Sunday, June 8, 2014

BRINGING BOWE BERGDAHL HOME WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO

I don't know why I continue to find what's going on in politic's today so shocking...not surprising...but still shocking. It's really outrageous. In the growing number of phony scandals generated by the well-funded, billionaire-backed, GOP propaganda machine; this story is the most grotesque--to date. I can't believe what I'm hearing and seeing on the box from GOP acolytes, suggesting that Sgt. Bergdahl should have been left to die. As you would expect, I have something to say about that.

It doesn't matter whether Bergdahl is a deserter or not.
Bowe Robert Bergdahl enlisted with the United States Army in 2008. As with many before him, 22yr old Bergdahl was immediately engulfed in the Iraqi and Afghani conflicts from the Bush administration. This young man was briefly trained in the ways of the infantry, and shuttled over seas to make his way in a war zone. Let's marinate on that point for a second... With all the pundits and politically-extreme GOP talkers chiming in on how Bergdahl should have conducted himself--how many were brave enough to serve themselves? How many even graduated college as opposed to service, and at least offer an educated opinion? Seriously, do the research. Look up the most popular GOP talking heads and loud-mouth shock jocks that are screaming into their microphones and internet web shows. You will surprisingly find very little education. BOOM. That fact, in-and-of itself, is  crazy considering the millions they rake in to stir up the masses in their bubble.

I'm getting sidetracked. Back to Bergdahl. The theatre of battle soon overwhelmed the young man from Ketchum, Idaho. With only a GED under his belt for education, Bowe Bergdahl struggled with his faith and his future before shipping off to war. He was never able to afford a car. He dabbled in fencing, martial arts, and ballet as an adult. He was raised Presbyterian but flirted with Buddhism shortly before enlisting, and even spent time in a monastery between 2007 and 2008. Given his background, let's imagine life for this kind of soldier in war torn Afghanistan. Add to that, the ironic shifting of public opinion on the conflict led by GOP antagonism of the President--a sentiment that emails revealed to be shared by Bergdahl. Then Brian Bradshaw, a friend and member of Bergdahl's battalion, is killed by a roadside bomb. Follow me now in my picture of what happened here. Of course, only Sgt. Bergdahl truly knows; but I like to think I have an uncanny ability to see through the two sides of garbage and divine the small bits of truth. Disillusioned by the horror and death of real life warfare, Bergdahl soon lost faith in the 'cause' he was fighting for in Afghanistan. With his own religious ambivalence and Buddhist leanings in mind, Bowe Bergdahl felt empathy for the Afghans caught in the middle of this seemingly pointless struggle and began to hate his posting at the remote Mest Malak outpost in the Paktika Province. I would submit that Bergdahl was planning suicide-- not an uncommon mind-state for veterans these days both in and out of service from the last 12 years in the Middle East. Have you ever heard of suicide by cop? Well, I believe Bergdahl planned suicide by Afghani terrorist. Anyone who knows the region, and is honest about the threat assessment thereabouts, will tell you that just stepping foot off the compound and leaving the security within those walls was indeed, suicide. The supposition that Bergdahl warned team members he was leaving, and that he planned to make to some happily-ever-after mountain village life is utterly absurd. He was there long enough to know the danger and, I think, was planning on being killed in action.

Instead Bowe Bergdahl was captured. For the next five years he was subjected to torture, beatings, deprivation, propaganda, and God knows what else. Mind you, he tried at least twice to escape. Now, people like Rush Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Mike Rodgers, Ted Cruz, John McCain would have you believe that it was best to leave him to die. That, my friends, is disgusting. Never has this government looked down the POW/MIA list and said, 'Oh ok, let's just strike all the low ranking poor souls that weren't elite soldiers or battle heroes'. Imagine if we had said that in the 70's when John McCain himself was captured. That too, was somewhat controversial, and I'm sure there were those who were sure McCain had betrayed us already by the time we were ready to bring him home. That's not the way the United States operates, nor many of our allies. Israel famously gave up 1000 prisoners in 2006 for one solitary soldier, Gilad Shalit. Was Shalit a super soldier?...No. Just a man that was brave enough to put on the uniform, go to war and unlucky enough to be taken prisoner by the enemy. We don't know his mental capacity at the time Bergdalhl went missing in action so I can not justify leaving the only POW left in Afghanistan to fend for himself as we end the conflict and withdraw. Someone recently remarked that whether a crewman falls off the battleship, jumps, or is pushed; we go back for him.

