Bowe Bergdahl Charged With Desertion, Lawyer Says
Source: ABC
American soldier and former Taliban captive Bowe Bergdahl has been charged with desertion for allegedly walking off his post in Afghanistan in 2009, Bergdahl's attorney told ABC News today.
Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/International/bowe-bergdahl-charged-desertion-lawyer/story?id=29901602
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
strawberries
(498 posts)for 5 Taliban commanders? Nice work
blm
(113,011 posts).
Response to blm (Reply #2)
Post removed
tishaLA
(14,176 posts)How nice for you.
Response to tishaLA (Reply #6)
Post removed
tishaLA
(14,176 posts)by deserting fellow soldiers.
It's a perfect logic puzzle.
Response to tishaLA (Reply #15)
Post removed
tishaLA
(14,176 posts)than the death penalty is not to kill.
The difference is that those who receive the death penalty have had the benefit of a trial before their death sentence, unlike your death wish for Mr Bergdahl.
Or perhaps those with intense blood lust have little time for the rule of law, even as they hide behind the rule of law when advocating for Mr Bergdahl's death.
tblue37
(65,227 posts)conviction. Furthermore, torture is not the designated punishment, and leaving him with his captors would amount to long, drawn out torture.
Response to Post removed (Reply #13)
Post removed
stone space
(6,498 posts)AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your alert
Mail Message
On Wed Mar 25, 2015, 04:00 PM you sent an alert on the following post:
We get the remains from Vietnam soldiers fairly regularly. Body bags are appropriate for deserters.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1048849
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
YOUR COMMENTS
Body Bags are inappropriate for any living, breathing human being.
Way beyond harsh.
JURY RESULTS
A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Wed Mar 25, 2015, 04:05 PM, and voted 5-2 to HIDE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: moran
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This one is really borderline as to whether its over the top. I think I have to vote to leave it if it's questionable. Historically, the punishment for desertion in time of war is death and the reasons why are pretty obvious. To do so in one's right mind is to put all of your fellow servicemen at risk. Still, PTSD is a real thing and Bergdahl's conduct was looney enough to where it seems like a real possibility he was out of his mind when he did what he did. Afghanistan is one of the worlds most dangerous places, more so for someone obviously from the US who doesnt speak the language. To wander off base in the middle of that country is completely insane.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Highly inappropriate.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Nasty OTT.
Thank you.
Response to stone space (Reply #51)
Post removed
Brother Buzz
(36,382 posts)I bet Skinner is scouring the fine print and scratching his head.
Response to Brother Buzz (Reply #67)
GGJohn This message was self-deleted by its author.
Cha
(296,848 posts)tblue37
(65,227 posts)attached to their votes.
Brother Buzz
(36,382 posts)
Sheldon Cooper
(3,724 posts)Did I miss the big announcement? 
marble falls
(57,013 posts)example, is listed at the beginning of each term where anyone can see them. You have ability to keep people of your choice off any possible juried alert on your own posts. There's a lot of sunshine here on DU and that's one of the reasons I like it so much.
A day never goes by that something I've learned here hasn't made me smarter.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)stone space
(6,498 posts)If there's a new rule, then I suppose that I'll find that out eventually, perhaps the hard way.
Brother Buzz
(36,382 posts)his subsequent hide when he posted the jury results?
Oh, here are the jury results from stevenleser's post:
On Wed Mar 25, 2015, 04:21 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
Jury results for your following comment. 5-2 to hide, I was juror #2
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1048927
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
I believe it is inappropriate for an active juror on a specific Post to gloat about the verdict, especially when the individual gloating served on that jury, got the verdict they wanted and then the juror copies & pastes the entire results of the verdict including comments made by other jurors who had agreed to serve anonymously.
In a court of law this would be grounds for a mistrial. I have no opinion on the post that was originally alerted on however I do believe that a juror gloating that the verdict went the way they voted and furthermore posting for everyone to see the results of the verdict as well as the comments some juror's made after being promised anonymity compromises the entire DU Jury System...
