Posted on 07/07/2014 3:25:51 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Does he not understand the POS in question was not captured, but in fact deserted to the enemy and likely gave them useful intel?
Makes all the difference in the world to me.
Apparently Phil feels sorry for the traitor.
Well...yeah. "Suggestions".
I respect this man for his service and for his sacrifice, but his statement simply holds no water for me.
Lord I hate hippies, no matter what flavor they are.
He deserted and then went rogue. Big time difference.
I respect the opinion of those men who served with him before he deserted. I side with them, and if it puts me on the other side of the fence than this former POW, I can live with that.
later read
What would he say if he were rather captured, or his squadron-mates killed, on missions to rescue Jane Fonda?
No more need be said-- However, I thank Mr. Butler for his service to our nation in Vietnam... 
but he nowadays is a full fledged blivit, that's an old Navy term for "ten pounds of manure in a five-pound bag."
I can understand how someone who was a POW can empathize with Bergdahl but to do so means he has to overlook the fact that Bergdahl deserted and that is how he got where he was.
Bergdahl is a traitor and he should be treated like one.
This man Butler has broken faith with any person who wears or has worn the uniform. He is an ultra-liberal Democrat, and if that is a fact (and it is) he wishes to surrender this country to those who wish it ill.
The author laments how politicized Bergdahl has become...
While completely forgetting who politicized it. Barry brought his parents into the Rose Garden, to make a spectacle over it.
If the nature of his desertion is really still ‘under investigation’, the manner in which Barry gave his ‘seal of approval’ in the Rose Garden speech is beyond stupid. As commander in chief, he polluted the investigation...and as politician in chief, he took a fairly simple desertion case and made it very clear where liberals should line up.
As to the trade - the author forgets to note how Barry has pushed to release the fab five since he first took office, and put the onus on the military and intelligence agencies to prove why they shouldn’t be released. Then, all of the sudden, a prisoner swap? Its all too obvious that Barry wanted to release these very dangerous men. The only real question is why. But window dressing this release as a prisoner swap doesn’t change how dangerous this release was.
But don’t worry...they promised to stay put until after the mid-term elections...not that Barry politicized the situation, or anything like that.
Yep. See my post at #13.
I won’t be to hard on this pilot and former P.O.W. But he is failing to differentiate between captured and deserted.
Com-on MAN!
All evidence points to Bergdahl walking away from his post, and everyone else in his unit seems to support this narrative.
I'd be curious to know how much the Democommies paid the author to dream up this fiction. Did someone get jammed up with a commodities investment, or is upside down on his McMansion?
It matters not to Phil the egregious desertion of Sgt. Bergdahl. Due to the trauma suffered by years of POW incarceration, his mindset operates in very narrow parameters. Logic, in the manner exercised by those not so wounded, is impossible.
I thank Phil for his service, sacrifice, and grievous mental trauma. That being said, I would no sooner expect cogent thought on this topic from him than I would expect to see a Viet Nam era paraplegic dunk the ball at an NBA arena basket.
As someone who have been in a leadership position I would make him accountable for his actions. People died and their families deserve answers.
This former POW is a hard leftist liberal. To me, he surrenders any default respect and cover he gets by supporting the extreme liberal agenda which is deliberately destructive to the United States.
The fact that he cannot distinguish the circumstances of Bergdahl’s capture completely invalidates anything he has to say on the subject.
I think most humane and compassionate people might adjust their stance (or at least expose it to considerable reflection) on negotiating with those people if it was a person captured against his will while doing his job.
I don’t think there is any dishonor in opposing this swap in every single way, shape, or form, due to the circumstances surrounding his desertion.
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.