Taliban commander says Bergdahl swap encourages more abductions

posted at 10:41 am on June 5, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

Fear of this outcome came up as the strongest reaction in last night’s Fox News poll, where a clear majority was “very concerned” that we encouraged more hostage-taking with the 5-for-1 deal to get Bowe Bergdahl back. One Taliban commander tells Time Magazine today that we should be concerned. The huge payoff for five years of holding Bergdahl has the Taliban incentivized to look for more targets to use as bargaining chips:

A Taliban commander close to the negotiations over the release of U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl told TIME by telephone Thursday that the deal made to secure Bergdahl’s release has made it more appealing for fighters to capture American soldiers and other high-value targets.

“It’s better to kidnap one person like Bergdahl than kidnapping hundreds of useless people,” the commander said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to the media. “It has encouraged our people. Now everybody will work hard to capture such an important bird.”

Don’t rush to take the bait on this, though. There are a couple of very good reasons to be skeptical of this claim. First, Bergdahl was an anomaly from the start, because as a rule Taliban and al-Qaeda personnel don’t take soldiers as prisoners — they torture and kill them for being infidels on supposedly holy land. For that reason, US and NATO take care not to leave personnel in position to be taken alone. It seems doubtful that they would take prisoners — and feed and house them, and provide security to contain them — on the off chance that they may get someone out of Gitmo or Bagram or any of the other detention facilities.  (They’ve had success breaking their people out of those facilities when they really want to do so anyway.)

This might very well be a way for the Taliban to troll American opinion. They certainly must be keeping track of the reaction in the US to the deal that sent five of their top commanders to Qatar in exchange for a PFC suspected of desertion. This sounds like a way to goad outrage on our end.

Susan Page reviews the main criticisms of the deal, including the danger of encouraging more abductions. Page focuses on another important point that flows from the prisoner swap. Did Barack Obama undermine the incoming elected government of Afghanistan by dealing with the Taliban for the five detainees rather than Kabul?

 Could the decision to release the Taliban commanders encourage terrorist groups elsewhere to try to capture American soldiers, diplomats or citizens in hopes of winning a valuable reward for their release? And will these five particular commanders return to wage war against the United States and its allies?

While prisoner exchanges are a standard part of the conduct of war, political scientist Christopher Gelpi of Ohio State University cites as potentially problematic the administration’s equivalent treatment of an American POW and Gitmo detainees, who have not been granted POW status by the U.S. government. What’s more, the administration negotiated the swap with the Taliban, not the Afghan government.

“Once again, the U.S. may appear to be granting the Taliban some legitimacy as an international actor, and in doing so may undermine the legitimacy of the Afghan government,” says Gelpi, chairman of OSU’s Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution program.

It’s no secret that the Obama administration has had its differences with the Karzai government, and have been happy to see it pass from the scene. The newly-elected government was supposed to give us an opportunity to provide a fresh spark to the US-Afghanistan relationship. Instead, Afghanistan has filed a protest that we dealt its nationals through the Taliban rather than the recognized legitimate government in Kabul.

With 32,000 troops in the country and the US looking to the Afghan security forces for an exit strategy, that’s a real problem.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

I’m sure he was trying to make casual conversation

Chuck Schick on June 5, 2014 at 10:42 AM

Bowe Bergdahl was not ABDUCTED.

Pork-Chop on June 5, 2014 at 10:43 AM

Could we get the locks on the Spite House changed before he gets back?

ConstantineXI on June 5, 2014 at 10:45 AM

No it doesn’t, my President told me so.

RickB on June 5, 2014 at 10:45 AM

It’s no secret that the Obama administration has had its differences with the Karzai government, and have been happy to see it pass from the scene. The newly-elected government was supposed to give us an opportunity to provide a fresh spark to the US-Afghanistan relationship. Instead, Afghanistan has filed a protest that we dealt its nationals through the Taliban rather than the recognized legitimate government in Kabul.

With 32,000 troops in the country and the US looking to the Afghan security forces for an exit strategy, that’s a real problem.

Obama screwed (or ate?) the pooch again.

Shocker.

Bitter Clinger on June 5, 2014 at 10:47 AM

This might very well be a way for the Taliban to troll American opinion

…JugEars…is ‘teaching’ them something!