It doesn't matter which detainees we traded for Bergdahl.
The GOP frenzy is kicking into gear over the trade as all the talking points memo writers issue what is to be the media points to attack Obama with. Mostly I'm hearing the 'He's not worth it!' argument. The contention is that Bergdahl is worth so little as a soldier and the 5 terrorists from Gitmo are worth so much, that there is no way in hell we should have made the trade. This is also ridiculous and stupid. It's not going to take me too long to explain why, so bear with me a little longer before you get up to get that Sprite or glass of water. By 2016, we will have withdrawn and ended the war in Afghanistan. What do you think will happen to the prisoners we've taken during our war on the adjective of TERROR? The answer to that is not highly publicized because it is a bit convoluted. The GOP acolytes of late and their poorly educated Tea Party compatriots would have you believe we should just detain these people indefinitely or perhaps, water-board them to death in some Dick Cheney-esque legal torture move. The truth is that experts on international law would tell you that there is a subtle difference between Taliban fighters and Al Quaeda operatives, firstly. the Taliban were technically the Afghan government at the time of the conflict; and as such, captured Taliban fighters are considered Prisoners of War by the Geneva Convention. Conversely, Bergdahl would be as well since he was a member of the U.S. Army at the time of capture. Now that we know both parties are considered POWs, let's look at if the trade is 'worth it'. Consider this, with the end of the Afghan war approaching in a year and a half or so, the Gitmo detainees would have to be released. I'm going to say that again in all caps for any Tea Party readers. IN 2016 THE GITMO DETAINEES WOULD HAVE TO BE RELEASED ANYWAY. Knowing this to be true, what American in their right mind would not trade these five SOBs to get back our only POW; who would most likely be killed and publicly paraded down the road. It's the right thing to do for any captured soldier-- be he a hero or zero.

The President acted legally.
People like Congressman Mike Rogers and Lindsay Graham running around screaming to the rafters about not being consulted and tossing around impeachment innuendo. Let me just let everyone in on a little secret folks. This is all about impeachment first, and midterms second. They could careless about Bergdahl or the 5 scoundrels we've released. As a matter of fact, John McCain and Kelly Ayotte had previously wanted the U.S. to find Bowe Bergdahl and bring him home; that is, until President Obama did it. First of all, the President did not break the law. Constitutionally, as Commander in chief of the military forces of the United States, the President has the authority to exchange prisoners of war. There was an attempt by Congress in the defense authorization of 2014 to limit the powers of the President over the military. The President respondent by using the tool he seemingly disagreed with when Bush was in power--the signing statement. A signing statement is essentially a Presidential caveat to a law that is to be signed. It says, 'Ok, this is a law if...' In that vein, Barack Obama penned a signing statement on H.R. 3304 basically saying it is now law up to the extent that it does not limit my powers as Commander in chief. All legal and constitutional. Barack Obama is, after all, a constitutional law expert. Perhaps if he had freed a number of Al Quaeda fighters, that would at least have legal legs to stand on since Al Quaeda probably would not qualify as POWs under the Geneva conventions. To give you some perspective on the signing statements, President Bush used signing statements to challenge around 1,200 provisions of 172 laws he signed. That figure is twice all his predecessors combined. As a matter of fact, signing statements were rare until the conservative Godfather himself, Ronald Reagan, began using them to assert his authority over Congress. President Obama has published around 27 or so signing statements.

So you can see, all the phony outrage by Rogers, Cruz, Graham, etc is just garbage. It's political posturing. It's red meat for the uninformed political partisans. Its a possible path to impeachment for the wing-nuts. It's the new Benghazi for the do-nothing Congressmen on the right to use as a fundraiser for the 2014 midterms. If you ask me, it's repulsive. Congressmen attacking the family of POW/MIA soldiers. Right wing radio attack dogs stirring up the crazies. It's grotesque. Well, perhaps you disagree. This is just my take on it. I'm the Average Black Man, and that's my 2cts.




0 comments: