Posted on Nov 3, 2017
The Bergdahl Sentencing and the Precedent it Sets
102K
1.63K
529
318
318
0
The US Army Values are Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity and Personal Courage.
Former Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl apparently forgot these when, on June 30, 2009, he deserted his unit in Afghanistan, where he wanted to, in his words, “make the world a better place.” Former SGT Bergdahl also forgot that he was wearing the uniform of the United States Army, and that armies fight wars. He signed up. No one forced him into service, and no one forced him to continue service if at any point he decided he had had enough.
In the Army there are legitimate avenues of redress of grievances, and now more than ever before. Your chain of command, the Chaplain, a JAG (Judge Advocate General) officer, or even the highest commander above where you think your problem lies. SGT Bergdahl had whipped himself into an almost psychotic state of isolation, from his unit, from his battle-buddies and even from himself. In the end, the enemy seemed more desirable than the mess he had made in his foxhole.
The sentencing of SGT (now PV-1) Bergdahl is now complete. Instead of a 14 year sentence, sought by the prosecution, a sentence of time served, a reduction in rank, forfeiture of pay and a dishonorable discharge will have to do.
Although Bergdahl had plead guilty to desertion and misconduct before the enemy, the circumstances under which SGT Bergdahl was released, the trade of five Taliban leaders notwithstanding, has its own implications of treason. Some have said that Bergdahl has suffered enough, including his defense team. Some say he is not fit to live, let alone wear the uniform. Several witnesses have testified about their war injuries and losses they claim happened because of Bergdahl’s desertion. There were rumors but no evidence that SGT Bergdahl had given the enemy critical information about the unit, its operations and Standard Operating Procedures (SOP). This would allow the enemy to anticipate the unit’s movements and tendencies, potentially deadly information. Some say, while searching for SGT Bergdahl, they were hit and men died. One man, a former Navy SEAL, claimed tearfully that his service dog was killed on one such mission, and others suffered crippling and career ending injuries. All of this was supposedly taken into consideration before the sentence was handed down by the military judge, Col. Jeffery Nance.
In my opinion, all this testimony is over-engineering. It’s all good, but shouldn’t be necessary to complete the project. Bergdahl deserted in a time of war. How do you maintain good order and discipline if you allow folks to just walk away? There is no claim of insanity. There is no plea bargain. There is no excuse. The punishment for desertion can be death.The reason for this goes back to the beginning of human conflict. If you run in the face of the enemy, you have abdicated your responsibility as a member of the group to help keep the group safe.
In our own Revolutionary War and subsequent conflicts, such as the Civil War, it wasn’t so much power and punch that won the day as it was which side would run first. Name a war or conflict, and what wins the day more times than not is the will to win or survive. Fight or flight. This is why the American Army is so effective; we are trained that in war the mission comes first. We are trained to never leave a soldier behind. We are trained to be good teammates. We are trained to care for each other, help each other and protect each other. And in the foxhole, when the bullets are flying, it’s about you and your battle-buddy, fighting for your lives.The bigger picture is that you are defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, part of the oath of enlistment that Bergdahl breached. But if you allow soldiers to run and then suffer inadequate consequences, what are you telling everyone else who swore that same oath? What then does it mean? In our politically correct, social media, “If it feels good, do it” society, oaths and promises seem blasé and passé. In fact, they are our lifeblood. If we let one instance of obvious and blatant desertion slip through the cracks, what then do we do with the next one, or the next? Kneeling for the national anthem and the absence of even one American flag on the opening night of a national political convention are not simply warning signs, they are signs of the apocalypse that feed the idea that Bergdahl did nothing wrong. That he is innocent of desertion because he was oppressed and that somehow his actions were free speech. It’s not about any of that. It’s about loyalty. The number one most important Army value, and value in life. The acronym constructed out of the Army Values is LDRSHIP (Leadership). The Army aspires to train every soldier to be a leader. In the American Army, even E-Private Zero, Snuffy Smith is expected to carry out the mission if all the leaders above him are incapacitated, in the spirit of Audie Murphy. Murphy, the highly decorated farm boy turned hero from WWII who was battlefield promoted from sergeant to second lieutenant and saved many lives with his heroism, over, and over again, all at 5’4” and 112 pounds, carried on with the mission, time and again. We owe it to the memory of all those who gave their lives in defense of this great nation. We owe it to those who were injured and may have died while searching for Bowe Bergdahl, and we owe it to the future of this nation that Bowe Bergdahl’s punishment fit the crime. But the punishment in this case has not fit the crime in any way, shape or form. The echo from this proceeding will carry far and wide, that the perceived suffering of one man, a deserter, held more weight than the entire history of the military of the greatest nation on earth.
Former Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl apparently forgot these when, on June 30, 2009, he deserted his unit in Afghanistan, where he wanted to, in his words, “make the world a better place.” Former SGT Bergdahl also forgot that he was wearing the uniform of the United States Army, and that armies fight wars. He signed up. No one forced him into service, and no one forced him to continue service if at any point he decided he had had enough.
In the Army there are legitimate avenues of redress of grievances, and now more than ever before. Your chain of command, the Chaplain, a JAG (Judge Advocate General) officer, or even the highest commander above where you think your problem lies. SGT Bergdahl had whipped himself into an almost psychotic state of isolation, from his unit, from his battle-buddies and even from himself. In the end, the enemy seemed more desirable than the mess he had made in his foxhole.
The sentencing of SGT (now PV-1) Bergdahl is now complete. Instead of a 14 year sentence, sought by the prosecution, a sentence of time served, a reduction in rank, forfeiture of pay and a dishonorable discharge will have to do.