Furthermore, while I understand that you the men & women who make up this jury have no say in the matter, I believe this poster who served as a juror & then compromised the integrity of the DU Jury System should be banned from serving on all future juries.
I ask you as someone with a deep and abiding faith in the integrity of the DU Jury System to vote to hide this post that blatantly skews the confidentiality promised to the juror's when they,like you, agreed to selflessly serve as moderators on the DU Jury System...
Thank-You
JURY RESULTS
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Mar 25, 2015, 04:32 PM, and the Jury voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: "You're out of order! You're out of order! The whole trial is out of order! They're out of order!"
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: ?
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: assholish behavior.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
stone space
(6,498 posts)tblue37
(65,227 posts)Brother Buzz
(36,382 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)IF YOU SERVE AS A JUROR YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO COPY & PASTE THE ENTIRE VERDICT SENT IN YOUR INBOX
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1049016
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
YOUR COMMENTS
I am alerting on this because this poster is simply lying---there's no rule against posting jury results, and there's no rule "banning" anyone who does so. The confidentiality of the jury system is guaranteed, but if someone wants to reveal how they voted, they may. Please hide....this is the kind of misinformation that makes people reluctant to serve and post.
JURY RESULTS
A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Wed Mar 25, 2015, 07:56 PM, and voted 5-2 to HIDE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Incorrect. So incorrect that I vote to hide.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I just do not find it to be a big deal honestly
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Unbelievably stupid post.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Let's see Corey enforce it.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Thank you.
TO THE JURY.....the OP of the hidden poster made the claim that the TOS banned posters who posted jury results. That is demonstrably false....and I alerted because NO DUer has the right to make up TOS rules to suit their ideas of censorship. I'm posting the Jury Results.....because we can.
Cha
(296,848 posts)
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)pintobean
(18,101 posts)On Wed Mar 25, 2015, 07:49 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
IF YOU SERVE AS A JUROR YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO COPY & PASTE THE ENTIRE VERDICT SENT IN YOUR INBOX
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1049016
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
I am alerting on this because this poster is simply lying---there's no rule against posting jury results, and there's no rule "banning" anyone who does so. The confidentiality of the jury system is guaranteed, but if someone wants to reveal how they voted, they may. Please hide....this is the kind of misinformation that makes people reluctant to serve and post.
JURY RESULTS
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Mar 25, 2015, 07:56 PM, and the Jury voted 5-2 to HIDE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Incorrect. So incorrect that I vote to hide.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I just do not find it to be a big deal honestly
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Unbelievably stupid post.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Let's see Corey enforce it.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
marble falls
(57,013 posts)Bergdhal removed his 'soldier' identity when he tossed the uniform and joined the enemy camp.
At that point he became one of the enemy. Nothing will resurrect his identity as a US Serviceman
to active duty and veterans. A coward whether by his own making or mental failing is still a coward.
tishaLA
(14,176 posts)But the fact is, you're wrong. He is a soldier still.
DustyJoe
(849 posts)He was, after desertion, one of the enemy, maybe not in combat (no one knows for certain) but in the least collaberation with the enemy. So yes, I agree, no military court martial. This deserter, traitor, enemy collaborator should be in a dark hole in gitmo awaiting a military tribunal. And no, he should not be considered a 'soldier' and I wager no soldiers think of him as a brother in arms. He was kept on active duty for political reasons, accruing pay, awaiting charges where other deserters would have been incarcerated waiting formal charges. A simple deserter deserting his post and running for home or neutral territory should get a court martial and run out of the service, this type of desertion deserves the same treatment as the enemy he is.
tishaLA
(14,176 posts)and you have a few stipulations in your post that, as far as I know, have not been proven
BojackFan
(21 posts)I hope that was not too harsh.
.
