The Lost Sergeant Lost Again! (Updated)

If I were Sergeant Bergdahl and  if I were not a deserter, I would ask for a court-martial. Given the public airing of rumors concerning his case, I don’t see how his request could be turned down. He has been damaged by a very public discussion of his case. He is entitled to his day in court to clear his name. For a member of the military, this means a court-martial, a procedure giving good guarantees concerning the presumption of innocence.

The Army is keeping him incommunicado in a military hospital in Germany. It’s as if he had been lost a second time. Some say he has forgotten English. That’s completely absurd. It could be that the Army is merely trying to avoid the accidental spilling of military secrets. It could be that there is another, darker secret involved.

Could it be that he did not particularly wanted to be rescued? Had he cast his lot with the other side who cynically sacrificed him in return for the huge prize that Mr Obama provided?

Usually, I am quick to blame the Obama administration ineptness rather than criminal intent for its actions that look like sabotage of the USA. This time, the debacle is so huge that my judgment vacillates. Really, one lost soldier for five battle-hardened generals of armies who throw acid in school-girls’ faces? We are returning to the struggle people who were only one degree  of separation removed from 9/11?

President Obama, he of the Veterans Administration, suddenly speaks like a military patriot: We don’t leave any of our soldiers behind no matter who they are. Period! What if the Taliban barbarians had asked for a nuclear device in return for delivering Sergeant Bergdahl into our hands?

We don’t leave any of our soldiers behind. Period?

Update: It’s been one week and Sergeant Bergdhal has still  not been allowed to talk to his mother. Maybe he has forgotten how to say “Hi” in English, or “Mom,” or something.

It’s because of concerns for his health, says the administration. It has not told us what the health concern is.

I don’t much like conspiracy explanations as a rule but I can’t help notice that medical doctors are professionally obligated not to talk about their patients. And military officers usually follow orders including orders to keep their mouths shut irrespective of what they think. If this were not true, why in the world was Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat sent to die in a French military hospital?

16 thoughts on “The Lost Sergeant Lost Again! (Updated)

  1. “It could be that there is another, darker secret involved.”

    A conspiracy of this magnitude requires more than a single dark secret. I’d say at least three dark secrets:

    1) Proof that Hillary Clinton had her secret lover Vince Foster murdered.
    2) Proof that Barack Obama was not only born outside of the US but was indoctrinated in a salafist madrassa and never actually attended school in the US.
    3) Proof that the Bavarian Illuminati and the Bilderberg Group have orchestrated fraudulent climate change research and suppressed the publication of research showing that the climate is actually cooling.

    Is it mere coincidence that Bergdahl contains 3 consonants for every vowel? I think not!

  2. I can agree with this, but with some caveats. First, President Obama made a serious error by trading five high-ranking Taliban officials for an Army sergeant. This blunder provides us with a great opportunity to point out that the office of the President has become too powerful, and that serious reforms need to be enacted, but you seem more fixated on attacking the man rather than his power.

    Let’s be honest Dr J: Barack Obama is not as bad as George W Bush when it comes to making foreign policy blunders. He never will be, either. The illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq ceded the presidency to the Democratic Party for the next two decades and weakened the United States in every conceivable measure internationally. No amount of ad hominem attacks (or conspiracy theorizing) will change this.

    My second caveat deals with some history and some theory: Because the executive branch is fairly well-checked on the domestic scene, presidents in the last century and in this one have often looked to foreign affairs for their chance at making history. The American people have largely obliged them up to this point, much to the detriment of the American people. If we are truly concerned with limiting power then we need to think of ways that will reverse this century-long trend in the United States. Are you truly concerned with limiting power? If so, you’re doing a piss-poor job of proving it.

  3. Brandon: My small essay overlaps only slightly with your concerns. I am glad if I inadvertently gave you an opportunity to write on a topic close to your heart. Please, go to town on it.

    The executive branch is “fairy well-checked on the domestic scene”?

    The EPA is not a direct agent of the executive branch?

    President Obama has not modified the law concerning health care under his own power fifty times?

    Other than this, I don’t disagree with your observation that presidents play their games in foreign affairs. That’s what the Constitution says they are supposed to do.

    I don’t like conspiracy explanations either but this time, in connection with the lost sergeant, as I said, it’s hard to credit ineptness.

    The debate between us regarding the Bush presidency is long over. I am not interested in revisiting it unless you have new arguments.

    • Jacques,

      To answer your three questions: yes, no, and no. The latter two questions are odd, by the way. (More conspiracy theorizing? If so, you might want to take a vacation to somewhere far away from Santa Cruz for awhile…)

      I don’t think our debate on the godawful Bush presidency is over. Not by a long shot. I just want to know whether or not you still stand by your previous support for the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq? I ask because this (very easy) question seems like a good way to continually rate one’s credibility as an independent thinker.

      Do you think his presidency, his leadership, is responsible for the inability of the GOP to gain a majority in Congress or to win the Presidency? Or is the inability of the GOP to be anything other than the party of reaction a vast conspiracy implemented by naive Leftists who don’t realize that Muslims want to enslave us all?

  4. Brandon: The debate between us is over on the Bush legacy because it takes two to debate. I have other fish to fry. Not all debates are productive for bystanders.

    Perhaps, when I have a little more time, I will write a manifesto about libertarians and war that you can store and simply post as my response to many of your challenges.

    The GOP is politically incapable right now. I would guess (GUESS) that there are deeper causes than the legacy of the G. Bush presidency. The rise of vaguely libertarian ideas among voters who are not especially ideological would be one cause.

    I am not aware of GOP anything who have said that they believe Muslims want to “enslave us.” I seems to us that you are trying to revive a dead horse with words that don’t matter. Strange debating strategy!

    • Again, I find it odd that you would consider the legacy of George W Bush to be no longer approachable, as if it were somehow a taboo subject (much like the undeniable truth of global warming and wealth inequality).

      How hard can it be to answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to the question of whether GWB’s legacy has been a good one for the GOP?

      I found libertarianism because of its anti-war stance. The fact that other aspects of this creed fell neatly into line with my own way of thinking was just icing on the cake. You are tiptoeing around an ugly truth. A horrible sight indeed!

    • Bradon. I don’t know if GWB’s legacy is a good one or a bad one for the GOP on balance. (I don’t have trouble saying that I don’t know something.) I do know that his administration it’s beginning to feel like the good old days, by the day!

      For the rest, I chose my topics fairly carefully, mostly because some are boring but also because I have limited time and limited physical resources. Discussing war and peace with any libertarian is not high on my list of things to do. That’s especially true when – like you – they decline to address central questions such as the question I posed to you recently about the sacredness of nation-states’ boundaries.

      You are a mainstream, orthodox libertarian, Brandon, therefore, I am pretty sure that I already know 90% of what you want to say. Hearing you re-hash them on a sunny summer day is not attractive. The fish are calling.

      Forcing me to discuss matters that don’t interest me would be a kind of mild slavery, wouldn’t it?

  5. Re the above commenter – some people just choose to bury their heads in the sand as deeply as possible so as to avoid having to face whatever truth it is they are trying to avoid. Brushing “unsuitable” material under the metaphorical carpet is a painfully common strategy. (Yes I know…I wasn’t invited to speak but the Alpha Female of the Europa Pack likes to air her opinions regardless especially when people need to “man up” and deal with the realities 🙂 )

    I suppose you could also suggest that the authorities involved in this blog matter could just possibly be trying to brush whatever unsavoury truth they are apparently trying to hide, under the carpet too. Out of sight out of mind? Funny, I thought our governments didn’t “pay ransoms” but maybe this is different when it doesn’t involve money? I understand Mr Obama thinks they can manage any threat these released individuals may pose further along the line…I certainly hope so! Though I would seriously question that. And this would also redirect valuable resources away from other, possibly even greater threats which may then come into fruition. I also wonder exactly what they are doing to this guy in the hospital…I won’t think too hard about that. There are some uncomfortably dark possibilities lurking there. Better go bury my head in the sand and hope it’ll all go away….

  6. “I suspect they are un-brainwashing the lost sergeant.”

    Ah! Jacques reveals more about the ‘darker secret’ underlying the conspiracy. Who brainwashed the-lost-sergeant and why. The CIA? The NSA?……..The Internal Revenue Agency? Why was the-lost-sergeant brainwashed? What is the relationship between the-lost-sergeant conspiracy and Benghazi?

    Stay tuned as Jacques reveals another darker secret in a future post.

    • Hahah!

      I think Dr J and the gullible Right thinks Bergdhal was brainwashed by Muslims, not the US government. These guys are the same ones who have been insisting – for years and in the face of constant ridicule – that President Obama is secretly a Muslim. I have not yet read Dr J condemn this particular conspiracy theory. Perhaps he believes it, too.

