Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Political Forum
test
The Political Forum Discuss anything related to politics in this forum. World politics, US Politics, State and Local.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 646
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Jon Bon 396
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
Starscream66 279
George Spelvin 265
sharkman29 255
Top Posters
DallasRain70795
biomed163280
Yssup Rider61003
gman4453295
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48665
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino42682
CryptKicker37220
The_Waco_Kid37070
Mokoa36496
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117
View Poll Results: What should happen to Bo Bergdahl?
He should recieve the maximum penalty which is life, reduction, and forfeiture of all benefits. 14 63.64%
He is young and should recieve a lighter sentence but forfeit all benefits. 2 9.09%
He is a confused kid and we should be satisfied with time served and a dishonorable discharge. 2 9.09%
A general discharge, time served, and presidential pardon will do the trick for me. 0 0%
No action should be taken and he should be allowed to remain on active duty. 0 0%
He sounds like a perfect democratic candidate for Congress. 4 18.18%
Voters: 22. You may not vote on this poll


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-28-2015, 04:17 PM   #16
UnderConstruction
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 29, 2014
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,378
Encounters: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackie S View Post
The caveat to your post and the highlighted "in time of war".
The Constitution is very specific in that to be in a state of war, Congress has to actually "declare war".
We have not been in a Declared War since WW-2. So any good Defense Team could probably win an appeal on a death sentence.

In a sense, the Army would be in violation of someone's Constitutional Rights by handing down a death penalty when a Congress had not seen fit to issue a formal Declaration of War.
Semantics. Vietnam and Korea weren't 'officially' wars either and I bet deserters got what was coming to them.
UnderConstruction is offline   Quote
Old 03-28-2015, 04:23 PM   #17
nwarounder
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 30, 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 2,239
Encounters: 2
Default

We traded five muslim terrorists for one muslim terrorist. Only the idiot fucking Obama could make sense out of a trade like that. Hussein is a buffoon.
nwarounder is offline   Quote
Old 03-28-2015, 04:27 PM   #18
UnderConstruction
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 29, 2014
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,378
Encounters: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nwarounder View Post
We traded five muslim terrorists for one muslim terrorist. Only the idiot fucking Obama could make sense out of a trade like that. Hussein is a buffoon.
So you're saying that Bergdahl shouldn't face military justice? We should have let him get away with it?
UnderConstruction is offline   Quote
Old 03-28-2015, 05:19 PM   #19
nwarounder
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 30, 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 2,239
Encounters: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderConstruction View Post
So you're saying that Bergdahl shouldn't face military justice? We should have let him get away with it?
I'm saying we should have kept torturing the five muslim terrorists we had in gitmo, and droned Bergdahl, like we did the other muslim covert that betrayed us.
nwarounder is offline   Quote
Old 03-28-2015, 07:40 PM   #20
UnderConstruction
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 29, 2014
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,378
Encounters: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nwarounder View Post
I'm saying we should have kept torturing the five muslim terrorists we had in gitmo, and droned Bergdahl, like we did the other muslim covert that betrayed us.
I hope you haven't multiplied...
UnderConstruction is offline   Quote
Old 03-28-2015, 09:01 PM   #21
JD Barleycorn
Valued Poster
 
JD Barleycorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 12, 2011
Location: Olathe
Posts: 16,815
Encounters: 54
Default

They're already playing semantics. Bergdahl's lawyer has said "that they (the US Army) has no evidence that Bergdahl caused the deaths of those soldiers." Note the problems with that sentence. He did not say that there was no evidence but that the army did not have it. He is kind of admitting that there is evidence. He does also admit that soldiers died trying to rescue (which some people want to argue about) Bergdahl. And caused the deaths is different than responsible for the deaths. Leave it to lawyers.
JD Barleycorn is offline   Quote
Old 03-28-2015, 10:40 PM   #22
CuteOldGuy
Valued Poster
 
CuteOldGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 20, 2010
Location: Wichita
Posts: 28,730
Encounters: 20
Default

I thought he exhibited the kind of character that would help him fit right in the halls of Congress.
CuteOldGuy is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2015, 05:49 AM   #23
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderConstruction View Post
Semantics. Vietnam and Korea weren't 'officially' wars either and I bet deserters got what was coming to them.
Has the U.S. fought an "official war" since WWII? And ... what's the point of differentiating between an "official war" and an "unofficial war"?

