1
70
71

Bergdahl rescue: White House narrative changes radically in just 7 days (foxnews.com)

submitted by MonicleWim

all 15 comments
sorted by:
best
best
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順

[–]PublicEnema1 2 ポイント3 ポイント

This deal MIGHT have been worthwhile if we had secretly implanted locator chips in the 5 scumbags while we had them. Could have tracked their locations/movement by satellite, seen when they gathered together, kept them off of international flights, etc. That's the ONLY way turning them loose would make sense.

[–]burningmime 10 ポイント11 ポイント

So let me get this straight... 5 known terrorists are released (and with an even bigger vendetta against the US then they had before), all for the life of one soldier who was [misguided and selfish] and/or [deliberately traitorous].

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel also admitted the administration hadn’t notified Congress as it is required to do.

If five terrorists being free isn't scary enough, the entire checks and balances system put in place by the constitution seems to be completely ignored with little or no repercussions.

[–]ericcanton -1 ポイント0 ポイント

I would consider just letting them keep a guy that was a suspected traitor, even if they wanted to give him back with no strings attached.

[–][deleted]

[deleted]

    [–]cajungator3 5 ポイント6 ポイント

    He wasn't a POW.

    [–]thehungriestnunu 1 ポイント2 ポイント

    You can't be a POW if you're not a soldier. He quit being a soldier when he bitched out and deserted

    At best he was in their custody for illegally entering their country

    At worst he was their buddy(from the stories coming out this is looking more and more the case)

    [–]Citadel_97EConservative 1 ポイント2 ポイント

    Nope. Just because you're a deserter, you are still subject to all USMJ laws.

    I don't think he was a POW, it looks to me like he was their guest, in the truest sense of the word.

    [–]wethedownvotedNeoconservative 0 ポイント1 ポイント

    UCMJ

    i think we needed to get him back, it was obama's celebration and attempt to score political points that was messed up about the whole thing. "oh look at this hero i saved, that makes me a super hero! tee hee!"

    [–]Citadel_97EConservative 1 ポイント2 ポイント

    Yeah. I think we needed to get him back.

    Just to make sure he sees a court martial.

    [–]Rommel79Conservative 11 ポイント12 ポイント

    And yet, nothing will happen to Obama.

    [–]baldyloxLibertarian Conservative 1 ポイント2 ポイント

    You're probably right. It's sad. If Washington Republicans aren't willing to impeach him over this and take him out, then they've given up and ceded all of their power to the executive branch.

    [–]autodestrukt 0 ポイント1 ポイント

    And yet sadly now far down the line would we be impeaching the succession until someone who hasn't been complicit in the illegalities of this administration... Can we just do a bulk impeachment?

    [–]Hawk4192 -1 ポイント0 ポイント

    Why is it that the fools always jump on the "blame Bush" or "Reagan did ____."

    Past presidents have made mistakes. Bush was a Progressive Republican. He did plenty that any intellectually honest Conservative would decry. The point is, the current president is the one making decisions that affects the country. If he makes a bad decision, he/his administration need to be called on it. If the bad decision is severe enough, legal recourse should be considered.

    On a side note, Obama has not actually done anything dramatically different than Bush. If you're going to naysay one, you should recognize the other.