It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If your Anti Bergdhal return, your also anti-innocent until proven guilty in court of law.

page: 1
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 05:53 AM
link   
If your Anti Berghdal return your also anti-innocent until proven guilty in court of law. Americans are innocent until proven guilty. He did not act as an enemy combatant so your left with him being an innocent. You have to attempt to return your innocent Soldiers. Now that he is back he needs to be held accountable for his actions in court and spend time in jail or hung if warranted. We must return our troops though.

Look it seems like he is a traitor but we need to put him on trial. Until then he is innocent and should be treated as such. If he is guilty of being a traitor you can add me to the firing squad.

Would you rather the President have the power to decide which soldiers are worth rescuing in the world? Your answer might be yes if you think each future President will always agree with your viewpoints.




posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 06:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Xeven

I care less about whether he walked off his post or not. That is not for me to decide, but a military tribunal.

Tell you what I do care about, though: that the President exchanged 5 top guys for only one of ours, and did so without consulting Congress.

It's not an even trade at all, and it's also technically an illegal one.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 06:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Xeven
In the military, you are guilty until proven innocent though.
If other soldiers are willing to say he is a deserter, that says a lot.
Lying in the military is a bad thing...well if you are a non com anyway.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 06:14 AM
link   
There needs to be a court-marshal to prove once and for all one way or the other. If he is innocent the Court-marshal will remove the questions attached to him. If he is guilty, then it will determine his punishment. He is still a member of the US Army, until he is discharged. What kind of discharge has yet to be determined.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 06:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: g146541
a reply to: Xeven
In the military, you are guilty until proven innocent though.
If other soldiers are willing to say he is a deserter, that says a lot.
Lying in the military is a bad thing...well if you are a non com anyway.


Well ultimately it is not up to you or I or the other soldiers to determine which soldiers get to be swapped out in prisoner exchanges. That lies at the feet of the President of the United States. Do you really want the President to pick and choose?



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 06:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: AnIntellectualRedneck
a reply to: Xeven

I care less about whether he walked off his post or not. That is not for me to decide, but a military tribunal.

Tell you what I do care about, though: that the President exchanged 5 top guys for only one of ours, and did so without consulting Congress.

It's not an even trade at all, and it's also technically an illegal one.


I care if he walked off his post or not but believe that needs to be determined in court. As for the exchange, those prisoners are going to have to be released anyway as their is no legal justification for their being held as they have not been charged with anything illegal. We can change our laws so next time we can legally hold these guys but right now we cannot.

Your right. The President appears to have broke the rules and it is up to congress to hold him accountable for that.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 06:25 AM
link   

If your Anti Bergdhal return, your also anti-innocent until proven guilty in court of law

Uh ... no.

- We are anti letting five known mass murdering terrorists go.

- We are anti negotiating with terrorists in a manner that will embolden them to kidnap innocent people and hold them hostage in order to get their buddies out of jail.

- We are anti having the POTUS commit a felony by aiding the enemy in time of war.

- We are anti having the POTUS break the law and 'go rogue' ... go around Congress and do his own thing. That's dangerous, no matter what it is that the POTUS wants to do. Laws are in place for a reason. And in this case, he broke the very law that he signed into place.

- We are anti Susan Rice going on talk shows and telling lies .. AGAIN .. to cover for Obama's follies.

OH .. and Bergdhal wasn't "rescued". In order to be rescued he'd have to have been held against his will. The dude walked off his post and went looking for English speaking Taliban. He did that right after having told people he was renouncing his US citizenship.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 06:30 AM
link   
still harping on about whats right and whats wrong according to the military, well why not join the international criminal court then and lets really see who's right and who's wrong, who gets court marshaled for war crimes and who doesn't.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 06:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan

If your Anti Bergdhal return, your also anti-innocent until proven guilty in court of law

Uh ... no.

- We are anti letting five known mass murdering terrorists go.

- We are anti negotiating with terrorists in a manner that will embolden them to kidnap innocent people and hold them hostage in order to get their buddies out of jail.

- We are anti having the POTUS commit a felony by aiding the enemy in time of war.

- We are anti having the POTUS break the law and 'go rogue' ... go around Congress and do his own thing. That's dangerous, no matter what it is that the POTUS wants to do. Laws are in place for a reason. And in this case, he broke the very law that he signed into place.

- We are anti Susan Rice going on talk shows and telling lies .. AGAIN .. to cover for Obama's follies.

OH .. and Bergdhal wasn't "rescued". In order to be rescued he'd have to have been held against his will. The dude walked off his post and went looking for English speaking Taliban. He did that right after having told people he was renouncing his US citizenship.


Most of your reply is off "my" topic but I do not disagree with much of it. We can only speculate to Bergdhal's state of mind. That's not for you or President to Judge alone. We do not prosecute our soldiers based on hearsay even if likely true. We put them in court and tri them. Do you really want Presidents deciding weather to recover someone or not based on political position or hearsay? I think I prefer he be innocent until proven guilty and held accountable in court.

The only time I can go along with harmful action toward our troops is if they are actively combating our troops or committing terrorist acts against us. Then and only then I think its ok to judge in real time and put them down.

