Hillary Rodham Clinton defends prisoner swap

[No1butPaul]

Army Times, June 3, 2014




BROOMFIELD, COLO. — Hillary Rodham Clinton gave a measured defense Monday of the Obama administration’s controversial decision to swap five Guantanamo Bay detainees for a U.S. soldier held hostage in Afghanistan, noting that many of America’s allies make similar deals.

The former secretary of state was asked about the exchange by the moderator at an event in a Denver suburb. Clinton said she did not second-guess people who make such tough decisions, but said the American tradition of caring for its citizens and soldiers was a “noble” one.

She also noted that countries like Israel have made similar swaps, citing that country’s decision to exchange more than 1,000 Palestinian prisoners for one of its soldiers in 2011.

“This young man, whatever the circumstances, was an American citizen — is an American citizen — was serving in our military,” Clinton said. “The idea that you really care for your own citizens and particularly those in uniform, I think is a very noble one.”

Several Republicans have hammered the Obama administration for the deal, saying it had capitulated to terrorists. Additionally, some critics have suggested that Bergdahl deserted his post in Afghanistan before being captured by the Taliban in 2009.

Clinton said the most important thing will be to get as much information as possible from Bergdahl about his time in captivity, saying he could be a valuable intelligence asset and shed light on the Taliban’s workings. She noted the Guantanamo detainees were supposed to be kept in the Gulf emirate of Qatar for a year.

She added that she understood regrets about the deal but that the Obama administration feared Bergdahl wouldn’t survive much longer. She described it as an example of the “hard choices” in government that is also the title of her forthcoming book.

“You don’t want to see these five prisoners go back to combat. There’s a lot that you don’t want to have happen. On the other hand you also don’t want an American citizen, if you can avoid it, especially a solider, to die in captivity,” Clinton said. “I think we have a long way to go before we really know how this is going to play out.”

Clinton appeared as part of a public speaking series called Unique Lives & Experiences.
http://www.armytimes.com/article/20140603/NEWS05/306030057/Hillary-Rodham-Clinton-defends-prisoner-swap

RELATED: Gold Star mom: 'This guy was worth my son's life?'


“It gets really hurtful when I think, this guy was worth my son’s life? My son who was patriotic? Who was a true soldier? Who defended his country with his life?” Andrews told Army Times via phone on Monday. “That guy was worth that? I don’t think so.”

Andrews also was upset to hear the U.S. government agreed to release five prisoners from Guantanamo Bay in exchange for Bergdahl’s freedom.

“I bet you anything there were soldiers killed or wounded capturing those five guys,” she said. “So what does that do for their sacrifice? They sacrificed for nothing, because they turned right around and let them go.”
http://www.armytimes.com/article/20140602/NEWS/306020055/Gold-Star-mom-guy-worth-my-son-s-life-

[Cutlerzzz]

The US should swap all prisoners, sign a peace treaty, and go home.

[eduardo89]

What difference does it make?

[69360]

I'm getting really tired of hearing republicans armchair quarterbacking the decision to do the swap. If I was potus I would have done it. I rarely defend Obama, but I think he made the best choice in this situation.

The war is just about over, the Taliban waited the US out just like they did the Russians and won again.

[No1butPaul]

I'm getting really tired of hearing republicans armchair quarterbacking the decision to do the swap. If I was potus I would have done it. I rarely defend Obama, but I think he made the best choice in this situation.

The war is just about over, the Taliban waited the US out just like they did the Russians and won again.

Seriously, you see no problem with Obama breaking the law, not going through congress and further trampling on the constitution?

[James Madison]

Wish we'd direct our anger to the politicians who put them their in the first place...

...but then again, they're volunteers. They signed up knowing the risks. And if you know the guy is a deserter, why send people after the guy. Fuck him.

[69360]

Seriously, you see no problem with Obama breaking the law, not going through congress and further trampling on the constitution?

But when Reagan did it he was a hero right?

Bergdal is home, gitmo is a little less full, the Taliban are maybe a little less pissed off. All is good in the world. Once and a while Obama does something right, this is one of those times.

[Cutlerzzz]

Wish we'd direct our anger to the politicians who put them their in the first place...

...but then again, they're volunteers. They signed up knowing the risks. And if you know the guy is a deserter, why send people after the guy. Fuck him.

Fuck the deserter? Deserters are the only troops I support.

[fr33]

The US should swap all prisoners, sign a peace treaty, and go home.

This.

And this incident disproves the asshole progressives that claim "Obama wants to close Guantanamo but Congress won't let him." He could close it. This is evidence of it.

[James Madison]

Fuck the deserter? Deserters are the only troops I support.

