06-11-2014 09:51 AM
70 123
tools
  1. SteveISU's Avatar
    I'm not beating the dead horse. I'm showing you how partisan you are in your thinking. Free yourself from your partisan ideology!!
    Oh your proving plenty, might not be what you intended. You have nothing but prattle at this point.


    Do you want to define full credit or do you not know what that is at this point?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    06-04-2014 04:56 PM
  2. anon8126715's Avatar
    Oh your proving plenty, might not be what you intended. You have nothing but prattle at this point.


    Do you want to define full credit or do you not know what that is at this point?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    .....says the guy that thinks Obama needs to be impeached because Faux News told him so.
    06-04-2014 05:01 PM
  3. SteveISU's Avatar
    .....says the guy that thinks Obama needs to be impeached because Faux News told him so.
    Omg lol, where did I EVER say he needs be impeached? Don't hurt yourself stretching there.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    06-04-2014 05:04 PM
  4. anon8126715's Avatar
    Omg lol, where did I EVER say he needs be impeached? Don't hurt yourself stretching there.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    So you want to give the President a medal for "breaking the law"?
    06-04-2014 08:00 PM
  5. toober's Avatar
    .....says the guy that thinks Obama needs to be impeached because Faux News told him so.
    I think he should be impeached. Not only did he violate the law, but it was a law that he had signed into effect. Before you accuse me of getting my talking points from Fox News, here is the link from CNN:

    Jeffrey Toobin says President Obama broke the law
    06-04-2014 08:09 PM
  6. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    I'm not so sure if Obama broke the law or the Taliban duped us. The law does allow an exemption to the 30 days notice if the prisoner has a major medical concern. I've started hearing reports our negotiators were shown evidence as such and that he was in bad shape and barely able to walk. So that would technically allow for the exemption to be made in good faith by the President.

    The problem is now there are now reports coming out that he was in decent health once our guys got him and looked him over. Unless an honest divine miracle happened that healed him just before getting to tha choppa (sorry, couldn't resist ), it's starting to sound like the Taliban pulled a fast one on us.

    Add to that new reports too from other soldiers in the area about how soon after the desertion, the Taliban attacks on them became extremely precise and targeted. We really need to consider the possibility that this guy wasn't a POW. It's possible he was a traitor that aided the Taliban by letting them know our weaknesses. I'm not saying he definitely is, just that there's a lot of questions being asked because the information at hand isn't looking good for him.
    Again, at the time of the exchange he was classified as a POW. You can't base things on what-ifs.
    06-04-2014 09:47 PM
  7. SteveISU's Avatar
    So you want to give the President a medal for "breaking the law"?
    Yes, that's it. It's either impeach him or give him a medal. In case there's any doubt, that's sarcasm. Let's not stoop to childish levels and put words in ones mouth.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    06-04-2014 09:56 PM
  8. SteveISU's Avatar
    I think he should be impeached. Not only did he violate the law, but it was a law that he had signed into effect. Before you accuse me of getting my talking points from Fox News, here is the link from CNN:

    Jeffrey Toobin says President Obama broke the law

    It will never happen because it would be considered a racist witch hunt. The mans administration will continue to break laws and act like congress vanished in thin air. Learn to live with it.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    06-04-2014 09:59 PM
  9. Mooncatt's Avatar
    Again, at the time of the exchange he was classified as a POW. You can't base things on what-ifs.
    That's why I said at the beginning that I'm not sure Obama broke the law. In fact, given what I've heard reported, I fully believe the administration was acting in good faith in terms of the reporting exemption based on the intel they had. It's not the first time our government was duped by the enemy.

    What I'm questioning was the information that's coming out after the fact that suggests to me that this may have been a ploy. The guy desserts and aids the enemy, then they trade him under the guise of being a POW for 5 of their top guys. That's where the what ifs come into play, and brings up the possibility that this guy may have been a legitimate traitor. I'm sure there will be investigations into his actions and we'll find out more about what happened.

    There's always going to be what ifs in things like this because there hasn't been a chance to figure out exactly what happened and why. For all we know the guy may have been captured and just in fear for his life and potentially helped them in effort to save his own life. If that's the case, he'll probably just be labeled a coward, but we can't simply assume that was the case either.
    06-04-2014 11:00 PM
  10. anon8126715's Avatar
    I think he should be impeached. Not only did he violate the law, but it was a law that he had signed into effect. Before you accuse me of getting my talking points from Fox News, here is the link from CNN:

