Bowe Bergdahl freed by Taliban after five years of captivity

[Maximus]

See, regarding the "he did this to deflect from the VA scandal", this is the one thing that doesn't hold water. Obama has brilliant strategists around him. No way could they fuck this up and think, "you know, doing a prisoner swap will really help me with this VA scandal". They can't be that fucking stupid.

:chuckles:

 

[Damage]

Hell yes!! It sets multiple bad precedents. First, simply, that we negotiate with terrorists. Second, that we are the worst traders of all time. They got their top 5 targets, we got a deserter. We look like idiots. The trade only happened to take eyes of the VA scandal...that's the only reason.

The negotiating w/ terrorists is a separate subject. Quit conflating the 2. And I agree that it's bad to do so, btw.

Top 5 targets...of what? I keep asking this. When I say does it matter, I'm not talking about a perception pov. Will adding these guys actually make the Taliban stronger? I say no.

You're making broad assumptions with the VA scandal. Could it be true? Absolutely. It could also a myriad of other reasons. Stringing shit together and trying to find connections is where you delve into conspiracy theories (see Loose Change).

 

[AZ_]

See, regarding the "he did this to deflect from the VA scandal", this is the one thing that doesn't hold water. Obama has brilliant strategists around him. No way could they fuck this up and think, "you know, doing a prisoner swap will really help me with this VA scandal". They can't be that fucking stupid.

It's just lazy thinking, honestly.

Thinking that a controversial acquisition such as this will somehow overtake or make people forget about another controversial scenario?

Just...no.


You lambaste these guys for exploiting such events as political footballs, yet at the same time believe they don't understand the ramifications or blowback they'd receive from letting five guys out of Gitmo?


I mean, either they're criminal masterminds or they're not. Make up your minds.

 

[Marcus]

Daily Beast

You should at least cite the fact that these "sources" have what can only be described as a remarkable lack of objectivity.

To me, it doesn't really matter where it was posted. The soldier who wrote this account was writing just that - an account. He wasn't writing a commentary on what he thought of the administration, their decision to make the swap, etc. The first sentence in what you quoted is absolutely the truth - the government made them sign NDAs after what happened, and they were prohibited from talking about it to the media or anyone else.

I won't dispute the fact that Max often posts articles from right leaning sources, and that others (including myself) have done the same in this thread (I posted an article from IJReview that included all the tweets that I referred to earlier). I just thought this was a weird one to cite when it's really just a soldier's firsthand account of the events surrounding Bergdahl's disappearance.

To address something that Damage said, I'd like to see this not be a political issue as well, but the problem with that is that it really, really looks like a move to save face for the administration and the military in the wake of the VA scandal right about now, based on the timing. Think about it... the guys they released, they had captured and held well before he disappeared. They knew for five years he was being held by the Taliban, and he appeared "gaunt" in just about every video that they released of him. If they had serious concerns about his health, why did they let him rot with the enemy for five years? Why didn't they arrange something sooner? Oh sure, they've come out and said that they were arranging this for months, no man left behind, yada yada yada... that's the official account. I'd love to hear an insider's account of what really went on behind this, but it probably won't happen anytime soon.

My honest opinion is that this was done for some much-needed good press, both for the military and the administration... and with all of the stories coming out about the prisoners and Bergdahl himself, even that seems like it might derail. There's certainly going to be an investigation once he's been reintegrated and he's had time to recover, and I'm very interested to see how that turns out.

Via CNN:

Another senior Defense official said Bergdahl will not likely face any punishment. "Five years is enough," he told CNN on condition of anonymity.

To me, that indicates that there is more than a ring of truth to the accounts that all of these other soldiers are coming out with. There's a lot more to this story than the official account, and even the mainstream media is starting to pick it up.

 

[AZ_]

To me, it doesn't really matter where it was posted. The soldier who wrote this account was writing just that - an account. He wasn't writing a commentary on what he thought of the administration, their decision to make the swap, etc. The first sentence in what you quoted is absolutely the truth - the government made them sign NDAs after what happened, and they were prohibited from talking about it to the media or anyone else.

I won't dispute the fact that Max often posts articles from right leaning sources, and that others (including myself) have done the same in this thread (I posted an article from IJReview that included all the tweets that I referred to earlier). I just thought this was a weird one to cite when it's really just a soldier's firsthand account of the events surrounding Bergdahl's disappearance.

To address something that Damage said, I'd like to see this not be a political issue as well, but the problem with that is that it really, really looks like a move to save face for the administration and the military in the wake of the VA scandal right about now, based on the timing. Think about it... the guys they released, they had captured and held well before he disappeared. They knew for five years he was being held by the Taliban, and he appeared "gaunt" in just about every video that they released of him. If they had serious concerns about his health, why did they let him rot with the enemy for five years? Why didn't they arrange something sooner? Oh sure, they've come out and said that they were arranging this for months, no man left behind, yada yada yada... that's the official account. I'd love to hear an insider's account of what really went on behind this, but it probably won't happen anytime soon.

