SGT Bowe Bergdahl Freed

[brickhistory]

Do you honestly believe every person who fought against us in Iraq and Afghanistan (or elsewhere) is a terrorist? What's your definition of terrorist?

Distinction without a difference. Pick up a weapon against our guys and you are the bad guy. I am assuming you agree?

Released Gitmo vacationers were held for more than a decade. Pretty severe disagreements within even this Administration about releasing them.

The Marine is still in a Mexican jail. Not very effective if an 'ally' won't listen, so yeah, 'not a word. Especially a Rose Garden event, on a Saturday, when someone has been getting hammered for executive buffoonery for weeks on end.

Captain Phillips and Ms. Buchanan were civilians that military forces were used to rescue. Kinda the job and good on 'em for doing it.

Bergdahl is a solder yet, according to press reports, military forces were not used to rescue him because of the risk involved to the units and the cause for his captivity. And I don't blame the military. The Taliban didn't "grab him." He walked to them. He may have had second thoughts later, but that's a bit late after voluntarily leaving the wire without telling anyone.

Prisoner exchanges during war in the military context have been 1) for like - a soldier for a soldier and 2) usually for some sort of humanitarian reason - severe injury will keep the exchanged out of any future fights so what's the harm? and nearly always were a 1 for 1.

Got it. You like the deal. You want Gitmo closed. Congratulations, it appears you are getting your wish.

I'd hate to be one of the dudes still scheduled to be in Afghanistan after the 'war' is over.

Edited June 8, 2014 by brickhistory

[nsplayr]

Distinction without a difference. Pick up a weapon against our guys and you are the bad guy. I am assuming you agree?

Sure, but there's very specific legal implications behind calling someone an "unlawful combatant" or an "enemy combatant" or a "terrorist." What you designate someone determines how you deal with them. I totally disagree with labeling every member of the Afghan Taliban as a "terrorist," it's not an appropriate characterization for the vast majority of them or their actions within Afghanistan.

And don't get me wrong, I've participated in smoking a fair amount of Taliban who were shooting at our guys or rolling around with heavy weapons and I've got no issues with that. In a war you've generally got to kill the enemy.

Released Gitmo vacationers were held for more than a decade. Pretty severe disagreements within even this Administration about releasing them.

Vacationers? And yea, definitely lots of disagreement about whether to or how to clos Guantanamo across party lines and ideologies.

The Marine is still in a Mexican jail. Not very effective if an 'ally' won't listen, so yeah, 'not a word.

So because Mexico didn't ask "how high?" when we told them to jump that constitutes "not a word" of effort on behalf of the US government? You realize that effort and effectiveness aren't the same thing right? And that negotiating this guy's release when he may have legitimately broken Mexican law in Mexico doesn't just happen by waving a magic wand?

It's much easier to argue that "not enough is being done" or "the administration's efforts haven't been effective" without being hyperbolic and saying "Obama doesn't care! Hasn't said a word!!"

Captain Phillips and Ms. Buchanan were civilians that military forces were used to rescue. Kinda the job and good on 'em for doing it.

Just pointing out in all three cases that the US generally has a good record of getting our guys back under all circumstances, even during the hated current administration.

Prisoner exchanges during war in the military context have been 1) for like - a soldier for a soldier and 2) usually for some sort of humanitarian reason - severe injury will keep the exchanged out of any future fights so what's the harm? and nearly always were a 1 for 1.

Absolutely false. See Vertigo's post re: Israel prisoner swaps.

Got it. You like the deal. You want Gitmo closed. Congratulations, it appears you are getting your wish.

Like I said explicitly, I don't know if the deal was worth it but I'm glad we got our guy back. That's about it; anyone who claims it was an amazing victory (see Rose Garden announcement) or a terrible, impeachable offense (see any conservative outlet) either lacks most of the pertinent details, has a political agenda, or both.

WRT to Guantanamo actually closing...I doubt it. I'd be surprised if Obama gets it done before leaving office; obviously he's tried (effort doesn't equal effectiveness...) and Congress isn't having it and there aren't a lot of good options.

I'd hate to be one of the dudes still scheduled to be in Afghanistan after the 'war' is over.

I'm pretty sure I'll be there with 69 of my closest friends so see ya there if you're on the hook too. Edited June 8, 2014 by nsplayr

[brickhistory]

I am well past it now.

Just the ORF who, when not yelling at damn kids to get off my lawn, realizes that politicians, for the most part and especially in this Administration, don't give a rat's ass about folks in uniform.

Great props for showing how tough they are when a crisis erupts; or for paying lip service to on two holidays a year; but mostly alien and unfathomable.

Hence this Bergdahl episode blew up in this Administration's face.

I actually believe they wish they'd never done it now.

But it did get the VA buffoonery off the front pages, so there's that.

[Mark1]

Bergdahl is a solder yet, according to press reports, military forces were not used to rescue him because of the risk involved to the units and the cause for his captivity.