Or is there some "point" or "reason" to do so in YOUR "tiny, tiny mind"?
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2015, 06:15 AM   #24
i'va biggen
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2011
Location: kansas
Posts: 28,773
Encounters: 17
Default

According to you if congress votes on it or not barleycornball.
i'va biggen is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2015, 06:42 AM   #25
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by i'va biggen View Post
According to you if congress votes on it or not barleycornball.
Then it's Congress's War .... not the Presidents.

Which, BTW, is an excellent reason to have Congress vote on treaties.

Back to the OP/Poll...

Try him. If convicted, give him the maximum.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2015, 08:13 AM   #26
i'va biggen
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2011
Location: kansas
Posts: 28,773
Encounters: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
Then it's Congress's War .... not the Presidents.

Which, BTW, is an excellent reason to have Congress vote on treaties.

Back to the OP/Poll...

Try him. If convicted, give him the maximum.
Someone has to negotiate a treaty before congress to vote on it.

Back to the OP poll I did not vote .
i'va biggen is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2015, 08:28 AM   #27
I B Hankering
Valued Poster
 
I B Hankering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: South of Chicago
Posts: 31,214
Encounters: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RochBob View Post
My personal opinion is that the best course of action would be for the Military & Government to let this fade into the background again (which is where it was before the announcement of charges against him). Then quietly Court Martial him for Dereliction of Duty with a sentence of reduction in rank to E-1, forfeiture of all benefits & allowances and an Dishonorable Discharge. As far as any imprisonment goes, I'm pretty sure anything we would do to him would be a stay at a Luxury Resort compared to what he already received at the hands of the Taliban.
+1

Didn't vote. This wasn't one of the options. BTW, regarding publicity: the more, the better.


Quote:
Originally Posted by nwarounder View Post
We traded five muslim terrorists for one muslim terrorist. Only the idiot fucking Obama could make sense out of a trade like that. Hussein is a buffoon.
+1
I B Hankering is offline   Quote
Old 03-29-2015, 08:38 PM   #28
cowboyinjungle
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 29, 2010
Location: North Coast
Posts: 116
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RochBob View Post
I went with the third option even though it doesn't quite fit what I feel he should get. He was willing to sign up. Which is considerably more than some people are willing to do these days. Went through rigorous Training and accepted what would be considered a hazardous duty assignment. He made a stupid naïve mistake by leaving his Base unarmed. The only people that know exactly what the circumstances of his capture were are himself and the Taliban that performed the capture. He was held prisoner by them for 5 years and there is no indication he gave them any aid or assistance and he did try to escape several times. Yes, its unfortunate that other US solders were killed and injured looking for him. But you cannot forget that this was an active combat zone and some of those solders may have been hurt or killed in action anyway. My personal opinion is that the best course of action would be for the Military & Government to let this fade into the background again (which is where it was before the announcement of charges against him). Then quietly Court Martial him for Dereliction of Duty with a sentence of reduction in rank to E-1, forfeiture of all benefits & allowances and an Dishonorable Discharge. As far as any imprisonment goes, I'm pretty sure anything we would do to him would be a stay at a Luxury Resort compared to what he already received at the hands of the Taliban.
I agree with you. Also he could probably always have a job with the Navy. I hear they will take anyone that can't cut it in the Army.
cowboyinjungle is offline   Quote
Old 03-30-2015, 11:26 AM   #29
cptjohnstone
Valued Poster
 
cptjohnstone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 4, 2010
Location: Stillwater, OK
Posts: 3,631
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy View Post
I thought he exhibited the kind of character that would help him fit right in the halls of Congress.
what is a "shocker"?

is it something like this?
cptjohnstone is offline   Quote
Old 03-30-2015, 12:19 PM   #30
JD Barleycorn
Valued Poster
 
JD Barleycorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 12, 2011
Location: Olathe
Posts: 16,815
Encounters: 54
Default

As a veteran of the US Navy that has not been my experience. Yes, we had former soldiers, airman, and marines in our ranks but they were either hard chargers or assholes (there is a very fine line between the two). We had so many former ground pounders in one fireroom that the division head joked that during GQ he was afraid that they would all be in the bilge digging foxholes. Which kind of is the fundamental difference between the navy and the other services; we have to rely on each other. We don't just lose a foxhole or a squad if someone walks away from his job while on duty. We can lose a ship.

I can't help but notice that you are comparing a deserter to a sailor....care to retract that?
JD Barleycorn is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved