Posted on Nov 20, 2014
CW5 Desk Officer
2.89K
67
18
5
5
0
If what the article states is true, do you see this as a case of "Do as I say, not as I do" on the part of the United States?

I do find it hypocritical to "preach" no payments to terrorists and then - again, assuming what the article reports is true - to pay a ransom in an attempt to gain the release of SGT Bergdahl.

What do you think? Here's the article:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/19/inside-the-ring-ransom-paid-for-bergdahl/
Posted in these groups: 46ac8fde Bergdahl
Edited 10 y ago
Avatar feed
See Results
Responses: 12
SFC Mark Merino
7
7
0
Code of conduct %28united states military%29
I will just leave this here out of respect for all those who were honorable during their time in captivity.
(7)
Comment
(0)
CW5 Desk Officer
CW5 (Join to see)
10 y
Excellent point, SFC Mark Merino.
(2)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
1SG Civil Affairs Specialist
5
5
0
If so, I can see why officials would keep that secret.
It is already bad enough that we let five (!) bad, bad guys go in exchange for Bergdahl; this does not improve my opinion.
(5)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
MSgt Electrical Power Production
4
4
0
I would assume it is true when the The Pentagon’s spin on the payment is that the money was not technically a ransom (Really! It's not "technically" a ransom). Instead, defense officials are claiming the cash was intelligence money paid to a source for information that would lead to the release of Sgt. Bergdahl. I guess it only matters what the true meaning of the word is, is (sarcasm).

But then again it is very difficult to trust any information that involves this administration. What is or isn't, the magic of smoke and mirrors or dog and pony show seems to be a specialty by anyone associated with this administration.
(4)
Comment
(0)
CW5 Desk Officer
CW5 (Join to see)
10 y
Good post, MSgt (Join to see), I agree with your take on the situation.
(2)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
Avatar feed
What do you think of the ransom allegedly paid for the release of SGT Bergdahl?
See Results
Izzy Avila
4
4
0
Sir Arthur Helps once wrote, “Nothing succeeds like success.” That observation rings true, unfortunately, for terrorists turning to kidnapping for ransom to raise the funds they need to maintain and expand their operations. Simply put, kidnapping for ransom has become today’s most significant source of terrorist financing because it has proven itself a frighteningly successful tactic. Any payment of ransom provides an incentive for further kidnapping operations; each transaction encourages another transaction.


Making matters worse, the success of today’s kidnappers attracts the attention of tomorrow’s would-be kidnappers, who then seek to learn the tricks of the trade. This is a vicious cycle. Ransom payments lead to future kidnappings, and future kidnappings lead to additional ransom payments.


http://www.newsweek.com/why-us-does-not-pay-ransoms-americans-kidnapped-terrorists-266315
(4)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Mark Merino
3
3
0
Edited 10 y ago
This is the link to the full length movie "Hanoi Hilton." For our younger service members, it is the most famous POW camp in Northern Vietnam where so many brave service members lingered for years. One was there for over 12 years. Tortured, beaten, starved, humiliated, isolated, and neglected. This movie is not for the faint of heart, but should be mandatory viewing for all who have served. God Bless our Vietnam Veterans and all those who spent time in captivity. RESPECT!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mso877Wa1Sg
(3)
Comment
(0)
CW5 Desk Officer
CW5 (Join to see)
10 y
Amen to that, SFC Mark Merino. Thanks for the link to the film.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM
3
3
0
If this report is true then it is wrong for several different reasons.
- US Policy. This would violate stated and public US policy. US actions should not be in direct contradiction of US policy. If the policy is wrong then change the policy. If the policy is correct then have the discipline to stick with the policy.
- Proportionality. The US already gave up the equivalent of 5 Taliban GOs for a SGT. Why pay ransom on top of what is already a disproportional trade?
- Second Order Impacts. Payment of ransom in this case encourages kidnapping in future cases. This is the base argument of current US policy.
The issue of whether SGT Bergdahl is a deserter or not is a sequel issue that needs to be dealt with after his successful recovery. Since SGT Bergdahl is not recovered he should be investigated and possibly court martialed for desertion. Failure to court martial does both SGT Bergdhal and the US Army a disservice. SGT Bergdahl will have this allegation hanging over his head for the rest of his life. The Army will only encourage future desertions. Reasons for UCMJ include: punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation, and good order/discipline. Future desertions are not deterred if SGT Bergdahl is not punished (if tried and convicted).
(3)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SSgt Forensic Meteorological Consultant
2
2
0
Again, anything to win elections and look like a champion for Military personnel, active duty and retired alike.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
MSG Customer Care Representative
1
1
0
Why create an incentive for more kidnappings/imprisonment?
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
CPO Jon Campbell
1
1
0
The official policy is that we don't pay ransoms. The policy exists to discourage kidnappings. It doesn't mean we have tied our own hands and can't free ourselves. We make the process difficult but not impossible.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO2 Corey Ferretti
1
1
0
well we kind of did pay a ransome by freeing 5 high end detaines. And if we did pay money for it someone needs to be fired quickly
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close