He Was Trying To Reach Another Post To Report Unit Misconduct



They don’t care who they hurt, who they throw under the bus. They will slander his whole platoon rather than admit Obama shouldn’t have made the deal.

Quote:Washington (CNN)Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl told the military he left his unit in eastern Afghanistan in July 2009 intending to walk to the nearest U.S. military outpost to report wrongdoing, believing he could not trust his own commanders to deal with his concerns, according to sources familiar with the Army investigation. It is the clearest indication yet of the motive behind his decision to leave his post.

Bergdahl was planning to report what he believed to be problems with “order and discipline” in his unit, a senior Defense official tells CNN. A second official says Bergdahl had “concerns about leadership issues at his base.”

This information is part of the report presented to General Mark Milley who this week decided to charge Bergdahl with desertion and misbehavior before the enemy. This information outlines what could be a key part of Bergdahl’s defense, which the army is already aware of.

Both officials declined to be identified because of the legal proceedings against Berghahl, but both have direct knowledge of the information outlined in the report. “This was a kid who had leadership concerns on his mind,” the second official said. “He wasn’t fed up, he wasn’t planning to desert.”

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/27/politics/b...index.html

Which of course explains why he would leave all his gear behind. Or write a letter home to his family about how disgusted with America he was. Nor does it square with any of the statements from multiple people in his platoon, all of whom said he deserted.

So he takes off walking alone across enemy territory in order to report problems with "order and discipline"? Really?

Dude, if you're going to lie, at least try to tell a believable lie.

1) He failed to use the chain of command
2) He deserted
3) 7 men died trying to find him

He phucked

Ummm, there are phones he could use to contact another base, or the IG; he could also use this fantastic invention called an e-mail. This is just flat out bull****. There are procedures set in place for this, this excuse is just a mockery from the left in an attempt to justify such a horrible mistake. I hope he gets slammed with the book and this is attached with a jackhammer on Obama's legacy.

They're saying he was a whistleblower. The lies are becoming more laughable as we get near the end of the Obama Administration.

The problem with this lie is that they're not selling it to the bottom half of the American public. They have to convince military personnel that Bergdahl was a whistleblower, and that has no chance at all.

(03-28-2015 10:34 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  They're saying he was a whistleblower. The lies are becoming more laughable as we get near the end of the Obama Administration.

The problem with this lie is that they're not selling it to the bottom half of the American public. They have to convince military personnel that Bergdahl was a whistleblower, and that has no chance at all.

He can blow that whistle for as long as he wants. It isn't a defense to desertion.

The gall the clowns in this administration have is sickening

It's like they think the citizenry are idiots. They act like we are all as dumb as the gullible goofs who voted them in office.

This is right up there with the IRS emails are gone forever

I smell a pardon........

This is an awful excuse at best. I'm sorry, but leaving your post because you think there are leadership issues falls under the definition of desertion. All branches of the military have ways to report such issues without the necessity of leaving your post. More to the point, even small military units have at least several members throughout the chain of command available for face to face interaction/discussion.

The military teaches to solve problems at the lowest level possible, and going one step at a time through the chain of command. If this laughable excuse even has any shred of truth to it, he showed his immaturity in dealing with a situation by leaving his post. Desertion is a tangible sign of immaturity, lack of respect, and inability to work as a member of a team. The military has no need or place for people that handle problems by outright quitting on their unit and country.

Absolutely shameful, and nothing but a shameful attempt to try and make this guy out to be some sort of a patriot of goodwill like they did with Snowden.

I said it in a previous thread, and I'll say it again...

If you are familiar with the promotion of officers in the US military, the verbiage states that they "serve at the pleasure of the President of the United States..."

It is not difficult to end the career of an officer, and if possible... learn the names of the officers bringing the charges against Bergdahl. They're making a very risky career move by bringing these charges. Those that see a "pardon" coming may be right, but I'm more worried about the officers charging him with desertion. They are putting their careers on the line by doing so. Officers' careers are much more subjected to politics.

Former Platoon Members Speak About Bergdahl Desertion Charge…

The voices that should be heard instead of the sympathizers and alphabet media covering for Obama.

Gary Sinise: Obama Regime Must Explain The #Bergdahl Trade Immediately



Gary Sinise, such a friend of veterans and the military, such a good man. Of course Obama doesn’t think he owes anyone an explanation for anything.

