Vegas Free-for-All - Taliban Terrorist / American Soldier Swap

Boilerman

Jun 5, 2014
12:12am

Reagan is no longer in office, and what does he have to do with mistakes that Obama makes?

Regarding keeping bad guys in jail, I see no problem with it. Obama does what he wants, regardless of law so that's not an issue.

Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh

Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
PJ, my question didn't address hostage taking within any specific geography. There are Muslim terrorists around that globe, and do you believe that giving 5 hostages in return for this guy increases the likelihood that more American hostages will be taken in the future.

Do you believe the Taliban considered this a win, and if so, doesn't a win encourage more such actions?

Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
Does PJ believe that this deal will lead to more American hostages in the future?

Ronald Reagan might be a better person to ask if he were alive.

But since you ask me....My understanding is there wont be many Americans left for the Taliban to kidnap in Afghanistan by the end of 2015. So I'll say probably not.

And despite Sean Hannity's attempts to pretend this kind of thing is unprecedented...we have about 3000 years of recorded history of warfare and prisoner swaps.

No more so than when Reagan increased the likelihood of future kidknappings when he gave terrorists large scale weapons in exchange for prisoners.

I dont begrudge the president for getting back a soldier regardless of the soldiers actions. I have problems with the terms ( the 5:1 ratio).

My understanding is the released Taliban captives were never charged with a crime. If the war in Afghanistan is coming to an end then its pretty hard to retain captivity of uncharged POW's from that war. I think this reasoning may have been at play. It may be a step towards shutting down Guantanamo.

Boilerman

Jun 5, 2014
12:13am

Block User

I would be happy if PJ would please "cut and paste" my comments regarding Bundy's folks opening fire on federal agents.

Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
I find it amusing how all the right wingers on this board who were cheering for Grandpa Bundy to open fire at Federal agents in Nevada now want to lecture about treasonous behavior.

pjstroh

Jun 5, 2014
12:21am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: Boilerman
Reagan is no longer in office, and what does he have to do with mistakes that Obama makes?

Regarding keeping bad guys in jail, I see no problem with it. Obama does what he wants, regardless of law so that's not an issue.

It has everything to do with the scale by which you judge responisble policy. Like on so many issues you have one scale for Obama and a completely different scale for every Republican you ever voted for. Thats why you refuse to ever put anything in context of history.

If what Obama did was reprehensible...then you can say the same for the president you say your prayers to each night. But you wont. Because you have a double standard. If you cant bring yourself to begrudge Reagan's actions then your outrage in this matter is completely disingenuous.

Don

Jun 5, 2014
2:07am

Block User

“I don’t know what he means by ‘consulted Congress for some time'. In 2011, they did come up and present a plan that included a prisoner transfer that was, in a bipartisan way, pushed back. We hadn’t heard anything since on any details of any prisoner exchange.”__Representative Mike Rogers (R-MI)

“I don’t like it when the White House says the intelligence committees were briefed. Because we weren’t.”__Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV)

"It comes to us with some surprise and dismay that the transfers went ahead with no consultation, totally not following law. And in an issue with this kind of concern to a committee [Senate Intelligence Committee] that bears the oversight responsibility, I think you can see that we're very dismayed about it ."__Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA)

How can this happen ? How can this happen ? Oh, wait, . . .

President Obama: "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."
President Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir."
__Private Conversation of 26 March 2012 picked up inadvertently by hot microphone

Don

Jun 5, 2014
2:26am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: Boilerman
Does PJ believe that this deal will lead to more American hostages in the future?

Do you believe the Taliban considered this a win, and if so, doesn't a win encourage more such actions?

___quote______

[The Taliban] see the exchange as an unmitigated victory. “Our talks finally proved successful for the prisoners’ swap,” says the commander. “We returned our valued guest to his people and in return, they freed our five heroes held in Guantanamo Bay since 2002.”

Another senior Taliban commander who is close to the senior Taliban leadership based in Kandahar, Afghanistan and Quetta, Pakistan, and is close to the negotiations, describes scenes of intense jubilation among the Taliban leadership and their supporters. Candies and sweet pastries are being passed around, he says, speaking to TIME via telephone from the Kandahar area. Those close to the leadership and the detainees are feasting on “whole goats cooked in rice”—a special meal usually reserved for celebrations. “I cannot explain how our people are happy and excited over this unbelievable achievement.” (He too has been known to TIME for several years). “This is a historic moment for us. Today our enemy for the first time officially recognized our status.”