My honest opinion is that this was done for some much-needed good press, both for the military and the administration... and with all of the stories coming out about the prisoners and Bergdahl himself, even that seems like it might derail. There's certainly going to be an investigation once he's been reintegrated and he's had time to recover, and I'm very interested to see how that turns out.

Via CNN:



To me, that indicates that there is more than a ring of truth to the accounts that all of these other soldiers are coming out with. There's a lot more to this story than the official account, and even the mainstream media is starting to pick it up.

I just can't imagine any scenario where they acquired this guy and thought, "Well this is great, there certainly won't be any negative blowback considering we just let five high-ranking al-Queda leaders out of Gitmo."

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I wasn't saying these guys were fucking goat herders, I was responding to the claim that all people in Gitmo were bad, which they weren't, something you agree with per the bolded comment.

No, that's exactly the point. These guys weren't released as part of a normal review, and the Administration is already on record prior to this as saying that everyone remaining in Gitmo was dangerous. In Feb 2009, the new Administation commissioned a review of the guys remaining in Gitmo regarding the feasibility of release transfer. As a result of that review, there were only 149 left in Gitmo as of this month. The ones left were the worst of the worst. That's these guys. Point is, if the Adminstration deemed these guys worthy of release, that should not have been dependent upon a trade for Bergdahl.

http://www.justice.gov/ag/guantanamo-review-final-report.pdf

My main question is this: how much influence can 5 guys actually provide for a movement that is already ingrained into millions? It's not as if 5, 10, 100 extra bombs are going to make a difference. 1 bomb is enough. This, by the way, is completely independent from the act itself of doing a prisoner exchange.

Quite a bit. You can google for yourself some of the fun extracurricular activities in which prior release prisoners have engaged. But consider that the release of these specific five guys was requested not by some other government claming that their detention was wrongful, but by the Taliban itself.

 

[Marcus]

I just can't imagine any scenario where they acquired this guy and thought, "Well this is great, there certainly won't be any negative blowback considering we just let five high-ranking al-Queda leaders out of Gitmo."

I honestly can't come up with a response to this, because at this point, I don't what the hell they were thinking, and neither does anyone else. A prisoner swap with this particular crop of terrorists is unprecedented.

Come to think of it, the Taliban allowing a so-called American "POW" to live for five years without executing him like they have done so many others is unprecedented, as well.

Something is seriously not right about all of this.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

See, regarding the "he did this to deflect from the VA scandal", this is the one thing that doesn't hold water. Obama has brilliant strategists around him. No way could they fuck this up and think, "you know, doing a prisoner swap will really help me with this VA scandal". They can't be that fucking stupid.

It's not political stupidity. It's ignorance on this particular issue. The people making this decision did not have an understanding of how most current and former military people in particular would react to this. The President getting out there and citing "no man left behind" is simply a result of him being tone-deaf on military issues. Doesn't mean he is stupid or naïve on other issues. Reminds me a little bit of when the Army went to purple berets for everyone. Some of the advocates were just dumbfounded that some paratroopers, Rangers, and Special Forces guys were pissed. After all, it was a different color, right?

There are plenty of instances where people outside the military don't quite get some of the military ethic. It's a cultural gap to some extent. And I think what happened is that some people assumed that military people would react positively to this. "I did something good for a soldier being held by the Taliban. The military should like that." When in reality, most military personnel have an understanding of shitbirds and fuckups, and don't necessarily view everything that benefits any member of the military as a positive.

I mean, they tend to hate that dude who is fucking up and putting other people at risk/getting the unit in trouble. And that's when the "trouble" is much less than was caused by the search for this guy. In this situation....

There were a bunch of media reports and comments from people initially that seemed very positive. And then, you started getting a lot of blowback, in particular from members of the military/vets, and the reaction is "oh, uh, is it okay for me to be upset about this too?"

 

[Damage]

To me, it doesn't really matter where it was posted. The soldier who wrote this account was writing just that - an account. He wasn't writing a commentary on what he thought of the administration, their decision to make the swap, etc. The first sentence in what you quoted is absolutely the truth - the government made them sign NDAs after what happened, and they were prohibited from talking about it to the media or anyone else.

I won't dispute the fact that Max often posts articles from right leaning sources, and that others (including myself) have done the same in this thread (I posted an article from IJReview that included all the tweets that I referred to earlier). I just thought this was a weird one to cite when it's really just a soldier's firsthand account of the events surrounding Bergdahl's disappearance.

