For John, BLUF: The Bergdahl imbroglio just gets worse. Nothing to see here; just move along.
This is from The Washington Post, which I believe has been reliably pro-Administration for the last six years. The byline is Stephanie McCrummen, on 11 June, at 11:03 AM. "Bergdahl’s writings reveal a fragile young man".
Before he became a Taliban prisoner, before he wrote in his journal “I am the lone wolf of deadly nothingness,” before he ever joined the Army, Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl was discharged from the U.S. Coast Guard for psychological reasons, said close friends who were worried about his emotional health at the time.For those of you asking yourself how the Army could miss the Coast Guard discharge when Sergeant Bergdahl joined the Army, the answer is that to quickly expand the Army it lowered its standards. Let us face it. Less that half of our youth meet the military enlistment standards. Being a US Citizen or having a Green Card, having good health, passing the mental aptitude test, passing the physical standards, not having a criminal record, not having outlandish tattoos. When you need more folks in uniform you lower the standards. I recall someone telling me that toward the end of WWII the US was taking people with sight in only one eye.The 2006 discharge and a trove of Bergdahl’s writing — the handwritten journal along with other essays, stories and e-mails provided to The Washington Post — paint a portrait of a deeply complicated and fragile young man who was by his own account struggling to maintain his mental stability from the start of basic training until the moment he walked off his post in eastern Afghanistan.
I think that Sergeant Bergdahl should be treated with consideration for his personal problems and with appreciation for what he has endured. That does not mean that the Army is obligated to allow him to reenlist. Nor does it mean that he should be condemned for his actions in a manner that is insensitive to his mental state, at the time or now. Sergeant Bergdahl is not the issue and shouldn't be. There are two issues. The first is the Administration execution process. Granted that the Administration was concerned about leaks if they told Republicans in the US Senate. That said, notification to the Senate Intelligence was too long delayed.♠ The second issue is the fact that the Administration is tone deaf with regard to the American public.♥
Regards — Cliff
♠ Well, and the whole legality issue. Releasing five people from GITMO while ignoring the Congressional restrictions (which are law) is not a big deal. However, if the President next releases ten or twenty, releases fifty, or 100 or all of the prisoners, it will at some point cross the line and become an impeachable offense.
♥ The alternative view is that they, like Rhett Butler, just don't give a darn.
Sgt. Bergdahl must be punished under the UCMJ. His sentence can range from a reprimand to a Bad Conduct Discharge (unless they convene a General Court in which case he could receive a Dishonorable Discharge). He could be fined, he could do jail time....or a combination of all of the above. Suffice it to say, his days in the Army are at an end. He must be punished because it is important to the good order and discipline of the Service.
ReplyDeleteAs an aside, in times of stress, the Services almost always lower their standards to abysmally low levels. Lets not forget Project 100,000. This was a McNamara program to placate LBJ's War on Poverty. Men who did not meet virtually any standards for military service were invited to join. The effects of this program reverberated long after it was terminated, well into this century. To be sure, there were a few success stories that emerged, but from a command perspective, the inductees in that program were a disciplinary nightmare. Some social scientists argued that the program was a guileless move to sacrifice the dregs of society on a battlefield that was already showing the strains of non-support.