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
I am in suspense awaiting the details and the amount of $,$$$,$$$ included in Bergdahl’s “book deal”!
(5)
(0)
What can we do about it? For all of you still on active duty out there pay attention. All of you have the obligation to identify anyone who may be considering "going over the wall". I would be willing to bet you that members of Turdball's unit saw or hreard things that weren't quite right, but chose to not say anything.
If someone had identified Turdball as a potential deserter steps could have been taken to get his head back on straight or remove him from duty and place him under watch.
If someone had identified Turdball as a potential deserter steps could have been taken to get his head back on straight or remove him from duty and place him under watch.
(5)
(0)
MAJ Montgomery Granger
Interesting thoughts. Thanks for sharing them. Leadership is always a two-way street, and when I was coming up as a junior officer, after five years in the enlisted ranks, my mentors were always quick to remind me that a leader's job is to first COUNSEL his/her subordinates, and to assume personal issues were involved when soldiers colored outside the lines. The counseling approach is an important first step in progressive discipline. Like a doctor rules things out as they travel down the road of diagnosis, we must never forget that we are dealing with human beings and that personal problems affect a person's job performance. That said, Bergdahl's actions were his own, and I don't have enough information to determine how much others knew or suspected or what actions, including counseling, his leaders took. The system is not perfect, and it is very possible that there was a serious breakdown in leadership regarding Bergdahl's actions. On the other hand, Bergdahl may have been so bent on desertion that he masked or hid those intentions from his leadership chain and had alienated his colleagues to the point where they wrote him off instead of taking the time to report his behavior.
(1)
(0)
I was not the judge and would not have wanted to serve as the one for this case.
Unless you have heard all of the testimony that the judge heard it is unfair to say if he did or did not do the right thing.
Yes, I disagree with the outcome, but, that is based on very limited information of what happened at the court marshal and I am willing to think the judge acted fairly.
Unless you have heard all of the testimony that the judge heard it is unfair to say if he did or did not do the right thing.
Yes, I disagree with the outcome, but, that is based on very limited information of what happened at the court marshal and I am willing to think the judge acted fairly.
(5)
(0)
PO3 John Jeter
With respect I must disagree. 5 years back pay (lump sum), and an arguable "slap on the wrist" punishment for desertion in enemy territory? I cannot conceive of any combination of circumstances that would justify this decision. If I recall correctly, Bergdahl has been on post arrest rather than being confined, So he has served no time in 'jail' at all. For the next decade, anyone convicted under UCMJ for anything less than desertion will argue that they shouldn't receive prison time either.
(4)
(0)
Capt (Join to see)
PO3 John Jeter - Well, that is no change. The defense has, and will always argue for no prison time.
Again, why did a general and the judge (colonel) decide the way they did? I certainly don't know. But, I believe they both reached that decision based on the items that were presented to them.
My vote would be for firing squad. But, if I was the judge, my vote would be based (to the best of my ability) on the evidence presented to me by the defense and prosecution. That is the task the judge was faced with. Emotion can not be part of the judgement.
Again, why did a general and the judge (colonel) decide the way they did? I certainly don't know. But, I believe they both reached that decision based on the items that were presented to them.
My vote would be for firing squad. But, if I was the judge, my vote would be based (to the best of my ability) on the evidence presented to me by the defense and prosecution. That is the task the judge was faced with. Emotion can not be part of the judgement.
(1)
(0)
PO3 John Jeter
Much as I hate to say it, the specter of politics comes to mind. I've seen people get 15 years for far less of an offense than this. Like you, my initial knee jerk would have been execution, but the 14 years recommended would have been a plausible alternative. If it was in my power, I would require that General and Colonel to meet with the victims and families of those wounded in public, and explain why their suffering was not worth punishing the accused with more than putative slap on the wrist and a boot out the door.
(3)
(0)
1SG Ed Hewitt
Sir, politics have played a large role, in this whole ordeal we have witnessed, since that worthless POC walked away from his post in 2009... We are in another undeclared war because we have no leaders with backbones in Washington DC. We witnessed the Obama administration, with all their liberal progressive policies do their best to destroy our country... We wonder why our military is in the state it is in!!!! It does not surprise me the Judge making this disrespectful(to our military heritage) decision.... The fact is Good and honorable soldiers who hunted for this dirtbag were injured and killed and all those lives will never be the same. I believe we will find out more of his dishonor in the future...
