Given he didn't send any help at all to those under attack in Benghazi and has lied about what happened since. Obama is one sorry ass human being.

5 high ranking Taliban fighters - 1 Army Sgt (alleged deserter)
??? - 1 Marine currently in Mexico (alleged honest mistake)

I guess Obama gets a pass since technically a Marine is not a "Soldier".

Wonder what he'll say when it's eventually confirmed that one of those released terrorist have killed an American soldier(s) again.

Now, this: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/06/02/22...tment.html

(06-03-2014 08:54 AM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  Given he didn't send any help at all to those under attack in Benghazi and has lied about what happened since. Obama is one sorry ass human being.

You can say that again. WHY doesn't America wake up and DEMAND BHO BE IMPEACHED AND DO IT NOW ?????

Another comment that's right on the money.

"Richard John Stacy · Top Commenter · Works at The Ranch, Lancaster, Ca
We are under attack by the President of The United States. Hellooooo? Is anybody out there? What are we going to do? Nothing. go back to making your living and just watch. Like the Poles did in 1939. Idiots."

(06-03-2014 09:11 AM)tigertom Wrote:  Another comment that's right on the money.

"Richard John Stacy · Top Commenter · Works at The Ranch, Lancaster, Ca
We are under attack by the President of The United States. Hellooooo? Is anybody out there? What are we going to do? Nothing. go back to making your living and just watch. Like the Poles did in 1939. Idiots."

I hear the Gov. has already started construction on the concentration camps, I think you guise need to get your militias up and running before you're out of time.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...re-releas/

For weeks, Republicans have questioned the wisdom of closing the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. President Barack Obama plans to transfer the approximately 230 remaining detainees to other countries or to prisons in the United States.

Responding to the Republicans, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told reporters on June 16, 2009, that it's important to consider Obama's plans in context with the overall number of releases in the past seven years.

"Some 500 detainees were released from Guantanamo during the Bush administration," Hoyer said.

So while the military and the patriots of America are angered over this, all the liberals can do is try to justify it by talking about something Reagan did 30 years ago. How disgusting.

Furthermore, when this piece of shiit deserted, he no longer held the status of "soldier" although the Army upgraded his rank TWICE after his desertion and capture.

(06-03-2014 09:21 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  Furthermore, when this piece of shiit deserted, he no longer held the status of "soldier" although the Army upgraded his rank TWICE after his desertion and capture.

Not Reagan. Bush

Try and pay attention.

(06-03-2014 09:18 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...re-releas/

For weeks, Republicans have questioned the wisdom of closing the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. President Barack Obama plans to transfer the approximately 230 remaining detainees to other countries or to prisons in the United States.

Responding to the Republicans, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told reporters on June 16, 2009, that it's important to consider Obama's plans in context with the overall number of releases in the past seven years.

"Some 500 detainees were released from Guantanamo during the Bush administration," Hoyer said.

When all else fails, say Bush.



It’s also true that the Obama administration has been steadily transferring Guantanamo prisoners to third countries for years, as the George W. Bush administration did before it. But the Bergdahl deal was the first major release under the new, looser restrictions and the five Taliban former prisoners were seen as some of the worst of the worst being held at the facility.



The drive to stop Obama from releasing Guantanamo prisoners without Congressional oversight over the next seven months has also lost its key Democratic ally, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, who celebrated the Bergdahl-Taliban swap this weekend.

“I support the president’s decision, particularly in light of Sgt. Bergdahl’s declining health. It demonstrates that America leaves no soldier behind,” she said in a statement.

That’s a change of position for Feinstein. Back in 2012, when the prisoner swap negotiations were done directly by State Department, Pentagon, and White House officials in secret meetings with the Taliban in Berlin and Doha, Feinstein was vehemently opposed to the idea.

“These are major Taliban figures, they are not minor people. And they will not be in the same kind of custody, maximum-security custody. Forget that it won’t be Guantánamo, just maximum-security custody,” she said at the time. “And in my view, there’s no way of knowing what they may do and what kind of propaganda they may breed.”

-

(06-03-2014 09:31 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 09:21 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  Furthermore, when this piece of shiit deserted, he no longer held the status of "soldier" although the Army upgraded his rank TWICE after his desertion and capture.

