I disagree with Hightower.

What you will find here is: a centrist's view of current events;
a collection of thoughts, arguments, and observations
that I have found appealing and/or amusing over the years;
and, if you choose, your civil contributions which will make it into a conversation.

He not busy bein' born, is busy dyin'. - Bob Dylan

Please refer to participants only by their designated identities.

suggestion for US citizens: When a form asks for your race, write in: -- American

Saturday, June 7, 2014

Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl

The trade of 5 Guantanamo prisoners for Sgt. Bergdahl has become so politicized that I am not sure it is possible to have a meaningful discussion, but we can try.  I would like to know some of the opinions of YA readers regarding the merits of the trade (excluding the vehement political reaction to the trade).  Specifically:

1.      Considering the way the trade was conducted was it legal?
      2.      Discounting the imbalance of the trade (5 for 1) was it OK to trade these particular
      3.      Should the trade have been made?

My answers are no, no and no. 


  1. Tom, I don't know what to think about this action. It simply makes no sense given what we know. I keep thinking that there must be more to this than just the trade of 4 al Queda guys for an accused deserter. The "we don't leave men behind" reasoning just doesn't stand up. Of course we leave men behind. We do it all the time. We don't negotiate with terrorists either...usually.

    If what we know is all there is to this thing then I agree with your no, no, and no.

  2. 1. So many laws now have caveats about what the president can modify (a bad trend by Congress) that it is sometimes hard to know what is and is not legal for a president to do.

    2. Serious questions about his record say probably not. (Not his record after capture – that should probably never count against you.)

    3. Probably not. Certainly not at this time.