      He can’t seem to bring himself to consider whether or not George W Bush’s presidency was good for the GOP, so maybe a lower bar will get him thinking again.

      I can’t believe we are having this conversation on the blog…

  7. Just to serve your mania, Brandon: 1 I don’t think Pres. Obama is a Muslim. If he were, that would be fine with me. I might even like it a little because it would help give him the backbone he lacks and that plenty of Muslim politicians demonstrate. If he were a secret Muslim, it would bother me a little. The fact that his second name is Hussein means nothing except that his father was a nominal Muslim.

    2 I don’t think Bergdahl was brainwashed by Muslims. I suspect (SUSPECT) that his long captivity turned his early sympathy toward what he thought were Afghan Muslims into a form of jihadism. I suspect further that the US military has orders to not let him communicate with anyone including his mother before it can de-program him in that area.

    It would be an embarrassment for the Obama presidency if he had been tricked into trading one tiny jihadist for three big ones. Are they stupid enough? There are precedents.

    Brandon: You are not at liberty to announce what goes on inside my mind. Don’t go there, it’s too complex for you; you might get lost and never found again! I have thought about whether the Bush administration was good or bad for the GOP, on balance. It was not hard to “bring myself” to do it. This is silly (again). I just have not made up my mind. In my book, it’s not shameful to say, “I don’t know.” How about in yours?

  8. “Europasicewolf: I suspect they are un-brainwashing the lost sergeant.”

    “I don’t think Bergdahl was brainwashed by Muslims.”

    Mmmm. Ok. The-lost-sergeant is being un-brainwashed. He wasn’t brainwashed by Muslims. Ergo the-lost-sergeant was brainwashed by someone else during his absence. Given Jacques predilections I’m betting that he will tell us that the-lost-sergeant was brainwashed by the National Organization for Women.

  9. @Terry:

    Hahah! Dr Delacroix’s suspicion of “brainwashing,” coupled with his inability to elaborate upon who or what actually brainwashed The Lost Sergeant, certainly suggests bad faith.


    It’s nice to know you still have some sense left in you. It’s a pity you spend it on frivolous pursuits like suspecting the President of treason (or something).

    On the complete and utter failure of the George W Bush administration: You once wrote an essay about the obstinate ignorance of the Left. It was a very good essay. It in, you explained how and why Leftists remain in a state of ignorance even when it becomes quite clear that they are wrong (it has to do with their belief in their superiority over others).

    You seriously have no idea about the failure of the Bush administration? You cannot see that his illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq – coupled with his tax cuts and spending increases – destroyed the intellectual legitimacy of the American Right for an entire generation?

    How strange, although I must admit that I get a certain amount of pleasure from seeing an otherwise stalwart defender of reason squirm while I burn his idols in front of his eyes.

    On your charge of me being a “mainstream, orthodox libertarian”: Ouch! That hurts, although by now it should be clear that you are not exactly honest about those who would dare to disagree with you. Your straw men have been burned down on this blog far too often for our precious few readers to fall for it.

    Dr Delacroix, in case anybody is reading this and is still unconvinced of Jacques’s trouble with labeling his sparring partners, often used to refer to the late, great Christopher Hitchens as a “conservative.” The only problem with Dr J’s label is that it is completely false. Hitchens himself disavowed the label of conservative and stressed – quite correctly – that one did not have to be a conservative to support the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. Hitchens loathed the Republican Party. He attacked it whenever and wherever he could. He was a proud Marxist and a self-appointed enemy of conservatism. Yet Dr Delacroix labeled him a conservative anyway, as long as it served as a convenience for him. Such dishonesty, and in the name of a dishonest war to boot. Coincidence?

    And I’ve already rebutted your argument about borders, Jacques. You either missed it or you have chosen to remain in a blissful state of ignorance about it.

  10. Now that Abu Khatallah is in custody he’s moved from ringleader on the loose proof of Obama fecklessness to Obama fall guy. Allen West is in the top 5 for teapublican crazy so it won’t be long till the same meme shows up in one of Jacques’ muddled wall-of-texts. I predict that it will be part of his newest lost-sergeant brainwashing conspiracy theory. I know that it’s hard to imagine what the connection could be but we need to have faith in his demonstrated ability to post gibberish.

Please keep it civil

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s