KOOLAID2 on June 5, 2014 at 10:48 AM

C’mon Mr. President! Two more reps with those 2 pound weights! You can do it!

Roy Rogers on June 5, 2014 at 10:48 AM

If you interact with Lefties on other sites, they will tell you that the Taliban was the legitimate government of Afghanistan before we went in. They don’t care that only three Islamic countries recognized them as such. Those people’s Hell will never end.

Cindy Munford on June 5, 2014 at 10:48 AM

Good news for Obama.
If the Taliban would just kidnap more Americans then Obama could make trades and empty Guantanamo Bay faster.

albill on June 5, 2014 at 10:48 AM

Maybe I’m remembering incorrectly here, but wasn’t this the whole reasoning behing Reagan saying that we will not negotiate with terrorists?

Pretty sure….

But being that obama is a terrorist and traitor to our own country, I guess he doesn’t see things the same way.

Diluculo on June 5, 2014 at 10:48 AM

I thought they just wanted to avoid doing stupid shit.

Not working so well is it.

BacaDog on June 5, 2014 at 10:49 AM

Does he also agree with Dog Eater that the Gitmo 5 might return to their old terrorist ways after their 1 year vacation in Qatar?

Bishop on June 5, 2014 at 10:49 AM

“Once again, the U.S. may appear to be granting the Taliban some legitimacy as an international actor,

Well, the Muslim Brotherhood and now Hamas were granted such legitimacy. Will Obama start negotiating with al Qaeda before he leaves office? The GOP?

Wethal on June 5, 2014 at 10:50 AM

“War on Vets”

Sven on June 5, 2014 at 10:50 AM

If I were the faculty at Harvard, I wouldn’t want Obama’s academic reference to the school publicly known.

b1jetmech on June 5, 2014 at 10:50 AM

as a rule Taliban and al-Qaeda personnel don’t take soldiers as prisoners

Rules were meant to be broken. I think they are more like guidelines. If they can benefit from taking someone, they will. This is case in point.

Patriot Vet on June 5, 2014 at 10:51 AM

First, Bergdahl was an anomaly from the start, because as a rule Taliban and al-Qaeda personnel don’t take soldiers as prisoners — they torture and kill them for being infidels on supposedly holy land.

Not if they know that they can get much more than killing those who they captured… This deal will certainly encourage our islamic terrorist enemies to target more of our troops for capture…

mnjg on June 5, 2014 at 10:51 AM

Obama the Beta-Male King. All hail slip their tea to the Beta-Male King.

Oil Can on June 5, 2014 at 10:51 AM

It doesn’t really matter whether the Taliban source quoted was sincere or lying. It’s fairly obvious that the Bergdahl swap WILL encourage more hostage taking by the Taliban.

I never though I’d see an American president take an action best described as treason. But this president has been breaking all kinds of new ground.

There Goes the Neighborhood on June 5, 2014 at 10:52 AM

Rules were meant to be broken. I think they are more like guidelines. If they can benefit from taking someone, they will. This is case in point.

Patriot Vet on June 5, 2014 at 10:51 AM

Exactly…

mnjg on June 5, 2014 at 10:53 AM

First, Bergdahl was an anomaly from the start, because as a rule Taliban and al-Qaeda personnel don’t take soldiers as prisoners — they torture and kill them for being infidels on supposedly holy land

Tell us then why did they keep this Bergdahl alive for five years? Then when he tried to escape they didn’t kill him just to rid themselves of trouble. Hmmmm, very strange behavior for these very bad guys. To me future danger to Americans being kidnapped is the greatest danger and issue.

Herb on June 5, 2014 at 10:53 AM

This sounds like a way to goad outrage on our end.

Like Obama needs help with that.

BobMbx on June 5, 2014 at 10:53 AM

Bishop on June 5, 2014 at 10:49 AM

He’s really hoping for sometime after Jan. 21, 2017.

Cindy Munford on June 5, 2014 at 10:54 AM

Unexpectedly.

