Missing/Captured: Bowe Bergdahl

[Salt USMC]

He did make a stupid decision but he was not a young and dumb soldier. I believe he understood the repercussions. Someone said it, but soldiers get dishonorable discharges for a lot less harmful offenses in garrison.

Having listened to the ten-part podcast series about this very topic, I really think that Bergdahl was an incredibly naiive and sheltered young man. When you hear about the writings in his journals, its clear that he thought of himself in grand, Homer-esque terms. He thought that Afghanistan was going to be his Odyssey, when really it was more like his Ulysses. I don't think he had a very good grasp of the repercussions until he got caught.

Give it the series a listen sometime, it's very enlightening: Season Two

 

[AWP]

I really think that Bergdahl was an incredibly naiive and sheltered young man. When you hear about the writings in his journals, its clear that he thought of himself in grand, Homer-esque terms. He thought that Afghanistan was going to be his Odyssey, when really it was more like his Ulysses. I don't think he had a very good grasp of the repercussions until he got caught.

He's still guilty of desertion and his grandiose dreams and visions are irrelevant. He knew right from wrong and chose to act regardless. I sincerely hope he dies of hemorrhagic dick cancer of the mouth.

 

[CDG]

Who cares how he viewed himself? You join the military, you play by the rules. He broke a huge one, and I could care less what idiotic dreams of grandeur he had in doing so. He got people injured and killed, and he deserves more punishment. 5 years with the TB is a direct result of his actions, and is not a legal sentence. I thinks it's bullshit to consider it time served.

 

[Totentanz]

Who cares how he viewed himself? You join the military, you play by the rules. He broke a huge one, and I could care less what idiotic dreams of grandeur he had in doing so. He got people injured and killed, and he deserves more punishment. 5 years with the TB is a direct result of his actions, and is not a legal sentence. I thinks it's bullshit to consider it time served.

I think it's worth taking into consideration as a consequence of his actions. It should not, however, supplant his punishment by the DoD for his self-admitted criminal act.

FWIW, while I don't think it absolves him of anything, the Serial podcast is worth a listen.

 

[Salt USMC]

Oh don't get me wrong - I'm not excusing his actions whatsoever. Maybe I'm being a bit of an apologist but I think it's important to establish intent when judging these events. Even if you're not judging them in a strictly legal sense, I think history requires it.

 

[TLDR20]

Yeah fuck that guy.

However he was a stupid kid with no intent. He is going to be dishonorably discharged. That is not as common as some here have implied. DUI’s don’t garner dishonorable’s, they get bad conducts, or other than honorable. Dishonorable’s are treated the same as a felony conviction in many states.

A pretty basic search shows how rare a dishonorable discharge really is, with less than a couple hundred out of hundreds of thousands of discharges. Many of those were felony convictions, with previous time served...

 

[Marauder06]

Oh don't get me wrong - I'm not excusing his actions whatsoever. Maybe I'm being a bit of an apologist but I think it's important to establish intent when judging these events. Even if you're not judging them in a strictly legal sense, I think history requires it.

Upon what are we judging his intent, other than on statements made by the defense? He claims he wanted to 'report bad behavior," what behavior was it, exactly? Has any of this alleged malfeasance been confirmed? If he wasn't deserting, why was he making statements like "I am sorry for everything. The horror that is America is disgusting" in letters to his father?

Why, on the night that he deserted, did he leave a note behind saying "he had become disillusioned with the Army, did not support the American mission in Afghanistan and was leaving to start a new life?" Why did he mail all of his stuff home before he walked away?

Asking because I don't know, not because I'm challenging. But it seems that this "reporting bad behavior" thing is smoke and mirrors from the defense. In light of the other evidence, I don't believe it for a second.

 

[Il Duce]

Upon what are we judging his intent, other than on statements made by the defense? He claims he wanted to 'report bad behavior," what behavior was it, exactly? Has any of this alleged malfeasance been confirmed? If he wasn't deserting, why was he making statements like "I am sorry for everything. The horror that is America is disgusting" in letters to his father?

Why, on the night that he deserted, did he leave a note behind saying "he had become disillusioned with the Army, did not support the American mission in Afghanistan and was leaving to start a new life?" Why did he mail all of his stuff home before he walked away?

Asking because I don't know, not because I'm challenging. But it seems that this "reporting bad behavior" thing is smoke and mirrors from the defense. In light of the other evidence, I don't believe it for a second.

If only there was some human with specialized training and experience who could hear every aspect of this evidence from the prosecution and defense - yet still bound them within the legal system - and come to a judgment on these sorts of things. A decisioner? The decidicist? That doesn't sound right...

 

[Marauder06]

If only there was some human with specialized training and experience who could hear every aspect of this evidence from the prosecution and defense - yet still bound them within the legal system - and come to a judgment on these sorts of things. A decisioner? The decidicist? That doesn't sound right...

I see what you did there.

The thing is though, AFAIK the mitigating factor considered by the judge wasn't the defense's argument about Bergdahl's rationale, it was the negative command influence of the commander in chief.

 

[Il Duce]

I see what you did there.

The thing is though, AFAIK the mitigating factor considered by the judge wasn't the defense's argument about Bergdahl's rationale, it was the negative command influence of the commander in chief.

Yeah, that's what I think is tough about POTUS comments - this one and the last - how do you ascertain the degree of influence their comments have, intentionally or unintentionally? As @AWP said I think it's tough to know the degree of influence President Trump's comments may have had and we'll likely never know unless the judge (decicisizer to you) writes an uncommonly honest memoir. To me it's one of the strongest arguments for why POTUS' need to have some self-discipline on that stuff.

