quote:

HE WAS NOT A "CAPTIVE"! HE WAS/IS A FUCKING DESERTER!

And as such, should consider himself lucky he doesn’t get what he truly deserves. Which isn’t a cash award.

Why don't we just let the Taliban have him back? They reaped a bunch of propaganda from us "recovering" him, and they still are causing us pain for as long as we squabble over slapping his wrist.

quote:

Originally posted by rburg:
Why don't we just let the Taliban have him back? They reaped a bunch of propaganda from us "recovering" him, and they still are causing us pain for as long as we squabble over slapping his wrist.

Air dropped from 10,000 feet or so, sans parachute, right into one of their camps?

According to Susan Rice, he served with "honor and distinction."

Susan Rice stands by 'honor and distinction' remark on Bergdahl

BY REBECCA SHABAD - 06/06/14 10:54 AM EDT

White House national security adviser Susan Rice on Friday defended her remark about how Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl had served in the military with "honor and distinction."

The comment has come under fire amid conflicting reports about whether Bergdahl deserted the Army in Afghanistan before being captured by the Taliban and held as a prisoner for five years.

Speaking to CNN’s Jim Acosta from the 70th anniversary event to mark D-Day in Normandy, France, Rice said her remark about Bergdahl was describing his decision to enter the military in war time.

“I realize there has been a lot of discussion and controversy around this,” Rice said to CNN about that remark. “What I was referring to is the fact that this was a young man who volunteered to serve his country in uniform at a time of war. That in itself is a very honorable thing.”

“But ‘honor and distinction?’ ” Acosta asked.

“Jim, really,” Rice said. “This is a young man whose circumstances we are still going to learn about.”

Rice said Bergdahl is being tried in “the court of public opinion” and said people should withhold judgment until the facts are known...

Complete article:

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog...rt-of-public-opinion

quote:

Originally posted by Sigmund:
According to Susan Rice, he served with "honor and distinction."

Susan Rice stands by 'honor and distinction' remark on Bergdahl

BY REBECCA SHABAD - 06/06/14 10:54 AM EDT

White House national security adviser Susan Rice on Friday defended her remark about how Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl had served in the military with "honor and distinction."

The comment has come under fire amid conflicting reports about whether Bergdahl deserted the Army in Afghanistan before being captured by the Taliban and held as a prisoner for five years.

Speaking to CNN’s Jim Acosta from the 70th anniversary event to mark D-Day in Normandy, France, Rice said her remark about Bergdahl was describing his decision to enter the military in war time.

“I realize there has been a lot of discussion and controversy around this,” Rice said to CNN about that remark. “What I was referring to is the fact that this was a young man who volunteered to serve his country in uniform at a time of war. That in itself is a very honorable thing.”

“But ‘honor and distinction?’ ” Acosta asked.

“Jim, really,” Rice said. “This is a young man whose circumstances we are still going to learn about.”

Rice said Bergdahl is being tried in “the court of public opinion” and said people should withhold judgment until the facts are known...

Complete article:

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog...rt-of-public-opinion

I actually agree with her. I think everyone knows he was a total shitbird, but the principle of innocent until proven guilty is a very important part of our Justice system and one of the great things about the US that separates us from the rest of the world. It's imperative that the administration respect that principle. I'll wait to see what she says after the verdict is in before I judge her for it.

Even now the JAG core is getting ripped for undue command influence that probably destroyed the lives of many innocent people. The system isn't perfect as is, but it fails completely if administrators outside of the process wade into things with a damning opinion before the process is complete. Just 4 years ago the administration would have jailed this entire forum for our shared hobby if they were allowed to run unchecked and their (wrong in this case) opinion became the standard for judgement.

“Honor and distinction” isn’t withholding judgment. On the contrary, it is a very strong judgmental statement.

The “honor” part might have been justified on the basis that the man enlisted in the Army which is a very unusual act these days, but “distinction”? Hardly, unless one can distinguish oneself by wandering off to get captured by the enemy—either deliberately or through gross violation of standing orders. In any event, once questions had been raised about the circumstances of his disappearance from his unit, then withholding judgment would have consisted of a statement to that effect: “We don’t know the circumstances of his being captured, and therefore we are withholding judgment about the matter until after a proper investigation.” Period, end of story.

