Bergdahl Charged With Desertion

[Dolphster]

Bergdahl was finally charged with desertion today.  So let's recap.  Five Taliban Commanders were traded for one piece of shit deserter.  Who knew that Obama hired Jeff Ireland as his Player Personnel Guru?       On a related note, Hooah to you, Gen. Milley for having the courage to take a stand and charge Bergdahl.  I just hope you retire soon before the White House takes out their revenge on you for doing the right thing. 

[Rich]

Well, this movie had an underwhelming and predictable ending.

Hopefully the next movie, Global Leadership II - Kissing the Ayatollahs' Asses, will have a less predictable ending.

[DenverFinFan]

http://antiwar.com/blog/2015/03/27/army-report-confirms-bergdahl-never-intended-to-desert/

Even if he did try and desert, good for him the war is illegal anyhow.

[Rich]

http://antiwar.com/blog/2015/03/27/army-report-confirms-bergdahl-never-intended-to-desert/

Even if he did try and desert, good for him the war is illegal anyhow.

Nice, reputable source you posted there. Even the very liberal DailyKos has said they are not a legitimate source of news.

So where is this argument coming from that the war in Afghanistan is illegal?

[Dolphster]

"antiwar.com"   LULZ   

[Rich]

"antiwar.com"   LULZ   

And they got it from wearepurposelybiased.com, another reputable source.

[DenverFinFan]

Actually the source was http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/27/politics/bergdahl-intended-to-walk-to-nearest-base/index.html

And the war is illegal because it's undeclared even with some silly "authorization" that should have long expired, not to mention it's completely purposeless, no goal no mission.

[Rich]

Actually the source was http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/27/politics/bergdahl-intended-to-walk-to-nearest-base/index.html

Antiwar.com says an army report says he never intended to desert.

CNN.com says he claims to the Army that he never intended to desert.

Notice the not so slight difference?

And the war is illegal because it's undeclared even with some silly "authorization" that should have long expired, not to mention it's completely purposeless, no goal no mission.

War does not need to be declared to be legal. Under International Law, an act of self defense is justified. Seeing as how the Taliban was harboring the leader of the organization that triggered the 9/11 attacks and because the Taliban was the ruling government in Afghanistan at the time and because they were harboring a leader that could continues his activities against us, the invasion was legal.

[DenverFinFan]

Antiwar.com says an army report says he never intended to desert.

CNN.com says he claims he never intended to desert.

Notice the not so slight difference?

War does not need to be declared to be legal. Under International Law, an act of self defense is justified. Seeing as how the Taliban was harboring the leader of the organization that triggered the 9/11 attacks and because the Taliban was the ruling government in Afghanistan at the time and because they were harboring a leader that could continues his activities against us, the invasion was legal.

Semantics.  Bin Laden is dead so why are we still there?

[Rich]

Semantics.  Bin Laden is dead so why are we still there?

Stop changing the discussion. I wasn't addressing why we are still there, I was addressing your erroneous statement that the invasion was illegal.

[DenverFinFan]

We didn't get Bin Laden during the invasion Bush let him go, by the time Bergdahl left it was an illegal occupation.

[DenverFinFan]

I'm sure you'll just discredit the source here but yes the invasion was Illegal

http://www.globalresearch.ca/did-9-11-justify-the-war-in-afghanistan/19891

[Rich]

We didn't get Bin Laden during the invasion Bush let him go, by the time Bergdahl left it was an illegal occupation.

I never read that story that Bush was there at the Tora Bora, had Bin Laden in grasp and let him go. Has Bush even been to Afghanistan? Ever?

As for it being an illegal occupation, first you said it was an illegal war because no formal declaration of war had been made, then you asked why we're still there, now its an illegal occupation. Sorry if I don't have faith in your understanding of what constitutes an illegal war or illegal occupation given your lack of consistency.

The bottom line is Berghdal is being charged as a deserter even if he is arguing he was just going to the next base. Also, I haven't seen any stories of any other soldiers having issues with that particular base. And lastly, his dad's little prayer in Pashtun during that White House ceremony and their back and forth emails while Berghdal was still on base certainly raise the question about his son's loyalty to the Army as a whole.

I recommend informing yourself of all the facts in this case rather than just the information you WANT to hear...

[Rich]

I'm sure you'll just discredit the source here but yes the invasion was Illegal

http://www.globalresearch.ca/did-9-11-justify-the-war-in-afghanistan/19891

Of course I am going to discredit it. A site that has articles saying the 9/11 attacks were actually a controlled demolition of the twin towers deserves no benefit of the doubt.

[DenverFinFan]

Ok Rich, the hijackers were Saudi's The Taliban would have turned over OBL if we proved it to them, the war  was illegal in the beginning.

It took more courage to leave that mess than stay and follow orders.