More on Bergdahl (UPDATE 03/25 - Bergdahl Charged)

General General Discussion
21

Yep, I was one of the USAF TACP in the next battalion AO over (OE), and we were told immediately this was the case. I didn’t even realize that wasnt public knowledge until I started seeing those “Ask about Bowe” NIPR screen savers like 3 years later.

I don’t know anything about tactics changing, but I do know all we did was look for him until Cop Zerok was attacked, the guys there believe they wouldn’t have pulled that attack off if they had their usual air support rather than everything being in support of the wild goose chase.

22

You were supporting my Battalion when he decided to go take his vision quest.

23

…

24

So glad we gave up five prisoners and lost good men looking for this douche.

25

He should be charged with much more than that, and frankly his ass should still be rotting in the hands of the Taliban. Its disgusting the lives of good men were lost for this turd.

26

Pro war, anti war, R, D, pacifist, aggressivist, left, right, center, outfield, shortstop - this young man abandoned his post in wartime. Firing squad is appropriate.

27

“Firing squad is appropriate.”

Yes.

28

Yep Pvt. Slovic treatment would be appropriate.

Although a firing squad is a death for a soldier, hanging would be better since Bergdahl is a traitor.

29

30

http://weaponsman.com/?p=21619
[b]You may recall that in an interview with ABC’s Diane Sawyer, Hillary Clinton (during the initial Taliban negotiations, Secretary of State), said that desertion or not, honorable service or not, it didn’t matter.

CLINTON: [O]ne of our values is we bring everybody home off the battlefield the best we can. It doesn’t matter how they ended up in a prisoner of war situation.

SAWYER (in disbelief): It doesn’t matter?

CLINTON (dismissively): It doesn’t matter.

(Hat tip, Paul Bedard). Of course, given Hillary!’s long-standing disinterest in and contempt for military and foreign service personnel, that shouldn’t be a shocker. (“What difference does it make?”). Stumblebum National Security Advisor Susan Rice, fully briefed on Bergdahl’s betrayal of his mates, pronounced at the time of the swap that he, we are not making this up, “served the United States with honor and distinction.” [/b]

Good read

31

Irish: :lol: just :lol:

32

That right there is both the funniest and most infuriating thing I have seen in a while.
Kudos to whoever made this pic.

33

http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/09/07/bergdahl-charged-with-misbehavior-before-the-enemy-in-addition-to-desertion/
Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who has been accused by the U.S. Army and soldiers who served with him of abandoning his outpost in Afghanistan back in 2009, has been charged with “misbehavior before the enemy” in addition to desertion.

The “misbehavior” charge, which has seldom been used since World War II, carries a stiffer penalty in Bergdahl’s case when compared to desertion.

34

As I said, Slovik was shot for less

35

Bergdahl will likely be demoted, get a BCD and kicked out with loss of benefits. I’m sure the families of the guys killed looking for his ass would like him shot.

36

Should have just left him at the mercy of the tallies then…

37

Why no treason charge? Would that have been too “Islamophobic”?

38

I think he should rejoin his Company up at Ft Rich.

We’ve all long since PCS’d, but I’m sure there are guys up there who would love to see him.

39

The last line is the best.

10 U.S. Code § 899 - Art. 99. Misbehavior before the enemy

Any member of the armed forces who before or in the presence of the enemy—
(1) runs away;
(2) shamefully abandons, surrenders, or delivers up any command, unit, place, or military property which it is his duty to defend;
(3) through disobedience, neglect, or intentional misconduct endangers the safety of any such command, unit, place, or military property;
(4) casts away his arms or ammunition;
(5) is guilty of cowardly conduct;
(6) quits his place of duty to plunder or pillage;
(7) causes false alarms in any command, unit, or place under control of the armed forces;
(8) willfully fails to do his utmost to encounter, engage, capture, or destroy any enemy troops, combatants, vessels, aircraft, or any other thing, which it is his duty so to encounter, engage, capture, or destroy; or
(9) does not afford all practicable relief and assistance to any troops, combatants, vessels, or aircraft of the armed forces belonging to the United States or their allies when engaged in battle;
shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.
(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 69.)

40

So plundering and pillaging is ok so long as its conducted during the course of ones official duties? Lol, I kid.