US - Taliban Prisoner Exchange

[cabiness42]

This whole thing has me very perplexed. A US soldier and supposedly a Taliban sympathizer, just goes AWOL from his unit and gets "captured". Then, five years later, the US gives up five very dangerous terrorists in order to get this guy back?

 

I am not one of those who believes any of the right wing Obama conspiracy BS, but this one has me very concerned.

[LittleHurt05]

I'm gonna be in that part of Idaho in two and a half weeks, it's beautiful up there.

 

I don't have much to add to the actual topic, but it is weird how they suddenly negotiated his release five years later.

[Jenksismyhero]

I think they said his health was starting to get really bad. He was losing a lot of weight. But yeah, it's weird that when you read up on this, some are calling him a POW, some are calling him a deserter, and apparently the admin/Pentagon won't talk about it.

 

I hope they implanted some kind of chip in these terrorists they're letting go to track them. Maybe this was just a long con to obtain more intel.

[Milkman delivers]

I admit that I know nothing about this. But, what I do know is that a lot of the military people I know seem to be very upset about this. They're calling him a deserter and they seem especially upset that he was made a sergeant and a hero because of this.

[EvilMonkey]

And yet an American veteran still remains in a Mexican prison being tortured, with no action or response from the American government than to give him access to a 'list' of lawyers that 'might' be able to help. Considering all the ass-kissing the Feds to to Mexico, you would think that one phone call would do it.

[Cknolls]

A little background:

 

 

 

Mullah Mohammad Fazl (Taliban army chief of staff): Fazl is “wanted by the UN for possible war crimes including the murder of thousands of Shiites.” Fazl “was associated with terrorist groups currently opposing U.S. and Coalition forces including al Qaeda, Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin (HIG), and an Anti-Coalition Militia group known as Harakat-i-Inqilab-i-Islami.” In addition to being one of the Taliban’s most experienced military commanders, Fazl worked closely with a top al Qaeda commander named Abdul Hadi al Iraqi, who headed al Qaeda’s main fighting unit in Afghanistan prior to 9/11 and is currently detained at Guantanamo.

 

Mullah Norullah Noori (senior Taliban military commander): Like Fazl, Noori is “wanted by the United Nations (UN) for possible war crimes including the murder of thousands of Shiite Muslims.” Beginning in the mid-1990s, Noori “fought alongside al Qaeda as a Taliban military general, against the Northern alliance.” He continued to work closely with al Qaeda in the years that followed.

 

Abdul Haq Wasiq (Taliban deputy minister of intelligence): Wasiq arranged for al Qaeda members to provide crucial intelligence training prior to 9/11. The training was headed by Hamza Zubayr, an al Qaeda instructor who was killed during the same September 2002 raid that netted Ramzi Binalshibh, the point man for the 9/11 operation. Wasiq “was central to the Taliban's efforts to form alliances with other Islamic fundamentalist groups to fight alongside the Taliban against U.S. and Coalition forces after the 11 September 2001 attacks,” according to a leaked JTF-GTMO threat assessment.

 

Khairullah Khairkhwa (Taliban governor of the Herat province and former interior minister): Khairkhwa was the governor of Afghanistan’s westernmost province prior to 9/11. In that capacity, he executed sensitive missions for Mullah Omar, including helping to broker a secret deal with the Iranians. For much of the pre-9/11 period, Iran and the Taliban were bitter foes. But a Taliban delegation that included Kharikhwa helped secure Iran’s support for the Taliban’s efforts against the American-led coalition in late 2001. JTF-GTMO found that Khairkhwa was likely a major drug trafficker and deeply in bed with al Qaeda. He allegedly oversaw one of Osama bin Laden’s training facilities in Herat.

 

Mohammed Nabi (senior Taliban figure and security official): Nabi “was a senior Taliban official who served in multiple leadership roles.” Nabi “had strong operational ties to Anti-Coalition Militia (ACM) groups including al Qaeda, the Taliban, the Haqqani Network, and the Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin (HIG), some of whom remain active in ACM activities.” Intelligence cited in the JTF-GTMO files indicates that Nabi held weekly meetings with al Qaeda operatives to coordinate attacks against U.S.-led forces

Edited June 2, 2014 by Cknolls

[Balta1701]

And yet an American veteran still remains in a Mexican prison being tortured, with no action or response from the American government than to give him access to a 'list' of lawyers that 'might' be able to help. Considering all the ass-kissing the Feds to to Mexico, you would think that one phone call would do it.

Seriously?

[EvilMonkey]

Seriously?

What part of that don't you get? He treats rules as suggestions and brings back a pow who may not have been so much a prisoner as a convert or sympathizer. And when asked for help by family members for a veteran in a Mexico jail, nothing.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/30/us/mexico-us...ined/index.html

Edited June 2, 2014 by Alpha Dog

[Balta1701]

What part of that don't you get? He treats rules as suggestions and brings back a pow who may not have been so much a prisoner as a convert or sympathizer. And when asked for help by family members for a veteran in a Mexico jail, nothing.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/30/us/mexico-us...ined/index.html

The fact that one of these was a situation where the U.S. was actually in combat and the other wasn't? The fact that the guy broke the law in Mexico whereas this person was an actual combatant? The fact that the U.S. military generally seems to have a tradition of "not leaving men behind" in areas where they are in active combat?

[EvilMonkey]

The fact that one of these was a situation where the U.S. was actually in combat and the other wasn't? The fact that the guy broke the law in Mexico whereas this person was an actual combatant? The fact that the U.S. military generally seems to have a tradition of "not leaving men behind" in areas where they are in active combat?