Although Bergdahl had plead guilty to desertion and misconduct before the enemy, the circumstances under which SGT Bergdahl was released, the trade of five Taliban leaders notwithstanding, has its own implications of treason. Some have said that Bergdahl has suffered enough, including his defense team. Some say he is not fit to live, let alone wear the uniform. Several witnesses have testified about their war injuries and losses they claim happened because of Bergdahl’s desertion. There were rumors but no evidence that SGT Bergdahl had given the enemy critical information about the unit, its operations and Standard Operating Procedures (SOP). This would allow the enemy to anticipate the unit’s movements and tendencies, potentially deadly information. Some say, while searching for SGT Bergdahl, they were hit and men died. One man, a former Navy SEAL, claimed tearfully that his service dog was killed on one such mission, and others suffered crippling and career ending injuries. All of this was supposedly taken into consideration before the sentence was handed down by the military judge, Col. Jeffery Nance.
In my opinion, all this testimony is over-engineering. It’s all good, but shouldn’t be necessary to complete the project. Bergdahl deserted in a time of war. How do you maintain good order and discipline if you allow folks to just walk away? There is no claim of insanity. There is no plea bargain. There is no excuse. The punishment for desertion can be death.The reason for this goes back to the beginning of human conflict. If you run in the face of the enemy, you have abdicated your responsibility as a member of the group to help keep the group safe.
In our own Revolutionary War and subsequent conflicts, such as the Civil War, it wasn’t so much power and punch that won the day as it was which side would run first. Name a war or conflict, and what wins the day more times than not is the will to win or survive. Fight or flight. This is why the American Army is so effective; we are trained that in war the mission comes first. We are trained to never leave a soldier behind. We are trained to be good teammates. We are trained to care for each other, help each other and protect each other. And in the foxhole, when the bullets are flying, it’s about you and your battle-buddy, fighting for your lives.The bigger picture is that you are defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, part of the oath of enlistment that Bergdahl breached. But if you allow soldiers to run and then suffer inadequate consequences, what are you telling everyone else who swore that same oath? What then does it mean? In our politically correct, social media, “If it feels good, do it” society, oaths and promises seem blasé and passé. In fact, they are our lifeblood. If we let one instance of obvious and blatant desertion slip through the cracks, what then do we do with the next one, or the next? Kneeling for the national anthem and the absence of even one American flag on the opening night of a national political convention are not simply warning signs, they are signs of the apocalypse that feed the idea that Bergdahl did nothing wrong. That he is innocent of desertion because he was oppressed and that somehow his actions were free speech. It’s not about any of that. It’s about loyalty. The number one most important Army value, and value in life. The acronym constructed out of the Army Values is LDRSHIP (Leadership). The Army aspires to train every soldier to be a leader. In the American Army, even E-Private Zero, Snuffy Smith is expected to carry out the mission if all the leaders above him are incapacitated, in the spirit of Audie Murphy. Murphy, the highly decorated farm boy turned hero from WWII who was battlefield promoted from sergeant to second lieutenant and saved many lives with his heroism, over, and over again, all at 5’4” and 112 pounds, carried on with the mission, time and again. We owe it to the memory of all those who gave their lives in defense of this great nation. We owe it to those who were injured and may have died while searching for Bowe Bergdahl, and we owe it to the future of this nation that Bowe Bergdahl’s punishment fit the crime. But the punishment in this case has not fit the crime in any way, shape or form. The echo from this proceeding will carry far and wide, that the perceived suffering of one man, a deserter, held more weight than the entire history of the military of the greatest nation on earth.
Command Post
Military History
Deployment
Military service
Bergdahl
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 239
124
124
0
I cannot help but believe that a political message was placed higher in priority than justice in this farce. With a single decision, I believe the presiding officer has abdicated the Army's right and duty to impose punishment and enforce discipline among the ranks. Furthermore, this decision is a slap in the face to every family whose loved one stood their ground and made the ultimate sacrifice keeping faith with their comrades. Desertion has always been among the most odious and detestable of offenses, even more so when it occurs on the battlefield. It is a base betrayal of every moral trait and core value of every warrior since the beginning of time. It is inconceivable to me that any officer of the United States military could countenance such leniency for such a spurious reason as the effect of a personal opinion expressed in a public forum by the POTUS. Our commander in chief has taken rather obvious pains to step back from the intense micromanaging of previous administrations in military matters. Additionally, he has never been known to punish or persecute people over differences of opinion as long as they perform in a competent manner. Much has been made by the defense about how this.......person.... suffered at the hands of his `captors'. They maintain that he has suffered enough. I would hasten to observe that he was (allegedly) mistreated because of his own choices and actions and therefore should have no relevance to sentence imposed. I'm not privy to all the evidence or facts considered in rendering this decision, but I cannot conceive of any possible combination of factors which would justify this person walking away with several hundred thousand dollars of back pay and an arguable "slap on the wrist" as punishment. As an enlisted man, I would take extreme pains to avoid being assigned to any command under this presiding judges authority. In our volunteer military, one must have confidence in the integrity and judgement of those who command in order to serve, and that confidence has been severely shaken......
(124)
(0)
(1)
(0)
SFC James Simpson
CW4 Craig Urban - And now 10/21/19 one of the soldiers who went looking for him has died from his wounds.
(0)
(0)
MAJ Montgomery Granger I was shocked and angered by the sentence. He should be doing serious prison time.
(94)
(0)
CPO Nate S.