Not Reagan. Bush

Try and pay attention.

I said that in reference to a post made yesterday, not what you'd just said. Don't get so excited. It's still disgusting that you would compare releasing 5 major terrorists to Bush releasing small fries so that you feel as though this is justified. Prisoners have been released from Guantanamo for years and years. However, we don't negotiate with terrorists, and we shouldn't be releasing major terrorists. Scream Bush all you want, this was unjustified and against the law.

(06-03-2014 09:39 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 09:31 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 09:21 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  Furthermore, when this piece of shiit deserted, he no longer held the status of "soldier" although the Army upgraded his rank TWICE after his desertion and capture.

Not Reagan. Bush

Try and pay attention.

I said that in reference to a post made yesterday, not what you'd just said. Don't get so excited. It's still disgusting that you would compare releasing 5 major terrorists to Bush releasing small fries so that you feel as though this is justified. Prisoners have been released from Guantanamo for years and years. However, we don't negotiate with terrorists, and we shouldn't be releasing major terrorists. Scream Bush all you want, this was unjustified and against the law.

I'm simply pointing out that there is nothing new here. Bush released over 500 gitmo detainees and Reagan negotiated with terrorists.

It happens all the time.

(06-03-2014 09:54 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  I'm simply pointing out that there is nothing new here. Bush released over 500 gitmo detainees and Reagan negotiated with terrorists.
It happens all the time.

So was it right when they did it or wrong when Obama does it?

Bottom line:

There should never have been any Gitmo releases.
Because there should never have been a Gitmo.
Because nobody who ended up in Gitmo should have been allowed to live long enough to require Gitmo to house them.
And yes, we would have been in full compliance with the Geneva Conventions had we handled it that way.

Folks, I hate to break the news to you, but war is a nasty business. If we don't kill them, they're going to kill us. The only appropriate approach is to kill them until they get tired of dying. That's pretty nasty. That's why we should not go to war often, and only as a last resort. Once we approach one or at most two wars that way, we won't have to fight any more. Because nobody wants to take on the US functioning in that mode.

(06-03-2014 09:54 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 09:39 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 09:31 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 09:21 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  Furthermore, when this piece of shiit deserted, he no longer held the status of "soldier" although the Army upgraded his rank TWICE after his desertion and capture.

Not Reagan. Bush

Try and pay attention.

I said that in reference to a post made yesterday, not what you'd just said. Don't get so excited. It's still disgusting that you would compare releasing 5 major terrorists to Bush releasing small fries so that you feel as though this is justified. Prisoners have been released from Guantanamo for years and years. However, we don't negotiate with terrorists, and we shouldn't be releasing major terrorists. Scream Bush all you want, this was unjustified and against the law.

I'm simply pointing out that there is nothing new here. Bush released over 500 gitmo detainees and Reagan negotiated with terrorists.

It happens all the time.

Apparently in your black and white world, you are incapable of seeing a qualitative difference, and imply a false equivalence among the three events.

I'm not suggesting that the Bergdahl incident was worse than the others, but just suggesting there is a difference beyond nuance.

As an aside, I'm pretty sure you have posted many times about the fallacy of "broad brush" equivalence.

(06-03-2014 09:31 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 09:21 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  Furthermore, when this piece of shiit deserted, he no longer held the status of "soldier" although the Army upgraded his rank TWICE after his desertion and capture.

Not Reagan. Bush

Try and pay attention.

Wow, blaming Bush. How $@%@Y original. Turn the page....

(06-03-2014 10:56 AM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 09:31 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(06-03-2014 09:21 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  Furthermore, when this piece of shiit deserted, he no longer held the status of "soldier" although the Army upgraded his rank TWICE after his desertion and capture.

Not Reagan. Bush

Try and pay attention.

Wow, blaming Bush. How $@%@Y original. Turn the page....

I'm not blaming Bush. I'm glad he did it. Keeping prisoners in prison without charging them with a crime goes against everything that is American.

(06-03-2014 09:21 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  Furthermore, when this piece of shiit deserted, he no longer held the status of "soldier" although the Army upgraded his rank TWICE after his desertion and capture.

When was he court marshalled? If he wasn't, he's still a soldier...