The fact that the man may have 'left', and not been 'left behind'? The fact that EVERY allegation of prisoner abuse here is treated with kid gloves, a US citizen claims abuse there, everyone shrugs?

[Balta1701]

The fact that the man may have 'left', and not been 'left behind'? The fact that EVERY allegation of prisoner abuse here is treated with kid gloves, a US citizen claims abuse there, everyone shrugs?

From the perspective of him as a POW, that should not matter in the least. If he did desert, then he should face military charges for doing so, but unless he renounces loyalty to the U.S. he is a prisoner of war. If he did not, "being disillusioned with an incredibly stupid war" is not reason to be left behind.

 

You think this guy is the only American to get roughed up in a Mexican prison?

[juddling]

I shouldn't be surprised with this administration but it's beyond laughable that they do this exchange while saying that they don't negotiate with terrorists.....umm.......hello....you just DID negotiate with terrorists........

 

Just curious what Obama will do if a US serviceman is kidnapped next week and they ask for 5 more guys to be released. Does Obama cave again??? or does he look THAT guy's parents in the eye and says 'We don't negotiate with terrorists"

 

Once again I feel this admin. has emboldened the enemy.........

[southsider2k5]

I shouldn't be surprised with this administration but it's beyond laughable that they do this exchange while saying that they don't negotiate with terrorists.....umm.......hello....you just DID negotiate with terrorists........

 

Just curious what Obama will do if a US serviceman is kidnapped next week and they ask for 5 more guys to be released. Does Obama cave again??? or does he look THAT guy's parents in the eye and says 'We don't negotiate with terrorists"

 

Once again I feel this admin. has emboldened the enemy.........

 

IIRC, didn't we see more hostages taken after we traded arms for hostages under Reagan?

[Jake]

It isn't like we haven't given up the responsibility to find that this guy did desert. The fact is that we don't know and it's probably better not to err on the side of "this guy is going to be mutilated by terrorists"

[EvilMonkey]

You think this guy is the only American to get roughed up in a Mexican prison?

Sadly, I am pretty sure he is not unique in that aspect.

[Balta1701]

The fact that the man may have 'left', and not been 'left behind'?

Apparently the military also promoted him while he was in captivity, so whatever the exact allegations against him are, that seems to be an indication that the military does not believe them.

[EvilMonkey]

His squad mates think of him as a deserter. They mince no words about it. And others as well.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/06/02...gdahls-conduct/

 

the Defense Department source confirmed to Fox News that many within the intelligence community harbor serious outstanding concerns not only that Bergdahl may have been a deserter but that he may have been an active collaborator with the enemy

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/controversy-...ory?id=23961090

"And that the truth is: Bergdahl was a deserter, and soldiers from his own unit died trying to track him down," Bethea wrote in The Daily Beast Monday. “Bergdahl was relieved from guard duty, and instead of going to sleep, he fled the outpost on foot. He deserted. I’ve talked to members of Bergdahl’s platoon—including the last Americans to see him before his capture. I’ve reviewed the relevant documents. That’s what happened.”.

Edited June 2, 2014 by Alpha Dog

[Texsox]

Should it be policy to decide whether we attempt to bring back prisoners of war or not based on comments and suspicions? Should we have a trial without the soldier present and say meh, keep him? Or should we bring the soldier back and prosecute him if there is sufficient evidence? The decision seems pretty easy to me.

 

I hope every President would do the same thing. Put the full force and commitment of the US in bringing home every US prisoner being held by hostile nations. If one or more are later prosecuted for crimes, at least they are in the hands of the US and not the enemy.

 

[EvilMonkey]

Should it be policy to decide whether we attempt to bring back prisoners of war or not based on comments and suspicions? Should we have a trial without the soldier present and say meh, keep him? Or should we bring the soldier back and prosecute him if there is sufficient evidence? The decision seems pretty easy to me.

 

I hope every President would do the same thing. Put the full force and commitment of the US in bringing home every US prisoner being held by hostile nations. If one or more are later prosecuted for crimes, at least they are in the hands of the US and not the enemy.

I don't have a problem with them bringing him back. I have a problem with rules being treated as mere suggestions, as usual by this president.

[Brian]

I don't have a problem with them bringing him back. I have a problem with rules being treated as mere suggestions, as usual by this president.

 

So he's the same as the last 5 presidents.

 

I need to read up on the story. How did he desert the country? Left post and wandered off?

[EvilMonkey]

No, Brian, because HE is not held accountable for it. And yes, he wandered off after a guard shift.

[Balta1701]

No, Brian, because HE is not held accountable for it. And yes, he wandered off after a guard shift.

Would "being left in a Taliban prison" be being held accountable for it?

[farmteam]

Would "being left in a Taliban prison" be being held accountable for it?

He was referring to Obama, not Bergdahl. He was responding Brian's comment about the last 5 presidents.

 

EDIT: I see the confusion now. In Alpha's post, the first "he" was for Obama, the second "he" was for Bergdahl.

Edited June 3, 2014 by farmteam

[Balta1701]

He was referring to Obama, not Bergdahl. He was responding Brian's comment about the last 5 presidents.

 

EDIT: I see the confusion now. In Alpha's post, the first "he" was for Obama, the second "he" was for Bergdahl.

Ah. Pronouns (shakes fist)

[Texsox]

I don't have a problem with them bringing him back. I have a problem with rules being treated as mere suggestions, as usual by this president.

 

What rule was broken?