Britten - Billy Budd - 1966 BBCtv recording complete
The 1966 television recording of Britten's opera, with Peter Pears, Peter Glossop, Michael Langdon, John Shirley-Quirk, Bryan Drake, David Kelly, Kenneth Mac...
PO2 David Allender - I, could not remember but looked it up https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1lVBfqQyjs . Seems like I had now that I reviewed this link, but it was many many years ago. So I have watched it. Why do you ask?
(1)
(0)
CPO Nate S.
edited by Jack Smith written by Jack Smith, Thomas Rudden, Evan Bean
PO2 David Allender - I was wondering are you saying that Bergdahl is a "Billy Budd" character/ I and others will need you to connect those dots in a factual or at least in a logical manner. Because, I am sure that the connection CANNOT be made for him being a "Billy Budd" type character, such that his cowardice before the enemy got others killed when trying to search and attempt to rescue him.
Yet, the ONLY reason I can even "remotely consider" for the previous POTUS and perhaps the JAG judge in taking the actions they did regarding Berghal, was to protect him as an intelligence asset. Meaning, Sgt Bergdahl, could have very well been an intelligence operative, under very, very deep cover, with this scenario played out well in advance, knowing full well he was taking one for the team (aka the USA) and was willing to gather much deeper intel as a result of his deliberate capture and apparent desertion. Some would call this idea, fantasy, and it very well could be imagination thinking to extremes, but it is the ONLY reason I can postulate that would make sense by any stretch of anyone's imagination.
A ruse is a ruse. However, for this ruse is to be complete our intelligence arm would have had to also turned one or more of five returned terrorist in order to continue the deep intel groundwork he may have been tasked to lay. Again, this is a scenario that could have been thought about as a Hollywood screen play. I would not doubt that! Yet, it is the only "real world" thing that makes sense, otherwise, in my mind and others, he remains a coward and a traitor to the men he served with, those that tried to save him and the nation at large until facts are revealed that can change minds. The chances of our government revealing such an operation is hazardous on so many fronts that implications are - mind blowing!!! So, even if this possible scenario is in fact true, it can neither be confirmed nor denied to the satisfaction of pun dents on the left or the right precisely because of its - implications! We are playing an international chess game on the world stage and sometimes - pawns are sacrificed for a greater good! No fair, but a reality nonetheless!
Here are two commentaries that you and others may find interesting, to a point, regarding the movie:
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbmjBH-V64g
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PI05awdayvU
Finally, injustice has been with humankind since time began (I have experienced may own injustices, yet still it is important to take the high road). What are you actually telling this group? Also, have you read Melville's book for yourself, not withstanding your viewing of this movie? I like Melville, and think I'll reread the book again for myself.
In the meantime, I encourage you to read this summary of the book entitled "Its Your Ship" http://www.gary-tomlinson.com/media/Book_Report_-_Its_Your_Ship.pdf. Plus, get the book for yourself and read it. My version is highlighted and annotated including having the aforementioned summary folded inside the pages that is about 2-feet from my home office desk. I kept it close to remind me of my obligations on many levels.
Finally, Bergdhal I don't believe understands this: "If the catapult to launch planes is broken, then tell the CO it is broken, they have the right and the responsibility to know; but, have plan(s) to get it fixed correctly so the CO can get planes launched to accomplish the mission the CO has been assigned! The task by the technical specialist to fix the catapult (quickly, but correctly). The CO's job is to accomplish the larger mission, that includes every element at their command!"
What we have to ask today, is simple: Was Bergdhal, playing a role, that our government is not obligated to reveal; or, was the Sgt. simply unable to understand his role, not withstanding any fantastic scenario, that he was trained to accomplish? If he was engaged in a "fantastic scenario" we as the American people are not likely to know, and that is a cross he has chosen to bear! However, if he made a decision that he could not reconcile, and was not so trained or tasked to be engaged in such as "fantastic scenario", then he remains a coward. Yet, his chain of command may have also failed him if they lacked the courage to also act, as the Captain portrayed in the book that spawned the movie could have down by stayed a Courts Marshal, for other choices that were in his role of "Master of His Ship" to do. That then speaks to a MUCH, MUCH larger issue!!!
Yet, the ONLY reason I can even "remotely consider" for the previous POTUS and perhaps the JAG judge in taking the actions they did regarding Berghal, was to protect him as an intelligence asset. Meaning, Sgt Bergdahl, could have very well been an intelligence operative, under very, very deep cover, with this scenario played out well in advance, knowing full well he was taking one for the team (aka the USA) and was willing to gather much deeper intel as a result of his deliberate capture and apparent desertion. Some would call this idea, fantasy, and it very well could be imagination thinking to extremes, but it is the ONLY reason I can postulate that would make sense by any stretch of anyone's imagination.
A ruse is a ruse. However, for this ruse is to be complete our intelligence arm would have had to also turned one or more of five returned terrorist in order to continue the deep intel groundwork he may have been tasked to lay. Again, this is a scenario that could have been thought about as a Hollywood screen play. I would not doubt that! Yet, it is the only "real world" thing that makes sense, otherwise, in my mind and others, he remains a coward and a traitor to the men he served with, those that tried to save him and the nation at large until facts are revealed that can change minds. The chances of our government revealing such an operation is hazardous on so many fronts that implications are - mind blowing!!! So, even if this possible scenario is in fact true, it can neither be confirmed nor denied to the satisfaction of pun dents on the left or the right precisely because of its - implications! We are playing an international chess game on the world stage and sometimes - pawns are sacrificed for a greater good! No fair, but a reality nonetheless!
Here are two commentaries that you and others may find interesting, to a point, regarding the movie:
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbmjBH-V64g
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PI05awdayvU
Finally, injustice has been with humankind since time began (I have experienced may own injustices, yet still it is important to take the high road). What are you actually telling this group? Also, have you read Melville's book for yourself, not withstanding your viewing of this movie? I like Melville, and think I'll reread the book again for myself.
In the meantime, I encourage you to read this summary of the book entitled "Its Your Ship" http://www.gary-tomlinson.com/media/Book_Report_-_Its_Your_Ship.pdf. Plus, get the book for yourself and read it. My version is highlighted and annotated including having the aforementioned summary folded inside the pages that is about 2-feet from my home office desk. I kept it close to remind me of my obligations on many levels.
Finally, Bergdhal I don't believe understands this: "If the catapult to launch planes is broken, then tell the CO it is broken, they have the right and the responsibility to know; but, have plan(s) to get it fixed correctly so the CO can get planes launched to accomplish the mission the CO has been assigned! The task by the technical specialist to fix the catapult (quickly, but correctly). The CO's job is to accomplish the larger mission, that includes every element at their command!"
What we have to ask today, is simple: Was Bergdhal, playing a role, that our government is not obligated to reveal; or, was the Sgt. simply unable to understand his role, not withstanding any fantastic scenario, that he was trained to accomplish? If he was engaged in a "fantastic scenario" we as the American people are not likely to know, and that is a cross he has chosen to bear! However, if he made a decision that he could not reconcile, and was not so trained or tasked to be engaged in such as "fantastic scenario", then he remains a coward. Yet, his chain of command may have also failed him if they lacked the courage to also act, as the Captain portrayed in the book that spawned the movie could have down by stayed a Courts Marshal, for other choices that were in his role of "Master of His Ship" to do. That then speaks to a MUCH, MUCH larger issue!!!
(3)
(0)
CPO Nate S.
Disturbed - The Sound Of Silence [Official Music Video]
Download or stream the song now: https://wbr.ec/immortalized Directed by Matt Mahurin http://www.mattmahurin.com New Album "Immortalized" Out Now! https://wb...
PO2 David Allender - My final commentary - He should have, as others have clearly stated, contacted the IG or even his Congressional Rep (not withstanding the far reaching possible "fantastic scenario" mentioned earlier). If there were command issues, he would have had to withstand the storm that was sure come, but putting others in danger because he had issues with the chain of command was - never an option. There are bad Senior enlisted and bad Officers. The trick is in navigating the bad circumstances. A Master Chief, whom I respected, early in my naval career suggested saying "PO Szejniuk (he actually called me by my first name)...when this job quits being fun you need to get out or retire."
The new CO and new CMC at my last command asked me to reconsider NOT to retire, which I found interesting. They both knew what was taking place when they assumed command. So this brings me to the back story: I had a Command Master Chief near the end of my naval career who was like the Master at Arms in the book and movie. But, much more insidious in his manner. He was a recovering drug & alcohol addict, who was zealot in his recovery processes. I had been spoiled early in my naval career with Master Chief's that had the same issues (e.g. recovering from the grip of drugs and alcohol) as this man, but they were not been Zealots nor tyrants as he was!!! Instead they were the forces that shaped my naval career to be positive and a success. Frankly, had this very negative experience of a "Bad MCPO" been at the beginning of my naval career I would not have stayed as long as I did in order to retire. But, thanks to the high quality leadership of Master Chief's (especially Command Master Chief's) early in my career I did stay to make a career and retire. I had a ton of fun! If anything, I should have waited out the last "bad" Master Chief and remained on active duty instead of choosing to retire in order to keep my honor intact and not to be compromised by his "madness". What I learned from this "bad" MCPO was that telling the truth had now become less important than bending to political correctness. Something, high quality Chief's (before I became a Chief myself) and some of the best Officers I was privileged to have served under had taught me was important to do - tell the truth!!!
Under this tyrant of a MCPO, the job had now "not remained fun", because the Chief's mess was becoming more political than honest! It was the right time for me to go! I had worked for tough MCPOs before, and they were nothing like this unfettered tyrant was. With this experience working for tough MCPO that pushed me be better and succeeding, I was completely surprised when working under this tyrant MCPO. So I made a decision to maintain my honor and retain my soul! My wife had just retired from the USN a year earlier, and our kids were still small (grade school), so it made sense to opt for my family and retire. I will be honest, I feel I did opt out too early, because of "bad leader". I have weighed that choice and often think about and listen to the implications of three songs dear to me:
- Sound of Silence (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9Dg-g7t2l4)
- God Bless the USA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps7xmW-9LXQ)
- I've got a Name (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTsDT99hC_g)
I have told my wife and grown children and now my grand-children that if the POTUS (any POTUS) ever dug deep and needed me (or other like me) back on active duty, I'd be happy to fill whatever role was asked. I am very confident, Bergdahl, by his actions neither understands nor appreciates this!!!