You should quit getting your news from whichever press outlet reported this.

[Lawman]

You should quit getting your news from whichever press outlet reported this.

Agreed. Anyone familiar with the task force missions going on at the time knows there were a lot of missions actioned on intel to try and get him back.

[Fuzz]

Agreed. Anyone familiar with the task force missions going on at the time knows there were a lot of missions actioned on intel to try and get him back.

You should quit getting your news from whichever press outlet reported this.

There is a difference between using the military to look for him initially and sending the SEALs to kick in the door of where he was being held. That is what the news reports were saying, that military leaders didn't want to risk high value assets on a person that could be a deserter.

Edited June 8, 2014 by Fuzz

[Lawman]

There is a difference between using the military to look for him initially and sending the SEALs to kick in the door of where he was being held. That is what the news reports were saying, that military leaders didn't want to risk high value assets on a person that could be a deserter.

And I'm calling BS.

There were quite a few missions actioned on "active intel" (I shouldn't have to go into what that is on here) not just OPs set out or random patrols. I'm talking the same complex air assaults and ground assaults stuff you would see for any other HVT mission.

This whole "SF commander refused to send his people after a deserter" is crap to sell a story in the 24 hour news cycle.

Edited June 8, 2014 by Lawman

[FlyinGrunt]

OK, the "solution" for the Gitmo folks?

1. What I'd like to see? Summary execution, bodies dumped at sea. Sadly, such a brazen move would have grave impacts abroad for us, due to the way it would look . . . illegal combatants or not, you go shooting prisoners/hostages/whatever, and you're going to have the whole world against you. Not good in the age of sequestration.

2. What should we do? Best case, covert RFID tag, track, AGM-114 direct to the skull. Worst case, release them, and use the appropriate assets to track them, same ending. If it was me, and the RFID wasn't an option, I'd release them all at the same time and place, knowing they'll go back to their buddies in large groups. AGM-114, bonus points for their friends.

3. Of course, if we could engineer a transfer via a Pacific routing with a 3rd party flagged ship, then talk the Chinese into one of their maritime sovereignty demonstrations, i.e. sinking a helpless civilian vessel, that would be best case for everyone.

Never pass up the chance to be Machiavellian. Proclaim our values to the world loudly, but be merciless and downright evil in their defense. Hypocrisy is only a valid concept in terms of the national defense if you're caught, so be shady!

[sky_king]

http://www.duffelblog.com/2014/06/uss-pueblo-north-korea-obama/#!WdY7S

I saw this pop up on my Facebook and thought it was funny and relevant to this topic.

[pawnman]

http://www.duffelblog.com/2014/06/uss-pueblo-north-korea-obama/#!WdY7S

I saw this pop up on my Facebook and thought it was funny and relevant to this topic.

The ship is expected to undergo “reintegration” for several months, where its former sailors will allege it was a communist sympathizer as it gets a fresh coat of paint before decommissioning.

Read more: http://www.duffelblog.com/2014/06/uss-pueblo-north-korea-obama/#ixzz343tczoYo

Sounds about right.

[waveshaper]

Meet Mohammad Fazi (unconfirmed) one of the five traded Taliban leaders.

http://www.bookwormroom.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Mohammed-Fazi.jpg

[HerkFE]

Meet Mohammad Fazi (unconfirmed) one of the five traded Taliban leaders.

http://www.bookwormroom.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Mohammed-Fazi.jpg

He's probably really an okay dude, just misunderstood.

[StoleIt]

[GreasySideUp]

Meet Mohammad Fazi (unconfirmed) one of the five traded Taliban leaders.

Warning for those with triggers, he is sitting in front of five decapitated craniums.

A little nuggets up next time please.

[waveshaper]

Warning for those with triggers, he is sitting in front of five decapitated craniums.

A little nuggets up next time please.

Noted. Believe it or not but the reason I selected this picture is because it was the only image (of many available)

that had the decapitated heads intentionally "blurred" in the photo.

[deaddebate]

SECDEF Statement on the transfer of GITMO detainees for SSgt Bergdahls' release

http://docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/ByEvent.aspx?EventID=102314

Like any American, Sergeant Bergdahl has rights, and his conduct will be judged on facts – not political hear-say, posturing, charges, or innuendo. We owe that to any American and especially those who are members of our military and their families. Like most Americans, I’ve been offended and disappointed in how the Bergdahl family has been treated by some people. No family deserves this. I hope there will be sober reflection on people’s conduct regarding this issue and how it relates to the Bergdahl family. In 2011, the Obama administration conducted talks with the Taliban on a detainee exchange involving the five Taliban detainees that were ultimately transferred after the release of Sergeant Bergdahl. These talks – which Congress was briefed on in November of 2011 and January of 2012 – were broken off by the Taliban in March 2012. We have not had direct talks with the Taliban since this time. In September of 2013, the Government of Qatar offered to serve as an intermediary, and in November, we requested that the Taliban provide a new proofof- life video of Sergeant Bergdahl. In January of this year, we received that video, and it was disturbing.