Deserters can find their own way home.
blm
(113,011 posts)concerning his mental wellbeing.
If he is convicted of desertion, can we just send him back? Or should we use more traditional punishmnets?
blm
(113,011 posts)and letting the chips fall where they may.
Elmergantry
(884 posts)had to have known he may have deserted. So releasing five taliban commanders to go back to killing our soldiers was no bargain. Perhaps in immortal example of Buddy Ryan Obama could have offered a 6-pack.
I hope justice is done and if found guilty gets all that he deserves.
blm
(113,011 posts)murdered and raped innocent civilians by your measure. And they knew it BEFORE they were brought in for questioning.
Elmergantry
(884 posts)His fellow soldiers where interviewed. They said he up and left. So they new they could be dealing with a deserter.
blm
(113,011 posts)to have NOT happened. Their perception of the events at the time proved inaccurate.
Would you want your fate decided by people who wrongly blamed you for deaths?
hamsterjill
(15,220 posts)The administration may have had information as to Bergdahl and what may or may not have happened, but until the man is tried and found guilty, he is an American soldier deserving of the same rights and privileges as any other soldier. That's why we have a judicial system...even in the military.
blm
(113,011 posts)that our system of justice and what Obama did here IS what our American exceptionalism is supposed to be.
hamsterjill
(15,220 posts)Wouldn't they? It's okay to send someone else up the river, but when it's "them", they want a jury trial.
RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)recommendation of the his military advisors. And no, they didn't know the full circumstances of his disappearance which is why they conducted an investigation. At the time, Obama and the military stated that regardless of the circumstances of his initial disappearance, we don't leave troops on the battlefield. We get them out, and then let military justice do its work.
Prisoner exchanges have been done FOREVER. Going back to the Revolutionary War, sometimes we might give the British 100 of theirs for 50 of ours, or vice versa. Same with the Civil War. Same with many of our wars. We have never done perfect swaps. In the Revolution, how many British POW's do you think returned to their ranks to fight us again? How about during WW1 or WW2?
Please, study this case and study some history.
Igel
(35,274 posts)I've never been so tempted as to say, "Well, I was just acting on advice." It's a bad excuse--whether this is a bad decision or not.
It's the epitome of "the buck stops there," which is not what you want in either a chief executive or a leader or commander in chief. Then again, he didn't say it. At least not in this case. (There have been cases where he's claimed full responsibility by saying, "The decision was made by somebody else, and I'll hold them accountable.)
It's less a criticism of the man and more a criticism of the age. "The ATM said I had $2 million, how was I to know somebody made a mistake and deposited $2,000,000 to my account instead of $2,000. Sure, I spent $1.5 million over the weekend, but that's not my fault. Now they want it back, and that's just not fair."
Same sort of thing. If I can blame somebody, it must mean I'm really, really not responsible.
Cha
(296,848 posts)That's all we need to know. They did the right thing.
Cha
(296,848 posts)Precisely, RBIM.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)...for being *accused*, not convicted, of desertion? Without bothering with that pesky trial thing?
BP2
(554 posts)blm
(113,011 posts)how does it actually answer the question posed?
7962
(11,841 posts)Lie down with dogs, you know the rest
Cha
(296,848 posts)7962
(11,841 posts)Cha
(296,848 posts)truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)(Barack? Are you referring to the President?)
Cha
(296,848 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Oktober
(1,488 posts)Many feel that 5 terrorist leaders for this guy was too high a price to pay...
What's that? No price is too high? Well, what if they asked for a suitcase of weaponized anthrax? A missile system...? Barack Obama saying he's sorry for American actions in the region?
Oh... That's too high...
Ok, we've established that there is indeed an upper limit on what is an acceptable cost and I think we got the short end of the stick on this deal.
Yupster
(14,308 posts)People say we leave no one behind no matter what.
So if the Taliban demanded Obama cut Susan Rice's head off in the Rose Garden, he'd do it?
Of course not.
We leave no one behind if we can reasonably get them back.
So the important question is did the administration make a reasonable deal getting him back?
Looking from here, it doesn't look like a very good deal.
Oktober
(1,488 posts)I say this as a service member who travels to high threat areas frequently.
I don't expect the government to trade back for me if the price is too high.
If found guilty, we,(USA) will punish him. He's still our soldier and our responsibility.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)NewEnglandGirl
(610 posts)deals with our own soldiers, that is never left to any other country. No matter what they have done we are the ones to see it through.
Many people propose Bergdahl should have been abandoned because he was not the brave American hero we know all of our military personnel to be. Ever watch TV? The show about the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) focuses mostly on crimes committed on military personnel by various criminals, with navy members being the victims. Once in a while, you get to see an episode where NCIS is shown doing what it does most of the time, investigating navy personnel who do bad things. Gasp! Some of the heroes are criminals, not brave guardians of the American Way. Bergdahl threatens the image.
strawberries
(498 posts)that the deal included others too
blm
(113,011 posts)Did you inform the Pentagon of this?
strawberries
(498 posts)did talk to the families who lost their loved ones trying to save him
blm
(113,011 posts)Perhaps an unhealthy reliance on Moonie News made you and the families you spoke with just 'think' that happened?
strawberries
(498 posts)my apologize they are so honest and honorable.
blm
(113,011 posts)Do share. Starting with their names.
strawberries
(498 posts)Staff Sergeant Clayton Bowen, 29, of San Antonio, Texas, and Private 1st Class Morris Walker, 23, of Chapel Hill, N.C., were killed by a roadside bomb in Paktika province on Aug. 18, 2009, while trying to find Bergdahl. Like Bergdahl, they were part of the 4th BCT from Fort Richardson, Alaska.
http://time.com/2809352/bowe-bergdahl-deserter-army-taliban/
blm
(113,011 posts)BTW - the TIME article was written before the pentagon investigated the claims.
Now….tell us about YOUR personal conversation with the families - were they the families of the two you mentioned?
strawberries
(498 posts)calm down. All will come out now and you will see that you just may be wrong
blm
(113,011 posts)That should be easy for you, shouldn't it, given the personal aspect of the knowledge you claim?
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Cool stories, little fella...
strawberries
(498 posts)
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)that you're full of shit.
Igel
(35,274 posts)So take Bowen's claims.
Media reports are that his parents said he died hunting for a Taliban commander.
A later claim is he was killed while involved in a search for Bergdahl.
Later he was said to have been killed by an IED--which may be true under each narrative--while protecting the polls.
When you're stationed at a place for a while, it's unlikely you have one mission. "Go out looking for the Taliban that have Bergdahl" during an election turns into "looking for Taliban that might disrupt an election." Notice there's absolutely no difference in what the soldiers would do.
One makes him brave. The other plays to partisan politics. The third plays to partisan politics. It's possible that all three are perfectly true--or there's a fourth story lurking that I haven't seen.
Or perhaps the squad was there looking for Bergdahl as part of a reinforced unit and, since the elections were going on, they were repurposed for a day. Maybe they were there as part of a unit whose job was routine security, but they were repurposed for a while to look for Bergdahl.
Point is, the military isn't going to intentionally phrase things that make their chief look bad. (R) aren't going to phrase things to make Obama look good. And (D) aren't going to phrase things that make their political leader look bad. Esp. not when the phrasing you hear is still factually true.
MADem
(135,425 posts)expect to be taken seriously.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)How craven, to use and manipulate the families of the fallen this way, but that's the way the GOP is--sick sociopaths. These soldiers died, first and foremost, because they were in a combat zone, close to the enemy, during one of the most dangerous years of the war.
Elmergantry
(884 posts)That we lost men who were looking for him, then he should be charged with murder as well.
blm
(113,011 posts)The RW propaganda media keeps hanging their hat on that lie, though.
Why do you suppose so many Americans rely on propaganda media developed over the last 3 decades by a Korean cult leader and an Australian extortionist, anyway?
Oktober
(1,488 posts)
frylock
(34,825 posts)who the fuck is this?
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)Wars end, or they should...especially stupid ones. If punishment is merited, it is up to our side to mete it out (although, speaking for myself, 5 years in captivity under the Taliban ought be considered "time served"
.
christx30
(6,241 posts)If a guy is injured commiting a crime, we don't consider his injuries as punishment for the crime and release him. He is treated for his injuries and tried, convicted, and sentenced.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)But fwiw a good friend knows him and his family personally, and from what she says I suspect a pre-existing mental defect. Plus his family didn't not want him to enlist, and he had already been discharged from the Coast Guard for psych reasons.
So I am not inclined to be judgmental and condemnatory.
christx30
(6,241 posts)robbery, we don't take 5 years off his sentence if he gets shot in the arm during the robbery.
What happened to him was a direct result of his breaking the law. It sucks, but it shouldn't mitigate sentencing.
He made bad decision after bad decision, knowing the consequences. Everything that is happening is because of his actions. I'd never join the military, or allow my kids to join. Too many rules. And the consequences of breaking them are dire as hell. And even if you follow the rules, death from IED or suicide are very real possibilities.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)One who already washed out of the Coast Guard in less than a month? Do they bear any responsibility for this? How about the other soldiers and Bergdahl's chain of command, who were apparently aware that he was a half bubble off plumb before he left? Any actions there that contributed to this, any responsibility?
I am talking about this specific case; you, and the previous poster, are talking about universal principles. We will not--cannot--agree when the issues under discussion are not the same on both sides.
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)Someone who would rather leave our own behind. Aren't you special.
strawberries
(498 posts)thanks for the notice
Response to strawberries (Reply #19)
Post removed
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Second, him staying with the Taliban means more propaganda opportunities for them. Getting him back deprived them of that; leaving him would have given them that opportunity.
It would have given, say, aid to an enemy of the US.
And you know what they say about giving aid to the enemy.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)There will be may revelations about many things involved in the whole military experience. Bergdahl is obviously not quite right in the head. Did the army do that to him? Was he that way before? Did the army know he was maybe half a bubble out of plumb?
mybuddy
(28 posts)He was all of the things you mention and still rose to the occasion and saved American lives when it mattered.
blm
(113,011 posts)Interesting that you chose a fictional character for comparison, instead of all the real soldiers and vets who committed suicide or homicide or both.
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)Just don't mention that he is a fictional character.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)
Historic NY
(37,449 posts)he was the one they caught. There are reports of dozens of soldiers walking away from camps to search for drug, liquor or otherwise fraternized with the populace. Some returned on their own and others were caught and returned. Just recently a marine who left was convicted. He actually faked his abduction and evaded detection for years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/24/us/a-marine-is-convicted-on-two-counts-of-desertion.html?_r=0
7962
(11,841 posts)without releasing 5 known terrorists. Stupid decision and now it looks even worse.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)charge those five detainees anyway--didn't have the evidence to bring them to trial. Legally, we can't just forever hold onto these people with no trial, especially if combat operations are over, and they are in Afghanistan.
7962
(11,841 posts)We chose to deal with the wrong people instead of some with power that we'd done deals with before.
Either that or the plane flying out the terrorists could have had an "accident" over the ocean, since everyone here thinks we do that all the time anyway!
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)suicide or dies some other way (likely), or they release him (unlikely).
2--Pay ransom or arms or some other deal that may be illegal (though I'm sure this is sometimes done anyway, quietly).
3--Try to rescue him, thus risking troops' and special forces' lives.
4--Prisoner swap.
Too much has been made of these five clowns we sent to Qatar. They were not AQ, they were mostly administrative/government guys in the Taliban when we invaded, the Taliban was the government of Afghanistan at the time. We can also find and kill them if they get stupid. As for Bergdahl, the Army has to charge him based on the evidence and his own words/admission. It's OK that the process is playing out, that's fair and to be expected. It would be worse if it didn't, in fact. But surely the Army knows it took a kid who washed out of the Coast Guard for psychological reasons and stuck him instead on a FOB in the shittiest place on earth at the time. Maybe walking away in a mentally-distressed state was better than shooting up your platoon mates, or civilians, in a mentally-distressed state.
madville
(7,404 posts)He is still subject to the UCMJ regardless of how his situation turned out after his alleged desertion.
He will get a trial and all the evaluations and representation he is entitled to along with it.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)I think it is over the line to even threaten Bergdahl with charges like that!
I do Not think President Obama has pardoned enough people over the past 6 years. I would like to see him pardon a lot of people who have suffered enough with our military and police.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)a trial and some sort of punishment if it's warranted. But most likely any sentence or punishment he receives will be mitigated by: his mental state and behavior during his time in the Coast Guard and Army, how the Army handled those issues (or ignored them, possibly), what his command/platoon situation was like, his cooperation/honesty, or lack thereof, with the investigation, and most of all his five years of captivity. Barring something we don't know, it would be cruel to sentence him to yet another prison, he's apparently not even able to deal with seeing his own family.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)that tells me a lot - that he's still too mentally fragile.
Dubya needed warm bodies for his wars and the Army bears full responsibility for letting him in and then sending him to the worst part of battle.
Cha
(296,848 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)I was hoping a deal could be worked out here. there is no reason the government can't show mercy but if he wants a deal he will have to admit his crime. That is if he is guilty.
Innocent until proven guilty.
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)Pathetic keyboard authoritarians slobbering about how they'd do better and punish harder. Shameful.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)Obama got him home, and now they're crawling out of the woodwork even here, braying for his blood. Because five years of eating wormy goat innards, living in a cage and being a Taliban plaything just wasn't ruinous enough. Sick.
PeteSelman
(1,508 posts)They bashed Obama for not getting him back. It was proof he hated America and the troops.
blm
(113,011 posts)They switch their outrage as soon as the Moonie News tells them what it needs to be that day.
Darb
(2,807 posts)If you are clamoring for hanging this kid you are undoubtedly a right-wing troll.
GGJohn
(9,951 posts)Bergdahl is innocent until proven guilty, and if proven guilty, then he'll get the punishment he deserves.
NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)He's done.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)
former9thward
(31,941 posts)Prosecutors don't bring cases they think they may lose unless ordered to by superiors.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)Because some of these comments are atrocious.
And I haven't used that word for a long, long time to describe what has been said at the DU.
Oktober
(1,488 posts)He did the crime and now he can reap the consequences of his choices...
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)Interesting that you think he is guilty, before he's even had a trial.
I guess "liberty and justice for all" is just a saying to some of you guys.
Bohunk68
(1,364 posts)
gwheezie
(3,580 posts)he has the same rights of any other soldier. He will get to defend himself.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)
Hugin
(33,052 posts)47 Senators breathe a sigh of relief.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)I am confident that his lawyer will mount a vigorous defense, and one of the first things he'll say is "He wasn't the only one to do this--and what did you do with them? His bad luck was that he was captured while mucking about!"
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/bergdahl-soldier-walk-off-afghan-outposts/story?id=24053366
If I were the lawyer, I'd also toss up the "unsuitable for military service" chaff, seeing as the guy was discharged administratively from the USCG as a boot camp wash-out. Put the blame on the army for their precipitous lowering of standards. Then I'd pull out the "mental illness" card--and aver that he was not in his right mind and couldn't make an informed decision as to the advisability of going walkabout.
Of course, he could alway plead out--and that might be what happens at the end of the day. He gets a dishonorable, and he walks away with "time served" courtesy of his captors, or he does a short stay at Leavenworth--enough time to get a degree and learn a skill, perhaps (that really is the Gold Standard when it comes to prisons, it's not hard time at all--plenty of visiting time with friends/family and worthwhile work/study). I can't see a life term as proper in his case, but I can see stripping him of military benefits if the case is strong enough--actions need to have consequences.
I have a feeling that his big fat mouth got him in this fix....I mean, really, once he got back home he should have re-learned how to say "I don't remember" in English. Oh well--live and learn, fella. I'm still glad POTUS got him out of there--I like the fact that we made the effort and succeeded in that mission.
Larry Engels
(387 posts)It serves the interests of justice.
MADem
(135,425 posts)That said, a skilled lawyer can mitigate this down and sort out a plea deal.
There will be no "You can't handle the truth" moment with regard to this evolution.
NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)I hope my lawyer could offer a better explanation than "everyone else was doing it", since you're implicitly admitting guilt.
Personally I think a deal will be struck. The prosecutor will dangle the military's 90%+ conviction rate and remind Bergdahl that he faces lifetime imprisonment if convicted. So the prosecutor will offer to cap his sentence in return for a guilty plea.
MADem
(135,425 posts)hospitalized following his rescue and extraction.
I got the impression he was a rather garrulous lad on a GOOD day...so I'm guessing he probably talked himself INTO trouble early on.
I think he was a low quality recruit from the get-go...not in terms of his physical fitness or basic skills, but I think the psych component was not the full quid. I mean, he washed out of Coast Guard boot camp--he's one of those "Not compatible with military service" types. Doesn't follow orders, doesn't mix well in the group, thinks he can do his own thing, etc. I mean--really, who the hell smokes a PIPE unless they're smoking weed, these days? No one under seventy that I know!
I don't think his stupidity should land him in jail for the rest of his life though--I think the military set up the circumstances for this kid to fail, by RE-admitting him after his first wash-out. They share the blame for this mess because they were so anxious to fill quotas in a tough recruiting market that they accepted him when he didn't meet standards in terms of his adaptability and ability to work and play well with others.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)Of his own free will.
I doubt that he admitted guilt of any kind.
According to the local news, his lawyer released a letter this week that Bowe wrote about how he was held in solitary confinement for the entire 5 years that he was a captive, alternately subjected to long periods of bright light, and long periods of total darkness in order to disorient him and cause him to lose any sense of time.
Bowe also said in his letter that he tried to escape on 12 different occasions, but said he was captured each time.
And severely beaten by his captors each time.
He also said that his captors told him numerous times during his 5 year captivity that they had just reached an agreement with the United States, so they were going to free him the next day . . . but instead, they threatened to execute him on the morrow.
In order to keep him in fear of imminent death.
MADem
(135,425 posts)he was in civilian clothes headed for India, he was departing his unit with an intent to never return.
Normally, in order to be regarded as a deserter, you have to have that intent, and be gone for thirty days.
His lawyer might argue that he would have turned around and gone back if not captured, but that's not a sure defense, either. He's in a bit of a pickle, frankly. He's not going to get the "Go and sin no more" treatment.
It's entirely possible, too, that they've already cut a deal, but they're slowing the roll-out and jumping through the hoops. I've sat on CMs where the deal was cut before the trial started, contingent upon the accused saying/doing the "right" thing. Of course, that wasn't known to us sitting the trial at the time, but I've seen it happen.
What his captors did or said to him can be brought in as a factor in mitigation if it comes down to sentencing, but his captors didn't bust down the door to his hooch and drag him away--he was walking away from his base, stopped to do some pooping and they came up on him. That's a bit problematic, if the reports are accurate.
We'll know more once the show starts, I guess.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)is that we're still in Afghanistan 13 years later
5 more years of this and we'll have soldiers dying there who weren't even born yet when the war started.