The new CO and new CMC at my last command asked me to reconsider NOT to retire, which I found interesting. They both knew what was taking place when they assumed command. So this brings me to the back story: I had a Command Master Chief near the end of my naval career who was like the Master at Arms in the book and movie. But, much more insidious in his manner. He was a recovering drug & alcohol addict, who was zealot in his recovery processes. I had been spoiled early in my naval career with Master Chief's that had the same issues (e.g. recovering from the grip of drugs and alcohol) as this man, but they were not been Zealots nor tyrants as he was!!! Instead they were the forces that shaped my naval career to be positive and a success. Frankly, had this very negative experience of a "Bad MCPO" been at the beginning of my naval career I would not have stayed as long as I did in order to retire. But, thanks to the high quality leadership of Master Chief's (especially Command Master Chief's) early in my career I did stay to make a career and retire. I had a ton of fun! If anything, I should have waited out the last "bad" Master Chief and remained on active duty instead of choosing to retire in order to keep my honor intact and not to be compromised by his "madness". What I learned from this "bad" MCPO was that telling the truth had now become less important than bending to political correctness. Something, high quality Chief's (before I became a Chief myself) and some of the best Officers I was privileged to have served under had taught me was important to do - tell the truth!!!
Under this tyrant of a MCPO, the job had now "not remained fun", because the Chief's mess was becoming more political than honest! It was the right time for me to go! I had worked for tough MCPOs before, and they were nothing like this unfettered tyrant was. With this experience working for tough MCPO that pushed me be better and succeeding, I was completely surprised when working under this tyrant MCPO. So I made a decision to maintain my honor and retain my soul! My wife had just retired from the USN a year earlier, and our kids were still small (grade school), so it made sense to opt for my family and retire. I will be honest, I feel I did opt out too early, because of "bad leader". I have weighed that choice and often think about and listen to the implications of three songs dear to me:
- Sound of Silence (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9Dg-g7t2l4)
- God Bless the USA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps7xmW-9LXQ)
- I've got a Name (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTsDT99hC_g)
I have told my wife and grown children and now my grand-children that if the POTUS (any POTUS) ever dug deep and needed me (or other like me) back on active duty, I'd be happy to fill whatever role was asked. I am very confident, Bergdahl, by his actions neither understands nor appreciates this!!!
(3)
(0)
PO2 David Allender
CPO Nate S. - Sometimes, Command has to make difficult decisions that are not always the best for everybody. There was a time when desertion in time of war meant the death sentence when and if caught in the U.S. Armed Forces. The last time it was carried out was toward the end of World War Two. Could be that maybe it should be brought back to stop desertion. IF a person can not hack war, then they should talk to their commander and seek discharge. GOD alone knows how many deserted during Nam. All rabcges wentr through a change due to Nam. Many got oout, including me. The services are better now than they were during Nam. Those that serve now can have pride in their outfit and serve with distinction.
(1)
(0)
69
69
0
PVT Birdshit's next stop: The nearest sympathetic media outlet to cry about how HE is the "real" victim in all this!
(69)
(0)
Cpl Gabriel F.
SFC Robin Patty - They can be a real couple now. May they burn in hell. the darlings of the liberal politically correct new world order set.
(4)
(0)
PO2 Robert Cuminale
I've really only had two questions since this affair started. Why was a man who was let go by another military service for being flaky recruited? How was this man selected for advancement to non-commissioned officer? Were his spacey thinking and statements not evident to his superiors?
(2)
(0)
38
38
0
It’s getting to be a harder pill to swollen when we talk about the Army Values because they’re being loosely practiced all around. It’s disappointing to watch.
(38)
(0)
MAJ Monique Ruiz
Very true Sir! I’m known as an aggressive officer. I speak for the Soldiers who entrust me with their lives and their families’ lives. I don’t sacrifice their trust for my own personal or professional advancement. My superiors know my position in every matter and why I believe their decisions may or may not be in the organization’s best interest. I can only do so much with the rank I have but at least I let them be fully informed of the consequences of their decisions. I keep record of everything to avoid being prosecuted as part of the problem or outcome. I encourage Soldiers to file IG or congressional complaints if they feel someone has failed them in the process. They feared I would get in trouble but I assured them that I wouldn’t because I can validate my actions and how I supported them but the failure was occurring at a higher level than me, and higher needed to answer for themselves.
I believe a lot of senior leaders have lost their way and forgot the purpose of their level of responsibility and duties to their organization and Soldiers, and the effects of their decisions on the most junior Soldier/level.
I believe a lot of senior leaders have lost their way and forgot the purpose of their level of responsibility and duties to their organization and Soldiers, and the effects of their decisions on the most junior Soldier/level.
(8)
(0)
MAJ Montgomery Granger
Excellent! Keeping personal records is essential not only to protecting yourself, but sleeping at night! Senior leaders lose their way sometimes because of politics; because at that level the choice is sometimes the right thing or resign. But that's the role they chose. We all choose our jobs in this country, Bergdahl included. Big boys and girls live with their decisions. Hooah! PS - I would have enjoyed serving with you, CPT. Drive on!
(5)
(0)
CPO Nate S.
MAJ Monique Ruiz - CPT, Thank you! I knew a Vietnam era Navy nurse like you once. She did not take crap from people, especially her junior nurses or tolerate same from her seniors. Many of us, Enlisted types, who had come from the fleet (operational medicine) to our first hospital command, liked her no nonsense style, but could not, at first, grasp where this woman got her audacity. All we had only seen her in nursing whites. But, one day we had a dress inspection and the four of us what has been in the fleet noticed her chest, and not for the reasons you may think.