We have a Justice system for that. As for Obama's judgments in how we returned him, that is definitely questionable and it is up to congress to hold the President accountable.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 06:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xeven
Most of your reply is off "my" topic

Nope. It's on topic. You said that 'if your Anti Bergdhal return, your also anti-innocent until proven guilty in court of law'. I stated clearly that isn't true, and I stated clearly what we really are 'anti' about with this ... and it's not 'anti-innocent until proven guilty'. All on topic.


Do you really want Presidents deciding weather to recover someone or not based on political position or hearsay?

I want the POTUS deciding whether or not to recover someone based on THE LAW. Obama broke it. And then he lied and said said 'oops, sorry, it was an oversight that I, a supposed 'constitutional lawyer' didn't follow the very law that I wrote'.

And as I said ... Bergdhal wasn't in need of 'recovery'. He was in need of capture. He ran into the arms of the enemy after renouncing his citizenship. That means 'capture' ... not 'recovery'.

/out



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 07:15 AM
link   
Story You Haven't Heard About Bergdahls Desertion

When he deserted, the Army didn't go on a rescue mission.
They had orders to shoot him if they saw him.
That's how sure they were that he had defected and was aiding the enemy.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 07:42 AM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan

I agree the guy seems to be a scum and maybe needs to hang but that is just a "Story". We have a Justice system designed to get at the truth and protect us Americans from our Government. You rather Obama be Judge and Jury and just leave him over there without a trial?

Let say for a moment that Obama determined Bergdahl was guilty of something and did not warrant rescue or recovery. You would support Obama being the judge and jury on that? Or would it be better that our Presidents attempt to recover all our soldiers and let our Justice system sort out the criminals?

It was the decision of some front line commanders to send troops to get Bergdahl knowing he may have walked off r deserted his post. Obama did not make that decision.

What if we had a President who does not like Christians and just decided to not attempt to seek return of Christians after a war. It could happen you know...You really want any President to just leave who ever he thinks is the "Bad" troops in the hands of our enemy?? Not me Id rather we return them then tri em and if guilty put bullets in there skulls when warranted.

With Liberty and Justice for all...
edit on 5-6-2014 by Xeven because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 07:44 AM
link   
Soldiers are under UCMJ NOT the Constitution.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 07:48 AM
link   
a reply to: AnIntellectualRedneck



Tell you what I do care about, though: that the President exchanged 5 top guys for only one of ours, and did so without consulting Congress. It's not an even trade at all, and it's also technically an illegal one.


Exactly right!!!

and a star!



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 07:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
Soldiers are under UCMJ NOT the Constitution.


Yes and guilt and punishment is still determined in a trial.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 07:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xeven
Let say for a moment that Obama determined Bergdahl was guilty of something and did not warrant rescue or recovery.

Did you read the story I posted above your comments here ??
It wasn't a rescue. The soldiers had orders to shoot him if found.
They knew he had defected to the enemy and the soldiers were
out looking for him to contain the problem ... not rescue him.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 07:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xeven
a reply to: FlyersFan

I agree the guy seems to be a scum and maybe needs to hang but that is just a "Story". We have a Justice system designed to get at the truth and protect us Americans from our Government. You rather Obama be Judge and Jury and just leave him over there without a trial?

Let say for a moment that Obama determined Bergdahl was guilty of something and did not warrant rescue or recovery. You would support Obama being the judge and jury on that? Or would it be better that our Presidents attempt to recover all our soldiers and let our Justice system sort out the criminals?

It was the decision of some front line commanders to send troops to get Bergdahl knowing he may have walked off r deserted his post. Obama did not make that decision.

What if we had a President who does not like Christians and just decided to not attempt to seek return of Christians after a war. It could happen you know...You really want any President to just leave who ever he thinks is the "Bad" troops in the hands of our enemy?? Not me Id rather we return them then tri em and if guilty put bullets in there skulls when warranted.




I would have preferred to see the last 5 years being used to figure out what's up with this guy... not Obama being judge, jury and executioner at the "Last second' (which is quoted because 5 #ing years passed).



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Xeven



We can only speculate to Bergdhal's state of mind.

We have a lot to go on there.
-He left a note.
-He was asking to be taken to the Taliban in the first town that he came upon after he left his post.
-The Taliban said that he was helping them make bombs.

Makes it easy to see what he was about.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 08:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: Xeven
Let say for a moment that Obama determined Bergdahl was guilty of something and did not warrant rescue or recovery.

Did you read the story I posted above your comments here ??
It wasn't a rescue. The soldiers had orders to shoot him if found.
They knew he had defected to the enemy and the soldiers were
out looking for him to contain the problem ... not rescue him.
It is certainly messy situation. I hope he stand trial for any traitorous behavior he committed and is held accountable. I just believe it was the right thing to bring him home. And yes I did read the story. Even in the story they say they did not know his state of mind. Just saying he needs to be tried in court even if military court before we condemn him to be a POW.
edit on 5-6-2014 by Xeven because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 08:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Antipathy17

I agree but we did not do that unfortunately.




top topics



 
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join