|
ThirdWheelWanted -> RE: Bergdahl (6/7/2014 9:39:10 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:
ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:
ORIGINAL: HornyDaisy
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen
In the real world desertion has a definition and so does treason and Bergdahl meets neither. His command can charge him with a bunch of stuff, being UA, dereliction, disobeying but not desertion. It's the sort of stuff he very well might not even get court martialed for in peace time but I expect he will in this case. But really he's spent 5 years in a cage already what more should be done to him?
Desertion is leaving one's post without being relieved, with the intention of not returning. If you're AWOL for more then 30 days, you're automatically classified as being a deserter, but that's more of an administrative action. If you're on a combat footing, this is often much more serious. Desertion during time of war/while under combat conditions, carries a maximum penalty of death. The death penalty is pretty rare now, since the Civil War it's only been carried out once. More commonly it's life without parole.
Going AWOL to "shirk important duty", which includes to miss a combat deployment or while your unit is actively deployed, is also desertion. If he went AWOL, but was captured a minute later, he's still guilty of desertion. If he colluded with the enemy after deserting, those are the sort of extenuating circumstances that gets the charges increased from just a few years to life or worse.
Since it is fairly well established that he intended to come back desertion is off the table.
Going UA and getting captured does not make you guilty of desertion. No one has ever been treated that way before. And it has happened before.
And escaping from captivity twice seems to be indicative of not colluding with his captors.
It's really amusing how you skipped right over the section that makes your statement pointless. Let's try this again.
1) If you go AWOL (Not UA, there's no such thing, especially in the Army) to "shirk important duty", which includes to miss a combat deployment or while your unit is actively combat deployed (being on a small hilltop in Iraq certainly seems to qualify) it's desertion. It doesn't matter if you're gone a minute or a year, it's desertion, this is especially true if he left when he should have been on guard duty. If that's the case, he endangered the entire command in order to leave, which again, is desertion.
It is not desertion. Desertion requires a specific intent which he will have to confess to or it simply is not there. He would have to have been gone for 30 days of his own volition to qualify. Guys have gone into town in both Vietnam and Korea gotten captured and we did not classify them as deserters or collaborators.
quote:
2) Regardless of your opinion, if he deserted (see #1 above), even if he was subsequently captured, he is still a deserter. One does not alter the other.
Being captured prevents what he did from ever being desertion since desertion required doing something voluntarily.
quote:
3) If the radio traffic that was reported is accurate, he left his post and traveled to a nearby town to talk to the enemy. That's collusion.
No it is not. That is radio traffic. We have no idea of the source or the accuracy.
I've already posted the definition of Desertion from the UCMJ, as well as several links explaining exactly what that means. I won't bother posting them again. The simple fact of the matter is, you're incorrect.
There are several ways for AWOL to be classified as Desertion, and only one of those requires intent. Bergdahl's unit was deployed under combat conditions. He left his post, whether before or after his guard shift was over is irrelevant for the basic charge, although would have merit in determining the severity of any sentence if he's charged and found guilty. Just from that alone, he can be charged with desertion.
However, as far as Intent goes, there is no requirement for him to admit anything. A military prosecutor can present circumstantial evidence that the panel may consider to judge intent. Per the NY Times, he left a note saying that he was starting a new life and shipped his personal belongings home. Per Rolling Stone, he sent his parents an e-mail before he left saying how evil the US was, and how sorry he is for serving in the Army. That right there is intent and changes his status from AWOL to Deserter the minute his foot crossed the perimeter. Several sources state that the Pentagon had concluded an investigation finding incontrovertible proof that he had walked away from his unit. So there must be more evidence out there that we're not privy too yet.
I think the problem with what people have heard, or it wasn't that way when I was in arguments, is that most of us weren't in during time of war or serving in a combat zone. That is what changes everything. I was in from the late 80s to the mid 90s. I left active duty just before Panama, and left the Guard just before they started deploying Reserve and Guard units to Iraq. When I was active, what you're describing is generally accurate. I heard the 30 day rule too. But that was a peace-time Army.
By the way, I didn't say that the radio traffic as accurate. I said "IF the radio traffic is accurate" then he's guilty of collusion. If the traffic is accurate, then he might have been trying to join the Taliban. (Which is another way for AWOL to become Desertion automatically, joining a foreign military while AWOL, seeking asylum with a foreign nation while AWOL, either would do.)
|
|
|
|