Simply put, here was a woman that had a Purple Heart and a Bronze Star and several awards you would not think a nurse of that period would have. We, collectively were amazed and began to understand her attitude much better. Needless to say she was a leader forged in war and tempered by a desire to serve others. Her tour in Vietnam was anything but simple. We, all guys, finally got the courage to ask her out as a group to dinner. Amazingly, she accepted! So here are four junior Corpsman to dinner with a very seasoned, and very senior Navy Lt (aka CPT in USA language) and not a bad looking lady. As we asked questions and listened to her experience, we could not help but to commit ourselves to never letting her down on our duties a young Corpsmen. She would chew out a junior nurse in a micro-second if she learned a corpsmen during the course of their official patient care duties had informed the nurse of something and the nurse in turned ignored the young corpsman, which BTW I witnessed up close and personal one morning when she made a young Nurse Corps Ensign cry. That is in another story, but suffice it to say, that young Ensign, never ignored what I shared with her again, which almost cost a patient their life. Also, the LT was always willing to teach, especially young Corpsmen. Don't get me wrong, she demanded excellence and did not tolerate fools - Enlisted or Officer.
I find it refreshing that young officers, like yourself, have the courage and the will to do things the right way. As an ole Navy Chief, I be'd honored to, with my wife's permission (LOL), to share a fox hole with you. From what I can see, you seem to be cut from a cloth that is both soft as fine silk and hard as new steel. That is a rare combination to find in officers. Please never lose this edge. Men and women from all backgrounds, junior and senior enlisted alike will follow such courage and honest leadership - even to the gates of hell itself, if your course is true and your purpose just. People know the real deal and the false, "wanna bee's" are easy to spot. I am willing to bet you are - the real deal.
In closing, "Take care of your troops and your troops will take care you!!!" They have to trust, and you have to demonstrate to them that you trust them too!
If you get the chance get a coffee, wine if you like or just some water and read these 11 pages (http://www.gary-tomlinson.com/media/Book_Report_-_Its_Your_Ship.pdf). Then buy the book and read it some weekend. Leadership takes courage!!! Hope this might help you continue to be a - great leader!
Fare Winds and Following Seas as we say in the US Navy.
Sincerely,
Nate Szejniuk, HMC (SW/AW), USN (Ret)
HM-8404 / HM-8432
Simply put, here was a woman that had a Purple Heart and a Bronze Star and several awards you would not think a nurse of that period would have. We, collectively were amazed and began to understand her attitude much better. Needless to say she was a leader forged in war and tempered by a desire to serve others. Her tour in Vietnam was anything but simple. We, all guys, finally got the courage to ask her out as a group to dinner. Amazingly, she accepted! So here are four junior Corpsman to dinner with a very seasoned, and very senior Navy Lt (aka CPT in USA language) and not a bad looking lady. As we asked questions and listened to her experience, we could not help but to commit ourselves to never letting her down on our duties a young Corpsmen. She would chew out a junior nurse in a micro-second if she learned a corpsmen during the course of their official patient care duties had informed the nurse of something and the nurse in turned ignored the young corpsman, which BTW I witnessed up close and personal one morning when she made a young Nurse Corps Ensign cry. That is in another story, but suffice it to say, that young Ensign, never ignored what I shared with her again, which almost cost a patient their life. Also, the LT was always willing to teach, especially young Corpsmen. Don't get me wrong, she demanded excellence and did not tolerate fools - Enlisted or Officer.
I find it refreshing that young officers, like yourself, have the courage and the will to do things the right way. As an ole Navy Chief, I be'd honored to, with my wife's permission (LOL), to share a fox hole with you. From what I can see, you seem to be cut from a cloth that is both soft as fine silk and hard as new steel. That is a rare combination to find in officers. Please never lose this edge. Men and women from all backgrounds, junior and senior enlisted alike will follow such courage and honest leadership - even to the gates of hell itself, if your course is true and your purpose just. People know the real deal and the false, "wanna bee's" are easy to spot. I am willing to bet you are - the real deal.
In closing, "Take care of your troops and your troops will take care you!!!" They have to trust, and you have to demonstrate to them that you trust them too!
If you get the chance get a coffee, wine if you like or just some water and read these 11 pages (http://www.gary-tomlinson.com/media/Book_Report_-_Its_Your_Ship.pdf). Then buy the book and read it some weekend. Leadership takes courage!!! Hope this might help you continue to be a - great leader!
Fare Winds and Following Seas as we say in the US Navy.
Sincerely,
Nate Szejniuk, HMC (SW/AW), USN (Ret)
HM-8404 / HM-8432
(4)
(0)
LCpl Emanuel W.
I've had Company Commanders just like you Captain. I'm glad your kind hasn't gone extinct yet, Ma'am.
(3)
(0)
29
29
0
I'm P.O'd, it appears he walked off, supposedly going to complain to higher about something. Hm, a non-Arab in an Arab land wearing American uniform going to walk x Km's across Indian territory to higher HQ. WTF happened to requesting to see the IG, or calling the IG office with this problem? Then he gets caught and SAYS he tried at least once to escape, again in the middle of Indian territory, who is he Rambo. Patrols are sent out to find him- NOT normal recon, check on the neighborhood, but lets hit every village and question/search everyone, and folks get killed/maimed for it. ( Ignoring dumb leatherneck Junior NCO here)- This might not have happened during NORMAL Patrols. Spends 5 yrs as a captive (HIS OWN FAULT) and the politicians trade 5 known terrorists for him, and several of them go right back to killing. Is it worth the money to keep him in jail, execution ( not going to happen in PC land), bring the dead/maimed back to life? Answers probably not, but it might keep some other lil snowflake from trying it. I would live happy knowing that he was slowly rotting away in Leavenworth or some Federal Pen.
(29)
(0)
SSG (ret) William Martin
Even breaking CoC procedures and emailing top brass in the Army would have been way better than what he did.
