Bergdahl non-news
So the news and my inbox is full of non-news about the Bergdahl case – you remember, the fellow who left his post and as a result was a guest of the Haqqani Network for the next five years. The Associated Press doesn’t want you to get your hopes up for a desertion prosecution;
In trial cases over the last 13 years, about half the soldiers pleaded guilty to deserting their post. Another 78 were tried and convicted of desertion.
Desertion is relatively easy to prove, former Army lawyer Greg Rinckey said, but circumstances such as post-traumatic stress or family problems are also taken into account.
“A lot of deserters suffered from PTSD or other mental health issues, or they were on their second or third deployment,” said Rinckey. Numbers spiked as soldiers began returning to the battlefront, sometimes for up to 15 month deployments.
[…]
Rinckey and other military officials say the Bergdahl case will be difficult. It’s now in the hands of Gen. Mark Milley, head of U.S. Army Forces Command at Fort Bragg, N.C.
Even if Milley concludes Bergdahl deserted his post, he may consider mitigating circumstances while weighing whether to charge the soldier with desertion or being absent without leave (AWOL). He may also handle the matter administratively.
Now I’m no expert on the Uniform Code of Military Justice, but I know that if the military wants to burn you, they’ll find a way – there are enough catch-all provisions in that manual that, undoubtedly, you’ll be guilty of something. So, if and when they ever come to a conclusion in this case, you’ll know whether its a political decision or not.
Meanwhile, in Bergdahl’s hometown, Hailey, Idaho, they’re being a little more forgiving than those of us wore the uniform and followed the laws;
“We have a soldier who’s been returned to America, who’s been in captivity for 5 years under extremely adverse circumstances. I would hope that at this point, everybody would just support Bowe going on with his life,” said Sue Martin, owner of Zaney’s Coffee.
“I think the community in general is glad to read about Sgt. Bergdahl and glad to know that there is progress being made. I think those who care about him want there to be resolution for his sake and the sake of his family,” said Schoen.
Oh, I’m all about Bergdahl getting on with his life, but I’m not going to roll over if the government decides to act like nothing happened, that no one was spending their time Afghanistan looking for someone who was a flaky sparkle pony and wandered the country side for some stank-ass hippie reason. Yeah, I’m glad he’s not going to be beheaded on a propaganda video, but that doesn’t mean that he shouldn’t be punished like the rest of would have punished during our tours if we’d flaked out like Bowe.
Thanks to one of our ninjas for the Idaho link.
Category: Military issues
“Now I’m no expert on the Uniform Code of Military Justice, but I know that if the military wants to burn you, they’ll find a way – there are enough catch-all provisions in that manual that, undoubtedly, you’ll be guilty of something. So, if and when they ever come to a conclusion in this case, you’ll know whether its a political decision or not.”
THIS.
Mike
After he deserted, how many soldiers were killed trying to recover him?
How about their families?
When do they get to “get on with there lives”?
Minimum of 6 soldiers were killed as a direct result of the SAR operations conducted after his “capture”. Unknown number as an indirect result of any information or propaganda he may have spouted.
Don’t think any catch-all provision is required here, Jonn. Given Bergdahl’s conduct as reported, proving the second form specification of Desertion – “Quitting unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to avoid hazardous duty or to shirk important service” – should be a slam-dunk. See page IV-12 of
http://www.marines.mil/Portals/59/Publications/MCM2012.pdf
(The text here seems to be identical, and is a bit easier to read. The “Quits unit, organization, or place of duty . . . ” form of desertion is explained in this second link on the 2nd and 3rd pages.)
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm85.htm
Hell – going AWOL to avoid service in a combat zone is one of the freaking examples given in the MCM for this type of desertion.
Given what’s been made public to date, if Bergdahl skates here . . . IMO it’s purely due to politics and lack of spine. Period.
Hondo, if the military displays that lack of spine what’s the ramifications for other cases? With the UCMJ does something like this create a precedent for others to appeal against in their own cases?
