Posted on 06/03/2014 7:53:30 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Barack Obama may be in Warsaw as part of a European tour, but in a real sense he’s stuck in Washington. At a joint press conference after a state meeting in Poland, Obama got questioned about the deal that exchanged Bowe Bergdahl for five high-ranking Taliban detainees, including two wanted by the UN for crimes against humanity. Obama mainly avoided discussing the detainees, although he insisted that he was “confident” that the US could prevent them from being a threat to American security in the future.
Instead, Obama defended the action by focusing on Bergdahl, perhaps learning a lesson from Susan Rice’s jaw-dropping appearance on Sunday. Regardless of the quality of Bergdahl’s service, Obama argued, the US does not leave men and women behind. “We do not condition that” pledge to their families, and said Bergdahl’s case would be evaluated at the appropriate time:
As President Barack Obama starts his third overseas trip in less than three months, he finds himself once again peppered with questions about his foreign policy, even as he attempts to cement his own legacy on the world stage.
Obama landed Tuesday in Poland, his first stop, on a mission to reassure nervous allies in Eastern Europe after Russia’s incursion into Ukraine.
His three-nation journey comes as Republicans have unleashed a new line of attack questioning his judgment in exchanging five Taliban prisoners held at the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for the return of a former prisoner of war, Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.
At a news conference in Warsaw, Obama defended the decision.
“We don’t leave men and women in uniform behind,” the President said.
Obama added, “We don’t condition that.” That’s the argument to which the White House should have stuck all along. It’s true, and it’s compelling — although it doesn’t exactly address the other side of that question, which is why it took all five of the Taliban’s wish-list detainees to make the trade. Nor does it really address how badly this hurts American security, considering that two years ago these same men were considered unreleasable by the Obama administration because of their danger to the US and others.
Obama tried defending his snub of Congress with much less success:
His administration had previously consulted with Congress on the possibility of a prisoner exchange for Bergdahl, Obama said, but had to move quickly because of concerns over Bergdahl’s health and to not miss a window of opportunity.
Really? Obama was in the Rose Garden on Saturday announcing this deal, but Congress didn’t get their official notification until yesterday. As I ask in my column for The Week, if Obama and the White House didn’t have time to inform Congress, how exactly did they find the time to get Bergdahl’s parents to Washington DC from Idaho on Saturday to participate in the Rose Garden speech?
Even by Monday, the White House had not bothered to notify the chair of the House Armed Services Committee of the release of the five Taliban figures and the security arrangements to keep them from rejoining the fight in Afghanistan, despite a pledge made last year that Congress would be consulted on any release. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel argued that “exigent circumstances” prevented the White House from notifying Congress — but those same circumstances somehow didn’t keep Obama from getting the Bergdahls into the Rose Garden from Idaho.
The White House’s nonchalance about the five Taliban detainees also had people scratching their heads. Press Secretary Jay Carney tried arguing that they presented no threat to the U.S., but two of them have been charged with mass murder by the United Nations, and the Taliban celebrated their release as a “big victory” over the U.S. One detainee, Khairullah Khairkwa, was a confidante of Osama bin Laden, while Abdul Haq Wasiq served as deputy intelligence minister to the Taliban.
The deceptions didn’t stop there, either:
Susan Rice, who infamously fronted the false narrative on the Benghazi attack, appeared on ABC’s This Week and arguably did it again. When George Stephanopoulos pressed her on the lopsided trade in the context of his apparent desertion, Rice instead insisted that Berghdahl had “served the United States with honor and distinction.”
That came as news to the men who served with Bergdahl and had attempted to find him after he walked away from the base. Multiple members of his unitwent public after the announcement, despite the non-disclosure agreements, to denounce Bergdahl as a deserter. One set of parents who had been told that their son died while attempting to capture a high-ranking Taliban commander instead discovered that he had been killed trying to find Bergdahl.
Even worse, James Rosen at Fox News reported that Bergdahl’s disappearance became the subject of an investigation by U.S. intelligence, which produced a “major classified file” on the questions of desertion — or perhaps even collaboration.
It’s difficult to credit Obama for any argument when he and his team at the White House keep destroying their own credibility. They seem intent on undermining themselves even when the truth would work better for them.
Of course with Obama’s new military, they never leave a man’s behind.
What about the Marine rotting in a Mexican jail when he made a wrong turn Huh?
What is Obummer doing about it?
Correction: the US never leaves our own men behind.
lying sack of crap
Unless you happen to be diplomatic staff in Libya.
What no barf alert? One word for you Bammy: Benghazi
Oh, so that’s why Ambassador Stevens and the others in Benghazi got left behind....they wore the wrong clothes.
Except in places like Benghazi or Mexico.
Depends on what mood His Heinous is in and whether or not such action benefits his Jihadist pals.
Except for ambassadors.
“Oh, so that’s why Ambassador Stevens and the others in Benghazi got left behind....they wore the wrong clothes.”
Right on, and how about our Marine being held prisoner by Mexican Drug Cartel’s proxy government, aka Mexico.
But once a “man” is a deserter, he is no longer part of the US Military - which is why the Special Forces did indeed leave this man behind, on purpose.
Intentional statement made to irritate those who actually know he’s lying.
“In uniform?” Bergdahl mailed his uniform home to his parents before he abandoned his unit and broke his oath. And his actions caused the death of those who kept their oaths. And his actions caused irreparable harm to some of the other men in his unit.
“Obama: The US never leaves a man behind.”
The Commie bastard has already forgot the Marine in Mexico!
Guess he was not “in uniform”.
After 5 years of leaving him behind.
If you recall, some of the men who went to rescue the folks in Benghazi had to take off their uniforms and leave them in Tripoli. I think but am not sure that one of those guys was left to die on the roof of the “annex” though he was retrieved alive the next day. I may be confusing stories though. It is a vague recollection.
“We don’t leave men and women in uniform behind,” the President said. (Where’s the period)
Ok, so the Benghazi dead weren’t wearing uniforms and the Marine in Mexico was in street clothes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.