Like it or not, he signed a contract with the military, knowing the risks, and did not honor their terms. If I was a soldier, I'd let him walk.

[Cutlerzzz]

Like it or not, he signed a contract with the military, knowing the risks, and did not honor their terms. If I was a soldier, I'd let him walk.

I don't consider contracts with the military valid.

[specsaregood]

My only complaint is that Obama didnt trade all the prisoners in Guantanamo for him.

[alucard13mm]

I hope they planted a polonium or ricin pellet in the terrorists so they will die soon after... maybe a tracking device at the base of their brain.

so it seems to me that people are fine admiring a desserter that indirectly caused the death of 6 soldiers.... if he was going dessert, why not tell his officers hes done and to either put him in jail or discharge him surely 5 years in military prison is better than 5 years in taliban captivity and worrying about being beheaded.

[Brian4Liberty]

Hillary:

She also noted that countries like Israel have made similar swaps, citing that country’s decision to exchange more than 1,000 Palestinian prisoners for one of its soldiers in 2011.

Well, that's the most important factor, isn't it now? Everything must be done in the US exactly the same way it is done in Israel.


But when Reagan did it he was a hero right?

Bergdal is home, gitmo is a little less full, the Taliban are maybe a little less pissed off. All is good in the world. Once and a while Obama does something right, this is one of those times.

Ends justify the means eh? Rule of law be damned. Whatever benevolent Big Brother (soon to be Big Sister) decides is best, is the law.


I hope they planted a polonium or ricin pellet in the terrorists so they will die soon after... maybe a tracking device at the base of their brain.

It would be interesting if they had put some kind of tracking device on them. Of course that would probably work as well as "fast and furious".


so it seems to me that people are fine admiring a desserter that indirectly caused the death of 6 soldiers.... if he was going dessert, why not tell his officers hes done and to either put him in jail or discharge him surely 5 years in military prison is better than 5 years in taliban captivity and worrying about being beheaded.

Just about everyone involved knew that he was a deserter. He had talked about it, and he left a note. But it's probably better PR to say they went out on rescue missions as opposed to capturing a deserter missions.

[Brett85]

My observation on this is that I don't quite understand why President Obama traded five Taliban members for this one guy who deserted his fellow troops, but yet they're completely ignoring the soldier in Mexico who's in a Mexican prison simply for making a wrong turn and having firearms in the back of his car. I don't know why the Obama administration isn't doing everything possible to get the soldier in Mexico out of prison if their policy is that we can't allow one of our soldiers to be held in prison by a foreign country.

[specsaregood]

And this incident disproves the asshole progressives that claim "Obama wants to close Guantanamo but Congress won't let him." He could close it. This is evidence of it.

I think that^ is the most important part of this whole debacle.

[Thor]

Clinton said she did not second-guess people who make such tough decisions

Bootlicker. She will do what her handlers tell her without second guessing them.

All hail Hitlery!

[No1butPaul]

But when Reagan did it he was a hero right?

Bergdal is home, gitmo is a little less full, the Taliban are maybe a little less pissed off. All is good in the world. Once and a while Obama does something right, this is one of those times.

So is that a yes? That is a very un-libertarian response I must say.

[messana]

Some top-level officials within the administration, including Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, are very wary about making a swap for Bowe. "Panetta and Hillary don't give a shit about getting him home," says one senior U.S. official involved in the negotiations. "They want to be able to say they COINed their way out of Afghanistan, or whatever, so it doesn't look like they are cutting and running." (Both Clinton and Panetta, by law, would have to sign off on any exchange.) As with Vietnam, many in the military are resisting any attempt to end the war. "Even after Robert Bales" – the Army staff sergeant charged with massacring 17 Afghan civilians in March – "they are making the argument that the war is turning a corner," says this official. "They don't realize that the mission is changing. We don't need all those U.S. soldiers there anymore."

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/americas-last-prisoner-of-war-20120607?page=7

Looks like second guessing to me.

[Feeding the Abscess]

So is that a yes? That is a very un-libertarian response I must say.

The existence of Gitmo is un-libertarian. There is literally no correct libertarian answer outside of shutting it down completely, no matter the process it takes.

[No1butPaul]

The existence of Gitmo is un-libertarian. There is literally no correct libertarian answer outside of shutting it down completely, no matter the process it takes.

this country did not elect a king

[Brett85]

The existence of Gitmo is un-libertarian. There is literally no correct libertarian answer outside of shutting it down completely, no matter the process it takes.

Would having a Gitmo like prison within the United States be any more libertarian?

[Feeding the Abscess]

Would having a Gitmo like prison within the United States be any more libertarian?

