Author Topic: Unconfirmed Bergdahl to be charged with desertion (Read 7776 times)

RocketMan · « **Reply #25 on:** January 28, 2015, 09:21:22 PM »

Quote from: TommyGunn on January 28, 2015, 01:03:04 PM

Yup. The book was a lot better .... but the movie was one of the most competent movies ever made from a book.
Tom Clancy wished he could write like Fletcher Knebel and Charles Bailey .....

FIFY

wmenorr67 · « **Reply #26 on:** January 29, 2015, 06:54:54 AM »

Quote from: Hawkmoon on January 28, 2015, 09:15:48 PM

When did Fort Dix, NJ, cease to be a BCT post?

Fort Lost in the Woods? I remember it well -- unfortunately.

91 but was/is a training ground for Guard and Reserve units. I went to Basic there in 88/89 and was back there in 2006 training up to go to Iraq. Actually was there 18 years later to the day.

Scout26 · « **Reply #27 on:** January 29, 2015, 08:55:06 AM »

I hear/read that there a lot of back and forth between the DoD and the Administration on this.

DoD wants to put Bergdahl against the wall with a blindfold. The 15-6 has (more than) enough to go to an Article 32 hearing and then Courts Martial.

Administration doesn't want to embarrass Obama, the whole "He's a hero" thing in the Rose Garden, plus the five terrorists we gave up that reportedly are all back to being terrorists.

Be interesting to see how this plays out.

41magsnub · « **Reply #28 on:** March 25, 2015, 02:23:37 PM »

It's official, he has been charged.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/03/25/bowe-bergdahl-once-missing-u-s-soldier-charged-with-desertion/?hpid=z1

wmenorr67 · « **Reply #29 on:** March 25, 2015, 03:10:39 PM »

Can I please, pretty please sit on the Court Martial panel? I promise I will be nothing but fair.

RocketMan · « **Reply #30 on:** March 25, 2015, 03:16:17 PM »

It would be interesting to see a list of Army colonels and above that ~~are cashiered~~ retire in the coming weeks. And it would be interesting to compare that list to the list of Army colonels and above that were involved in making this decision to charge Bergdahl.

Ben · « **Reply #31 on:** March 25, 2015, 05:38:14 PM »

I just saw that the New York Times is asking if he'll still be able to get an honorable discharge after the desertion charges so he won't have a problem finding employment afterwards.

vaskidmark · « **Reply #32 on:** March 25, 2015, 05:52:12 PM »

Quote from: Ben on March 25, 2015, 05:38:14 PM

I just saw that the New York Times is asking if he'll still be able to get an honorable discharge after the desertion charges so he won't have a problem finding employment afterwards.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/26/us/army-bowe-bergdahl-desertion-charges.html?ref=topics

Quote

....
A lawyer for Sergeant Bergdahl, Eugene R. Fidell, said Wednesday that the sergeant’s lawyers had not decided how they would proceed, including whether they would try to negotiate a discharge for Sergeant Bergdahl in lieu of trial by court-martial.

Defense officials have indicated that there is little desire to see Sergeant Bergdahl serve time behind bars if he is court-martialed and convicted.
....

Try to negotiate a discharge? Oo, that's rich!

And just which "defense officials" are indicating little desire?

Sounds to me as if the Grey-water Lady needs to flush out her filters.

stay safe.

added the missing close bracket

Firethorn · « **Reply #33 on:** March 25, 2015, 07:27:11 PM »

Quote from: vaskidmark on March 25, 2015, 05:52:12 PM

Try to negotiate a discharge? Oo, that's rich!

Dropped a bracket on that closing quote tag...

And pretty much anybody in the situation of facing a court martial is going to be trying to negotiate on the sentence. Means the lawyer is doing his job.

HankB · « **Reply #34 on:** March 25, 2015, 07:40:18 PM »

Quote

. . . And just which "defense officials" are indicating little desire? . . .

Can the Commander-in-Chief be considered to be a "defense official?"

Ben · « **Reply #35 on:** March 25, 2015, 07:43:21 PM »

Quote from: Firethorn on March 25, 2015, 07:27:11 PM

Dropped a bracket on that closing quote tag...

