Skip to comments.Conservatives are criticizing the Bergdahl prisoner swap for the wrong reason.
Posted on 06/05/2014 10:56:25 PM PDT by Leaning Right
Regarding the Bergdahl prisoner swap, most conservatives are criticizing Obama's deal because Bergdahl might have been a deserter, or even a traitor.
That might be true, but it's the wrong way to go. The swap is bad mainly because of the price that the USA paid. Suppose it were 1942 and the Germans had captured an American sailor who had fallen (or jumped) overboard. Would FDR had swapped that sailor for, say, five crack U-Boat commanders? No way. But that's just what Obama did.
There are two separate issues. The deal was bad and dangerous no matter who it was. But acting like he is a hero (if he isn’t) is wrong to. But the U.S. SHOULD try to get deserters, and not just let them leave. But this was the WRONG WAY.
Since we are criticizing him for returning five crack terrorist leaders to the battlefield, and calling them the “Dream Team” of terrorists and that people will die, I don’t get your point.
If we could have got him back without any real risk, sure, but 14 dead men, plus wounded, plus whatever damage the five terrorists will do in the future plus $5 million dollars for one scuzzy peacecreep deserter? Only someone like Barack Obama would’ve made that deal. And will someone like Mr. Obama punish this soldier for his obvious dereliction of duty, defection and aiding the enemy? Don’t make me laugh!
There can be more than one right reason.
I think you are splitting hairs. If it was wrong, then it was wrong, despite any subtle personal nuance or issue. O effed up.
Another analogy: paying $50,000 for a ‘74 Gremlin.
Obama is good with drones...he should have just droned the deserter.
You might be criticizing Obama for returning those five to the battlefield (good for you), but that's not what I'm hearing from Fox News, conservative radio, etc. Here's what I'm hearing: Is Bergdahl a deserter? Is he a traitor? Is he an islamist?
The "evenness" of the swap itself has not been ignored, but it been pushed into the background. And that's what I'm objecting to.
It’s beginning to look like a one-way swap: SIX jihadis for nothin’.
No. There are two separate lines of criticism. The “deal” isn’t really being criticized because Bergdahl is a deserter. There’s certainly a bit of that, because the trade is pretty lopsided. The “deal” is being criticized mainly for two reasons: One, because it put 5 very senior Taliban back on the battlefield, and Two, because it means the US negotiated with terrorists.
It’s *Obama and his administration* that are being criticized for making a deal for a deserter, and for badly botching the “optics” of the deal, trying to portray him as a hero who “served with distinction”, and for going so far as to try to suppress or bury all the evidence to the contrary. And too, some of the criticism concerning negotiating with terrorists is being laid on Obama and his cronies specifically, because they’re the ones who pushed this, and also for doing so through a backdoor process that ignored the law.
To borrow a lib term, the situation is a lot more “nuanced” than the MSM is willing to admit.
Agreed. But there is a primary reason, and then there are secondary reasons. IMHO, the primary reason that this is such a bad deal is that we are swapping five Rommels for one Sad Sack.
Most Americans will sympathize with getting an American home, but they won't sympathize much with a clown making a foolish deal. Let's emphasize the foolish deal here.
But just one issue makes it easier for the apologists in media to control public sentiment.
I think it’s best to put it all out there. The public will respond for various reasons, and not necessarily hold a unified view of what is arguably the “primary” reason.
My understanding is the real point of this is to empty GITMO and the admin miscalculated on the cover Bergdahl would provide.
This is all about zero freeing the people he agrees with.
It’s what we get for electing an anti-American as POTUS. He no longer seeks or needs our approval so he’s doing what he wants - with “absolutely no apologies”.
Only Congress can change this.
Once they determined he was a deserter they shouldn’t have used any assets to rescue him. If during normal operations he was captured then bring him back for court martial.
Why does there have to be only ONE reason. He should be criticized:
1. for releasing the terrorists
2. for breaking several laws in doing so, including
a. not consulting congress
b. providing material aid to the enemy in the form of 5
c. negotiating with terrorists
3. for exchanging them for a traitor
4. for lying about the traitor, by saying that he served “honorably”
Good post, yours. All true, and all will be ignored by the MSM and the GOP establishment.