No.


this country did not elect a king

And? If Rand Paul manages to get elected, the only hope of doing anything worthwhile will be if he decides to go all king-like and shred a bunch of stuff. Congress will do exactly nothing to repeal anything.

[anaconda]

Fuck the deserter? Deserters are the only troops I support.

+1.

[anaconda]

5 goat herders that did nothing wrong in the first place?

[Occam's Banana]

5 goat herders that did nothing wrong in the first place?

Not according to John McCain: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/13-things-you-need-to-know-about-bowe-bergdahl-20140602

"They're the five biggest murderers in world history!" McCain fumed.

[Vanguard101]

I sometimes wonder if libertarians could ever be good generals at war. Lmao there is no legitimate justification for this trade unless there is not definite proof they are terrorists who committed crimes.

[Feeding the Abscess]

I sometimes wonder if libertarians could ever be good generals at war. Lmao there is no legitimate justification for this trade unless there is not definite proof they are terrorists who committed crimes.

Conversely, and more importantly, there is no legitimate justification for the imprisonment of those individuals unless there is proof that they are terrorists, and have been tried for those crimes.

[CaptUSA]

I think that^ is the most important part of this whole debacle.

Actually, I think this is far more sinister. This feels like a serious "wag the dog" controversy. Something to get the VA story out of the headlines and to take up valuable minutes on air.

"The guy who ran the VA is gone, and now, look over here..."

We can't show the people the true face of government-run healthcare.

[Vanguard101]

Conversely, and more importantly, there is no legitimate justification for the imprisonment of those individuals unless there is proof that they are terrorists, and have been tried for those crimes.

I think what's more important is whether it's ok to exchange terrorists for a soldier

[CaptUSA]

I think what's more important is whether it's ok to exchange terrorists for a soldier
Sorry, Vanguard. Can you be more specific? Which ones are the terrorists and which ones are the soldiers?

I guess the answer sort of lies in your frame of reference.

[osan]

I don't consider contracts with the military valid.

This is the trouble with "government" and with people, in general. "Government" does not exist in sé and the average man is too bottomlessly stoopid to realize it. Can a man make a contract with a non-existent entity? No. If a contract indeed exists, then it must be with another person or group thereof. This, of course, leads to the somewhat knotty question of with whom, exactly, has one entered into a contract if indeed one exists? I am inclined to believe that no contract exists. The elements of a contract are as follow:




Offer
Acceptance
Consideration
Capacity
Intent
Lawfulness



Offer: if there is an offer, it must be made by a person or persons. "Government" per sé cannot make the offer because it does not exist. An "organization" cannot make an offer for the same reasons, therefore disqualifying "Army", "Navy", and so forth except when the terms are explicitly used as nothing more than convenient labels to denote a specific group of individuals. Whether that is the case is not at all clear to me. This would well be the stake in the heart of the notion that a contract exists.

Acceptance: clearly it is the case that the acceptor is an individual.

Consideration: in exchange for one's dutiful obedience they are housed, fad, trained, compensated, and granted the rights of certain other benefits.

Capacity: Do the parties to the contract hold the mental and physical capacities to fulfill the terms of the contract? If so, contract exists.

Intent: It is easily determined that the contractee (person enlisting) can be said to have intent to enter into legal relations with the contractor. Can the intent of the contractor be as easily established? This presents the same problems as with "offer". Whose intent is it, exactly, of which we speak?

Lawfulness: Note firstly that this has nothing to do per sé with "legality". Here is yet another element of the so-called "contract" between the so-called "government" and its enlistees that comes under serious question when examined with something better than the most brain-numb effort.


As we can see, half of the elements come into serious question when we ask, "what, exactly, is the contractor-side of the agreement?" A group of people acting in unison and accord with a script does NOT make that group a thing in itself. It is naught more than a group of individuals acting in accord, all labels and other talk to suggest otherwise notwithstanding.

It's all academic in any event. The fact is that there are men who call themselves "army" and so on. They are well armed, thanks to the picking of YOUR pocket for a lifetime. They are well capable and perhaps even willing to reduce you, your home, and those of all your neighbors to rubble if so ordered, certainly in the event you are labeled "deserter".

All that aside, this deserter did join voluntarily and he did desert, leaving his buddies in a lurch, which is not cool. That wretched excuse of a man, Obama, traded 5 valuable Taliban assets for this worthless piece of shit. Both should perhaps see a firing squad. But then, can the same not be said for many others whose complicity in this clusterfuck of war?

Even this little examination exposes with some harsh clarity why the human race is doomed, all else equal. We have painted ourselves into a hopeless corner with our "logic" (if it can even be called that anymore), our standards of what is normal and acceptable, and our very long technological arms that now enable us to level entire cities with the turn of two metallic keys or the push of a button.