*spit*

pambi on June 5, 2014 at 10:56 AM

I can imagine some liberal martyr surrendering to the Taliban, knowing this administration will bargain for their release.

right2bright on June 5, 2014 at 10:56 AM

This is nothing more than a whipped up controversy….btw, why did Karzai snub Dear Leader during his secret visit to Afghanistan recently…?

d1carter on June 5, 2014 at 10:58 AM

As it was intended to all along. No other reason to swap 5 Four Star Generals and 6 million dollars for one deserter and traitor.

oscarwilde on June 5, 2014 at 10:58 AM

A Taliban commander … told TIME by telephone

How is it that TIME has a direct line to the Taliban, but our military can’t catch them or take them out?

What am I missing?

Mark Boabaca on June 5, 2014 at 10:59 AM

One good thing…the liberals posters must all be on vacation…

right2bright on June 5, 2014 at 10:59 AM

Are you going to believe the Taliban or this impertinent creep?

Schadenfreude on June 5, 2014 at 11:01 AM

Fox News headline: “Obama digs in on Taliban-for-Bergdahl trade, vows ‘no apologies’”

Of course, because he know the Republicans won’t do sh!t about it, except maybe complain, and hold some hearings that won’t have any effect.

Ward Cleaver on June 5, 2014 at 11:01 AM

You, the 35%, I hope you all choke from consuming obama’s chit. It ain’t Beluga caviar, you incredible scum of the land.

Schadenfreude on June 5, 2014 at 11:01 AM

One good thing…the liberals posters must all be on vacation…

right2bright on June 5, 2014 at 10:59 AM

Classes haven’t let out yet.

CurtZHP on June 5, 2014 at 11:01 AM

Wow he just competely f $&@# up this time although that’s unsurprising there is no winning on this issue.

sorrowen on June 5, 2014 at 11:01 AM

One good thing…the liberals posters must all be on vacation…

right2bright on June 5, 2014 at 10:59 AM

But Burning Man isn’t until Labor Day weekend.

Ward Cleaver on June 5, 2014 at 11:02 AM

The 5 released terrorists are the future leaders of Afghanistan.

Thank GWB and obama, two of the creepiest Americans, traitors to all the Soldiers, dead and alive.

Schadenfreude on June 5, 2014 at 11:02 AM

Lsm loving dear leader and the whipped up controversy

Defending him from the Gop who have deleted their tweets

Good lapdogs

cmsinaz on June 5, 2014 at 11:03 AM

because as a rule Taliban and al-Qaeda personnel don’t take soldiers as prisoners — they torture and kill them for being infidels on supposedly holy land.

For 5 years, they held on to this low-level soldier, Why? Why so long? Why not get what they could from him, and kill him? Why wasn’t Bergdahl such a big deal 3 years ago? Or 2? Or 6 months ago?Makes me believe some deal was in the works from the beginning. Dad bothers me too. Stinks to high heaven.

leftamark on June 5, 2014 at 11:03 AM

But, just about anybody else the Taliban grabs won’t be as easy to get as the traitor Bergdahl.

Ward Cleaver on June 5, 2014 at 11:04 AM

How is it that TIME has a direct line to the Taliban, but our military can’t catch them or take them out?

What am I missing?

Mark Boabaca on June 5, 2014 at 10:59 AM

That’s funny…

“Do u wnt 2 tlk”
“k”
“call me”
“k”
“call u l8r”
“k”
“I hve info,we will kidnap more”
“k”
“I will send pic of new uniforms, cool”
“awesome, you look sweet”
“bye”
“luv u”

right2bright on June 5, 2014 at 11:04 AM

Lets go to the videotape.

Obama chuckles as he refers to this as a “controversy whipped up in Washington”.

Naturally Curly on June 5, 2014 at 11:04 AM

as a rule Taliban and al-Qaeda personnel don’t take soldiers as prisoners

I have a feeling that’s about to change. Islam has a huge history of hostage-taking for ransom, going at least back to the Barbary Pirates at our nation’s infancy and to today’s Somali pirates. And even back in the Barbary days the ransoms went into the millions.

paul1149 on June 5, 2014 at 11:06 AM

I’m sure the Taliban commander was serious, but I’m sure they are all laughing their behinds off at how stupid we really are.