To address something that Damage said, I'd like to see this not be a political issue as well, but the problem with that is that it really, really looks like a move to save face for the administration and the military in the wake of the VA scandal right about now, based on the timing. Think about it... the guys they released, they had captured and held well before he disappeared. They knew for five years he was being held by the Taliban, and he appeared "gaunt" in just about every video that they released of him. If they had serious concerns about his health, why did they let him rot with the enemy for five years? Why didn't they arrange something sooner? Oh sure, they've come out and said that they were arranging this for months, no man left behind, yada yada yada... that's the official account. I'd love to hear an insider's account of what really went on behind this, but it probably won't happen anytime soon.

My honest opinion is that this was done for some much-needed good press, both for the military and the administration... and with all of the stories coming out about the prisoners and Bergdahl himself, even that seems like it might derail. There's certainly going to be an investigation once he's been reintegrated and he's had time to recover, and I'm very interested to see how that turns out.

Via CNN:



To me, that indicates that there is more than a ring of truth to the accounts that all of these other soldiers are coming out with. There's a lot more to this story than the official account, and even the mainstream media is starting to pick it up.

They can't be this naive to think there wouldn't be a blowback. The timing is absurd, but it's not like the Taliban are filled with dumb fucks. Could have been a "make this deal now or Bergdahl is going to be killed. We will let it be known you knew about this and failed to act".

 

[AZ_]

I honestly can't come up with a response to this, because at this point, I don't what the hell they were thinking, and neither does anyone else. A prisoner swap with this particular crop of terrorists is unprecedented.

Come to think of it, the Taliban allowing a so-called American "POW" to live for five years without executing him like they have done so many others is unprecedented, as well.

Something is seriously not right about all of this.

In fairness though, most of US/Terrorist organization relations is unprecedented.

This is all new. I do think it's fascinating, though. Mainly as a big fan of Homeland.

 

[Marcus]

They can't be this naive to think there wouldn't be a blowback. The timing is absurd, but it's not like the Taliban are filled with dumb fucks. Could have been a "make this deal now or Bergdahl is going to be killed. We will let it be known you knew about this and failed to act".

But there have been countless other American POWs in Iraq and Afghanistan that were executed (and often filmed) after the US came out time and time again and said that they do not negotiate with terrorists, and refused to do prisoner swaps in the past. Why did that change all of a sudden? Most of the general public forgot that Bowe Bergdahl even existed. His capture wasn't even in the news for more than a few days when it happened. What made this scenario different than all the other POW scenarios that we've dealt with in the past 13 years?

 

[Damage]

No, that's exactly the point. These guys weren't released as part of a normal review, and the Administration is already on record prior to this as saying that everyone remaining in Gitmo was dangerous. In Feb 2009, the new Administation commissioned a review of the guys remaining in Gitmo regarding the feasibility of release transfer. As a result of that review, there were only 149 left in Gitmo as of this month. The ones left were the worst of the worst. That's these guys. Point is, if the Adminstration deemed these guys worthy of release, that should not have been dependent upon a trade for Bergdahl.

http://www.justice.gov/ag/guantanamo-review-final-report.pdf



Quite a bit. You can google for yourself some of the fun extracurricular activities in which prior release prisoners have engaged. But consider that the release of these specific five guys was requested not by some other government claming that their detention was wrongful, but by the Taliban itself.

I said it in an earlier post, the Taliban isn't dumb. In fact, they're brilliant. I'm not saying these guys weren't extremely valuable assets, but who is driving that narrative - the Taliban? I mean, everyone in the Taliban is dangerous, but it could be very easy for them to say, "These are our 5 highest ranking officials and we want them released", all while knowing it's been eons since they've been with the movement, people have replaced them, and they aren't that high ranking anymore. Broad assumptions for sure, but not more far fetched than what our side is saying.

 

[Damage]

But there have been countless other American POWs in Iraq and Afghanistan that were executed (and often filmed) after the US came out time and time again and said that they do not negotiate with terrorists, and refused to do prisoner swaps in the past. Why did that change all of a sudden? Most of the general public forgot that Bowe Bergdahl even existed. His capture wasn't even in the news for more than a few days when it happened. What made this scenario different than all the other POW scenarios that we've dealt with in the past 13 years?

Well for one it's 2014. If you remain stagnant you're going to fall behind. Movements evolve. This is unprecedented. Anything else and I'd just be guessing.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

They can't be this naive to think there wouldn't be a blowback.

Sure they can. They probably assumed some blowback, but thought it would be limited to a few GOP members of Congress who could be easily dismissed as partisan. Then, the Admin could come back with a trump card of "you don't care about the troops." A political win all around for them.

They misread it, again likely due to a cultural disconnect. And I suspect that there are a fair number of civilians who are surprised by the reaction this is getting as well.

 

[Damage]

Sure they can. They probably assumed some blowback, but thought it would be limited to a few GOP members of Congress who could be easily dismissed as partisan. Then, the Admin could come back with a trump card of "you don't care about the troops."

They misread it, again likely due to a cultural disconnect.

What does this even mean?