Quote: After the U.S. Army announced Bowe Bergdahl would be charged with desertion on Wednesday, actor Gary Sinise said the Obama administration “must explain” the controversial Bergdahl trade that set five Taliban commanders free.

More importantly, he said the administration owes an explanation to the family members of soldiers who lose their lives searching for him. Members of Bergdahl’s platoon have claimed that “soldiers from his own unit died trying to track him down.”

Bergdahl has been charged with Article 85 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, “desertion with intent to shirk important or hazardous duty,” and with Article 99, “misbehavior before the enemy by endangering the safety of a command, unit or place.”

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/...desertion/

Spent nearly 11 years in the Navy, and was on several combat zones during my time on ship and on shore.

Navy evaluations are like many others when there are certain "codewords" that signal one's prior committment and future promotability.

To have a CO write that "I'd comfortably go into combat operations with XxXxXX", was a badge of honor, indicating that they trust your ability to make the right decisions and keep your composure when when things got tough. Bergdahl exhibited and earned no such confidence, and this "served with distinction" crap is political theater. Time for Mama MoonBeam and Daddy Hippie to realize their son was a traitor that failed to uphold the oath he pledged to serve. There are ramifications to this behavior, and the Piper is waiting. Eat ****, you traitorous scum, and moreso the political DC elite that use this loser in an ever-increasing lie of duty vs cowardness. He earned a battlefield death worse than any of the heroes that tried to save his sorry ass.

(03-28-2015 09:56 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  Gary Sinise: Obama Regime Must Explain The #Bergdahl Trade Immediately



Gary Sinise, such a friend of veterans and the military, such a good man. Of course Obama doesn’t think he owes anyone an explanation for anything.

Quote: After the U.S. Army announced Bowe Bergdahl would be charged with desertion on Wednesday, actor Gary Sinise said the Obama administration “must explain” the controversial Bergdahl trade that set five Taliban commanders free.

More importantly, he said the administration owes an explanation to the family members of soldiers who lose their lives searching for him. Members of Bergdahl’s platoon have claimed that “soldiers from his own unit died trying to track him down.”

Bergdahl has been charged with Article 85 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, “desertion with intent to shirk important or hazardous duty,” and with Article 99, “misbehavior before the enemy by endangering the safety of a command, unit or place.”

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/...desertion/

I love Lieutenant Dan.

No, I'm not gay.

(03-27-2015 11:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  So he takes off walking alone across enemy territory in order to report problems with "order and discipline"? Really?

Dude, if you're going to lie, at least try to tell a believable lie.

Or, get a better lawyer than this guy...

(03-28-2015 09:17 AM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  Ummm, there are phones he could use to contact another base, or the IG; he could also use this fantastic invention called an e-mail. This is just flat out bull****. There are procedures set in place for this, this excuse is just a mockery from the left in an attempt to justify such a horrible mistake. I hope he gets slammed with the book and this is attached with a jackhammer on Obama's legacy.

Exactly. Watching the wheel spinning for this is going to be comical. Combined with the US Army drawdown, giving this guy a pardon might actually lead to a general revolt in the Armed Forces.

All that is, is his defense strategy for charges of desertion. Seems like quite the long shot. What does this have to do with Obama?

(03-30-2015 02:14 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  All that is, is his defense strategy for charges of desertion. Seems like quite the long shot. What does this have to do with Obama?

Other than making a mockery of the administration's efforts to portray him in a positive light to justify the absurd swap, not much.

(03-30-2015 02:49 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 02:14 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  All that is, is his defense strategy for charges of desertion. Seems like quite the long shot. What does this have to do with Obama?

Other than making a mockery of the administration's efforts to portray him in a positive light to justify the absurd swap, not much.

How did the administration portray him in a positive light? Did they say he wasn't a deserter?

(03-30-2015 03:02 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 02:49 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 02:14 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  All that is, is his defense strategy for charges of desertion. Seems like quite the long shot. What does this have to do with Obama?

Other than making a mockery of the administration's efforts to portray him in a positive light to justify the absurd swap, not much.

How did the administration portray him in a positive light? Did they say he wasn't a deserter?

You mean like Susan Rice, who said Bergdahl served the United States with "honor and distinction"? Or the story linked in the OP?