To read: everything you need to know about the Bowe Bergdahl issue is in Michael Hastings his June 2012 Rolling Stone article: America’s Last Prisoner of War. It’s long – ten pages – but an easy read. IMHO Obama and Kerry came down on the right side of this one. Others, such as a former SOS and potential POTUS candidate and a half-term governor and losing VP candidate, disagree.
To watch: Elizabeth Warren and Thomas Piketty It’s long – almost forty-eight minutes. A good introduction as to why income and wealth inequality matters and why it needs to be corrected. And on student loan debt Warren completely rocks.
Hastings makes no mention of any US troops that were injured or killed in efforts to find and free Bergdahl. Nor were such injuries and deaths mentioned by those that objected to a prisoner exchange.
It’s possible that Hastings didn’t manage to pierce that part of the story. Not possible that he did and censored it. However, I’m hard pressed to believe that almost three years after the fact that Hastings wouldn’t have heard such explosive allegations. Therefore, I’m inclined to suspect that these claims were created after Hastings wrote his piece.
Others beginning to look at the facts:
How Many Died Saving Bergdahl? Likely None (There are a couple of NYT articles (for what it’s worth) reporting the same thing.
Old news I missed:
This wasn’t missed by everyone and it’s not sitting well with some:
More on this from OpEdNews
The 13 year project inaugurated on Memorial Day 2012 — and is budgeted at $5 million/year.
“Was the war even necessary? “
Not according to the many Vietnam vets I work with. They are still bitter about their reception by the public, the VA, etc, but even more they are bitter that it was unnecessary and the Dulles brothers were nuts.
Left or Right, White or Black, they are proud of their service, but feel it was a complete waste of life and money.
While the Dulles bros had the US picking up where France left off in S. Vietnam, it took the combined talents of the Bundy bros, McNamara, and insecure Democratic pols a decade later to turn it into a major US military action.
Didn’t surprise a former Yale classmate of the Bundys that they would be involved in such a debacle given their intellectual arrogance and inability to acknowledge mistakes. (That classmate partially worked his way through college playing bridge and took a few dollars off the Bundy bros.)
Not sure I can take another two and a half years of bloggers partisan and/or personality defensiveness. It does stymie any serious discussions of current issues and candidates. Example: Republicans confuse Bergdahl with Benghazi and demand answers from Hillary.
No evidence that Republicans are confusing the two matters. But that doesn’t stop “liberals” from conflating the two based on opposition demands that Hillary answer questions and scoffing at the opposition and defending Hillary in both matters.
All the “but what about” X or Y (Republicans) is reminiscent of school yard disputes and not how rational adults should discuss or debate any issue.
WRT Benghazi, “please proceed” (to quote Obama) is all that needs be said to those determined to make themselves look like jackasses. There’s nothing in the event or post-event handling of this matter that would derail Hillary’s possible future ambitions.
WRT Bergdahl, as reported in Hasting article, Hillary opposed a prisoner swap. Does the rightwing want her to confirm that she’s on their side? Give them a reason to support her? However, note in that thread that dKos posters make no mention of Hillary’s position on this in 2012 and consider it outrageous that anyone would inquire as to where she stands on it.
In a rational world wouldn’t conservatives line up behind a neo-liberal, neo-con and liberals shun such a candidate? But “liberals” don’t seem to want to have that discussion anymore than “conservatives” do.
The hits just keep on coming, but also keep making me feel like I backed the “better” evil in that race. I keep hearing from lefties (Stoller, Ian Welsh) that Hillary was more left than Obama; and maybe that’s true on paper; and maybe she understood her enemies better than he did; and I don’t know what it is, but I just “trusted” (not the right word, but it’s what I’ve got atm) his instincts more than hers.
Please, Dem base…don’t swallow such a hook in 2016…
Wasn’t a difficult call for me at all. Dianne Feinstein is occasionally and pleasantly surprising. Hillary never. Obama, unfortunately, almost never, but in 2007/2008 it wasn’t clear if Obama would toe the DLC line, and therefore, given a choice between DLC and maybe not DLC, have to go with the latter.
Back in 2003/2004 many pointed out that based on their bios and paper trails, Howard Dean was far more conservative than John Kerry. That assessment IMHO was correct — but also meaningless. Kerry is far less principled and more egocentric. Politically, he’s been on a rightward trajectory for decades. Slow in part because he was the Jr. Senator to an authentic liberal.
Other than at the political gamesmanship level, I wouldn’t say that Obama’s instincts are better than Hillary’s. Neither seem all that sharp; likely because their principles are too fungible. One difference I think I’ve detected is that Obama listens more than Hillary does and allows himself to be surrounded by a slightly wider range of voices. Too narrow and if not for his cautious impulse he would have been a much worse POTUS.
More facts wrt Bergdahl:
The GOP is Heading for a World of Hurt on Bergdahl
There’s more and it’s worth reading.
“…at least one prior occasion…”
Hmmmm…
I have wondered whether he was some kind of spook since this thing hit the news. Still wondering. So far nobody’s been dumb enough/brave enough to blow his cover if he has one/had one. He’s certainly not your average grunt.
AG
Raymond Allen Davis was/is a spook and we saw how fast SOS Clinton went into action after he was arrested for murder. (An obvious spook for those good at sensing them despite official denials.)
Bergdahl as a spook is ludicrous.
I didn’t say a U.S. spook. Maybe a spook wanna-be. Read up on him. Sounds like he was trying to channel T.E. Lawrence. Bookish, withdrawn, a little…different. And then maybe he snapped.
AG
Maybe he went out to smoke Hash. Maybe he had a girlfriend/boyfriend/camelfriend. Maybe he just wanted to get away from the assholes he bunked with.
I heard on ABC Morning News that his hometown has cancelled the “Welcome Home” celebration that it had planned. Damn those Republican hypocrites!
Yes that hit the internet yesterday. Apparently a necessary move by his hometown as the RWNJ (and there are a lot of them in Idaho) were making noise about disrupting such a planned event.
Should also add that one of the lingering gripes among Vietnam Vets is that they weren’t honored by the public when they returned. If a parade with no message other than “welcome home” is all they need/want, it’s a small enough request to grant — even by those that prefer not to have sent troops in harm’s way for no national security purpose.
Charles Pierce answers.
Not to mention all those RWNJ that have been idle since the closing of the Bundy standoff.
Bonus fun – PA State Senator compares unions to Hitler and OK St. Sen has a fainting fit over Toni Morrison’s “The Bluest Eye.”
Yes, why haven’t Bundy and his neighbors been arrested for armed resistance to a federal court order? Where is our AJ? Looking for Occupy protesters to harass?
Bergdahl trash-talking Vet
Buried all the way at the bottom on the article is this:
A reminder for those who may have forgotten and a history lesson for those that never knew:
It’s too bad more didn’t walk off.
Pat Tillman may have “walked off” in a more sophisticated way if he hadn’t been cut down.