Bowe Bergdahl

[Anonymous]

If Bowe Berghdahl was your son, wouldn't you want him out of the Taliban's hands no matter what he did, no matter what the cost?

I think that the callousness of the posters here is directly related to the fact that there is no longer a draft. Your sons and daughters are not at risk, so who cares what happens to someone elses? This hews perfectly to the "I got mine" mentality I see in modern Republican attitudes.

Look at the Israeli attitude toward prisoners of war and ours. They traded over 1000 prisoners for one. This is because everyone there knows that one day that could be their son or nephew or brother because there EVERYONE serves their country.

Of course, I would want him back. However, I sure would feel guilty if that meant putting other soldiers at risk.

[Anonymous]

I think that the callousness of the posters here is directly related to the fact that there is no longer a draft. Your sons and daughters are not at risk, so who cares what happens to someone elses? This hews perfectly to the "I got mine" mentality I see in modern Republican attitudes.

Actually, I do have a child at risk for being sent to Afghanistan. I guess my concern is that Bergdahl's release may put his friends that are there now at risk.

[Anonymous]

Look at the Israeli attitude toward prisoners of war and ours. They traded over 1000 prisoners for one. This is because everyone there knows that one day that could be their son or nephew or brother because there EVERYONE serves their country.

That has nothing to do with this. And, again, I don't like this as it puts lots more soldiers at risk. Particularly those left there in the coming year when numbers are reduced. That will be quite dangerous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think that the callousness of the posters here is directly related to the fact that there is no longer a draft. Your sons and daughters are not at risk, so who cares what happens to someone elses? This hews perfectly to the "I got mine" mentality I see in modern Republican attitudes.

Actually, I do have a child at risk for being sent to Afghanistan. I guess my concern is that Bergdahl's release may put his friends that are there now at risk.

+1 I do too, and I am worried about the same. Our soldiers all know there is a risk in what they do. They do it anyway, and most of them with great pride for their country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think that the callousness of the posters here is directly related to the fact that there is no longer a draft. Your sons and daughters are not at risk, so who cares what happens to someone elses? This hews perfectly to the "I got mine" mentality I see in modern Republican attitudes.

Actually, I do have a child at risk for being sent to Afghanistan. I guess my concern is that Bergdahl's release may put his friends that are there now at risk.

+1 I do too, and I am worried about the same. Our soldiers all know there is a risk in what they do. They do it anyway, and most of them with great pride for their country.

I don't get the logic here. If you are in a position where the Taliban can grab you, they can easily shoot you. If you have no value as a hostage, then you are dead.

[Anonymous]

I don't get the logic here. If you are in a position where the Taliban can grab you, they can easily shoot you. If you have no value as a hostage, then you are dead.

Do you have any idea of the reality of the propaganda effect? This will energize the Taliban.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't get the logic here. If you are in a position where the Taliban can grab you, they can easily shoot you. If you have no value as a hostage, then you are dead.

Do you have any idea of the reality of the propaganda effect? This will energize the Taliban.

Propaganda value? Energize them? What next, are you going to mention sunday talk shows and talking points???

These people are fighting to control their country. They have been doing it since the 70's. They don't need to be "energized". And we are exiting the war.

[Anonymous]

And we are exiting the war.

And, our remaining troops will be more vulnerable than ever.

[Anonymous]

Propaganda value? Energize them? What next, are you going to mention sunday talk shows and talking points???

These people are fighting to control their country. They have been doing it since the 70's. They don't need to be "energized". And we are exiting the war.

Study a little about war. Morale is a significant factor on the battlefield.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Propaganda value? Energize them? What next, are you going to mention sunday talk shows and talking points???

These people are fighting to control their country. They have been doing it since the 70's. They don't need to be "energized". And we are exiting the war.

Study a little about war. Morale is a significant factor on the battlefield.

Do you know anything about the history of Afghanistan? When it comes to fighting foreign invaders, morale has never been a problem.

[jsteele]

BTW, Republicans are seeing more of their talking points falling apart:

http://washingtonexaminer.com/carl-levin-obama-gave-proper-notice-for-prisoner-release/article/2549247

Levin said, “Relative to the requirement that the notification be provided 30 days in advance of the transfer of detainees, the President put Congress on notice on Dec. 23, 2013, that he intended to exercise his powers as commander in chief, if necessary, ‘to act swiftly in conducting negotiations with foreign countries regarding the circumstances of detainee transfers.’”

So, the only issue on which Republicans seemed to have a legitimate case turns out to be moot.

[Anonymous]

Well, I'm not sure that is the Gop's main talking point. Even Mukasey said today that Obama broke the law--but that the law is unconstitutional. Still doesn't make it right.

[Anonymous]

Do you know anything about the history of Afghanistan? When it comes to fighting foreign invaders, morale has never been a problem.

Valid point. However, this sure doesn't help. My husband has always said that Afghanistan is futile--that the Russians couldn't do it and neither can we.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Well, I'm not sure that is the Gop's main talking point. Even Mukasey said today that Obama broke the law--but that the law is unconstitutional. Still doesn't make it right.

Bush's AG? I"m not sure he was briefed on classified communications in the Obama administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, I'm not sure that is the Gop's main talking point. Even Mukasey said today that Obama broke the law--but that the law is unconstitutional. Still doesn't make it right.


Bush's AG? I"m not sure he was briefed on classified communications in the Obama administration.

I guess Mukasey was referring to the law in general. I question that Levin's explanation really covers it. I don't think the Senators considered it in that way. Feinstein must not have thought it did.