Last edited:
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS June Giveaway ***Keltec SUB2000***
American POW freed from Taliban
- Thread starter Amd813
- Start date
M60
NES Member
You have my vote for president.
On one level desertion is a criminal act and an effort is made to find a deserter so that they can be punished under the UCMJ. This is done with various degrees of success and emphasis.. In WWII desertion rates in the front lines were reaching unacceptable levels and one soldier Eddie Slovik was actually executed for desertion since the American Civil War. This was done to deter others and his execution has always been controversial. In Viet Nam desertion was not uncommon. I know of one deserter who is a member of this Forum by their own admission (not AWOL which is being Absent Without Leave 30 Days or Less). The .gov pays a bounty on any deserter that a local police officer discovers and returns to military authority. If the assertions regarding Bergdahl are correct then there might have been some sound reasons for go looking for him at the time. Chiefly, because he might have had information about the Taliban operating in the area which could have been exploited from an intelligence perspective. Many of you have served but only at the squad and platoon levels. There is a larger operational perspective here, or some of you have never served and are simply parroting platitudes based on ignorance.
Bergdahl didn't get anybody killed except possibly the soldiers that got killed as a result of any information he may have shared with the Taliban. The officers appointed over the soldiers that got killed, got them killed and the operational planning was such that the leadership was willing to take the risk for whatever the reason, and what many of you fail to realize is that there may have been a very sound military reason for trying to get him back at the time. Soldiers are expendable commodities, every soldier. I know you don't like to hear that and it sounds pretty cold, but at the end of the day, that's ground truth. The leadership was willing to risk lives to get him back, they had a reason, if it was a sound reason, then it was worth it, but if it was a bad reason then they are the ones that should be held accountable IMO.
Now it matters not to me whether you think I'm stupid, whether you like me, or whether I harbor popular opinions that conform to your group think. I have worked in Intelligence for over thirty years, twenty of those years in military intelligence. There is a reason why things are done that sometimes make no sense or poor sense and then people get all worked up about a sense of justice or that word should.
When Dave Hunt weighs in, I listen. I served with Dave Hunt when I was in the Division G2 (intelligence staff) and he was the division G3 (Assistant Chief of Staff for Operations, G3 is the operations staff) 4th Infantry Division at Fort Carson. If he said that Bergdahl deserted, he probably did, but there was a reason we wanted him back and were willing to pay a price to try to get him back and I am convinced based on my experience, anyway, that it was more than retrieving a wayward comrade. Loose, he was potentially aiding and abetting an enemy, captured he could be compelled to give us a lot of information about the Taliban operating in that area.
So that's how this stupid, unpopular guy sees it, but what do I know, I've only spent my adult life in this crazy business
![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
Last edited:
M60
NES Member
The wife of soldier who was not killed posted this on facebook yesterday.
Desertion is punished by the death, it should be strongly considered for Bergdahl if what we are hearing happened. And it should be certain if he aided the Taliban in any way.
- - - Updated - - -
And tell me why Bergdahl was promoted while captured after deserting?
The photo of MSG Mark Allen Brings on allergy season.
richc
NES Member
Have you read all the medical and psychological help being given to this guy? His care will cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and he was given immediate care and attention.
Compare that to our veterans who did their service honorably and are now dying while waiting for the VA to help them.
What's wrong with this picture?
Compare that to our veterans who did their service honorably and are now dying while waiting for the VA to help them.
What's wrong with this picture?
The wife of soldier who was not killed posted this on facebook yesterday.
Desertion is punished by the death, it should be strongly considered for Bergdahl if what we are hearing happened. And it should be certain if he aided the Taliban in any way.
- - - Updated - - -
And tell me why Bergdahl was promoted while captured after deserting?
This picture makes my heart hurt. Soon or later Bergdahl's hero bubble is going to burst.
M60
NES Member
No matter what else, McCain did his time In Nam the hard way, in the Hanoi Hilton. I hope you at least served making a statement like this.
gentlemen, please, stop it. Nobody got killed because of him. Soldiers were killed because it was their time. When your clock runs out, you can hide in a hole under the earth, or at the bottom of the deepest seq, but brother death will find and kiss you. When you sign on the dotted line, you give your employer permission to put your life on the line as he sees fit. That's what soldiers do, no big deal. These men who got KIA had a mission. They carried their mission out, at the cost of their lives. It's what we do (or used to do). They did not run, they didn't just "walk off the base". They served with honor and fidelity, and they paid the ultimate price. They certainly were better men than the deserter (or me, for that matter). But it is wrong to say that they died because of that piece of shit. They died because they were stupid enough to sign up. Just like the rest of us.
