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.
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 239
Well, I tend to think that we should have just left him in Afghanistan. Why is it that he's being freed in the US? He left his ID on the FOB he deserted. On deployment you ID counts as a passport. A revocation of citizenship abroad only requires that you surrender your passport to the US government, which he did. By that metric, he isn't a citizen anymore, he is a man without a country.
(9)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
We do not leave soldiers behind on the battlefield. Period.
Your comment on losing US citizenship is also incorrect.
Your comment on losing US citizenship is also incorrect.
(2)
(0)
MAJ Montgomery Granger
I like your comment a lot. If nothing else it shows INTENT. He knew he would be identified by the Taliban as an American, and he used leaving the ID behind as proof that he wanted to be on their side. More circumstantial evidence of treasonous behavior. Hooah!
(2)
(0)
SGM Erik Marquez
"Well, I tend to think that we should have just left him in Afghanistan."
That would be covered under something your parents likely taught you..
Two wrongs don't make a right.
No, he needed to come back to the US, we leave no one behind, friend or foe.
Im not in agreement in how the president at the time did that, but I accept it needed to be done in some way.... No one gets left behind.
Clearly I have stated my believe justice was not done after he was brought home ...and that is the topic now.
That would be covered under something your parents likely taught you..
Two wrongs don't make a right.
No, he needed to come back to the US, we leave no one behind, friend or foe.
Im not in agreement in how the president at the time did that, but I accept it needed to be done in some way.... No one gets left behind.
Clearly I have stated my believe justice was not done after he was brought home ...and that is the topic now.
(2)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
MAJ Montgomery Granger - it's a good thing that circumstantial evidence can't be used to prove the offense of treason, not that he was charged with anything approaching that, and not that leaving the ID would even rise to the level of circumstantial evidence of treason. That would never get before the court, and if it did, under the argument proposed by the two of you as to its meaning, it would result in a mistrial.
(1)
(0)
The precedent was already set with this Scumba He deserted TWICE.
Once in Iraq and once while awaiting trial. He only served two years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wassef_Ali_Hassoun
Once in Iraq and once while awaiting trial. He only served two years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wassef_Ali_Hassoun
Wassef Ali Hassoun - Wikipedia
Wassef Ali Hassoun (Arabic: واصف علي حسون; born January 1, 1980) is a United States Marine who was charged with desertion for leaving his unit and engaging with others in a hoax to make it appear that he had been captured by terrorists on June 19, 2004 while serving in Iraq. Originally listed as having deserted, the Lebanese-born U.S. Marine was then thought to have been taken hostage by Iraqis who were thought to have befriended him.
(9)
(0)
First "Chelsea" and now Bergdahl. How are military leaders supposed to enforce the rules and regulations when apparently the UCMJ has be overcome by political correctness and career officers afraid to make the right call. I for one have a hard time deciding who is the bigger failure, Bergdahl or the judge.
(8)
(0)
What a slap in the face of justice. Wonder who got paid off? I'd put my faith in the UCMJ, but it has clearly failed this time.
(7)
(0)
While I agree with you whole heartedly, apparently Col. Nance does not. I have to wonder which Army the Col is in. Because the professed values of the U.S. Army, and the DOD as a whole were not held up today.
(7)
(0)
PO3 John Jeter
Personally I see a trend continuing from the previous administration. Most of those officers who stood up and publicly differed from the agenda of our last 'leader' were hammered into the ground or swept aside. Though I have nothing but an opinion to go on, I'm of the belief that this "sentence" was predetermined when Bergdahl was brought home and it was just a matter of finding a compliant........instrument......to carry out the job. That is a bitter and painful idea to contemplate, as it shows a betrayal every bit as bad as the one committed by the accused.
(0)
(0)
Absolutely correct on all counts
The Presiding Judge abdicated not only his ability to enforce a very simple rule of war;
"run from combat and suffer the consequences."
This was politically motivated and now we all suffer from this stupid decision...and for what it is worth. I really dont care if they beat him wet noodles or barbed wire... he put himself in that position and that decision carried its own weight.
Add this scumbag to the PVT Manning who sold secrets and was then pardoned in another misguided liberal attempt to sway how the Military works... and we have a lasting legacy of shame that will never truly go away.
The Presiding Judge abdicated not only his ability to enforce a very simple rule of war;
"run from combat and suffer the consequences."
This was politically motivated and now we all suffer from this stupid decision...and for what it is worth. I really dont care if they beat him wet noodles or barbed wire... he put himself in that position and that decision carried its own weight.
Add this scumbag to the PVT Manning who sold secrets and was then pardoned in another misguided liberal attempt to sway how the Military works... and we have a lasting legacy of shame that will never truly go away.
(6)
(0)
I am extremely disappointed with the judges choice for no prison time. I do not care if he got busted down to a private along with dishonorable discharge and pay fines for 10 months. He should be sitting in a military prison for life. He endangered several soldiers’ lives by what he did.
Plus he is going to fight the dishonorable discharge.....that’s a bunch of......welll, you know what....... this a-hole is a waste of air and space. He needs to shot on site and buried outside of a cemetery in the ground facing down. That way, he for goes and rots in hell along with his Taliban brothers.
Plus he is going to fight the dishonorable discharge.....that’s a bunch of......welll, you know what....... this a-hole is a waste of air and space. He needs to shot on site and buried outside of a cemetery in the ground facing down. That way, he for goes and rots in hell along with his Taliban brothers.
(6)
(0)
Poor excuse for justice. Should at least spend the rest of his life in Levenworth. Penalty should have been Death. Men died trying to rescue him cut and dried.
(5)
(0)
There was actually a precedent for Bergdahl in the Garwood case after Viet Nam. I feel the same way about Bergdahl as I did Garwood and find many similarities in the cases. Both had questionable, but brief, records prior to their leaving, or disappearing, from their posts, and both reaped the profits of having powerful politicians on their teams and courts when popular support of the war had dissolved or at least waned. Fortunately, judging from the majority of the responses to the Major's write up, the sense of duty persists in the hearts of most of us, and the leniency of Bergdahl's sentence will not have any more lasting effect upon military members as did Garwood's. True warriors know what is expected of them and will adhere to their self generated expectations of service. The threat of a court martial is not the source of dedication to duty, nor even obedience to orders; they come from within.
(5)
(0)
Read This Next