So the infamous Bowe Bergdahl is back in the news cycle. Remember him, the soldier who walked off a United States Army base in Afghanistan, was captured and held by the Taliban for five years and got traded back to us in exchange for five Guantanamo prisoners? How could you not remember? No one could escape his name or his face for a really, really long time — he was everywhere.
If you do remember him, then you probably also remember the months and months of backlash and character assassinations that followed his homecoming. The Bergdahl case sparked some of the most vicious media campaigns against a person and soldier ever — particularly on the part of Fox News — though other media sources are just as guilty of making something worth pontificating about out of a whole lot of nothing.
I’m sure you also remember how our government leaders responded to and handled the affair, and how completely furious House and Senate Republicans were at then-President Obama. No matter where you turned, the overarching question was the same: Why trade an alleged traitor who cost the military a hoard of resources, energy and maybe even lives, for three high level Taliban fighters? What kind of leader does something like that?
Besides the fact that Bergdahl is an American and a person, and no one deserves to be left in Taliban captivity for a week — let alone five years — he wasn’t a traitor. A deserter who walked off base, sure. A stupid and misguided young man who thought he might make it by on his own in Taliban-occupied Afghanistan, alright. But not a traitor.
I will grant, though, that this supposition wasn’t totally unfounded. It didn’t materialize out of thin air, that is. There was, and still very much is, a rumor floating around that Bergdahl sympathized to some degree with the Taliban — that he walked off base because he disagreed with what the United States was doing in Afghanistan and Iraq — and that rumor was largely based on the fact that Bowe appeared in several propaganda videos.
Certainly we’d like to think that Bergdahl, an army man who agreed to a code of army ethics upon enlistment, would keep his head high in the face of terrorists. But pause for a second, and really think about the situation. It’s just unreasonable to expect someone who had a gun held to his head and a band of armed fighters ready to pounce on him if he made the wrong move, to defend America fervently and proudly in a stupid propaganda video. He said what he had to say to stay alive. You and I would do the same. Anyone would.
Aside from that, Bergdahl attempted escape on multiple occasions. He was incredibly ill for most his time in captivity. The Taliban locked him in an iron cage, made jokes at his expense and barely gave him enough food and water to survive. Would you sympathize with people who did that to you?
Anyway, Bergdahl is back in the news because his sentencing hearing is now taking place for what’s officially known as “desertion” and “misbehavior before the enemy.” He’s facing the possibility of a lifetime in jail for his crimes. What’s even worse, Bergdahl is incredibly hated by a vast swath of U.S. leaders, people in the army and run-of-the-mill countrymen, so his time back in the states has been pretty unpleasant. In fact, our own president tweeted in 2015 that Bergdahl should “get the death penalty” and that he’s a “dirty, rotten traitor.”
The fact of the matter is that no military deaths have been directly linked to Bergdahl’s search and recovery mission, which makes the idea of locking him up for life profoundly problematic. The bulk of anger at Bowe comes from a kind of victim blaming that everyone is guilty of. Take, for example, when a journalist is captured and held hostage in Syria. Almost everyone thinks, “What an idiot, why were you there in the first place?” But in thinking like that, we justify the crime, when in reality, the crime is still far and away the most horrific part.
Bowe should not get put away for life. I’m of the opinion that he’s gone through enough already. And he certainly shouldn’t be dragged through the mud and back in the media or not by people who don’t really know the complexity of his story.
Anna, perhaps you should look up the definition of the word traitor. According to Merriam-Webster:
Definition of traitor
1 :one who betrays another’s trust or is false to an obligation or duty
2 :one who commits treason
You are only going by the second definition. Let’s look at the first. Did Bergdahl betray another’s trust? Yes, he betrayed his fellow soldiers trust, trust that he would fulfill his obligation to them. Was Bergdahl false to an obligation or duty? Yes, he left his post, something you’re never supposed to do without being properly relieved. Sounds like a traitor to me. But you are not a soldier, so you don’t know these things or understand them.
Also, you believe it’s “unreasonable” to expect Bergdahl to defend America “fervently and proudly” as a POW? Well, Bergdahl, like all military personnel, are educated on the code of conduct, should they become a POW. I will not cut and paste the whole thing here, you should have read it before giving your two cents, but I will highlight Article V:
When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.
I will repeat that last part:
“I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.”
You do not understand Anna because you were never in the military, you do not know what it’s like to serve, so you have no frame of reference.
Bergdahl betrayed his unit, his fellow soldiers, and the Army. He left his post for no good reason. He endangered the lives of people that searched for him, and he deserves life in Leavenworth. If you had any knowledge of military rules, regulations, and laws you would understand this.
I listend to the Serial podcast, and his story does not add up. You don’t abandon your post to trigger a DUSTWUN, in order to draw attention to leadership problems within your unit. You use the chain of command. You can also report it to the Inspector General. Everyone in the military knows this. You don’t Anna, so you don’t understand. You are entitled to your opinion, but that opinion is meaningless without the frame of reference to back it up.
Thirty years at hard labor sounds about right.
While House /Senate bill lies dormant on Trump’s desk prohibiting sale of arms to Saudi Arabia which he is already benefiting from. I wonder if the next Russia Sanction) act of congress will be minus the arms ban.
Tim, what’s that got to do with this article about Bowe Bergdahl?