I don’t actually blame Rice either, though. She was simply the mouthpiece for the Administration whose position on the matter she was merely parroting and was truly to blame for that travesty of opinion.

And FWIW, the verdict is in. He was found guilty and sentenced for his military crimes.
Plus, we are not “innocent” in the sense of “didn’t do it” until proved guilty, we are not guilty until proved guilty. “Not guilty” is a legal term that can be far different from innocent of the act charged.

Evidently the case is being reviewed and it’s still possible the verdict could be overturned on the basis that the President’s statements about the case constituted improper command influence. If that happens, it could make the deserter “not guilty,” but it would never make him “innocent.”

And finally, lest we forget, the “honor and distinction” statement and how the deserter’s parents were feted at the White House after his ransoming were every bit as much improper command influence over the case than anything our current President said.

Susan Rice wouldn't know Honor & Distinction if it slapped her in the face!

quote:

According to Susan Rice, he served with "honor and distinction."

NO, he did not! While his enlistment during a period of conflict 'may' be been considered honorable, his 'service' was NOT!!! And YES, I'm making that distinction!

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
Susan Rice wouldn't know Honor & Distinction if it slapped her in the face!

Bingo


...

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:

quote:

According to Susan Rice, he served with "honor and distinction."

NO, he did not! While his enlistment during a period of conflict 'may' be been considered honorable, his 'service' was NOT!!!

Excellent point.

- UPDATE -

Bowe Bergdahl's court-martial conviction voided by U.S. judge

It’s too early in the morning for me to be this pissed off; so I’m going to save my anger for November when he runs for (and wins) some type of office.

WASHINGTON, July 25 (Reuters) - A U.S. federal judge on Tuesday voided a 2017 court-martial conviction against Bowe Bergdahl, an Army sergeant who walked off his post in 2009 only to be captured by the Taliban and spend five years as their prisoner.

Bergdahl's conviction in 2017 left him with a dishonorable discharge, reduction in rank to the lowest enlisted pay grade and an effective fine of $10,000. Tuesday's ruling, which is subject to appeal, vacates that court-martial conviction.

“Subject to appeal.”

I hope the military does appeal this including getting the judge’s right to even hear the case overturned. However, knowing the administration’s remarkable tendency to choose the wrong path on just about every issue before it, I wouldn’t be surprised to see them quash the appeal and let this bad decision (and bad precedent?) stand.

quote:

Originally posted by StarTraveler:
“Subject to appeal.”

I hope the military does appeal this including getting the judge’s right to even hear the case overturned. However, knowing the administration’s remarkable tendency to choose the wrong path on just about every issue before it, I wouldn’t be surprised to see them quash the appeal and let this bad decision (and bad precedent?) stand.

I saw that this morning. I expect you're right about the administration/military blowing this off. He gets to go free on a technicality, and the fact that he's actually guilty of desertion doesn't even enter into the decision.

We should not forget that people were killed and wounded searching for Bergdahl. They are the ones who served with "honor and distinction." I do not recall that their sacrifice was recognized by the Administration at the time.

Well shit. I came here hoping to see Bergdahl had been in some sort of accident with a woodchipper. And now this. I will be surprised if this bunch in the White House does the right thing and appeal. He’s the kind of malfunctioning shithead they love.

I can't say what I (and probably everyone else) is thinking...

Absolute piece of fecal matter.

This is justice denied retroactively. I’ve noticed a trend that way for Leftists caught dead to rights. Later after we think justice is done, they’re let out through the back door

If we would have hung that son-of-a-bitch from a tree, or blindfolded up against a wall in the beginning, we wouldn't be having this problem today.

quote:

Originally posted by scot818:
Well shit. I came here hoping to see Bergdahl had been in some sort of accident with a woodchipper. And now this. I will be surprised if this bunch in the White House does the right thing and appeal. He’s the kind of malfunctioning shithead they love.

This "bunch in the White House" is effectively the Obama third term, you know they people this all happened under.

So what exactly was the reason for this?
I couldn't tell from the article.