    Jeffrey Toobin says President Obama broke the law
    Wow, one non-fox news lawyer says so, then it must be true! But lets be partisan about this. Lets also arrest the Bush administration for war crimes. I mean I do recall a few lawyers, GOP politicians, professors, and countries claiming that they violated the Geneva convention.....
    06-05-2014 05:53 AM
  11. anon8126715's Avatar
    It will never happen because it would be considered a racist witch hunt. The mans administration will continue to break laws and act like congress vanished in thin air. Learn to live with it.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Sure lets not EVER do strawman arguments like never.......
    06-05-2014 06:06 AM
  12. SteveISU's Avatar
    Sure lets not EVER do strawman arguments like never.......
    It's hardly a fallacy given what we've seen proponents of the administration do when they have no sound logical backstop to defend the administration, they yank out the race card.
    06-05-2014 09:03 AM
  13. SteveISU's Avatar
    That's why I said at the beginning that I'm not sure Obama broke the law. In fact, given what I've heard reported, I fully believe the administration was acting in good faith in terms of the reporting exemption based on the intel they had. It's not the first time our government was duped by the enemy.

    What I'm questioning was the information that's coming out after the fact that suggests to me that this may have been a ploy. The guy desserts and aids the enemy, then they trade him under the guise of being a POW for 5 of their top guys. That's where the what ifs come into play, and brings up the possibility that this guy may have been a legitimate traitor. I'm sure there will be investigations into his actions and we'll find out more about what happened.

    There's always going to be what ifs in things like this because there hasn't been a chance to figure out exactly what happened and why. For all we know the guy may have been captured and just in fear for his life and potentially helped them in effort to save his own life. If that's the case, he'll probably just be labeled a coward, but we can't simply assume that was the case either.
    Shouldn't the UN or International Red Cross be called in to check on his health status if there was any concern? Or to at least verify the "deterioration" of his health. If he's deemed an EPW it's not uncommon one of the two to step in an check on EPW's if there's a concern.
    06-05-2014 09:49 AM
  14. toober's Avatar
    Wow, one non-fox news lawyer says so, then it must be true! But lets be partisan about this. Lets also arrest the Bush administration for war crimes. I mean I do recall a few lawyers, GOP politicians, professors, and countries claiming that they violated the Geneva convention.....
    I don't care which party they are with, if a law was broken, they should be prosecuted. If they thought they had a case against Bush, they should have impeached him. The impeachment process is there for a reason and should be used when it is needed.
    06-05-2014 10:06 AM
  15. toober's Avatar
    Again, at the time of the exchange he was classified as a POW. You can't base things on what-ifs.
    US Knew Bowe Bergdahl Had Deserted, Investigated Him
    As early as 2010, the Pentagon had confirmed that Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl had deserted his post in 2009, and even before he deserted he had been the subject of “a major classified file” by U.S. intelligence.
    They knew long ago that this guy was a deserter.
    06-05-2014 10:23 AM
  16. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    US Knew Bowe Bergdahl Had Deserted, Investigated Him

    They knew long ago that this guy was a deserter.
    That does not change what his classification was at the time of the exchange. My point is very specific. If he was classified as a POW than these types of exchanges have happened before.
    06-05-2014 10:43 AM
  17. pappy53's Avatar
    That does not change what his classification was at the time of the exchange. My point is very specific. If he was classified as a POW than these types of exchanges have happened before.
    They shouldn't have classified him as a POW if they knew that he was a deserter.
    06-09-2014 11:50 AM
  18. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    They shouldn't have classified him as a POW if they knew that he was a deserter.
    I would assume that they know more than us.

    Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
    msndrstood and rexxman like this.
    06-09-2014 12:05 PM
  19. Timelessblur's Avatar
    Fellow soldiers call Bowe Bergdahl a deserter, not a hero - CNN.com

    Not only did the administration break the law not informing congress or giving them 30 days. But we went against a bedrock principle of ours of not negotiating with terrorist. To say nothing of the fact that we handed them 5 of the most dangerous guys we've caught, in exchange for a soldier who dropped his weapon willingly and left his post, putting the lives of his fellow soldiers at risk. On top of the fact that his decision to walk away got men killed in the attempt to find him. This kid should have a military trial for leaving his post and everyone who agreed to this "deal" should get drilled by congress.
    Yes another I hate Obama thread with zero logical though process.

    First off the 30 day is a more of a guidline but in this case woudl never of worked. If you want the law to required 30 days it would be unconstitutional as this was a POW issue. President is commander and chief and this is an army matter. In this case congress and scream and shot all it wants but you know as well as I do they would do their standand not let it happen.

    Also the "We negotiate with terrorists" really should say "we negotiate with terrorists expect when we do." It basically they have something to gain. If you want to go down that route you care to look at your good body Region you love to worship who traded weapons.
    Or would you rather an army solder be left behind? Remember we have the no solider left behind policy.

    Oh by the way those 5 guys they released where going to get released any way as soon as we finished pulling out. We had no legal reason to hold them. We were not going to charge them with anything. All this did was speed up how soon they got released by a few months.