And pretty much anybody in the situation of facing a court martial is going to be trying to negotiate on the sentence. Means the lawyer is doing his job.

Just seems to me (as someone with no expertise in the subject matter), that asking for an honorable discharge in this case is kinda like asking for a million dollars and a pony. Wouldn't a general discharge be more in line with "best case scenario" (for Bergdahl) considering the charges?

Firethorn · « **Reply #36 on:** March 25, 2015, 08:51:55 PM »

Quote from: Ben on March 25, 2015, 07:43:21 PM

Just seems to me (as someone with no expertise in the subject matter), that asking for an honorable discharge in this case is kinda like asking for a million dollars and a pony. Wouldn't a general discharge be more in line with "best case scenario" (for Bergdahl) considering the charges?

Negotiating tactic. Shoot for the moon, settle for the next continent over.

For example, perhaps he deserted, but my thought is that if you count the time he was held captive, that's far more than the average deserter serves anyways, even if one looks back at in-combat desertions during Vietnam and Korea.

One should maintain perspective in these matters. Personally, I'm of the mind to just kick him out. One problem you'll have, even with a DD, is that he's still a former POW. Remember, your being in the military doesn't end until they say so, they don't back date it. So the VA is still going to be on the hook for anything medical stemming from his time as a POW(or before).

JN01 · « **Reply #37 on:** March 25, 2015, 09:11:35 PM »

Was he actually a POW or was he there voluntarily and collaborating with the enemy?

HankB · « **Reply #38 on:** March 25, 2015, 10:01:01 PM »

Quote from: JN01 on March 25, 2015, 09:11:35 PM

Was he actually a POW or was he there voluntarily and collaborating with the enemy?

Well, when he walked away from his fellow troops in a war zone I don't see how he thought he'd end up with anyone but the enemy . . .

41magsnub · « **Reply #39 on:** March 25, 2015, 10:11:58 PM »

Quote from: HankB on March 25, 2015, 10:01:01 PM

Well, when he walked away from his fellow troops in a war zone I don't see how he thought he'd end up with anyone but the enemy . . .

I don't think anybody is crediting him with an overabundance of smarts.

Scout26 · « **Reply #40 on:** March 25, 2015, 11:39:40 PM »

A couple of things I found interesting.

1. Why is the FORSCOM commander preferring charges and not either the Division, Corps, or most importantly Theater Commander?
2. I read it as they want his ass, and by having the FORSCOM commander do it, he's somewhat "insulated", from the White House and the administration by JCS and Army Staff at the Pentagon.
3. Only if he's found "Not Guilty" does he retain rank, money and VA Benefits. Guilty of either Desertion or Misbehavior Before the Enemy, and he even loses his VA bennies for anything to do with his captivity.
4. In the NYT article, in the video. Why is spokesman wearing Armor branch insignia, yet his regimental affiliation is with the 7th US Cavalry?

Regolith · « **Reply #41 on:** March 26, 2015, 12:35:36 AM »

Quote from: scout26 on March 25, 2015, 11:39:40 PM

4. In the NYT article, in the video. Why is spokesman wearing Armor branch insignia, yet his regimental affiliation is with the 7th US Cavalry?

According to Wiki, they have a few armored Armored Reconnaissance Squadrons. Maybe he was in one of those?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7th_Cavalry_Regiment#Current_status

They also have a combined arms battalion...

Scout26 · « **Reply #42 on:** March 26, 2015, 09:01:07 AM »

Yes, but if he's affiliated with a Cav regiment, then he should be wearing Cav branch insignia.

Phantom Warrior · « **Reply #43 on:** March 26, 2015, 08:35:03 PM »

Quote from: scout26 on March 25, 2015, 11:39:40 PM

A couple of things I found interesting.

1. Why is the FORSCOM commander preferring charges and not either the Division, Corps, or most importantly Theater Commander?
Where is SGT Berghdahl assigned these days? Is it possible that he is assigned to some random unit at or near FORSCOM HQ? Much the same way GOs facing UCMJ are often assigned as a special assistant to the CSA since they wouldn't be much use in a normal unit. Perhaps the FORSCOM CG is the first GO with UCMJ authority in his chain of command? I'm not a JAG, just speculating.