NavyMustang on June 5, 2014 at 11:06 AM

as a rule Taliban and al-Qaeda personnel don’t take soldiers as prisoners

No need to take that which was offered freely.

Bmore on June 5, 2014 at 11:07 AM

A solider is going to be kidnapped or Americans are going to be killed because of this “deal” and all hell is going to break loose.

You can see it coming a mile away.

gophergirl on June 5, 2014 at 11:09 AM

Golly-Freaking DUH!!!!

Ricard on June 5, 2014 at 11:10 AM

as a rule Taliban and al-Qaeda personnel don’t take soldiers as prisoners — they torture and kill them for being infidels on supposedly holy land.

Ed: These were not Taliban or al-Qaeda…these were Haqanni…big difference…

They are motivated more by $$$ than ideology…

PatriotRider on June 5, 2014 at 11:10 AM

This guy w/b better

Schadenfreude on June 5, 2014 at 11:11 AM

Ward Cleaver on June 5, 2014 at 11:01 AM

Hey, who knows, maybe our side, the loyal opposition will send him a sternly worded letter.

Bmore on June 5, 2014 at 11:11 AM

So rewarding bad behavior encourages more bad behavior? That is so weird.

Flange on June 5, 2014 at 11:12 AM

as a rule Taliban and al-Qaeda personnel don’t take soldiers as prisoners

Perhaps because it was known we didn’t negotiate with terrorists.

Now we do.

lynncgb on June 5, 2014 at 11:12 AM

Bergdahl was never abducted, nor was he ever a POW. The Army knows all this.

Schadenfreude on June 5, 2014 at 11:12 AM

This is getting to feel more and more each day like trying to run while submerged in liquid cement. Why bother? If people are incapable on what must be a spiritual level of processing the most obvious, simple things; if all of the explanations, if all of the writing and speaking is the equivalent of trying to teach linear algebra to a clump of wet lint, why bother?

Obama used the known deserter/traitor/musloid convert Bergdahl for the release of the top five most valuable Gitmo detainees because the entire former American government, now fronted by the imbecile-puppet Obama, along with the Clinton machine, and a massive contingent of bureaucrat operatives loyal to the megabanks saturating all three branches and the military, has been overthrown and is explicitly allied with islam. Obama, Clinton, the FBI, the CIA, the Pentagon and on and on has been completely infiltrated by the Musloid Brotherhood, and those not in the MB per se are allied with it because it is a highly complementary political system with a litany of shared goals and objectives, namely the establishment of a tyrannical oligarchy looting and dominating by terror a massive, destitute underclass.

Obama IS Musloid Brotherhood, for all intents and purposes. They own him and have since his earliest days. No, he doesn’t believe in the faux-religious aspects of the musloid political system, because almost none of the musloids above the very lowest caste do. It’s a TOTALITARIAN POLITICAL SYSTEM, not a religion. Hillary Clinton is up to her neck in Musloid Brotherhood. Good grief, her right hand “man” and likely lesbian concubine, Huma Abedin, is the daughter of TWO of the highest-ranking Musloid Brotherhood leaders on the planet. The CIA is headed by a “convert” to islam, John Brennan.

When I read commentator after commentator breathlessly asking, “Why would they do this? It looks so bad!” I just shake my head. They did it because THEY ARE THE ENEMY. They’re not Americans. America is dead. It’s their state now, and they will do what they want, when they want, and what you think about it or what the Constitution or the old U.S. Code says is utterly, totally, completely irrelevant.

They don’t care that it looks bad because the overthrow of the constitutional republic is a fait accompli and has been for YEARS. What the hell are you going to do about it? -A. Barnhardt

Oh, it gets even better.

Akzed on June 5, 2014 at 11:12 AM

Who possibly could have guessed this was going to happen / sarc

rjoco1 on June 5, 2014 at 11:13 AM

as a rule Taliban and al-Qaeda personnel don’t take soldiers as prisoners

Why should they? Bergdahl stretched the rug out for them. The Haqquanis welcome him, from behind. It’s when his azz woke up.

He was not with the Taliban. The Haqqanis, contrary to their Allah, love loot, of all kinds.