But, I think it goes to even wider stuff. I feel like I routinely hear - on this forum and other places - how President Trump or President Obama caused all these things that are multiple degrees of decision and action away from them - i.e. stock market, MOAB drop, consumer confidence, military success, military defeat, kneeling players, sexual assault internet lynch mobs, etc. Some have stronger arguments for correlation than others but regardless it's still difficult (at least to me) to be able to say the degree of blame or influence POTUS should bear.

I think it's plausible to the judge would have come to this decision without POTUS' comments. But I also think whether he was influenced or not he'll never admit - maybe not even to himself.

 

[AWP]

Yeah, that's what I think is tough about POTUS comments - this one and the last - how do you ascertain the degree of influence their comments have, intentionally or unintentionally? As @AWP said I think it's tough to know the degree of influence President Trump's comments may have had and we'll likely never know unless the judge (decicisizer to you) writes an uncommonly honest memoir. To me it's one of the strongest arguments for why POTUS' need to have some self-discipline on that stuff.

I'm somewhat onboard with the "judge was concerned about backlash due to the president's comments" argument. I'll step through that for a moment. Let's say he is genuinely concerned, he still screwed up. I don't know if the current sentence can be appealed, but convict the guy, levy jail time, and then allow the appeals process to work. I think the judge ran scared and virtually eliminated the chance for justice. It sends a horrible message to our service members and the lives Bergdahl changed forever.

 

[Teufel]

 

[Ooh-Rah]

View attachment 20209

Game.
Set.
Match.

Fucking brilliant, sir.

 

[Marauder06]

Yeah, that's what I think is tough about POTUS comments - this one and the last - how do you ascertain the degree of influence their comments have, intentionally or unintentionally? As @AWP said I think it's tough to know the degree of influence President Trump's comments may have had and we'll likely never know unless the judge (decicisizer to you) writes an uncommonly honest memoir. To me it's one of the strongest arguments for why POTUS' need to have some self-discipline on that stuff.

But, I think it goes to even wider stuff. I feel like I routinely hear - on this forum and other places - how President Trump or President Obama caused all these things that are multiple degrees of decision and action away from them - i.e. stock market, MOAB drop, consumer confidence, military success, military defeat, kneeling players, sexual assault internet lynch mobs, etc. Some have stronger arguments for correlation than others but regardless it's still difficult (at least to me) to be able to say the degree of blame or influence POTUS should bear.

I think it's plausible to the judge would have come to this decision without POTUS' comments. But I also think whether he was influenced or not he'll never admit - maybe not even to himself.

I don't understand this

Yeah, that's what I think is tough about POTUS comments - this one and the last - how do you ascertain the degree of influence their comments have, intentionally or unintentionally? As @AWP said I think it's tough to know the degree of influence President Trump's comments may have had and we'll likely never know unless the judge (decicisizer to you) writes an uncommonly honest memoir. To me it's one of the strongest arguments for why POTUS' need to have some self-discipline on that stuff.

But, I think it goes to even wider stuff. I feel like I routinely hear - on this forum and other places - how President Trump or President Obama caused all these things that are multiple degrees of decision and action away from them - i.e. stock market, MOAB drop, consumer confidence, military success, military defeat, kneeling players, sexual assault internet lynch mobs, etc. Some have stronger arguments for correlation than others but regardless it's still difficult (at least to me) to be able to say the degree of blame or influence POTUS should bear.

I think it's plausible to the judge would have come to this decision without POTUS' comments. But I also think whether he was influenced or not he'll never admit - maybe not even to himself.

I don't understand this argument, brother. The jury decides guilt and the judge imposes punishment, right? If the defense pleads guilty, and the evidence is overwhelming in this case, and the judge (who refuses to bow to the President's pressure) decides the punishment, then isn't the whole negative influence issue moot? The judge seems to be making this case about the President and not the defendant.

 

[RackMaster]

Judges should be able to put aside personal opinion, ignore outside influence and follow the rule of law. No matter what the Commander in Chief expressed as their own personal view. Precedence has already been set.

Let's look at another traitors trial affected by command influence.

Did Obama taint WikiLeaks suspect's right to fair trial?

Or how about influencing a whole group of trials.

Judge: Obama sex assault comments 'unlawful command influence'

 

[Gunz]

Any idiot in uniform knows the consequences of going over the hill...and especially desertion in time of warfare. Any slavering, knuckle-dragging, crayon-eating, ass-scratching syphilitic swinging dick out there should know.

 

[ThunderHorse]

I don't understand this


I don't understand this argument, brother. The jury decides guilt and the judge imposes punishment, right? If the defense pleads guilty, and the evidence is overwhelming in this case, and the judge (who refuses to bow to the President's pressure) decides the punishment, then isn't the whole negative influence issue moot? The judge seems to be making this case about the President and not the defendant.

Bergdahl opted for a Bench Trial because he felt he'd be declared guilty easy. Well he then declared guilt, but somehow serves zero time because this O-6 is apparently a dunce.

 

[Ooh-Rah]

Any idiot in uniform knows the consequences of going over the hill...and especially desertion in time of warfare. Any slavering, knuckle-dragging, crayon-eating, ass-scratching syphilitic swinging dick out there, knows the deal.

Hate cause...I felt inspired! LOL

 

[Gunz]

Hate cause...I felt inspired! LOL

Well, Young Sir, (LOL) it came across as a "disagree" so your attempt at "Hate" failed. And where the hell did you get a "disagree" function? And where's mine?

And BTW, I've seen your "Pirate Picture"...so let's not go there.

 

[Frank S.]

Well, Young Sir, (LOL)

Is that like giving the Navel Salute?