Bowe Bergdahl is a Free Man. Now What Do We Do?

On May 31, 2014, after nearly five years of captivity in Afghanistan, Army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl was released by the Taliban in exchange for five Guantanamo prisoners.  Republicans from all phases of life--politicians, failed politicians, ex-soldiers and assorted Fox News pundits have all had something to say about the issue.

1. Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) -- In 2012 he found the idea of prisoner exchange "bizarre."  Then just a few weeks ago he said "I would be inclined to support such a thing."  Now that the exchange has happened and Bergdahl is free, Senator McCain finds the swap "disturbing", "ill-founded" and "a mistake."  In the meantime, he seems to have forgotten that he won his freedom from a POW camp through a prisoner exchange with Vietnam.
2. Senator Kelly Ayotte (R- New Hampshire) -- Senator Ayotte delivered a Memorial Day speech just one week ago urging Americans to keep Army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl in their "thoughts and prayers," adding, "I renew my call on the Defense Department to redouble its efforts to find Sergeant Bergdahl and return him safely to his family."  After the prisoner exchange, Ms. Ayotte changed her mind telling the New Hampshire Union Leader the exchange "endangers U.S. national security interests."
3. Sarah Palin (R) -- In 2009, the 1/2 term Alaska governor and failed Vice Presidential candidate said "Todd and I are praying for Private First Class Bowe Bergdahl, his family, and all his fellow soldiers who are putting their lives on the line to defend our freedom and and protect democracy abroad." After Mr. Bergdahl was released:  "You blew it, Mr. President...a soldier expressing horrid anti-American beliefs--even boldly putting then in writing...is not honorable service."
4. Oliver North (R) -- He helped the Reagan administration secretly sell arms during the Iran-Contra scandal then lied to Congress about it.  Now he is demanding that the media ask the President if there was "a ranson, a fiscal, financial, money transaction" between the White House and the Taliban as part of the prisoner swap.  "Was there a ransom paid?"
5. Fox News, in a blatantly hypocritical and unabashedly silly reaction to the prisoner exchange, decided to question Bowe Bergdahl's loyalty to the U.S. by focusing on his father's beard.  Bill O'Reilly - "You've got this father showing up looking like he's one of the Taliban."  Laura Ingraham - "He actually looks like the terrorists." Eric Bolling - "Anyone else a little skeptical about that father with the beard?" Note that these are the same people who called the like-bearded Duck Dynasty men "true American patriots."  

what eye thynk:  The prisoner exchange that resulted in the freeing of POW Bowe Bergdahl is a case where everyone is right...and wrong...or maybe both.

On one hand, as we close down the debacle of our ill-conceived interference in Afghanistan, could we, as a people, leave one American behind?   My knee-jerk reaction is "No."  But getting beyond a knee-jerk response gets complicated.  

There is some evidence that Mr. Bergdahl chose to walk off his army base of his own free will after becoming disenchanted with the American mission in that country, (a disenchantment that I share), thus leaving himself vulnerable to imprisonment by the Taliban. So, if he left by choice, do we leave him to find his way back on his own--a classic case of "you made your bed, now lie in it?" And do we know for sure that he did leave on his own; or is that just one side of the story?

And it gets even more complex.  The army never charged him with desertion or classified him as AWOL.  They even promoted him to sergeant while he was held by the Taliban.  So, did he desert or not?  If the answer is yes, then why was he promoted?  If the answer is no, then how can anyone object to using any means possible to get him returned to his country?  Was his service "honorable" or not? Do we need an "honorable-ness" scale to decide if an American is worth saving?  And whose values do we use to create the scale?  Conservatives?  Liberals?  Joe, the Plumber?

The question of the five Guantanamo prisoners who were exchanged for Mr. Bergdahl is an equally confusing conumdrum.  Yes, it is possible those five will step right into terrorist leadership roles.  And, yes, by virtue of their long incarceration by this country, their hatred of us and everything we stand for has only worsened. But, again, is that a reason to abandon an American citizen in a foreign country?  

Another argument that has been raised is that prisoner exchanges set a precedent and put other American soldiers at risk for capture.  I agree. But, again, there is no cut and dried, easy answer.  Should we have left one de facto prisoner behind today in order to prevent the possibility of additional prisoners tomorrow? 

Since the Taliban obviously were not going to put Mr. Bergdahl in a truck and drive him to the nearest U.S. base, pat him on the head and let him walk off into the sunset, the only other possibility would have been an all-out assault on their terrorist stronghold--if we could have identified its location--an operation that quite possibly would have caused the loss of additional American lives and would have angered the terrorists and the Afghanistan government, all without any guarantee of a positive outcome for Bowe Bergdahl.

I doubt anyone can honestly begrudge the Bergdahl family having their son returned to them.  The current uproar is over the method President Obama used: prisoner exchange.  Congress thinks they should have been consulted.  I don't know or understand the law on this; but I do question, given the non-productive nature of today's Congress, how many months it would have taken for them to come to a decision.  Did Bowe Bergdahl have that long to wait? 

And while we're on the subject of "waiting," this is a question I'd like the Republicans to answer:  How long do we intend to hold those men in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba?  Until they all die of old-age?  President Obama has been trying to close Guantanamo since 2009.  He has been trying to get the prisoners moved to U.S. soil and tried in U.S. courts.  The Republican Party has done everything in its power to ensure that doesn't happen. So, if we can't move them, and we can't try them, and we can't exchange them, what does the GOP suggest we do with them?  

The more I write on this, the more questions I create for myself.  The only obvious conclusion is that there is no one simple answer; but I'm sure the GOP message gurus are feverishly working on one right now.  I imagine it will have something to do with Obamaghazi.