Commutation of sentence is not full pardon. Still a dishonorable discharge. Still a federal felon, just ended the prison time early.
Missing/Captured: Bowe Bergdahl
- Thread starter Havoc13
- Start date
Commutation of sentence is not full pardon. Still a dishonorable discharge. Still a federal felon, just ended the prison time early.
Topkick
Verified Military
I couldn't bring myself to hit the like button. This is when I miss the hate option.
Last edited:
The sad thing is all the people who are going to think it's real. I mean, it's not even a good PhotoShop job.
Red Flag 1
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2010
- Messages
- 7,587
[QUOT
Last edited:
Goodbye horses...
You have to serve honorably in direct combat with the enemy. Or did they change that too?
Through '05 you didn't. I know a number of guys with CIB's due to indirect fire. 20th Group put almost every 11B secondary holder (and 18 series even if they sat at a FOB and took IDF) in for the award in 2002. One of the Indiana infantry brigades did something similar except it ran an 11B MOS course in Afghanistan.
As for Bergdahl? I don't know his circumstances. I'm told the requirements for a CIB are much more stringent since the above running from 02 to 05, but some units decided the bling was more important than the meaning or intent. Promotion points for everyone!
TLDR20
Verified SOF
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 6,237
Like I said he initially served in direct combat with the Taliban. Earlier in the deployment, prior to the walkabout.
Either way after what Mara posted, take that shit.
Bowe Berghdal apparently thinks coming home to the US was just as tough as captivity. I don't necessarily agree with a President commenting openly on a case like this, even if I may agree with the comment content itself, and I hope ol' Bowe never sees the outside world again. This piece of shit traitor can fuck right off.
Bowe Bergdahl says returning to U.S. was as tough as being a hostage
Bowe Bergdahl says returning to U.S. was as tough as being a hostage
From the above article:
"...Bergdahl, now 31, walked off his remote post in Afghanistan in 2009 with the intention of reaching other commanders and drawing attention to what he saw as problems in his unit..."
That's been his excuse except that he left a note saying he was bugging out to "start a new life." He was unassing the whole fucking program. The last place he wanted to go was an FOB 19 miles away to "report" to the commanding officer there about problems in his unit.
If he'd actually reached that FOB--with that fucking story--he'd have been locked the fuck up.
This worthless motherfucker was planning either to walk to Pakistan or join the Talitubbies. His hatred for the Army and his own country is clearly evident in his email exchanges.
If he enjoyed captivity so much, I guess he wasn't really a prisoner...
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2008
- Messages
- 1,422
That seems like the most logical explanation to me as well - and I can understand how SSG Bergdahl's statements should be taken with a significant degree of optimism.
However, from what I have read the investigating officer found SSG Bergdahl's statement credible - he ultimately concluded SSG Bergdahl, however incorrectly and dipshitedly, actually left for the reasons stated. Further, the IO recommended (if I am remembering correctly) that SSG Bergdahl had served his time for his mistakes by being in captivity for six years. Whether you agree with him or not the IO has done a much more significant investigation than any internet sleuth on this case. I think his views - and really the views of his team because no GO really does his own work - should not be dismissed out of hand.
I give two shits about SSG Bergdahl now that he's home. I have much stronger opinions on the way he was brought back (negotiation) than his sentencing one way or the other. I just think this thread, like the Las Vegas shooting thread, exposes something I wish we would do less of in America - treat everyone's opinion, because it's on the internet, as equal.
Topkick
Verified Military
Are you referring to the release of captives in trade?
Yes, IMO that's the worst aspect of this case. Soldiers will do stupid/terrible shit during a war - it happens, doesn't mean it's good, but I thought the response was the right one - go as hard as you can to find them. Similarly, when a Soldier is captured we do everything we can to get them back - even if they're a shithead. Finally, once they're back we have to evaluate the consequences for what they did/didn't do - UCMJ in this case. All of those to me followed the right procedure - if not always to the best result or perfect execution. For me, the thing that bothers me about this case is the trade of prisoners for a hostage. If there was a nation or state to trade with that obeyed the Geneva convention and it was an exchange of POWs that would be one thing - but it wasn't. It was essentially a shakedown by terrorists/criminals and only serves to legitimize them and those actions for the future - Iran has tried it more than once in Iraq. In my opinion it was a strategic mistake that should not have been made.
Similar threads