Jsfitzgerald85
NES Member
Cant you say the guys killed because of the lack of air support was directly a result of his selfish actions? If he doesnt desert, there is no search. There is no search then the air support is available to support those guys. Ya maybe they still get killed, but maybe not.
I dont think you can say no one died because of his actions, atleast with any certainty
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to mark056 again.
Well said Mark
Well said Mark
On one level desertion is a criminal act and an effort is made to find a deserter so that they can be punished under the UCMJ. This is done with various degrees of success and emphasis.. In WWII desertion rates in the front lines were reaching unacceptable levels and one soldier Eddie Slovik was actually executed for desertion since the American Civil War. This was done to deter others and his execution has always been controversial. In Viet Nam desertion was not uncommon. I know of one deserter who is a member of this Forum by their own admission (not AWOL which is being Absent Without Leave 30 Days or Less). The .gov pays a bounty on any deserter that a local police officer discovers and returns to military authority. If the assertions regarding Bergdahl are correct then there might have been some sound reasons for go looking for him at the time. Chiefly, because he might have had information about the Taliban operating in the area which could have been exploited from an intelligence perspective. Many of you have served but only at the squad and platoon levels. There is a larger operational perspective here, or some of you have never served and are simply parroting platitudes based on ignorance.
Bergdahl didn't get anybody killed except possibly the soldiers that got killed as a result of any information he may have shared with the Taliban. The officers appointed over the soldiers that got killed, got them killed and the operational planning was such that the leadership was willing to take the risk for whatever the reason, and what many of you fail to realize is that there may have been a very sound military reason for trying to get him back at the time. Soldiers are expendable commodities, every soldier. I know you don't like to hear that and it sounds pretty cold, but at the end of the day, that's ground truth. The leadership was willing to risk lives to get him back, they had a reason, if it was a sound reason, then it was worth it, but if it was a bad reason then they are the ones that should be held accountable IMO.
Now it matters not to me whether you think I'm stupid, whether you like me, or whether I harbor popular opinions that conform to your group think. I have worked in Intelligence for over thirty years, twenty of those years in military intelligence. There is a reason why things are done that sometimes make no sense or poor sense and then people get all worked up about a sense of justice or that word should.
When Dave Hunt weighs in, I listen. I served with Dave Hunt when I was in the Division G2 (intelligence staff) and he was the division G3 (Assistant Chief of Staff for Operations, G3 is the operations staff) 4th Infantry Division at Fort Carson. If he said that Bergdahl deserted, he probably did, but there was a reason we wanted him back and were willing to pay a price to try to get him back and I am convinced based on my experience, anyway, that it was more than retrieving a wayward comrade. Loose, he was potentially aiding and abetting an enemy, captured he could be compelled to give us a lot of information about the Taliban operating in that area.
So that's how this stupid, unpopular guy sees it, but what do I know, I've only spent my adult life in this crazy business
Last edited:
Jsfitzgerald85
NES Member
what was said first? I wonder if they are backtracking and now saying they are going to investigate because of all the stuff coming out in the public eye.
Here's what you don't seem to understand: they died because they followed
orders. That's exactly what soldiers do. Don't want to get shot at? Don't want to die? Simple: don't become a professional soldier. Most of us (and I use the "I" here very loosely as far as the "I" in "us" is concerned) knew that we would be engaged in combat situations even before we signed our contracts. I can't speak for the grunts or squids here, but I've met Marines in my time, and I can tell you that they like fighting. You know how you can tell? Because you can't be as good as those ugly bastards at fighting, if you don't love what you do.
and they do what they are ordered to do. Not for the money, not for the medals, but because bravery is one of the pillar traditions of their unit. To get back on topic: they died because their mission was to be in a certain place at a certain time. The reason why they had to be matters not. Bergdahl didn't call for rescue missions. Some overweight, overpaid lazy bastard General did.
