abandon him or forget about him. If you're going to send soldiers off to a war, you fucking well take care of those soldiers. Full stop. There's no conditional statements that you use to parse out exceptions to that rule.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Ya, as others have said, if he's a deserter then you try him for desertion after you get him back. What you don't do is come up with reasons to abandon him or forget about him. If you're going to send soldiers off to a war, you fucking well take care of those soldiers. Full stop. There's no conditional statements that you use to parse out exceptions to that rule.

But we gave the Taliban the Four Horseman and a terrorist to be named later. We had tortured these people and kept them in seclusion in a prison located on an island. That is certainly going to piss them off. So we are better just holding them forever without a trial instead.

Is this a good time to mention that when Obama proposed trying some prisoners in American courts, Congress rebuffed that too?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Benghazi!!!


It hasn't been said in a while.

 

[Ford]

My "shower thought" this morning...

I can't wait to hear what Oliver North has to say. Will he condemn the President for negotiating with terrorists in order to retrieve American hostages?

 

[funinspace]

My "shower thought" this morning...

I can't wait to hear what Oliver North has to say. Will he condemn the President for negotiating with terrorists in order to retrieve American hostages?

You asked ; and better than parody (reality trumps Underseer's lampoons):
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...d-a-ransom-for-an-American-hostage-No-really#

North demanded that the media ask the Obama administration if there was “a ransom, a fiscal, financial, money transaction,” with the Taliban as part of the deal. “Was there a ransom paid? Did the government of the United States, either directly or indirectly, finance a terrorist organization?”

I guess North doesn't embarrass easy...

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

That level of hypocrisy should be criminal.

Regardless, everyone needs to recalibrate their Poe Detectors.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Mine just exploded

 

[Sabine Grant]

Prisoner exchange has a long history in military conflicts.

Usually not for deserters and usually 1:1 for similar ranks. From what I have heard these five are high ranking Taliban exchanged for a mere NCO.

Are you suggesting that only commissioned O ranks and above are worthy of being traded? What's your issue with enlisted and NCOs?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Well, considering that he was the last POW held, it was all that we could trade for. (But the Army did promote him to sergeant while he was held so we could get a better deal. Obama!!! )

 

[Horatio Parker]

An interesting book:

The Deserters: A Hidden History of World War II

Most deserters were experienced combat veterans. Often they were in a fugue state when they deserted, not aware of their actions. Also, there were floods of desertions after the war ended; men wouldn't or couldn't wait to be demobilized.

Eventually, the military realized that the hard assed approach was self defeating.

I'm not saying any of this applies to Bergdahl, but I do think it wiser to apply a little sympathy and understanding, especially considering that the screamers have largely never been anywhere near a battlefield.

As e.e. cummings put it:

the luminous dithyrambs
of large immaculate unmute antibolshevistic gents
(each manufacturing word by word
his own unrivalled brand of pyro
-technic blurb anent the (hic)
hero dead that gladly (sic)
in far lands perished of unheard of
maladies including flu)
my little darlings,
let us now passionately remember how —
braving the worst, of peril heedless,
each braver than the other, each
(a typewriter within his reach)
upon his fearless derriere sturdily seated
Colonel Needless To Name and General You know who
a string of pretty medals drew
(while messrs jack james john and jim
in token of their country's love
received my dears the order of
The Artificial Arm and Limb)

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Was it really wise to exchange a deserter for five Gitmo terrorists?

Does it really matter?

Right now Obama could be healing the sick and raising the dead on the west lawn and the headline on Brietbart.com would read

OBAMACARE PUTS THOUSANDS OF DOCTORS OUT OF BUSINESS