4. In the NYT article, in the video. Why is spokesman wearing Armor branch insignia, yet his regimental affiliation is with the 7th US Cavalry?
My read on this is that he was regimentally affiliated with 7th Cavalry while assigned to one of its squadrons in the past. Per the ever helpful Wikipedia, "Officers and enlisted personnel assigned to cavalry regiments, cavalry squadrons or separate cavalry troops are authorized to wear the cavalry collar insignia in lieu of their insignia of branch when approved by the MACOM commander."*

But since he is now an FA 46 assigned to FORSCOM HQ he reverts to his normal basic branch insignia, Armor.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Cavalry#Heraldry

Scout26 · « **Reply #44 on:** March 27, 2015, 02:26:59 AM »

Bergdahl is currently at Ft. Sam Houston, Texas. There is a one star (USAF) commanding Joint Base San Antonio. So yeah, kicking it up to FORSCOM (at Bragg) makes some sense. But it should have been the 25th ID commander, ISAF or CENTCOM Commander.

Anyway, the Army is playing this to get a conviction, and if Obama says word one about it, then it screws up the Courts Martial. (undue command influence). Which would be a real loser move for Obama. Possibly enough to be classified as a "High Crime(s) and Misdemeanor(s)". As in obstruction of justice.

Of course he could wait untill all is said and done, then pardon him.

Monkeyleg · « **Reply #45 on:** March 27, 2015, 09:43:51 AM »

Has there been any sign in all of this that the military could have withheld from Obama the fact that Bergdahl was a deserter? I was thinking that, if I were in charge of the military and had a chance to keep Obama in the dark about something so that he'd go and make a fool of himself, I'd jump at that chance.

Ron · « **Reply #46 on:** March 27, 2015, 10:15:45 AM »

Quote from: Monkeyleg on March 27, 2015, 09:43:51 AM

Has there been any sign in all of this that the military could have withheld from Obama the fact that Bergdahl was a deserter? I was thinking that, if I were in charge of the military and had a chance to keep Obama in the dark about something so that he'd go and make a fool of himself, I'd jump at that chance.

That thought had crossed my mind as well.

RocketMan · « **Reply #47 on:** March 27, 2015, 11:33:25 AM »

Quote from: scout26 on March 27, 2015, 02:26:59 AM

Anyway, the Army is playing this to get a conviction, and if Obama says word one about it, then it screws up the Courts Martial. (undue command influence). Which would be a real loser move for Obama. Possibly enough to be classified as a "High Crime(s) and Misdemeanor(s)". As in obstruction of justice.

What's to stop him from making a loser move? Obama has making loser moves down to a fine art. I fully expect him to interfere with the case in some fashion.

Ben · « **Reply #48 on:** March 27, 2015, 02:18:38 PM »

Looks like he's going for the "whistleblower defense", claiming that he was walking to the nearest outpost to report "order and discipline" problems in his unit.

It's actually kind of a brilliant defense given the circumstances (based on public info), because, how do you prove beyond reasonable doubt that he wasn't? Not that it would get him out of a desertion charge, but it could get him leniency. Of course of note is that this is only coming out now, versus months ago, after the trade.

dogmush · « **Reply #49 on:** March 27, 2015, 02:49:12 PM »

Quote from: Ben on March 27, 2015, 02:18:38 PM

Looks like he's going for the "whistleblower defense", claiming that he was walking to the nearest outpost to report "order and discipline" problems in his unit.

Riiiight, because the DSN and email of the IG isn't posted right next to the SHARP* contact numbers every damn where, up to and including often on the walls above the urinal's and inside doors of porta-lets and toilet stalls. And his BC's memorandum on Open Door policy wasn't posted along with all the other command policies, and there wasn't an NCO support chain all the way back to freaking CENTCOM that could be used both by DSN and e-mail......Oh, wait...............

*Sexual Harrasment/Assault Response and Prevention.

News:

Author Topic: Unconfirmed Bergdahl to be charged with desertion (Read 7776 times)