Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Progress 2016 | Customer Service | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Should the U.S. have traded Taliban prisoners for the release of Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl?

  1. Yes, long ago
  2. Correct decision now
  3. Time will tell
  4. Never
  5. Other
 
 
 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(21)

JustaMan

Jun-05-14 9:39 PM

"Speaking of trolls, hi, PJinfinity."

Is that what you call someone chiming in just to chime in locomotive?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

locomotive

Jun-05-14 9:21 PM

Whereas this action of the President has conveniently bumped the VA scandal out of the headlines for a few minutes.

How low can anyone go when acting the part of a political opportunist? Low enough to live under a bridge and bother billy goats gruff.

Speaking of trolls, hi, PJinfinity.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Missy1

Jun-04-14 10:38 PM

I say "NO". They didn't even check with the Democrats on this. Harry Reed and Obama made this decision alone.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

locomotive

Jun-04-14 9:17 PM

"Rest assured, if Republicans were in power they would have left Bergdahl to die and every parent with a child in the military needs to be aware of this fact."

This is, of course, a opinion, though no doubt very sincerely held.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

locomotive

Jun-04-14 11:40 AM

Like I've said before, any and all criticism of the present administration is NOT to happen. It is verboten. Why? The avid administration apologists are there to cry how unfair and how unjust the criticisms are, while castigating former administrations for everything considered awful under the sun.

This prisoner trade was a result of this administration deciding to do it. Any fallout about that decision is this administration's baby.

How hard is this to understand?

Will this administration's apologists ever hold the President responsible for his own actions without blaming somebody else?

Yes, that's blunt, but people's lives and livelihoods are at stake with so many decisions made by those in high places in government.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PoeticJustice7

Jun-03-14 7:02 PM

landslide2014

May-24-14 10:55 PM

"Ad veterans day is coming and we have a marine sitting in a Mexican jail and as usual Obama is AWOL..

Why don't we offer up a trade.."

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JustaMan

Jun-03-14 6:43 PM

BillGarr2016 Jun-03-14 2:52 PM

"John McCain was freed in a hostage swap."

Etc., etc....Pretty right on post!

Did I mention Republicons don't like HISTORY!!!

6 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

locomotive

Jun-03-14 3:33 PM

"Politicians like Barack Obama insisted that Bush didn’t have this authority, and pressed the courts to interfere with his administration’s attempts to try the terrorists, with enough success that we still haven’t tried Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other 9/11 conspirators. Obama tried pushing the whole thing into the federal court system by arguing that the executive branch (including the military) should not have the final authority on matters concerning the detainees, although the White House ended up backing away from that political argument in the end.

"Ironic or not, the authority to trade prisoners in wartime still belongs to the executive branch. The only reason Congress believes they have a say is because Obama and his allies demanded it before Obama became President."

So what is it? Decisions made about Gitmo by Pres. Bush are always bad, but decisions made about Gitmo by Pres. Obama are always good? Is that how this rolls?

6 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

locomotive

Jun-03-14 3:29 PM

I"m posting this to get under billgrr's skin...

"'We believe that the President of the United States, as commander in chief, has the power and authority to make the decision that he did under Article II of the Constitution,' (Sec. of Defense) Hagel said. Obama has hesitated at times to assert his executive power without seeking congressional approval.

"If that sounds familiar, it should. George W. Bush used the same argument to defend the establishment of GITMO in the first place, along with the indefinite detention of people like the Taliban 5 that just got traded and the military commissions to try al-Qaeda terrorists at GITMO...."

cont...

6 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

locomotive

Jun-03-14 3:22 PM

Yeah, billgrr, the drivel you post is usually your own. Congrats...

7 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

locomotive

Jun-03-14 3:21 PM

And billgrr wins the "I played the race card first" prize for today. PJinfinity, you're slipping.

According to faithful supporters, nothing this administration does will ever be under suspicion, will ever qualify as a "wrong move."

Why? Because all accusations against the present administration are supposedly rooted in racism?

Grow up already and smell the prairie breezes.

Did Republicans make deals to release or transfer high-risk terrorists from Gitmo for Americans at a five-to-one margin?

There was a time in our nation that we did not negotiate with terrorists. Period.

6 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

locomotive

Jun-03-14 3:13 PM

"Rest assured, if Republicans were in power they would have left Bergdahl to die and every parent with a child in the military needs to be aware of this fact."

I'd say this qualifies more as an opinion.

5 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PoeticJustice17

Jun-03-14 2:34 PM

More than 500 detainees were released or transferred from Guantanamo while George Bush was president.

Republicans never said a word.

6 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

locomotive

Jun-03-14 1:50 PM

billgrr, didn't the president already declare that he would close Gitmo quite some time ago? Or was that a misstatement?

I suppose when he sees himself on TV closing Gitmo, that's when he'll be doing it.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

locomotive

Jun-03-14 1:46 PM

Of course, trading the five high-risk Taliban prisoners for the release of one Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl was George Bush's fault.

*facepalm*

Justaman, what would we do without your stellar observations? It's like George Bush hasn't left the White House for 6 years!

Note: above post done in big sarcasm mode (like you didn't know that already)

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Russ98387

Jun-03-14 11:01 AM

Praise Allah!!!!! The terrorists WON!!!!! Five "cabinet level" leaders for one deserter. Good job, burrock insane oblamer!!!

5 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

locomotive

Jun-03-14 10:42 AM

PJinfinity's trolling again.

Catch anything yet?

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

keyzgirl62

Jun-03-14 8:38 AM

If he is guilty of desertion, at least now, we can prosicute him.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JustaMan

Jun-03-14 8:06 AM

Seriously though, don't want to do a Romney here thinking I know what's going on.....But this guy coulda/shoulda been left behind with the amount of information available at present!

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JustaMan

Jun-03-14 8:04 AM

"Mark this day on the calendar..The day no US Citzen will no longer be safe traveling abroad.."

Can I borrow some white-out please!

Kinda got GW written in bold black for 364 of em.....

2 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FreedomRings

Jun-03-14 7:22 AM

At this rate, five for one, Club Gitmo will not have any terrorists left to house...just what the Commander in Retreat wanted in the first place.

The Arab World is very happy with the exchange, so what does that tell you?

10 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 21 of 21 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web