U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-15-2014, 06:08 AM
 
Location: Henderson, NV
883 posts, read 576,758 times
Reputation: 2318

Advertisements

In the reintegration, Bergdahl did not display any behavior or make an incriminating statement that would lead to inpatient psychiatric care or generate charges that might cause a trial counsel (JAG prosecutor) and a convening authority (a commanding general officer) to seek pre-trial confinement. How do I know this? He is walking around. His civil rights are protected...even the military has to follow rule of law. He cannot be restricted or confined without cause and charges presented, and I can tell you from personal experience, it requires compelling evidence of flight risk or behavior to harm self or others to confine someone before trial.

The general officer conducting the Article 32 hearing will present the government with findings and make a recommendation to proceed with charges, or not. The real news lays in the Article 32 results.

As someone who has led Soldiers on combat missions of questionable value and extreme risk, I have nothing but contempt for Bergdahl. I trust the anecdotal accounts of his platoon mates...and you should, too.

Is this story a San Antonio thing? Only in the loosest sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-15-2014, 03:38 PM
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
8,400 posts, read 20,103,487 times
Reputation: 4435
I agree, but if anyone honestly thinks a GO is going to find anything outside of the results he has been told to come up with, they are sadly mistaken. Bergdahl's fate was decided when the Obama administration traded five Taliban leaders for him. There is no way on God's green earth that the President will let this come back to haunt him or his party. Many already suspect this was a distraction for the VA fiasco, and will I am not a conspiracy theorist by nature; this time I am suspicious as well.

I just don't know how Bergdahl can walk around the Post Exchange at Ft Sam Houston where so many wounded warriors are present knowing what he did. Proud, honorable men and women who have sacrificed for their country; yet this deserter is allowed to roam free. The Army could not have picked a worse location to put him, there is probably a desk out at Camp Stanley where he could sit and not be a constant reminder to others of his cowardly act.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2014, 02:23 PM
 
733 posts, read 863,407 times
Reputation: 408
neighborhoods surrounding where he might be stationed are not happy either. military needs to gtfo its arse and take this to trial once and for all, else its just asking for trouble.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2014, 11:53 AM
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
8,400 posts, read 20,103,487 times
Reputation: 4435
Quote:
Originally Posted by KM1174 View Post
neighborhoods surrounding where he might be stationed are not happy either. military needs to gtfo its arse and take this to trial once and for all, else its just asking for trouble.
It's not the military making that decision, it is its civilian leadership...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2014, 02:31 PM
 
9 posts, read 15,481 times
Reputation: 13
Bergdahl is walking among others that have gave all and kneeled to their fellow soldiers battle cross. Moral is not good. My concern is for every soldier on the ground because of these terrorists that will eventually need to be reengaged.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2014, 09:42 PM
 
37 posts, read 42,653 times
Reputation: 38
Just remember Ft. Hood
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2014, 05:35 AM
 
2,096 posts, read 1,820,500 times
Reputation: 2197
Quote:
Originally Posted by majormadmax View Post
I agree, but if anyone honestly thinks a GO is going to find anything outside of the results he has been told to come up with, they are sadly mistaken. Bergdahl's fate was decided when the Obama administration traded five Taliban leaders for him. There is no way on God's green earth that the President will let this come back to haunt him or his party. Many already suspect this was a distraction for the VA fiasco, and will I am not a conspiracy theorist by nature; this time I am suspicious as well.

I just don't know how Bergdahl can walk around the Post Exchange at Ft Sam Houston where so many wounded warriors are present knowing what he did. Proud, honorable men and women who have sacrificed for their country; yet this deserter is allowed to roam free. The Army could not have picked a worse location to put him, there is probably a desk out at Camp Stanley where he could sit and not be a constant reminder to others of his cowardly act.

I would personally like to think that GO serving as the Article 32 lead would have the moral courage to report the findings accurately. I don't see how anyone at the Secretariat level or higher could, or would want to interfere with the process. It hasn't been that long since I retired (2009), and I just don't see how elected leadership would stand to gain anything by trying to alter the outcome of the Article 32 investigation. First, they would expose themselves to an extreme level of risk. With the ongoing IRS investigation starting to make Watergate look like a bake sale I wouldn't think the Executive branch would have an appetite for what could easily turn into Pandora's box. Why expose yourself to something that risky? Second, it's pretty clear cut, and already documented in most media outlets that SGT Bergdahl left his post of his own volition, and communicated his intent to do so in writing to his battle buddies and also discussed it with friends/family. Should be a pretty clear cut case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2014, 08:20 AM
 
Location: San Antonio
1,255 posts, read 1,753,435 times
Reputation: 1362
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXStrat View Post
I would personally like to think that GO serving as the Article 32 lead would have the moral courage to report the findings accurately. I don't see how anyone at the Secretariat level or higher could, or would want to interfere with the process. It hasn't been that long since I retired (2009), and I just don't see how elected leadership would stand to gain anything by trying to alter the outcome of the Article 32 investigation. First, they would expose themselves to an extreme level of risk. With the ongoing IRS investigation starting to make Watergate look like a bake sale I wouldn't think the Executive branch would have an appetite for what could easily turn into Pandora's box. Why expose yourself to something that risky? Second, it's pretty clear cut, and already documented in most media outlets that SGT Bergdahl left his post of his own volition, and communicated his intent to do so in writing to his battle buddies and also discussed it with friends/family. Should be a pretty clear cut case.
A Major General wants to become a Lt. General, need anything more need be said?

During my tenure in the Air Force, I say many things, to include the reassignment date changed of a Colonel to avoid another major accident on his stained record. Result: 4 Stars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2014, 08:59 PM
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
8,400 posts, read 20,103,487 times
Reputation: 4435
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilGar View Post
A Major General wants to become a Lt. General, need anything more need be said?

During my tenure in the Air Force, I say many things, to include the reassignment date changed of a Colonel to avoid another major accident on his stained record. Result: 4 Stars.
Pretty much.

TXStrat, do you honestly think the Obama administration is going to let the Army prosecute the very soldier they swapped five senior Taliban terrorists for? How would that look? People are already quite upset about the fact that it happened, the last thing the White House needs is to have that validated by a court martial conviction.

I go back to Air Force major Jill Metger, who disappeared from Manas Air Base in Bishkek, the capital of Kyrgyzstan back in 2006. She was found three days later in the nearby Kant, claiming to have been kidnapped. However, there was overwhelming evidence that she lied about it all and even gave conflicting accounts of what happened. Somehow (and there is a lot of speculation as to how it happened), she was not only never saw a court martial; but she was also "medically retired" because of the claimed post-traumatic stress disorder from the "kidnapping." Still, somehow she was able to come in 2nd place at the 2008 United States Air Force Marathon!

If Metzger's husband and father were able to cover up her fiasco, how well do you think the White House can bury the Bergdahl one? Pretty deep, I can assure you.

Nope, Bowe won't see the inside of a courtroom. The hope is to hide him until he is forgotten (which doesn't take long considering the goldfish memory of the US public), then release him from active duty so he can return to the mountains of Idaho never to be heard of again. Of course, I am sure he will get a full disability for his "trauma," and will be well paid despite the fact that he is a deserter and a disgrace to the US military!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2015, 12:32 PM
Status: "just keep scrolling then?" (set 12 days ago)
 
14,613 posts, read 31,138,127 times
Reputation: 6656
Bowe Bergdahl to be charged with desertion, his attorney says - CBS News
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > San Antonio
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:20 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top