And Bush was responsible for those how? It was the Army that took the heat for those because they were the ones telling the story. I gave you examples of controversies that the Bush Administration were linked to and did take alot of heat by the mainstream and liberal media. Don't blame partisan news channels for this. It is a very complex issue...... We leave no man behind, We do not deal with terrorists, we punish deserters and traitors... Everyone here is giving their personal point of view.
The 5 that barry turned loose WILL kill people. Mark it down. They aren't "rehabilitated" and now functional members of society, they are just more angry now then ever. Of course people die all the time, these most probably wouldn't have needed to. The fact that the taliban wanted, demanded, these 5 specifically should tell you something. One of them could end up being the next OBL. One more time, if you and the rest of the world want to give him that then fine, do it, just not at the expense of the innocent people that will die because your boy traded their murderers for such an insignificant piece of trash. That we know of, but the parents of that piece of trash sure did. Lots of them. Documents Amigo. Not making it up. I'm well aware of what AWOL is, hell I've been AWOL before. Having a little too much fun on vacation and not quite ready to go back, you do what your collar can handle. I didn't denounce my country, lay down my rifle and walk into the enemy hands. I'm sure I don't have to explain the difference but then again, maybe I do. And you never will because you can't, I understand that. What I don't get is how you so easily sweep the price we paid under the rug as if it is no big deal. Would you sell all your timber land for $5 and a ham sandwich? Didn't think so. When he does shit like this it is pretty hard to not think he does in fact hate America, why do you think he went behind the backs of the process? Does that not even get a single synapse to fire in that brain of yours? Does the stench of shady not overpower? He did it because no one would have said "Hey that is a great idea" No they would have said "Are you completely outside of your fucking mind"!!!! Make no mistake, I hate barry, I have hated him from day 1 and oh holy shit you can't even measure it now.
You aren't getting what I'm saying. I'm saying, had that happened under Obama, the right would calling for impeachment.
I think they are. While circumstances are different, it's clear that no matter what happens under Obama it's always his fault. If Vladamir Putin farts, it's Obama's fault. All these things that are Obama's fault, had they happened under a republican administration, would not be blamed on said administration. If the Jessica Lynch lies, and the Pat Tillman cover up had happened during this administration, it would be Obama's fault according to Fox and Republicans. These same republicans who were calling for the exchange and release of Bergdahl, are now lambasting the President for making it happen.
Both of those events were more about causes and power. Tillman was about McChrystal, his career, his ego, and giving the American people a reason to support more troops in Afghanistan. Lynch didn't fire because her weapon jammed. Since she has already said she never really expected to be in a situation like that, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that she didn't take adequate care of her rifle. That's usually why they jam. The initial reports of the incident were a rush to put out a fantastic story and the media deserves a big chunk of the responsibility there. Initial field reports can often be inaccurate but they didn't care and once again the story helped to gain American support. After that, the stories continued because politicians in West Virginia (Byrd and Rockefeller, both Dems) wanted a Medal of Honor winner from their state and push the stupid idea that "America needed a female war hero". Stupid, stupid idea. But really, everything isn't about partisan bullshit. Sometimes it's just about really bad politicians.
And how about this for "allies"....Haqqani was a CIA asset who received thousands of US dollars, in cash, as a freedom fighter against the Russians in Afghanistan. You sure can trust those allies. The deserter was seen shopping, unaccompanied, at outdoor markets near the Haqqani compound in Pakistan. He'd already converted to being a muslim. The Haqqani network didn't really need, or want, Bergdahl anymore. He had no benefit from an intel point of view and America had clearly shown a willingness to let it ride by not sending in forces to get him. Haqqani also knew the scum at Gitmo were going to be released anyway, so exactly why did they force an exchange now? The US tells a good story about Bergdahl's health but that is clearly nonsense. The tape of him in January with the usual death threat was used to THEIR advantage and we bought it. What did they get? A renewed sense of victory over America, 5 Taliban who can step right into Mullah Omar's cabinet, and a rally cry of revenge. America got 6 (now maybe 8) of her boys who came home in a box and 1 stinky deserter.
I see where you are going and at least for me you are still wrong because I would have the same opinion of anyone who approved this deal. R or D I don't care. It just so happened that Obama made it, illegally, and I hate him. As previously stated, the POTUS had zero to do with Tillman or Lynch but EVERYTHING to do with this.
One more thought....if we follow your process to conclusion, we seem to have two choices. We could relegate criticism to one's own party but as you stated that doesn't work because politicians will devour their own at election time. Or, we could simply not question anything because it's partisan douchebaggery. I don't know about you, but neither of those work for me. I say we assume douchebaggery at every turn and but still attempt to get the truth and still tell a politician when they screwed up and hold them accountable. Think on this....some people think this deal wasn't so bad because the Tali 5 are low level older dudes who aren't going to kill anyone specifically. When "we" found bin laden, wasn't he an old dude in a beat up old house wanking off to internet porn? And yet we declared him public enemy #1. Why? 9/11. He's a Saudi born Wahabbist. Why do you think Dubya had so many pages of 9/11 reports blanked out....maybe he didn't want anyone to know we had a relationship with SA and they helped fund the 9/11 terrorists. That's the kind of shit I think about.
Shane, while I can't say I understand your frustration at Bergdahl, I get why you are frustrated. If the stories are true (which is an if at this point right?) then you and everyone who gutted it out have every right to hate this dude. My whole point is I'm not sure this would have even been an issue under another president, (not with you or any other military person, again I get that) but since day 1, it's been the job of Roger Ailes and the evil fucks at Fox and their pawns in Washington to make any and everything that happens under this administration a conspiracy, and a cover up, or an impeachable offense. I think you have the right to slam this dude, I never served, neither did Sean Hannity or Bill O'Reilly so I feel NONE of us have the right to slam him.