(2)
(0)
Suspended Profile
I feel it is very hard to know what happened in the sentencing portion of the trial - where the judge noted the prior prejudicial statements and possible interference by both Obama and Trump. I would have liked to see an entirely independent military tribunal making a decision on the facts and the law - not basing their opinion and sentence on the protestations of the leadership of either political party. I beg to differ about the strength of the american military laying in the death penalty for desertion -- rather it lays in the high degree of commitment, training, honor, and loyalty of our officers and troops. I feel this is a sad day because serious prison time appears to have been fully warranted by his behavior. Warmest Regards, Sandy
http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/03/politics/bowe-bergdahl-sentenced/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/03/politics/bowe-bergdahl-sentenced/index.html
Bowe Bergdahl gets dishonorable discharge, avoids prison time
Bowe Bergdahl received a dishonorable discharge but no prison time for desertion and misbehavior before the enemy after abandoning his outpost in Afghanistan 2009, a military judge ruled.
MAJ Montgomery Granger
Thank you for your opinion. Well said. I like your idea of an independent tribunal. It would be interesting to know what the NCO corps thinks of the verdict, or the enlisted ranks, the junior officer corps, commanders, field grade, and then the general corps. We got a glimpse of the NCO and enlisted opinions from those with whom he served. I don't remember reading or hearing about even one sympathetic opinion. I have been enlisted and a commander, and I must say I would have no sympathy for Bergdahl were he a colleague or subordinate. I accept your comment about your perception regarding the strength of the American military. I did not intend for anyone to get the impression that I felt the American military was weakened in any way by Bergdahl's actions. As the former Honor Committee President in my Officer Candidate School class I was directly involved in honor violations committed by my classmates. Some proved "not guilty," others "guilty." The Code of Conduct, rules, UCMJ, regulations, SOP, and the Army Values were our guiding lights in our decision making. Were I adjudicating Bergdahl's sentence I would have had a difficult time not assigning the most harsh punishment because of his choices. There were many cases of desertion during our military history, but none I've read about like this one. This one deserved special treatment. A volunteer soldier deciding he'd had enough without using the most obvious avenue of redress to change his situation - conscientious objection. No, Bergdahl had a self-contrived mission which included treasonous behavior. Although not prosecuted for treason, in my book he was a traitor as well as a deserter. But, that's for another time! Thanks again for your thoughtful comments.
(6)
(0)
CSM Charles Hayden
1LT Sandy Annala Sandy, the majority of Rally Point members are gratified by your sentiments re: former SGT Bergdshl!
Sandy continues to probe and instigate!
Sandy continues to probe and instigate!
(1)
(0)
SFC Tony Bennett
MAJ Montgomery Granger - We (I) think it's NONSENSE. Next time some jack rabbit heads for the fence, let's give him a parade when he returns.
(0)
(0)
14
14
0
While the punishment for desertion can be death, reality is that it almost never is in the US military. Only one soldier from WWII on has been executed for desertion. That was a private in WWII, despite there being 21,000 soldiers convicted of desertion in WWII alone. And there were tens of thousands of deserters in the VN war, and over a hundred in the Iraq War. So the idea that deserters are routinely given a death penalty or severe sentences in order to prevent all the other troops from deserting is just not supported by the facts. And in a way, IMO, it is an insult to the hundreds of thousands of brave soldiers who served or are serving, suggesting that the only reason they stay and fight instead of running away is a fear of getting caught and getting a death sentence or a lengthy prison term.
(14)
(0)
SFC Tony Bennett
PO3 Bob McCord - Interesting, where does it end? And who gets to throw the first stone? Did this POS get over? Sure he did, But didn't the guy who killed Tamir Rice get over even more? Are we to understand that REVENGE and VIGILANTE justice is what we've stooped to?The idea of violating someone's right despite his lack of earning them is justified by a pronouncing a love of country? Think about it.......
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
SN Jay Perry
SFC Tony Bennett not that is very fair but old Beau misspelled is going to have to go to work almost immediately upon his release from the military because his stepfather had to basically sell his house to pay for his defense. Thus bow misspelled has no home
(0)
(0)
SN Jay Perry
SSgt Donald Libby private Slovak was executed for desertion in the face of the Enemy by Eisenhower after his fourth desertion charge! He is very much the exception in that very few times does anyone get more than 1 desertion in the face of the enemy charge and get away with it! Bow, misspelled, Bergdahl ought to be tried for desertion in the face of the enemy! Any injuries resulting from trying to rescue him. And damage to the service animals of least two of which were killed trying to find and rescue him.
(0)
(0)
13
13
0
I am greatly saddened by this ruling. Like all rulings, military or civilian, they all have consequences. As you can tell I see this as not just a military issue. It seems that in recent history the sentences for various acts of misconduct that make to the news, the rulings are getting less severe. This results in a ever increasing cycle lower expectations of people and no one being held accountable for their actions. How can a superior officer expect his order to be obeyed if the person receiving the order thinks that there will be little or no punishment for disobeying. I have read all of the comments concerning this discussion, yet no one has mentioned the bigger picture. I served on active duty in the U.S. Coast Guard from 1977 to 1986 and 1986 to 1993 in the Reserves. I was assigned to a unit where the moral was so bad that the Commandant ordered an investigation. Not once during my assignment to this unit (almost 3 years) did desertion or disobedience ever enter my or my shipmates minds. It sounds like in today's military you are not held to as high of a standard of Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, INTEGRITY and Personal Courage.
I am not privy to the actual proceedings and will not be an arm chair quarterback second guessing the thought process of the military judge, Col. Jeffery Nance. But if it looks like, sounds like and acts like a chicken then it is probably a chicken.