5. for lying about the state of health of Bergdahl - that he was in imminent danger - and using that as the excuse for the swap and why he couldn’t tell congress.
Criticism is all well and good, but we need ACTION. Congress, if they are not willing to impeach, should at least change the laws to make it harder for obama to repeat this fiasco. The Constitution says congress has the power to “make rules concerning captures on land and water.”
“Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.”
I don’t find you entirely wrong, but neither do I find your fine point of emphasis to be worth haggling about.
This scandal has many levels of wrong-doing, all intertwined. I find Obama’s tyrannical abuse of power the most worrisome aspect for our country overall, with the efforts of his “most transparent” administration to stifle the truth running a close second. The general contempt for the military is also a larger issue than the specific five bad guys released, and the precedent this swap sets for further kidnappings of American soldiers and civilians is also a bigger issue for me.
There are so many things wrong with this trade it is mind numbing.
In the past, people would say, that someone who went around shooting a lot of people, wither went postal or went muslim. Now they are saying if you got lied to, you got riced. Someone just coined a new slogan.
Conservatives are criticizing the Bergdahl prisoner swap for the wrong reason.,
You are correct in principal, but in practice there are so many things wrong with that deal on so many levels that the focus of criticism is more on prioritization of the seriousness of each individual issue
It's a target rich environment for criticism
There are 6 distinct reasons, this is an 0bama hexifecta:
1: It is a law violation, black letter law indicates that the president is to notify Congress 30 days in advance.
2: Returning 3 top officers to a conflict that is not over by any conceivable measure.
3: It sets a paradigm for future kidnappings/ransoms of essentially unlimited scope.
4: It was done for a deserter or defector.
5: There is absolutely no way on earth that the father of the deserter was not checked out with extreme seriousness in advance of the Rose garden ceremony. *Anyone* getting within arms reach of the president is checked out nine ways to Sunday by the Secret Service. Therefore it is impossible that the SS did not know everything about this guy, including his contacts with the Taliban or Al Queda or whomever. It is thus impossible, then, that the Taliban has been seriously emboldened by this move.
6: Even among the most liberal of liberals, this cannot have produced any sort of positive reaction among 0bama’s staff, nor Congress as a whole, nor any of his possible consultees, including any remaining military brass, unless they are card carrying members of the Muslim brotherhood or hopelessly sycophantic ass-kissers. It is thus an indication that he does not give a crap about any sort of rationality and is ready to proceed directly to the most enemy-friendly configuration imaginable.
Now...this is not the first time he has scoffed at black-letter law, not the first time has has ignored Congress, etc; etc.
Despite all that, 0bama has managed to shock the crap out of the world with this. This is a veritable salad bar of anti-American, anti-law, anti-Americanism that’s simply jarring.
No one is more important than another except for whatever the focus of the discussion is for that moment.
We are in a struggle for the support of the great American middle. For they will decide the midterms in 2014, and then the presidential election in 2016.
Those folks will be very sympathetic to any attempt to get an American home. So a conservative argument that Bergdahl doesn't “deserve” to come home will fall on deaf ears.
But an argument that the swap was very uneven will resonate with the American middle, veterans or not. That's my point. Hit Obama where it will really hurt him.
zer0 has been above it all for since his coronation, but this has him and them back-peddling. The more they attack, which is really all they know, the worse it gets for them
Just keep feeding the fire, elections are coming fast
Elections are being held in 8 days and a non-Taliban leader will be chosen. In one year (if they stay out that long) these 5 Taliban leaders will be back in Afghanistan to start getting the Taliban in control. Obama will probably have released the rest of the detainees and moved the rest of our troops out by 2016. The Taliban will take over and we are right back at 2001.
Problem with the comparison... Germany is a country, the Taliban are terrorists.
Wow. You really missed your chance to make an easy $100. Before your post, I would have instantly bet you $100 that Matthews was for the deal, if only because it was Obama's baby.
I guess the tingle is gone, at least for now.
That pig won’t fly.
No, you are right.
When the political winds shift in an ugly direction, and especially when he's getting hammered by yet another scandal (VA incompetence), Obama stands with the Islamists!
Yeah I agree, the wrong way to go... I have never said he should have been left behind which is the lefts argument they keep putting into Conservative mouths. Brings up a point that I Always wondered though, why Israel always gave 5 or 10 to 1 prisoner swaps... I also cant see this guy being guarded half as good as Osama bin laden was and why a team going in and getting him was not preferable to releasing 5 of our enemies leaders.
The smile on our commander in chiefs face when Mr. Bergdahl praised Allah said it all...
Extra prayers up for all our soldiers still in Afghanistan especially with our announced withdrawl, now as they are all high value targets to be captured and traded for more Gitmo releases in the short time before we leave.
I plan to spread it around as much as I can. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. And please consider posting the video as a new FR topic. It really needs to get out there.
Once again, when you sign on the bottom line, your life is forfeit in any given situation, whether by an enemy or just every day work. Too bad.
Why should we care about his health? I am going to say it over and over that is what free men and women sign onto the bottom line knowing they may be killed, maimed, or captured. That's the military. Personally, I believed he deserted, but if not and just wandered off and got captured - so what? Bad day for him, even worse for many others.
Shall we talk about all the Iraq/Aftganiscrap grunts who are trying to re-build their lives with missing body parts? Does anyone think a Ranger, SEAL, Delta Force wouldn't expect to be tortured and killed, not to mention the average grunt on patrol? Why wasn't Bergdahl beheaded or strung up years ago? He wasn't imprisoned by some benign local tribe, the Taliban had him.
I have never been more disgusted with Obambi than I am now. Really? Five high level terrorists for one low-level grunt? Hell, I would have killed myself in any way I could before I'd let that happen.
The other reasons are numerous, from giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war (even as Christian white gun-owners in the US are declared "potential terrorists", five ranking jihadis are returned on their own recognizance).
The trade was not a trade of combatants of equivalent rank, nor of equivalent value to their respective armed forces.
Any money involved, well, that's more aid and comfort to the enemy.
Congress was not notified, and in the past had voiced opposition to releasing these same persons. (exceeded authority).
Tried to lie about the event, in so many ways, for political gain, then as whitewash. The smokescreen over events at the VA is just part of what the lies were to accomplish.
I find Susan Rice’s outright lies as disturbing as just about any of the conduct of the Obamanites.K
Keep in mind that she didn’t exaggerate or embellish anything—she flat lied.
Then recollect that she was Obama’s mouthpiece in the days following September 11, 2012.
Democrats, we haven’t forgotten anything. We’re keeping careful inventory.
It’s just that you scoundrels are so ... damned ... prolific.
Like that old Certs commercial...
“Two, two, two fails in one”
You’re right, focus on the terrorists and the price we’re going to pay. And did we actually give them $5 mil to build more weapons to use against our families?
The Obama Administration would argue that those five crack U-boat commanders are going to be detained in Spain (lets say) until 1945, until the (planned) end of hostilities. Which is a farce.
I think there are more (actually many more) layers to this onion. These five going to Qatar for a one year pre-release. They will be given an allowance and some freedom in Qatar, in exchange the Qatari’s (Sunni) will recruit them to support the (Sunni) rebel cause in Syria. The Qatari’s are the money men and logistics behind the Syrian rebels (as we are also). The Taliban is Sunni Muslim and they have displayed a pension for killing Shiites. One of these five is wanted by the UN for commanding the slaughter of 7,000 Shiites in Afghanistan in 1999. Trust that the Qatari’s want to recruit manpower from Afghanistan to fight in Syria against Shiites. The rebels in Syria are fighting Shiites: Alewites and Assad himself (Shiite sect), regular Syrian Shiites, Iranian/Iraqi insurgents (Shiite), and Hezbollah (Shiite).
The Qatari’s (Sunni) effort in Syria has the money, the have training (we’re doing it) and they have the arms sources.
All the Qatari’s need are willing bodies to train, that is what the Qatari’s want from these five terrorist Afghans.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.