Schadenfreude on June 5, 2014 at 11:14 AM

Ed: These were not Taliban or al-Qaeda…these were Haqanni…big difference…

They are motivated more by $$$ than ideology…

PatriotRider on June 5, 2014 at 11:10 AM

You have your facts wrong…we negotiated with the Taliban…Bergahl was looking for the Taliban in a Haganni controlled area, but he sought the Taliban.

You can manipulate the time line all you want…but the fact is, he sought out the Taliban, and that is who we negotiated with.

right2bright on June 5, 2014 at 11:17 AM

When is the Lightbringer coming home from his European vacation???…

PatriotRider on June 5, 2014 at 11:17 AM

A Taliban commander … told TIME by telephone

…they called Carney?

KOOLAID2 on June 5, 2014 at 11:17 AM

Has John Kerry spoken about Bergdahl?

Has he intervened in Mexico “to not leave any US Soldier behind?

Schadenfreude on June 5, 2014 at 11:18 AM

If you are overseas on just a regular tourist bit, then do be warned that there is now an exchange price on your head that has been set by the Obama Administration.

It isn’t just soldiers that need to worry.

This is a war with a couple of hot areas but NO FRONT LINE. It takes place across many Nations, many continents and has actors who seek to blend in with civilian populations. AQ isn’t the only group with multi-national affiliates: the Hekmatyar organization, a guy who used to run Afghanistan when the Taliban were in charge, has an organization stretching from the Golden Triangle to London, and were the ones responsible for the ricin attack.

So, yeah, this is why you don’t negotiate with terrorists on anything. You put everyone at risk when you do so and corrode the law of nations when you do. There is a price on the head of every American and the easier you are for a Talibe operative to get to, the more risk you take. If memory serves London was only one of the gathering places for that organization and it isn’t the ONLY one with affiliates on different continents, including South America and Latin America.

ajacksonian on June 5, 2014 at 11:19 AM

I predict that we will find out that $$$ were also transferred, by some “third party” on behalf of the US, for the release of Bergdahl…

PatriotRider on June 5, 2014 at 11:19 AM

He was not with the Taliban. The Haqqanis, contrary to their Allah, love loot, of all kinds.

Schadenfreude on June 5, 2014 at 11:14 AM

Listen to the staff sarg. on the CNN video…he heard the radio talk that Berdahl was in town looking for the Taliban.

We negotiated with the Taliban for his release…don’t be taken in by the press. They want to minimize the Taliban as a faction in this.

The town and area was controlled by the Hagganis, so he had to pass through them to get to the Taliban.

right2bright on June 5, 2014 at 11:19 AM

I feel like a broken record, it seems like we can say weekly that the President has a warped view of the world.

Tater Salad on June 5, 2014 at 11:21 AM

The frown on Bibi’s face can be seen even without a photo.

Bmore on June 5, 2014 at 11:21 AM

I’m sure this was a requirement of his Nobel.

Tater Salad on June 5, 2014 at 11:22 AM

encourages more abductions

Absolutely! What a propaganda victory the Taliban release video was! Rugged, macho Taliban fighters depositing an effeminate wimp dressed like Gandhi and resembling Sinead O’Connor. This weill not only encourage more abductions but thousands more Taliban recruits.

MaiDee on June 5, 2014 at 11:22 AM

Part of the reason for the “no man left behind” concept is to provide the troops with the morale to fight. That somebody will have your back in the fog of war.

Well, now we’ve got a filthy deserter/defector who was traded for five high-level and valuable detainees. This after the searching for the bastard cost at least other decent human beings the ultimate sacrifice.

I’m guessing morale among the troops is not high right now. Now when they see a lazy stupid feckless CINC shucking and jiving about the necessity to rescue a traitor- no matter the cost to America. Here’s hoping Obama’s worthless brats have a front row seat when these detainees have had a chance to regroup and once again attack Americans.

Happy Nomad on June 5, 2014 at 11:27 AM

The practical military response would be to shoot dead instead of
capturing terrorist leaders.

Amjean on June 5, 2014 at 11:30 AM

I’m more worried about cells in Europe kidnapping some tourists or some lone ghost doing a Beslan here.

warren on June 5, 2014 at 11:32 AM

Couldn’t Obama have begged the Taliban to be merciful and release a sick man who is so bad off he is going to die soon? As a show of good faith? That they aren’t cold blooded killers and ruthless as all get-out?

