Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

Do you agree with how the U.S. handled the prisoner swap this past weekend?

  1. Yes
  2. No
sort: oldest | newest




Jun-27-14 8:13 PM

Hey Hartman, see the news today ? A Mexican helicopter flew into the US and fired on US Customs Officers. Mexico said they are sorry but still not releasing our Marine. Their helicopter and crew are back in Mexico. My what good law abiding neighbors they are.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-13-14 1:57 PM

Not to get off topic Hartman but I will answer your questions. Obama's actions are much more egregious than those of Bush or Reagan. Previous operations similar to "Fast & Furious" involved the Mexican government and The Mexico ATF office. Both received notification of what was happening. Not so with Obama/Holder, they simply allowed the guns to flow into Mexico. By torture I assume you are referring to the water boarding. It's done to some of our own troops for training. I would remind you it was Bush's intelligence gathering programs that allowed us to get Bin Laden. Obama's biggest contribution was not cancelling Bush's programs.

Reagan got back the Iranian hostages, Bush got Hussein and his policies got Bin Laden. Now let's see, what has Obama accomplished ?? Oh that's right, he got a deserter back, freed 5 terrorists and is letting a good Marine sit in prison just across the border.

3 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-13-14 10:09 AM

"Why were there no legal actions over that?"

I suppose for the same reason there were no legal actions taken against Bush for his "gun walking" operation "Wide Receiver" or when he authorized the torture of prisoners or when it was discovered that the invasion of Iraq was being planned even before it was determined that Bush's intelligence gathering on WMD's was false and misleading. President Obama's actions are no more egregious than those of former Presidents like Reagan.

11 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-12-14 5:53 PM

His mistake was unpopular with the administration unless you happen to be Eric Holder who allowed hundreds of guns to walk to Mexico. Why were there no legal actions over that ?

2 Agrees | 14 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-12-14 5:50 PM

Hartman, organizations change and so does our relationship with them. At one time we also supplied Russia with weapons.

I base my assessments of Bergdahl and Tahmooressi on public reports of their past actions and interviews with their platoon mates. Prior to Bergdahls's disappearance he shipped most of his personal effects home. His discussions were not those of a dedicated soldier. When he disappeared his weapon and most of his gear where left behind, not captured. He did desert, whatever else he may be guilty of will be determined by an investigation.

Tahmooressi's record and interviews with teammates is quite the opposite. He was a trusted and respected leader. He fulfilled his military obligation and continued to do so as a member of the IRR. At the time of his incident he called 911 for help and tried to explain his mistake. Unfortunately his mistake is one that is very unpopular with the Obama administration.

2 Agrees | 14 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-12-14 2:28 PM

Scout, you are passing judgment on two individuals and assessing President Obama’s actions based on hearsay, prejudice and before learning the facts.

Reagan once praised the Taliban calling them “Freedom Fighters” while supplying them with weapons & billions of dollars used to arm and train thousands of radical Muslims flocking to Afghanistan to fight Russia. The US supported Taliban leaders as late as May 2001 when Bush authorized a $43 million grant for Afghanistan. With help from the US, the Taliban is now far too entrenched to ignore since their influence extends throughout the Middle East. The negotiations involving the prisoner swap is just the first step in creating a dialogue. Peace in the region can only come with help from the Taliban. BTW, I am assuming that you do know the difference between the Taliban and Al Queada. Diplomacy has proven to be far more effective than bombing.

We have a soldier back – a military court will determine his status.

13 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-11-14 7:05 PM

Hartman you have discovered why our White House is doing nothing for Sgt. Tahmooressi. He broke a gun control law, accidentally and he attempted to turn around. Our administration loves gun control and are willing to let him rot in a Mexican jail because he broke a gun control law.

A recent letter to the editor stated that Mexican troops will wander into the US. I did a little research and found statements from US Customs confirming this. Why don't we put them in jail instead of just sending them back ? We have millions of illegal Mexicans in our country and instead of prison or deportations we give them drivers licenses.

Sgt. Tahmooressi's situation is a disgrace to our country and an example of the current administrations contempt and disregard for a Marine who did serve with honor and distinction.