We’ve seen a lot of two tiered disciplinary paths already, one for senior officers and quite a different path for less senior officers and enlisted. Frankly the disparity creates a perceptible mistrust for the alleged integrity of the process.
VOV: regarding your first point, the precedent set would IMO be catastrophic. One of the few bedrock things any military needs is discipline. Take that away, and I hold you do not actually have a military force; instead, you have a group of armed thugs doing largely what they please. Letting desertion to avoid combat go unpunished IMO strikes at the heart of military discipline.
With respect to your second point: I can’t help but agree. Senior leaders – officer or enlisted – who are documented to have committed offenses under the UCMJ should IMO receive MORE punishment than “Joe Snuffy” – not less.
That’s justified because they know better, and are in positions of higher responsibility and authority. This implies they’ve been found worthy of more trust to “do the right thing” than others. When such trust is abused, an individual should be nailed – to the freaking wall.
For officers and Senior NCOs (E7 and above), IMO the default court-martial sentence on conviction of willful and serious offenses should be dismissal/DD plus a year and a day in confinement, with the time to be served adjusted based on the particulars of the situation.
Harsh for their families? Yes – and irrelevant. IMO that is fully deserved due to the enhanced trust and authority they were granted and willfully chose to violate. They should have thought of that before violating that trust.
Thank you my friend, I thought that would be the case, but wanted a more knowledgeable opinion with respect to the legalese….
I look at it this way, if a court marshall was good enough for that Marine that deserted in Iraq, then it’s good enough for this homeschooled, wanna be ballerina spawn of hippies.
If the newscasters around here looked like those ladies, I would start watching the news–with the sound off.
If he’s still flying a desk, I’m thinking big Army is nowhere near done with his ass. But thats me…
One of the FNC military contributors last week predicted Jan 16 2015 for a decision. Why? Its on a Friday right before the new congress takes a week recess for MLK day.
We are still waiting for a photo/video of this TURD and his keeper/guard walking around on base. Can anybody help us out please.
Well, at least he doesn’t have any tatoos. Thank Christ for that. 😉
How does quitting his post to seek out and join the enemy not fit the Constitutional definition of treason?
And how does all those responsible for dealing with such things hiding from those responsibilities not fit the definition of misprision of treason?
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.” (Constitution, Article III, Section 3)
That’s a mouthful and signals why treason is an exceptionally difficult crime to prove. In fact, it hasn’t been proved of anyone since the WW II era, despite the Red Menace and the many traitorous homegrown bastards we’ve seen since then. BB is, in the eyes of many, a traitor and, for that, no constitutional pronouncement or process is required.
BB left his post in order to seek out and join the enemy during a war.
When BB was “released” he caused known enemy to be released from our own custody and possibly upwards of a billion* bucks to be transferred to the enemy.
*not sure on the amount of cash. Rumors only so far.
How is it that everybody involved, from the top down, are not up on charges of treason?
Imo, every piece of shit political that ordered a Gitmo release, and every military person who singed off rather than quitting in protest, should be put up against a wall and shot every time said Gitmo scumbag goes back to fight for the jihadiscum.
Sentence him to death by bunga-bunga. On second thought, that’s what his tent mate already did to him and apparently both enjoyed it. Better than a goat I suspect.
Is it too much to hope for that he gets blown away by one of the Mexican cartel’s gangs operating around JBSA? I mean clearly, we have lost the testicular fortitude in the DoD to put “men” like him up against a wall or strung up in the gallows.
I understand that he is currently in limited duty at Ft Sam… I can’t imagine him being in charge of any Soldiers and I feel for them if he has any.
Article 15, busted to E-4, general discharge. That way a show boat trial is avoided. Out of sight, out of mind.
Harp, think about it for a minute, sure that would be “easy” but hell, in his situation I’d take that deal in a heartbeat.
If they were to do that, he still walks away as a Spec, with the full veterans package, $300,000 in back pay, the POW medal,etc.
I have a feeling hussein secretly already pardoned him. It’s something that out of control douche would do because he has a phone and a pen you know.