Ask them to act civilized, perhaps?

That he didn’t do so speaks volumes.

If he did and they refused, then how can you deal with them AT ALL?

ajacksonian on June 5, 2014 at 11:34 AM

Too clever by half. Don’t take WHAT bait? I said this before the Taliban quote. The answer is yes.

Irritable Pundit on June 5, 2014 at 11:35 AM

They’ll be sure to ask for even more with the next prisoner they take. Unless we are willing to “leave an American behind”, we’ll have to pay the ransom. I’m predicting this is how they will get the blind sheikh back. Maybe even KSM.

Buddahpundit on June 5, 2014 at 11:40 AM

Taliban commander says Bergdahl swap encourages more abductions

OK Taliban here is the deal – you kidnap Obama and Michelle and we will release all the Gitmo prisoners……on the condition that you keep Obama and Michelle…..

redguy on June 5, 2014 at 11:40 AM

Obama screwed (or ate?) the pooch again.

Shocker.

Bitter Clinger on June 5, 2014 at 10:47 AM

He likes to screw them, before he eats them.

redguy on June 5, 2014 at 11:41 AM

Has John Kerry spoken about Bergdahl?

Has he intervened in Mexico “to not leave any US Soldier behind?

Schadenfreude on June 5, 2014 at 11:18 AM

Yeah and what about the people Obama left behind in Benghazi?

redguy on June 5, 2014 at 11:43 AM

THIS IS A WHIPPED UP CONTROVERSY…

OBAMA

Key West Reader on June 5, 2014 at 11:46 AM

Didn’t Obama promise the world that the US would not ‘go it alone’?

Like all his promises, it is good only as long as it suits his purposes.

s1im on June 5, 2014 at 11:51 AM

D’oh!

Christian Conservative on June 5, 2014 at 12:01 PM

Tell us then why did they keep this Bergdahl alive for five years? Then when he tried to escape they didn’t kill him just to rid themselves of trouble. Hmmmm, very strange behavior for these very bad guys. To me future danger to Americans being kidnapped is the greatest danger and issue.

Herb on June 5, 2014 at 10:53 AM

Bergdahl was the perfect useful idiot–sympathetic to the Taliban while officially being a POW they could use as a bargaining chip to make Obama look good while getting their terrorist leaders back.

Loyal American soldiers wouldn’t walk out alone and unarmed looking for the Taliban, and if a group of them were ambushed by the Taliban, there would be a lot of casualties on both sides.

Steve Z on June 5, 2014 at 12:02 PM

He was not with the Taliban. The Haqqanis, contrary to their Allah, love loot, of all kinds.

Schadenfreude on June 5, 2014 at 11:14 AM

Mohammed granted 80% of all loot going to the holy warrior and 20% goes to Mohammed and his family. All Muslim fighters are aware of this and they are all out for the booty among which your sons and daughters are included. It has been fashionable to pigeon hole and categorize seemingly disparate groups into anomalies unrelated to that big beautiful religion, Islam. They are all Muslims and all Muslims work for the same goal, conquest, in whatever fashion they can from being draining parasites, subverting institutions to simple murder in volume. All of Islam is the enemy of humanity. The “Bushes and Clintons” of America have been co opted for decades by oil tics and MoBros. That level of rot is pretty difficult to shed voluntarily.

BL@KBIRD on June 5, 2014 at 12:02 PM

Bergdahl wasn’t even worth one terrorist much less five. In fact they should have chopped off a middle finger of one of the Gitmo terrorists and sent only that to trade for the deserter. Now THAT would send a proper message terrorists would understand!

otlset on June 5, 2014 at 12:03 PM

The traitor defected to the Muslim terrorists, then taught them how better set IED’s to kill more Americans = faster.

ama on June 5, 2014 at 12:08 PM

Gitmo or Bagram or any of the other detention facilities. (They’ve had success breaking their people out of those facilities when they really want to do so anyway.)

They’ve broken people out of Gitmo. I must have missed that one.

Viator on June 5, 2014 at 12:20 PM

Of course it encourages them. You give a mouse a cookie, they’re going to want a glass of milk.

