[Alberta's Child]

I'm not sure what exactly the law requires, but since there was never a formal declaration of war in Afghanistan I'm not sure any laws would apply. I saw this because I don't know if this dude could even be legally considered a "prisoner of war" anyway.

Oh -- and that goes for the five al-Qaeda guys at Gitmo, too. The whole purpose of having them there was that they had no legal status as either criminals subject to U.S. law or prisoners of war subject to the provisions of the Geneva Convention.

Welcome to the brave new world of colonial military campaigns.

[ImNotLying]

“I don’t know if this dude could even be legally considered a “prisoner of war” anyway”

Prisoner of war status is not the issue here. The question is whether he “deserted” his unit and whether he “joined” the Taliban. It appears there is a great deal of evidence to support this. In addition, Bergdahl’s father appears to be supportive of Islam. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

[DouglasKC]

I'm not sure what exactly the law requires, but since there was never a formal declaration of war in Afghanistan I'm not sure any laws would apply. I saw this because I don't know if this dude could even be legally considered a "prisoner of war" anyway.

War or not doesn't matter....the law was about releasing prisoners from Gitmo.....he broke the law, period.

[Theoria]

Well said. Once you enter the rabbit hole, there are no boundaries.

Now, it will be interesting how Congress takes this. Some cry for a all powerful President, but in reality, Congress has more power and is control of the military.