I feel empathy and pride for the troops that sacrificed themselves for Bergdahl. Not knowing that he had deserted but assumed that something else happened against his will.
MAJ Montgomery Granger thank you for your thoughtful comments and thanks to all of you that had constructive comments.
I am not privy to the actual proceedings and will not be an arm chair quarterback second guessing the thought process of the military judge, Col. Jeffery Nance. But if it looks like, sounds like and acts like a chicken then it is probably a chicken.
I feel empathy and pride for the troops that sacrificed themselves for Bergdahl. Not knowing that he had deserted but assumed that something else happened against his will.
MAJ Montgomery Granger thank you for your thoughtful comments and thanks to all of you that had constructive comments.
(13)
(0)
MAJ Montgomery Granger
Thank you for your thoughts, PO2! Coasties rick! I enjoyed your perspective very much.
(2)
(0)
13
11
2
Well, that's a slice of time that I'll never get back, and is just about completely inaccurate.
MAJ Montgomery Granger stated at the end of his first paragraph that "no one forced him to continue service if at any point he decided he had had enough." You just justified desertion with that sentence. No, he can't just decide that he's had enough, he enlisted and has to serve through his enlistment, whether he wants to or not. He can't quit and walk away, that is what he was court-martialed for.
Next, treason is defined by the Constitution of the United States, and the fact that you don't understand that is troubling. The reason treason was defined is to keep it from being used against those whom are unpopular, to avoid it being used to punish those for which there was a public outcry against. The Founding Fathers had seen the charge of treason misused by the king, which is why, during the entire history of the United States, only 40 people have been tried for treason, with limited success.
Onto the desertion charge--first, he was not charged with desertion during time of war, for the simple fact that we are not legally at war. Only Congress can declare war, and that last happened in World War II. The military justice system is not stupid enough to put Bergdahl on trial for that when they can get the same practical punishment for the misbehavior before the enemy charge.
Finally, he was convicted and sentenced, after testimony and evidence was presented. That's what the system did, and it did so under the rule of law.
MAJ Montgomery Granger stated at the end of his first paragraph that "no one forced him to continue service if at any point he decided he had had enough." You just justified desertion with that sentence. No, he can't just decide that he's had enough, he enlisted and has to serve through his enlistment, whether he wants to or not. He can't quit and walk away, that is what he was court-martialed for.
Next, treason is defined by the Constitution of the United States, and the fact that you don't understand that is troubling. The reason treason was defined is to keep it from being used against those whom are unpopular, to avoid it being used to punish those for which there was a public outcry against. The Founding Fathers had seen the charge of treason misused by the king, which is why, during the entire history of the United States, only 40 people have been tried for treason, with limited success.
Onto the desertion charge--first, he was not charged with desertion during time of war, for the simple fact that we are not legally at war. Only Congress can declare war, and that last happened in World War II. The military justice system is not stupid enough to put Bergdahl on trial for that when they can get the same practical punishment for the misbehavior before the enemy charge.
Finally, he was convicted and sentenced, after testimony and evidence was presented. That's what the system did, and it did so under the rule of law.
(13)
(2)
Capt Gregory Prickett
AA Joseph Moody - what's up, don't have the cajones to explain your down vote?
(3)
(0)
SSG James Behnke
Capt Gregory Prickett
You want to nitpick technicalities as it relates to the law? Cool. The fact remains that ethically, morally, and legally, Bergdahl was completely in the wrong, and other soldiers lost their lives because of it. Bergdahl still has his. In addition, we gave up 5 terrorists who were responsible for the loss of even MORE American lives just to get him back...
Because of the factors I just mentioned, to say his punishment was too lenient is an UNDERSTATEMENT. MAJ Montgomery Granger led his post with the Army Values, and how the judge in charge of Bergdahl's trial undermined them and cheapened them. I completely agree. You posting here and trying to have a debate about legal technicalities on "act of war" and "treason" is just splitting hairs and it's unwarranted and calloused.
In my opinion, that is. There's your explanation for my down vote.
You want to nitpick technicalities as it relates to the law? Cool. The fact remains that ethically, morally, and legally, Bergdahl was completely in the wrong, and other soldiers lost their lives because of it. Bergdahl still has his. In addition, we gave up 5 terrorists who were responsible for the loss of even MORE American lives just to get him back...
Because of the factors I just mentioned, to say his punishment was too lenient is an UNDERSTATEMENT. MAJ Montgomery Granger led his post with the Army Values, and how the judge in charge of Bergdahl's trial undermined them and cheapened them. I completely agree. You posting here and trying to have a debate about legal technicalities on "act of war" and "treason" is just splitting hairs and it's unwarranted and calloused.
In my opinion, that is. There's your explanation for my down vote.
(4)
(1)
Capt Gregory Prickett
Thanks for your input SSG Behnke. I'll give it all the consideration it's due.
(2)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
Wow..... gentlemen, I just spend a good 30 minutes reading all this thread of banter between all of you. Have any of you considered that our boy Bergdahl will have it worst outin the streets that in the prison at Leavenworth? Think about this. The man has a name tha all hot blooded Americans know, think of the likely hood of him finding a job. He has a dishonorable discharge, which means he had forfeited all his veterans benefits for ever. He does not qualify to do government job. Screw him getting any sort of security clearance. He probably will end up working in a job if he changes his name and dies his hair blond. Life in Leavenworth would be to easy, because he would bein solitary so the other inmates would not shank him. I was a Medical Service Officer at Leavenworth and I tell you, him in the streets is a bigger punishment and a lot cheaper for the Army and taxpayers....
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google