06 Jun 2014, 2:39 pm
freeman3 wrote:I don't find praise or criticism to be warranted here.
I find that statement curious. Are you saying this decision is beyond analysis?
66 posts •
Page 3 of 5 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 21062
- Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am
I find that statement curious. Are you saying this decision is beyond analysis?
-
- Adjutant
- Posts: 3741
- Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm
06 Jun 2014, 2:58 pm
Well, there is a cost associated with letting Bergdahl remaining in Taliban custody. It complicates our dealings with the Taliban. What if he died while in Taliban custody? The president said he was concerned about his health. DF, if you were given a stark choice--trade these five Taliban leaders or Bergdahl dies, and it was your call, what would you do (I realize the decision was not that stark but there was certainly the chance that he would be killed if there was a refusal to trade or he could die because of illness)?Could you go to the family and justify not making the trade? Even if Obama made the wrong decision here, and I don't think that he did, but even for those that think he did can't we all empathize with how difficult that decision was?
Finally, there was only a possible significant cost if we would have kept these guys in custody after we left Afghanistan. I think we would have released them, as we have done in prior wars.
As for my comment that Obama 's decision does not deserve either praise or criticism, when someone does adequate work I think neither praise nor criticism is warranted.
Finally, there was only a possible significant cost if we would have kept these guys in custody after we left Afghanistan. I think we would have released them, as we have done in prior wars.
As for my comment that Obama 's decision does not deserve either praise or criticism, when someone does adequate work I think neither praise nor criticism is warranted.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 21062
- Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am
06 Jun 2014, 3:32 pm
freeman3 wrote:Well, there is a cost associated with letting Bergdahl remaining in Taliban custody. It complicates our dealings with the Taliban.
I find "our dealings with the Taliban" disconcerting anyway. Think about it. What do they want? To re-establish their tyrannical rule--one in which women are chattel, and Sharia is the law of the land. They want to keep Afghanistan in the 7th Century.
What do we want? The opposite of what they want in EVERY case.
Now, President Obama has announced our withdrawal. I've said it's about 8 years later than I would have preferred. In fact, with hindsight, I wish we'd just bombed the place to smithereens, killed every Taliban leader we could find, and left in 2001. Period. All the "nation-building" was useless.
As soon as we leave, the Taliban will commence to wreak havoc on a larger scale. Giving them the Fab Five almost makes us complicit in this. What kind of "dealings" should we have with murderous thugs?
What if he died while in Taliban custody? The president said he was concerned about his health.
And, without ANY specificity. I can be concerned about your health, Obama's health, Mullah Omar's health--what does that mean?
DF, if you were given a stark choice--trade these five Taliban leaders or Bergdahl dies, and it was your call, what would you do (I realize the decision was not that stark but there was certainly the chance that he would be killed if there was a refusal to trade or he could die because of illness)?
It's tough. I'll admit that. I think of the Danny Pearl situation, for example.
But, what is that? It's extortion and terrorism. If I were President, I don't think I could go down that road. What I would do is respond something like this, "Do it and the hounds of hell will be loosed on anyone who even looks Taliban. I will make it my personal goal to erase the word 'Taliban' from the modern vocabulary. You will be a relic of a former time."
The President has, imo, set a dangerous precedent.
Could you go to the family and justify not making the trade?
To the father who tweeted this?
I'm still working to free all Guantanamo prisoners. God will repay for the death of every Afghan child, ameen!
Yes, I probably could justify not making the trade.
Even if Obama made the wrong decision here, and I don't think that he did, but even for those that think he did can't we all empathize with how difficult that decision was?
Here's why it's hard to empathize:
1. He held a Rose Garden ceremony to celebrate it. If it was difficult, and you decide to do it, you don't take victory laps. You hold a press conference sans family, answer the questions, and that's that.
2. You don't send Susan Rice on 2 Sunday AM shows to lie about Bergdahl's service.
Finally, there was only a possible significant cost if we would have kept these guys in custody after we left Afghanistan. I think we would have released them, as we have done in prior wars.
I wouldn't--not unless we're pulling ALL our troops out and declaring defeat. That's what is wrong here. Obama wants to leave troops in Afghanistan. Why? Because the Taliban is still fighting. When they agree to peace, that's one thing, but they're not (and won't).
As for my comment that Obama 's decision does not deserve either praise or criticism, when someone does adequate work I think neither praise nor criticism is warranted.
I think you're in the minority of Americans. Most think this was inadequate work. In fact, I think this is going to hurt him more than any single thing he's done.
-
- Statesman
- Posts: 11324
- Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am
06 Jun 2014, 6:04 pm
fate
Most people would seek evidence for their claims... Not Fate.
As details are released more people will reflect on the trade and perhaps views will change. But for the moment .... its pretty much breaking about the way the committed electorate break. The difference is probably the republican outliers who are a little more practical.
I think you're in the minority of Americans. Most think this was inadequate work. In fact, I think this is going to hurt him more than any single thing he's done
Most people would seek evidence for their claims... Not Fate.
According to the just-released Rasmussen Reports survey, 40 percent of likely voters agree with Mr. Obama’s decision to make the trade. Forty-three percent disagree with that decision. The poll’s margin of error is plus or minus three points, according to Rasmussen, so that makes the outcome essentially a tie.
As details are released more people will reflect on the trade and perhaps views will change. But for the moment .... its pretty much breaking about the way the committed electorate break. The difference is probably the republican outliers who are a little more practical.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 21062
- Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am
06 Jun 2014, 8:02 pm
rickyp wrote:fateI think you're in the minority of Americans. Most think this was inadequate work. In fact, I think this is going to hurt him more than any single thing he's done
Most people would seek evidence for their claims... Not Fate.According to the just-released Rasmussen Reports survey, 40 percent of likely voters agree with Mr. Obama’s decision to make the trade. Forty-three percent disagree with that decision. The poll’s margin of error is plus or minus three points, according to Rasmussen, so that makes the outcome essentially a tie.
As details are released more people will reflect on the trade and perhaps views will change. But for the moment .... its pretty much breaking about the way the committed electorate break. The difference is probably the republican outliers who are a little more practical.
Let's bet.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 21062
- Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am
07 Jun 2014, 7:34 am
So, Bowe's life wasn't in danger?
It gets worse every day.
Senate Intelligence Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein said she has not seen any evidence that the Taliban would have killed Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl if details of an agreement had leaked, contrary to what Obama administration officials have said.
When asked whether there was a “credible threat” on Bergdahl’s life if word had gotten out, the California Democrat responded: “No, I don’t think there was a credible threat, but I don’t know. I have no information that there was.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/d ... z33xpQp4Zt
It gets worse every day.
-
- Statesman
- Posts: 11324
- Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am
07 Jun 2014, 10:28 am
“No, I don’t think there was a credible threat, but I don’t know.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 16006
- Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am
07 Jun 2014, 10:37 am
When you quoted Feinstein, it was of course totally different from ricky quoting Krauthammer.Doctor Fate wrote:Appeal to authority.
It's all a load of waffle and uninformed opinion so far. Given that there was a President who was prepared to sell your enemy weapons to get hostages released, I don't really think this is the worse thing that ever happened.
When I see that people are attacking the guy's family (his dad has a beard?, so maybe he's a muslim in which case maybe it's ok), I figure this is a silly argument.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 21062
- Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am
07 Jun 2014, 11:56 am
rickyp wrote:“No, I don’t think there was a credible threat, but I don’t know.
She's not just some mope. She's THE leading Democratic Senator in terms of intelligence.
There is ZERO evidence his life was in danger. None.
The Taliban (or whomever) could have killed him anytime for the past five years, but did not. Why? Hint: it's not because they're wonderful people. It's because they knew he represented leverage.
There is nothing we've seen in terms of video/photos that indicate he had major health issues. Does HIPAA apply to Presidents trying to justify trading 5 significant terrorist leaders for a deserter?
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 21062
- Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am
07 Jun 2014, 11:59 am
danivon wrote:When you quoted Feinstein, it was of course totally different from ricky quoting Krauthammer.Doctor Fate wrote:Appeal to authority.
It's all a load of waffle and uninformed opinion so far. Given that there was a President who was prepared to sell your enemy weapons to get hostages released, I don't really think this is the worse thing that ever happened.
Actually, it is different. Krauthammer knows nothing more than I do on this matter. Feinstein knows, or should, a lot more.
When I see that people are attacking the guy's family (his dad has a beard?, so maybe he's a muslim in which case maybe it's ok), I figure this is a silly argument.
I cited a tweet from his father that was, at best, questionable.
Meanwhile, Democrats are attacking the soldiers who served with Bergdahl.
You're welcome to your "waffle and uninformed opinion."
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 7463
- Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm
07 Jun 2014, 12:42 pm
danivon wrote:When you quoted Feinstein, it was of course totally different from ricky quoting Krauthammer.Doctor Fate wrote:Appeal to authority.
It's all a load of waffle and uninformed opinion so far. Given that there was a President who was prepared to sell your enemy weapons to get hostages released, I don't really think this is the worse thing that ever happened.
When I see that people are attacking the guy's family (his dad has a beard?, so maybe he's a muslim in which case maybe it's ok), I figure this is a silly argument.
What was it called, Gander? Oh I remember. You called it Whataboutery, and looked down on that.
Ahhh, good times..., good times...
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 16006
- Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am
07 Jun 2014, 3:27 pm
We discussed other hostage trades in the thread without it being called out (Israel, for example) - and so it is relevant to discuss previous American ones. That is not really 'whataboutery'. It's called 'context'.bbauska wrote:What was it called, Gander? Oh I remember. You called it Whataboutery, and looked down on that.
Ahhh, good times..., good times...
DF - He had a 'questionable' tweet? Gosh. It's not as if having a missing son might lead to someone not always conforming to expected behaviours.
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 7463
- Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm
07 Jun 2014, 4:18 pm
danivon wrote:We discussed other hostage trades in the thread without it being called out (Israel, for example) - and so it is relevant to discuss previous American ones. That is not really 'whataboutery'. It's called 'context'.bbauska wrote:What was it called, Gander? Oh I remember. You called it Whataboutery, and looked down on that.
Ahhh, good times..., good times...
DF - He had a 'questionable' tweet? Gosh. It's not as if having a missing son might lead to someone not always conforming to expected behaviours.
Your position is noted.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 16006
- Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am
07 Jun 2014, 4:23 pm
Will it go down on my permanent record?bbauska wrote:Your position is noted.
-
- Statesman
- Posts: 11324
- Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am
66 posts •
Page 3 of 5 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