Some [Taliban] members wanted a ransom payment for Bergdahl, in addition to the release of the Guantanamo detainees. But the leadership prevailed. “We told them that these five men are more important than millions of dollars to us,” he says.

Asked whether the Taliban would be inspired by the exchange to kidnap others, he laughed. “Definitely,” he says. “It’s better to kidnap one person like Bergdahl than kidnapping hundreds of useless people. It has encouraged our people. Now everybody will work hard to capture such an important bird.”

___endquote___
[boldface added - DD]

Ref: TIME.com, 5 June 2014

Boilerman

Jun 5, 2014
3:03am

Block User

PJ often makes incorrect assumptions regarding my position. Just today you wrote that I wanted Bundy and friends to kill federal agents, yet I did not. You argue that I was happy with George W Bush's overspending, yet I was not. How about we discuss our current president, and not Ronald Reagan. I'm 55 years old and Ronnie was in office while I was in college, for God's sake.

Will Obama's recent move increase future hostage taking? Will the 5 freed terrorists lead to more terrorism against American and around the Globe? I believe that the answer is yes and yes.

Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh

Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
Reagan is no longer in office, and what does he have to do with mistakes that Obama makes?

Regarding keeping bad guys in jail, I see no problem with it. Obama does what he wants, regardless of law so that's not an issue.

hoops2

Jun 5, 2014
4:23am

Block User

"We told them that these five men are more important than millions of dollars to us,” he says."

Sounds like they are headed back to kill more people

obama's latest proclamation "obama reiterated that he was adhering to a principle that America does not leave soldiers behind."

Apparently that doesn't apply to soldiers imprisoned in Mexico

pjstroh

Jun 5, 2014
4:50am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: Boilerman
PJ often makes incorrect assumptions regarding my position. Just today you wrote that I wanted Bundy and friends to kill federal agents, yet I did not. You argue that I was happy with George W Bush's overspending, yet I was not. How about we discuss our current president, and not Ronald Reagan. I'm 55 years old and Ronnie was in office while I was in college, for God's sake.

Will Obama's recent move increase future hostage taking? Will the 5 freed terrorists lead to more terrorism against American and around the Globe? I believe that the answer is yes and yes.

First a couple corrections...
(1) I did not call you out for cheering on grandpa Bundy. I did not name names. People can read that thread to see who said what.
(2) You most certainly did endorse George Bush's blank check war in Iraq ....and supported massive cuts in government revenues in addition to that.

I was only 9 years old when Reagan took office....but today I use the same scale to judge his administration as any other. How come you dont?

Boilerman is free to opine on the future outcome of the prisoner swap. Thats a benefit of living in a free country.

Boilerman

Jun 5, 2014
5:36am

Block User

I never support a blank check for anything that the government does , but I did support Bush's war. Bush spent far too much on domestic social giveaways. In fact, he spent money like a drunken sailor. If Bush spent like a drunk, Obama has spent like a heroin addict. I always support tax cuts, but they must come with massive spending cuts. We have a spending problem.

PJ said something like "all Conservatives on this site supported Bundy supporters firing on federal agents". I assumed that I was one of the "all Conservatives", but happily I was incorrect.

So, back to the question. Does PJ believe that Obama's actions will lead to more terrorism and more hostages? Was it good or bad?

Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh

Quote
Originally posted by: Boilermana
PJ often makes incorrect assumptions regarding my position. Just today you wrote that I wanted Bundy and friends to kill federal agents, yet I did not. You argue that I was happy with George W Bush's overspending, yet I was not. How about we discuss our current president, and not Ronald Reagan. I'm 55 years old and Ronnie was in office while I was in college, for God's sake.

Will Obama's recent move increase future hostage taking? Will the 5 freed terrorists lead to more terrorism against American and around the Globe? I believe that the answer is yes and yes.

pjstroh

Jun 5, 2014
5:47am

Block User

I answered your question. Se my post from 6/4/14 10:45 PM

«‹8 ›»

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:

Diamond Membership

$3 per month

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Limited Member Rewards Online

Join Now

Platinum Membership

$50 per year

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Exclusive Member Rewards Book

Join Now