[...]

This gave us growing urgency to act.

[...]

On May 12th, we signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Qatar detailing the specific security measures that would be undertaken and enforced by them if any Taliban detainees were transferred to their custody. Included in this MOU were specific risk mitigation measures and commitments from the Government of Qatar like travel restrictions, monitoring, information sharing, and limitations on activities, as well as other measures which we will detail in the closed portion of this hearing. They were described in the classified notification letter I sent to this committee last week.

[...]

We moved forward with indirect negotiations on how to carry out the exchange of five detainees, and agreed to the mechanics of the exchange on the morning of May 27th, following three days of intensive talks.

[...]

As the opportunity to obtain Sergeant Bergdahl’s release became clearer, we grew increasingly concerned that any delay, or any leaks, could derail the deal and further endanger Sergeant Bergdahl. We were told by the Qataris that a leak would end the negotiations for Bergdahl’s release.

[...]

it wasn’t until we recovered Bergdahl on May 31st that we moved ahead with the transfer of the five Guantanamo detainees.

[...]

In the case of these five detainees, the security measures Qatar put in place led me to determine – consistent with the National Defense Authorization Act – that the risks they posed to the United States, our citizens, and our interests were substantially mitigated. I consulted with the other members of the President’s national security team and asked them to review the risks and either concur or object to the transfer. The Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff all supported this transfer. There was complete unanimity on this decision.

[...]

First, we complied with the National Defense Authorization Act of 2014 by determining that the risk the detainees posed to the United States, American citizens, and our interests was substantially mitigated and that the transfer was in the national security interests of the United States.

Second, we fulfilled our commitment to recover all military personnel held captive. Third, we followed the precedent of past wartime prisoner exchanges, a practice in our country that dates back to the Revolutionary War and has occurred in most wars America has fought.

Fourth, because Sergeant Bergdahl was a detained combatant being held by an enemy force, and not a hostage, it was fully consistent with our long-standing policy not to offer concessions to hostage takers. The Taliban is our enemy, and we are engaged in an armed conflict with them.

Fifth, what we did was consistent with previous congressional briefings this administration provided in late 2011 and early 2012, reflecting our intent to conduct a transfer of this nature with these particular five individuals.

He's more apologetic and conciliatory in the rest of his statement. These were just the highlights.

[TreeA10]

http://www.duffelblog.com/2014/06/bus-defense-secretary/#!Z4sHg

White House bus runs over Hagel.

[HeloDude]

GAO gets it...seriously doubt anything will be done about it.

http://www.militarytimes.com/article/20140821/NEWS05/308210051/GAO-Pentagon-broke-law-Bergdahl-swap

[zach braff]

So if this was breaking the law…I can only wonder: What if the officer at Guantanimo who received the order to unlock the cells and transfer the prisoners had realized it was unlawful (not that I would expect him/her to). You think the DoD would back them up if they had refused to obey that order on account of their oath to obey 'lawful' orders?

And since this breaking of law came from the top, if there is any accountability for this DoD law-breaking, where will it be? The officers who obeyed the orders or the officer who gave them?

(note - I'm not an anti-Obama nut and I more or less support his decision to get our guy back. I'm honestly wondering what kind of worms are in this can if we're going to open it)

zb

[Dupe]

GAO gets it...seriously doubt anything will be done about it.

http://www.militarytimes.com/article/20140821/NEWS05/308210051/GAO-Pentagon-broke-law-Bergdahl-swap

The GAO doesn't get it at all. They're blindly reading rules that were created to figure out where the Gitmo detainees were supposed to go in the event we move detainees stateside.

An ADA violation is chickenshit in which every President and every SECDEF would rail against.

[clouseau]

He's probably really an okay dude, just misunderstood.

He's probably seeking help for that problem as we speak .

[deaddebate]

http://www.stripes.com/news/us/bergdahl-investigation-finished-1.307649

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/military/article/Bergdahl-investigation-finished-5812417.php

http://www.ktvb.com/story/news/local/2014/10/10/bergdahl-investigation-complete/17027607/

The Army said Thursday it has completed an investigation into Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl's disappearance from a base in Afghanistan five years ago. The report by Brig. Gen. Kenneth Dahl is being reviewed by commanders, but is not being released, Army spokesman Wayne Hall said. Hall said the review process likely would be lengthy, and that “the Army's priority is ensuring that our process is thorough, factually accurate, impartial, and legally correct.”

[di1630]

Just saw that he's gonna be charged with desertion via USA today

[M2]

Just saw that he's gonna be charged with desertion via USA today

Yep...here are the Fox blondes talking about it...

Bergdahl to be charged with desertion, officials say

[HeloDude]

This can't be...the President's administration said he 'served honorably' (and I don't think they have retraced the statement either). So this all just must be a misunderstanding.