    But we understand you hate Obama and just going to scream. I bet if he turned down the deal the screaming would be oh look he let "an american HERO stay and get killed."
    06-09-2014 04:13 PM
  20. Timelessblur's Avatar
    I'm not so sure if Obama broke the law or the Taliban duped us. The law does allow an exemption to the 30 days notice if the prisoner has a major medical concern. I've started hearing reports our negotiators were shown evidence as such and that he was in bad shape and barely able to walk. So that would technically allow for the exemption to be made in good faith by the President.

    The problem is now there are now reports coming out that he was in decent health once our guys got him and looked him over. Unless an honest divine miracle happened that healed him just before getting to tha choppa (sorry, couldn't resist ), it's starting to sound like the Taliban pulled a fast one on us.

    Add to that new reports too from other soldiers in the area about how soon after the desertion, the Taliban attacks on them became extremely precise and targeted. We really need to consider the possibility that this guy wasn't a POW. It's possible he was a traitor that aided the Taliban by letting them know our weaknesses. I'm not saying he definitely is, just that there's a lot of questions being asked because the information at hand isn't looking good for him.
    Again deserter is a separate issue. At the time he was a POW. What ever charges they DOJ wants to put again him is fine but he was a POW and we have a policy never to leave a man behind. SIMPLE AS THAT.
    The crime part has no bearing on the fact he was a POW.
    06-09-2014 04:15 PM
  21. Mooncatt's Avatar
    Again deserter is a separate issue. At the time he was a POW. What ever charges they DOJ wants to put again him is fine but he was a POW and we have a policy never to leave a man behind. SIMPLE AS THAT.
    The crime part has no bearing on the fact he was a POW.
    Note to self, "hate and bigotry" now replaced with "POW" for purposes of this thread.
    06-09-2014 04:26 PM
  22. SteveISU's Avatar
    Yes another I hate Obama thread with zero logical though process.

    First off the 30 day is a more of a guidline but in this case woudl never of worked. If you want the law to required 30 days it would be unconstitutional as this was a POW issue. President is commander and chief and this is an army matter. In this case congress and scream and shot all it wants but you know as well as I do they would do their standand not let it happen.

    Also the "We negotiate with terrorists" really should say "we negotiate with terrorists expect when we do." It basically they have something to gain. If you want to go down that route you care to look at your good body Region you love to worship who traded weapons.
    Or would you rather an army solder be left behind? Remember we have the no solider left behind policy.

    Oh by the way those 5 guys they released where going to get released any way as soon as we finished pulling out. We had no legal reason to hold them. We were not going to charge them with anything. All this did was speed up how soon they got released by a few months.

    But we understand you hate Obama and just going to scream. I bet if he turned down the deal the screaming would be oh look he let "an american HERO stay and get killed."
    lol, so we consider laws passed by congress as mere "guidelines"? Gotcha!
    06-09-2014 04:28 PM
  23. Timelessblur's Avatar
    lol, so we consider laws passed by congress as mere "guidelines"? Gotcha!
    Well if he broke the law why is the party of hate and bigotry doing nothing but grand standing.

    Oh wait because it did not apply here and they know it. It would be rule unconstitutional in this case as this is a POW issue. As such falls only to the commander and chief.

    I take it you would rather a solider be left behind and never gotten back?

    Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
    06-09-2014 04:31 PM
  24. SteveISU's Avatar
    Well if he broke the law why is the party of hate and bigotry doing nothing but grand standing.

    Oh wait because it did not apply here and they know it. It would be rule unconstitutional in this case as this is a POW issue. As such falls only to the commander and chief.

    I take it you would rather a solider be left behind and never gotten back?

    Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
    Diane Feinstein is in the party of hate and bigotry? Both Republicans and Democrats signed the law, the Senate passed it, the president signed it. Last I check the Supreme Court determines the constitutionality of the law in part or it's entirety.
    06-09-2014 04:50 PM
  25. Timelessblur's Avatar
    Diane Feinstein is in the party of hate and bigotry? Both Republicans and Democrats signed the law, the Senate passed it, the president signed it. Last I check the Supreme Court determines the constitutionality of the law in part or it's entirety.
    Again I ask the question. Would you rather an American solider be stuck over there held and died whole capture?

    Yes no. Would you rather a solider be allowed to die?

    Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
    06-09-2014 04:53 PM
70 123

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 06-16-2014, 11:13 PM
  2. Can't we develop a master ROM?
    By WallOfShame in forum General News & Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-02-2014, 11:17 AM
  3. Patchy music organisation with stock app
    By TTD187 in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-02-2014, 08:19 AM
  4. Several problems with my Galaxy S4 :(
    By Arrhenius in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-02-2014, 06:27 AM
  5. Can't send MMS with Texta, works with default app.
    By Lowlife in forum Samsung Galaxy S5
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-02-2014, 05:58 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD