1
1
0
I think this article "nails it" on why the Bergdahl investigation is likely taking so long. It is the hottest of political hot potatoes. Isn't MG Dahl between a big rock and a super hard place? On the one hand, President Obama views Bergdahl's release as a "feather in his cap" (see the article). On the other hand, some of Bergdahl's comrades are calling him a deserter.
Do you see a way forward (/outcome) that doesn't reflect negatively on the President and still results in justice?
http://www.reviewjournal.com/columns-blogs/sherman-frederick/court-martialing-bergdahl-would-make-president-look-bad
Do you see a way forward (/outcome) that doesn't reflect negatively on the President and still results in justice?
http://www.reviewjournal.com/columns-blogs/sherman-frederick/court-martialing-bergdahl-would-make-president-look-bad
Posted in these groups: 
Bergdahl
Bergdahl
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 6
4
4
0
There isn't an 'out' that won't make the administration look bad, if he is Court Martialed, he looks bad for swapping the bad guys for a deserter. If he is 'exonerated' of the charges of desertion, there will be a loud protest of cover up. I don't see an out on this one.. unless the tactic is to delay until they determine the public has forgotten (don't see that happening either).
(4)
(0)
CW5 (Join to see)
MSG Wade Huffman, that is my impression as well, which is why it's such an interesting issue. The bigger issues - alleged loss of American lives looking for Bergdahl and the swap - make this a really sticky wicket for the man in the middle (the military). Finding a way out of this situation that does not alienate somebody is going to be tough. Chances are there is huge pressure NOT to alienate or reflect negatively on the "big boss" (POTUS).
(1)
(0)
MSG Wade Huffman
CW5 (Join to see) , as far as not reflecting negatively on the "big boss", I'm afraid that ship has already sailed. Realistically it's a matter of looking bad or looking worse (and which is which is purely a matter of speculation at this point).
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
He broke his own rule #1 - "The US does not negotiate with terrorists" Now I feel for any US citizen, even this bum, who has to be on the sh!t end of that deal. SMs know the risks we signed up for, news media personnel know the risks when they travel to these hot spots, but John & Jane American who may get caught off guard (thought WTF would they be doing in an area like this)didn't agree to anything.
All it took was to give in ONCE, and he did.
All it took was to give in ONCE, and he did.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
If I were POTUS I would spin it as:
"He is a Soldier and now he is safe from our enemies to face up to his crimes in front of our system, not in front of our enemy."
"He is a Soldier and now he is safe from our enemies to face up to his crimes in front of our system, not in front of our enemy."
(2)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
In which case its not merely the desertion that he would need to answer for. Can we put a price tag on the lives given alledgedly in the search for a "deserter"?
(1)
(0)
CW5 (Join to see)
That's smart, sir. And it might work in the court of public opinion. Maybe they're waiting until after the elections? That would be another six weeks or so, which seems like a long time. Then again, if this issue can be used by Republicans against Democrats, the Democrats may want to get just such a statement out there and own the issue (in a good way) prior to the elections.
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
I don't buy the "how many died looking for the deserter" thing.
The unit was going to go on missions anyway into those same areas. It is unknown if the unit took any more killed or wounded due to Bergdahl's actions.
He's a dirt bag but I've seen nothing that shows anyone died because of him.
The unit was going to go on missions anyway into those same areas. It is unknown if the unit took any more killed or wounded due to Bergdahl's actions.
He's a dirt bag but I've seen nothing that shows anyone died because of him.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google