Where, exactly, does anyone here think this is all heading? Theye apparently have some grand idea and many goals pursuant thereto. Theye are not going to simply give up because we say, "Stop!". That places Themme on a collision course with those of us who say no. Therefore, we have two freight trains on the same track at full throttle, heading in opposite directions. Pray tell, what is the likely outcome?

Contracts... no contracts... In the immortal words of the great Hillary Clinton, "what does it matter" anymore? This nation has been at war almost incessantly since its establishment. Have we gone even one full generation without war? This should be telling you something about who and what we are, not only as Americans, but as human beings. It should tell you something about Empire. It should tell you something about the truer price you pay to have all the shiny stuff. Is it really worth your freedom to allow lunatics and other maniacs reign over you just so you can have toys and labor-saving devices? Is having less, but REALLY having it, that terrible that you would allow the devil into your pants just to save a little labor and have a little "fun"?

I'm serious about this, even though it will change nothing. I just hayed 4 acres of pasture BY HAND so I can feed my 13 goats for a year. That was a lot of work but I got it all done in about 5 days, including cutting, drying, raking, and stacking. It was tough and I admit I am getting a little long in the tooth for this kind of work, but I still didn't mind it enough to trade anything important for the relief I might otherwise obtain. I'd rather do that for a lifetime and be free of strings than to have a computerized tractor with all the implements that would get it done in one day's total effort and little personal physical outlay at the price of madmen hovering over me with swords. And make no mistake about it, these people calling themselves "government" are drooling, ranting, raving madmen. Sane men do not send their fellows 6K miles from home to slaughter a million people and to come home by the thousands in body bags and the tens of thousands with maiming injuries.

You can legitimately raise the issue of the logical fallacy of "false dichotomy", but I will point out that while the choice is not necessarily that of living small and freely vis-à-vis even smaller (though appearing large) and as a serf or slave, that is precisely what we have chosen with a consistency across the face of an entire planet that should be sending chills up everyone's spines. Seriously folks, just consider that single, glaring, and abjectly miserable fact: every "nation" on the planet has chosen empire and all its attendant misery, disease, death, and destruction over freedom. The worst thing of all is that we CHOSE. The vast majority of the human race has willingly traded its freedom for the chains of its mean liking - we have chosen our pretty slavery over freedom because we think it is better. We have, for no better reason than the sake of our corrupted sense of convenience, literally redefined what it means to be free such that we now label as "freedom" that which is naught but pretty slavery. There is no escaping that obscene little truth and it is the most sadly disgraceful thing I have ever considered in my thoughts and it makes me respect and admire all the more those of our forebears who died fighting to keep that which was sacred, and by right theirs. Those were the people more deserving of life than the rest who meekly obeyed the whipcrack of the treacherous punks presuming to be our masters. Ironically, they were the ones denied the gift no man may rightly deny his peaceable fellow. What a quagmire of shame it is in which we all live, myself included.

None of this bodes well for the likes of us, so prepare yourselves lest the disappointment and danger prove crushing to your spirit and body. But if and when the moment comes, the nexus, I can but hope my courage will hold, lest I fold like a cheap suit as I lick the master's boot, head bowed in endless shame. That is a thought that occasionally keeps me up at night.

[Cutlerzzz]

this country did not elect a king

I might prefer a King to a Democracy that allows anyone to vote.

[No1butPaul]

I might prefer a King to a Democracy that allows anyone to vote.

Defense of Obama and Hillary has devolved to a ridiculous level.

Here you go ...

http://www.independentsentinel.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/KingO_1-150x150.jpg

[anaconda]

Not according to John McCain: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/13-things-you-need-to-know-about-bowe-bergdahl-20140602

I have no confidence whatsoever in the "profiles" of the five prisoners. Our government lies way too much for me to even consider their claims as remotely factual.

[CaptUSA]

Actually, I think this is far more sinister. This feels like a serious "wag the dog" controversy. Something to get the VA story out of the headlines and to take up valuable minutes on air.

"The guy who ran the VA is gone, and now, look over here..."

We can't show the people the true face of government-run healthcare.

And it's gone. Completely. Mission Accomplished.

The media is so complicit in this farce. Even the so-called "conservative" media has moved these stories. Drudge? Gone. FOX? Gone. WSJ? Gone.

It's all a TV show and they control the programming.

[juleswin]

Not according to John McCain: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/13-things-you-need-to-know-about-bowe-bergdahl-20140602

Not better than Rand thinking they possess the same threat as 10k militants. This is one area I thought Rand would use to differentiate himself from the loony right but he is joining along with them in criticizing this move. What good is a commander in chief if he cannot make prisoner trades like this?