If one were to apply a legal standard for liability to this guy, I would say that he was the proximate cause of the death of those soldiers sent out to look for him. Or, more simply, but for his actions (leaving) the individuals sent out to find him who were killed would not have been killed. Now, this is not to say that they would not have been killed out on patrol that day if he was not out and about or that they would not have a heart attack on the can that day, it means that his actions likely caused their death. Very simplistic, but I think this is how most people are seeing this and I do not feel it is an unreasonable view from some perspectives. Of course, the criminal standard would be different and the UCMJ has its own peculiarities despite its revision in 1948.
Last edited:
There are a lot of people, especially those who have been professional combat soldiers like Frenchman who believe that when it is "your time, it is your time." There is a considerable weight of anecdotal evidence covering centuries of military history that support this. This is a philosophical and religious topic that is so deep and far beyond this thread or even this forum that we couldn't even begin to address it in any meaningful way, but it is something to think about.
I do know this, one of the first things you are taught when planning a combat operation is the problem of casualties and what is considered acceptable risk. Some commanders will waste troops to achieve an objective, others will go out of their way to spare lives to the point of being too cautious. In this instance commanders will willing to commit troops to find him knowing full well that there could be KIA. The soldiers who undertook the mission knew that they could be KIA. That's what being a soldier means in the final analysis, following a lawful order and being willing to lay down your life in executing that order. Maybe this is why only about 1% of our population is directly connected to the military anymore.
The US Military is a finite resource which is why we need to pick and choose how we commit this resource.
GPP
NES Member
Ugly bastards? ( glove slap) pistols at dawn sir.
Boris
Son of Kalashnikov
Should he get a medal if he willingly turned himself in to "help" Talibs and endured 5 years without running water? I think that Barry may want this shitshow just to simmer and go out. I may be off on my legalese, but mere desertion and turn-coat treason are too different things.
I think that there may be some special about this guy. Some Soviet POWs converted to Islam but were executed just the same. I don't know of any of their parents growing beards and thanking allah. Something smells like a dead camel here.
GPP
NES Member
Mark I think you're right on the money, as usual. There is just a lot of emotion with this, the MSM is all over it, and it's one more easy reason to loathe our commander in chief. If you've never been involved in the S-2 and S-3 shops, it's tough to grasp what you're getting at I think. Like I said earlier, I hope he offs himself in spectacular fashion when he gets home, but I agree you can't leave him there. The 5 to 1 ratio is a bitter pill, knowing those guys are basically the TB S-2 and S-3 supermen, and knowing they will have direct input on future operations in Afghanistan.
This sums it up quite well. Bergdahl deserted, and he deserves a court martial and a discharge. But after five years in captivity, I think he's served his time. He will need quite a bit of time to return to "normal", and re integrate back into society. He probably is suffering heavily from Stockholm Syndrome and very traumatized. I pray that he and his family will find peace in his return.
Nobody, is stupid enough to take that deal. Maybe threaten to send them if he's not released.
GPP
NES Member
Done!
M60
NES Member
Did you serve in the armed force of the United States sir? Why did you not answer this question? You don't give a shit that McCain was shot down over North Vietnam, or that he survived the crash only to serve as a POW for years in the Hanoi Hilton! In addition to your ungrateful brain not functioning properly, could it be that first and foremost you know nothing about serving this country, or combat itself sir? No true American disrespects the sacrifice of a serviceman, or his time in the Hanoi Hilton. So the summary question to you sir is this, do you just talk the shit talk that McCain helped pay for, or have you actually walked the combat walk sir? Have you ever returned fire while being fired upon sir? Have you ever been effective at it sir? If you haven't walked the combat walk, you should at least have the good sense to respect the fact that McCain helped pay the price so that you as a free idiot can in fact still and constantly talk cheap and freely. If you don't have the minimal level of sense to appreciate sacrifice, there is an equitable and just alternative that combat veterans will value as a substitute for your lack of combat contribution to America. "SHUT YOUR UNGRATEFUL MOUTH" and we'll call it even.
Last edited:
Boris
Son of Kalashnikov
it sounds like he traded a Talib soldier for 5 Talib generals. At this rate he would buy a penny for a dollar.
Mass-diver
NES Member