That’s why the U.S. doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.

I guess Obama was at a fund raiser when that briefing was given.

Meople on June 5, 2014 at 12:24 PM

Obama is an enemy of America. The only people that Obama considers “the enemy” is his fellow countrymen that disagree with him and his idiotic policies.

jukin3 on June 5, 2014 at 12:27 PM

“It’s better to kidnap one person like Bergdahl than kidnapping hundreds of useless people,”

Bullhockey. Right now, some bright guy who leads a cell has decided to snatch an American soldier, and one of his lieutenants is having this talk with him:

“Are you crazy? They had him for five years!”
“So what, it is only one more mouth to feed. And he might be useful.”
“Have you not heard what is being said? He was always complaining, ‘Is this falafel organic?’ ‘The cream in this coffee tastes funny’ ‘My cheeks hurt.’”
“That is just hooka talk.”
“OK, shiek, but I’m warning you that somebody is going to shoot you and the prisoner if that’s the crap we have to put up with.”

GWB on June 5, 2014 at 12:31 PM

Now THAT would send a proper message terrorists would understand!

otlset on June 5, 2014 at 12:03 PM

I’m more of a fan of the Ahnold technique in Commando: “I let him go.” You just update it to a C-130 at 10,000 feet (I don’t want these guys unconscious when they step outside).

GWB on June 5, 2014 at 12:39 PM

One good thing…the liberals posters must all be on vacation…

right2bright on June 5, 2014 at 10:59 AM

Not here. Jr. High School is still in session.

Wade on June 5, 2014 at 12:48 PM

Instead, Afghanistan has filed a protest that we dealt its nationals through the Taliban rather than the recognized legitimate government in Kabul.

Oh boy! A lawsuit!!

And cue the headline “zero’s Worst Week Evah!”…

Newtie and the Beauty on June 5, 2014 at 1:04 PM

Well, Dear Leader has pretty much screwed up everything important in the nation’s life: the economy, health care, foreign relations, the military, social relations among the citizenry, Constitutional governance and the separation of powers, the principle of equality before the law…

Thank you Mr.and Ms. Simple-Minded Go-With-Your-Feelings-I-Only-Watch-The-News-At-The-Airport-It’s-Time-We-Elected-A-Black-President American Voter – here’s your change.

jbspry on June 5, 2014 at 1:56 PM

Don’t rush to take the bait on this, though. There are a couple of very good reasons to be skeptical of this claim. First, Bergdahl was an anomaly from the start, because as a rule Taliban and al-Qaeda personnel don’t take soldiers as prisoners

As a rule, the U.S. doesn’t negotiate with terrorists either. How’d that work out?

xblade on June 5, 2014 at 2:37 PM

Should have contaminated as much of Afghanistan with nuclear waste as we could and destroyed the poppy fields. Next we tell them we won’t be so nice the next time. What we did in Afghanistan and Iraq is a waste of men, women, money and time.

alanstern on June 5, 2014 at 2:42 PM

How is it that TIME has a direct line to the Taliban, but our military can’t catch them or take them out?

What am I missing?

Mark Boabaca on June 5, 2014 at 10:59 AM

The NSA is too busy watching OUR phones and emails….

dentarthurdent on June 5, 2014 at 2:50 PM

As a rule, the U.S. doesn’t negotiate with terrorists either. How’d that work out?

xblade on June 5, 2014 at 2:37 PM

Ya, and of course there was a reason for that policy – when you give them what they want, they do it more.
Naturally King Putt is too clueless to understand that – and/or believes “it will work out different this time because I’M in charge”.

dentarthurdent on June 5, 2014 at 2:53 PM

Is it time to consider dropping pork fat (or something) on the Kaaba or is that still verboten?

Opinionator on June 5, 2014 at 3:12 PM

Bowe Bergdahl was not ABDUCTED.

Pork-Chop on June 5, 2014 at 10:43 AM

No. But others will be as a result of this.
And I’ll bet Romney’s $10K the first time King Putt says he won’t negotiate with terrorists, the victim(s) will get the Daniel Pearl treatment.

dentarthurdent on June 5, 2014 at 3:18 PM

Comment pages: 1 2