- Joined
- Jul 12, 2014
- Messages
- 26,506
- Reaction score
- 55,160
- Points
- 151
This is true. And I guess you could say they were "dismissed."
I think you could also say they were evaluated and deemed as less important than the alternative outcomes.
Clinton was the chief voice (in the minority surely) of dissent; but my understanding is her concerns were almost entirely political.
You will see this next year when Bergdahl is mentioned, as well as the deteriorating relations with Israel; especially in light of the recent Israeli elections, the Iran deal, and the apparent beginnings of a Sunni-Shia regional war that could quickly escalate to something larger.
But the release of Bergdahl was not a political or partisan decision. It was supported by the generals, by the CIA and largely by the State department.
That doesn't make it right though, and whether or not I agree, I understand the sentiment from many folks in this thread that it just wasn't worth it.
We leave no man behind. Even if he is a deserter. It is up to us to serve justice to the man, not the enemy.
As for the cost: I'd wager that within a few years all of the guys we traded in exchange for SGT Jackass will be dead courtesy of Special Forces and/or hellfire missiles. So, in the end, the cost may be negligible.