(0)
(0)
A total travesty of justice. Political correctness has hijacked our Armed Forces.
(4)
(0)
MAJ Granger: Nice summary and some very compelling arguments. Unfortunately, the military has always had deserters but we haven't talked about it much. During the Viet Nam Era, I worked in the Base Deserter Section at Camp Pendleton. We had over 6,000 case files, mostly from that era, mostly new Marines who deserted after taking leave after initial basic training or advanced training. Berghdahl was different to me because he deserted his fellow Airborne Troopers while in a combat zone. Anyone serving in OEF or OIF knows that it is absolutely unheard of and totally insane to leave a firebase and venture off into the countryside without your weapon, gear, and certainly while unauthorized to do so. This is a violation of General Order 1 and while we don't have all of the facts, it is certainly likely that brave men and women died and were maimed attempting to save him. While I have grave reservations about the lenient sentence, the whole affair has been political, even if the Army attempted not to make it so. Although justice may not have been served, the Dishonorable Discharge and the presumed denial of pay and benefits during the time within which he was captured and the other penalties like the reduction in grade to private and the withdrawal of his airborne wings and CIB will serve as a dark mark on his life and record that will follow him for the rest of his life. His weak and lame excuse that he had concerns about the leadership is also troubling and ridiculous. There are other positive ways to express concerns about issues in your chain-of-command and as Soldiers or other service members, we have an obligation to be professional and lead by example, not to run away because we don't like our superiors. I have always been in units with service members who may not have lived up to my expectations but overall, we had NCOs and officers who did the job, did it well, and I witnessed incredible courage, commitment, honor, and leadership in OIF and OEF consistently and in nearly all engagements. Even during Viet Nam War when I had to work with deserters every week being returned to Camp Pendleton, their poor judgment and actions did not appreciably diminish the incredible accomplishments of the fine Marines with whom I served and despite them, the Marine Corps was a great organization overall. The Army did well in every mission I took part in and despite men who fail and despite men who fail us, their nation, their service and in this case, the Airborne, we have prevailed and defeated the enemy continuously in the vast majority of instances. I have disdain for Mr. Bergdahl but I also have pity for him because he had an opportunity to serve in the best Army and combat force we have every had - He got the opportunity to wear an Airborne Tab, Airborne Wings, and a CIB and, he wore the combat patch in a respected and revered uniform of our Army - and than of an elite unit. He quit his Army, he quit his nation, he quit his unit, and he quit his buddies - the same Soldiers who risked their lives to find him and would have laid down their lives in any situation in combat. The verdict is in and I'll accept it but Bergdahl, most of all, has to live with himself and his failures. He violated his oath and our flag, and all that it represents (including the people of our nation) while he may get sympathy from some in our society, the "warrior class" we all belong to will give him no such support and to me, he will forever reside in a prison that I personally would not want to visit for even one moment. Thank you for listening.....Jon
(4)
(0)
MAJ Montgomery Granger
Thank you very much for your thoughtful comments, Sir! I appreciate the time you took to share your feelings on the matter. I just can't get around the failed opportunity to set an example for all time on the subject of desertion and "misbehavior before the enemy." The military should never be the butt of jokes, and the whole Bergdahl scenario is laughable if you don't cry over it. It is absurd. The incident can now be held up as an example of how seriously the military takes its own rules and regulations: not very. As I stated, LOYALTY is the most important Army Value, for without it, nothing else has value. If all one's actions can be compromised in a single act of betrayal then the strength and effectiveness of a whole unit, and in this case, a whole military establishment can be compromised. There are always going to be bad apples, but when there is one, it must be dealt with appropriately or we risk the deadly disease of accepting lower and lower standards until none of it matters anymore.
