• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

WCF

History, politics, and culture articles and forum discussions.

You are here: Home / Topics / Prisoner exchange

- By

Prisoner exchange

Home › Forums › Off Topic › Prisoner exchange

  • This topic has 6 voices and 12 replies.
Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • June 5, 2014 at 2:12 pm #3790 Reply
    Phidippides
    Keymaster

    Obama recently swapped five Gitmo prisoners for an American soldier.  Discuss.

    June 6, 2014 at 2:18 am #29972 Reply
    DonaldBaker
    Participant

    I don't have a problem with it….unless the guy was AWOL and a traitor, then I do.

    June 6, 2014 at 10:27 am #29973 Reply
    skiguy
    Moderator

    It just fits in with the scenario of the downward spiral of this country.  The only thing that can save it now is a bunch of Republicans with balls.  I don't see that happening at all.Personally, I'm more concerned with what pseudo-science is going to do with my electricity and heating bill next winter

    June 6, 2014 at 2:53 pm #29974 Reply
    Phidippides
    Keymaster

    The reports I heard made it sound like he did, in fact, go AWOL.  Well, technically not AWOL but a “deserter” (I guess the difference is that he was captured later and they couldn't determine his true status).  This plays into the next issue, that of equitable exchange.  I'm guessing most people would be much more understanding if the American soldier had been fighting and was then captured, and then later traded for five Taliban.  Then there's perhaps the largest issue of them all – Obama seems to have broken the law by bypassing Congressional notification before making the exchange.  There it is, folks; dismantling of the doctrine of “Separation of Powers” is really the first step in the road to tyranny.  Even the legal analyst on CNN said that Obama did or likely did break the law.  What I haven't heard, though, is the punishment for this.  I heard someone threaten to impeach him if he does it again, but how many chances to people in the real world get before they are punished?  And would Democrats really ever go along with impeaching Obama, even if he does break the law again?  This is not good.

    June 10, 2014 at 9:01 am #29975 Reply
    scout1067
    Participant

    The difference between AWOL and deserter is that one happens on the field of battle and the other does not.  He deserted his post and the penalty for that is death.  I know a guy who was in a different company in his BN who corroborates most of the stories floating around on the net.  He should be court-martialed, sentenced to die, and executed.  Point blank, it is that simple.  Obama should probably be impeached and convicted for releasing terrorists in exchange for him.  Too bad Obama cannot be prosecuted for violating decades old US policy that we do not negotiate with terrorists, period.

    June 10, 2014 at 9:07 pm #29976 Reply
    DonaldBaker
    Participant

    I agree he should be prosecuted for deserting his post and Obama should be impeached for negotiating with terrorists. 

    June 11, 2014 at 7:00 am #29977 Reply
    scout1067
    Participant

    I guess as a retired soldier and combat vet I take especial offense to the notion that there is anything heroic about this clown.  He is worthless and a waste of oxygen in my opinion.  I can think of no creature so contemptible as the supposed man who would abandon his comrades on the field of battle.

    June 11, 2014 at 10:00 am #29978 Reply
    skiguy
    Moderator

    I can think of no creature so contemptible as the supposed man who would abandon his comrades on the field of battle.

    How about a lowlife Commander in Chief who would tout him around as a hero?

    June 11, 2014 at 10:17 am #29979 Reply
    scout1067
    Participant

    How about a lowlife Commander in Chief who would tout him around as a hero?

    Still not as bad.  I generally expect politicians to look after their own interests and agenda first.  I fully expect my brothers in arms to have the same commitment to me that I have to them.

    June 11, 2014 at 5:00 pm #29980 Reply
    Aetheling
    Participant

    Well I guess that Obama and all the government knew about Bergdahl's status: he is AWOL.My question is: what is this deal really about? Of course they know that USA don't deal with terrorists. But why did they do it this time? Why these 5 men? What's the hidden agenda behind al this?

    June 11, 2014 at 7:51 pm #29981 Reply
    skiguy
    Moderator

    What's the hidden agenda behind al this?

    -Low poll numbers- the closing of Gitmo

    June 12, 2014 at 3:09 am #29982 Reply
    Phidippides
    Keymaster

    Aeth is right – why did they do this?  A 5-for-1 exchange for a POW who apparently left his post, a president breaking a law to do this….seems kind of strange.

    June 12, 2014 at 3:58 am #29983 Reply
    scout1067
    Participant

    I think Obama thought the trade would enahance his approval.  It probably never occurred to him that Bergdahl was not worth 5 major terrorists and that people would be upset about it.  He is probably scratching his head wondering why we don't get it.  I mean come on, 5 terrorists for a deserter, thats a good trade right?  Just one more example of how clueless, out of touch, and idiotic the President and those he surrounds himself with are.

    June 12, 2014 at 9:47 pm #29984 Reply
    Daniel
    Participant

    I don't have a problem with it….unless the guy was AWOL and a traitor, then I do.

    I do.Among other things it puts Americans–especially those living or traveling abroad–at risk.  Now the US will swap prisoners for Americans I expect kidnappings of Americans by terrorist groups for political purposes to become a problem.


    BTW, I hear he was AWOL.  Not somebody IMO who merited this consideration.

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
Reply To: Prisoner exchange
Your information:




Primary Sidebar

Login

Log In
Register Lost Password

Blog Categories

Search blog articles

Before Footer

  • Did Julian the Apostate’s plan ever have a chance?

    Julian the Apostate stands as an enigmatic figure among Roman emperors, ascending to power in 361 AD …

    Read More

    Did Julian the Apostate’s plan ever have a chance?
  • The Babylonian Bride

    Marriage customs in Ancient Babylon Ancient Babylonia was a society, which, although it did not …

    Read More

    The Babylonian Bride
  • The fall of Athens

    In 407 B.C. and again in 405 B.C.. the Spartans in alliance with their old enemies, the Persians, …

    Read More

    The fall of Athens

Footer

Posts by topic

2016 Election Alexander Hamilton American Revolution archaeology Aristotle Ben Franklin Black Americans Charles Dickens Christianity Christmas Constantine Custer's Last Stand Egypt email engineering England forum security Founding Fathers France future history George Washington Germany Greece hacker Hitler Industrial Revolution Ireland James Madison Jewish medieval military history Paleolithic philosophy pilgrimage Rome Russia SEO Slavery Socrates spammer technology Trump World War I World War II Year In Review

Recent Topics

  • Midsummer Night: June 25th
  • Testing out a new feature
  • Did Julian the Apostate’s plan ever have a chance?
  • Release of the JFK Files
  • What was the greatest military advancement of all time?

RSS Ancient News

Recent Forum Replies

  • Going to feature old posts
  • What’s new?
  • Testing out a new feature
  • Testing out a new feature
  • Testing out a new feature

Copyright © 2025 · Contact

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.