(1)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
COL Jon Lopey
MAJ Granger: Thank you for the thoughtful comments. It is greatly appreciated. I think now "Mr. Bergdahl" will regret is decision to betray his nation, his buddies, his Army, and his oath of office. He is a failure and he had every opportunity to be something that enriched everyone around him and he simply quit and obviously exposed brave servicemen and women to danger and some paid the ultimate price for their commitment to bring him home alive. I was not there and I do not know what evidence was presented to the courts martial. I do believe that we have to have some respect for the presiding judge and the panel. He technically had several years of service, most while he was in captivity. I think being reduced to private, a DD, and loss of pay and benefits was a major penalty that will follow him forever. Did he deserve more? Of course he did but I choose to respect the decision and assume there were legal factors that existed we may not be aware of. Additionally, when I returned from overseas during the Viet Nam War and worked in the USMC's Base Deserter Section (MCB, Camp Pen), President Nixon had issued almost a blanket amnesty to Viet Nam Era deserters and many who were caught or surrendered received bad discharges (BCDs if court martialed) but most received less than honorable discharges administratively like Undesirable Discharges and they served very little time. One friend of mine served in Viet Nam, deserted for 6+ years and surrendered. He did such a good job in 3/3 (1st MarDiv) while awaiting courts martial, he was retained and served out his remaining 2.5 years honorably (he was also a Purple Heart recipient). That Marine was the exception and he was given preference to a large degree because he turned his life around and served honorably during a tour in Viet Nam prior to his departure. Most deserters were not war veterans when I served in the Base Deserter Section. Again, I would hate to live the life he is going to live after his failures and some could argue, cowardess in a combat zone. I would reiterate that as a former NCO and 30-year commissioned officer, I also have disdain for non-performers or failures who later claim their problems are attributed to the leaders they had. The vast majority of leaders I knew in the Marines and Army were good people and even if you had a commander or platoon leader who may not have been the best, you always had stellar NCOs and other officers that had a tendency to make most units good units. We learned early that your job was to accomplish your mission and take care of your people. The vast majority of leaders I knew did that. Bergdahl had enough time in service that dictated that if saw problems he should have been part of the solution and not part of the problem. Again, leaving a fire base in Afghanistan was absolutely unheard of and essentially he signed his death warrant leaving his base contrary to common sense, long-term practices, and standing orders. Such a move was what I said before was essentially "insane." What he did was absolutely insane and he exhibited the intent by his actions to be a deserter from the very beginning. I also think he probably helped the Taliban but I don't have independent proof of that point. Courts martials have to convict people based on the evidence and I think most people agree he had some mental health challenges a well. Thanks, Jon
(0)
(0)
Sir, Thank you for the update but I am afraid that just like the exoneration of "Crooked Hillary" the fix was in with Bergdahl as well. After-all, we couldn't have this young man sentenced to 15 years behind bars after Obama and the First Lady so lovingly hosted his parents in the rose garden.
I don't know who this Nance character is, but coming up with a sentence of time served after all the evidence was presented, makes me believe it's time for him to submit his retirement papers.
I don't wish ill on anyone, but in Bergdahl's case, I just wish the "universe" return to him what his actions caused others.
I don't know who this Nance character is, but coming up with a sentence of time served after all the evidence was presented, makes me believe it's time for him to submit his retirement papers.
I don't wish ill on anyone, but in Bergdahl's case, I just wish the "universe" return to him what his actions caused others.
(4)
(0)
I'm coming to this topic late, but I have some brutal comments! Bergdahl is the poster child for everything that has been turned upside down and backwards in the armed services! His conduct brought about his captivity with the Taliban. The then Commander-in-Chief aggravated the problem by trading five hard-core Taliban leaders for him. Then "his" Generals provided the opening drama of an investigation did not open any new facts, and then they closed it with this shame of military justice. The military judge for this trial dumped on the Army, military justice, the soldiers who were involved in search missions, the families of those who suffered injuries during those search missions, and value of honorable military service. There was command influence for sure, but it was not by the current president. I have yet to hear as to the decision about the award of back-pay as of this writing. Should that come to pass he will be consumed by his guilt for his cowardice. For the generals that orchestrated this situation, and the judge that carried it out shame on you for you have done a great disservice to the nation, the US Armed Forces, and yourself!
(4)
(0)
COL Jon Lopey
Ken: I agree with you. I think the Army recognized the importance of trying him and convicting him of this misconduct but they had to wait until we had a new president. I too was interested in the back pay issue. I worked in a base deserter section with the USMC during the Viet Nam War and a deserter is not entitled to back pay and in this case, it is obvious he was convicted and should not be entitled to the money. Thanks for the excellent commentary. Jon
(0)
(0)
Read This Next