But we do have our deserter back.

3 Agrees | 14 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-11-14 6:53 PM

While we do have a responsibility to bring back Bergdahl, even though he is a deserter, the price was to high. The trade was done illegally and against the recommendations of many advisers. It has sent a clear message that US servicemen are for sale. The 5 Taliban will cause problems in the future.

3 Agrees | 14 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-11-14 5:56 PM

You're correct Crunchy, I did misunderstand your agree/disagree comment - thanks for clarifying.

I will say Crunchy that although we often express opposing views, I respect your civility and integrity.

15 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-11-14 4:43 PM

Hartman, you may have misunderstood me. I was suggesting it to be NOT likely (though certainly possible) that anyone would game the "agrees". At any rate let me officially AGREE with this: "a lengthy debate pondering the significance of the agree/disagree count seems rather pointless" :-)

I just tend to react strongly, I guess, when one side (Right, Left, Up, Down, whatever) accuses the other of irrationality. Usually "You're being illogical" just means "I don't understand your logic." Anyways, my goal in piping up here in the first place was just to perhaps encourage my conservative friends to step back a bit from any harsh rhetoric or unwarranted conclusions.

4 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-11-14 3:18 PM

Crunchy, I would agree there are probably several individuals willing to make the extra effort you described to agree/disagree multiple times. For what purpose, I honestly can’t understand. You provided a logical explanation while others offered less rational explanations. Since we'll never ascertain how many individuals agree/disagree multiple times, IMO, a lengthy debate pondering the significance of the agree/disagree count seems rather pointless, much like the conspiracy theories surrounding our President's every decision.

Scout, even FOX states, "there is no dispute that Tahmooressi violated Mexico's gun-control laws, even though it was an accident." Tahmooressi's predicament is not even close to the circumstances surrounding Bergdahl's liberation. Its interesting you, Kaptain, rona, sum and westline believe an enlisted American soldier should be left to die in captivity instead of making an effort to gain his freedom. That would be treason; ie: a betrayal of trust.

12 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-11-14 2:51 PM

Well said Crunchy !

1 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-11-14 10:36 AM

Mel/Hartman - I hate to nitpick, but "logic" ain't the problem with the conspiracy theory here. It's 100% logical (not violating any deductive rules of inference), and fits ALL of the available evidence any of us have (1-the "agrees" trend liberal; 2-sometimes they come in batches). Short of having more concrete evidence either way (i.e. the Independent's server logs), it can't be simply discounted.

The problem is instead in its assessment of probability. For someone to be gaming the "agrees" on this site they would have to - CONSISTENTLY - log in as several different accounts just to vote on comments. A lot of work, to be frank. Plus, assuming they pipe up from time to time they'd need to never "accidentally" comment under the wrong account in the middle of a conversation (and so expose themselves). Possible; not likely. The problem with most conspiracy theories is that they require more carefulness than most mere humans can muster....

4 Agrees | 8 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-11-14 10:35 AM

Your right Hartman there is something amiss with our news media. When was the last time you saw a story about Sgt. Tahmooressi on anything but FOX news ? Seems the other networks don't care about him.

Conspiracies, well there was a little problem with people voting more than once for your monarch. Of course look where he came from, Chicago, the land where dead people vote. Funny how when there is a voter fraud issue it always involves the liberal candidate.

2 Agrees | 13 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-10-14 5:16 PM

Right you are Mel. Not only do we have conspiracies involving our President, there are even conspiracies surrounding the “agree/disagree” vote totals. Clearly something is amiss when more individuals “agree” with logic than the rants of FOX News followers. Paranoia runs rampart in these parts.

Personally I believe that a single American soldier is worth far more than 5 Taliban who’ve been sitting in detention for the past decade but evidently there are some who disagree.

13 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-09-14 2:42 PM

That seems very logical Crunchy Con. What fun is a logical *possible*, however, when a mythical conspiracy is available and much more fun.

15 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-09-14 1:11 PM

Isn't it at least *possible* that the particular sub-set of readers that actually look at the comments (much less vote on them, which is probably even a sub-set of the sub-set) might just randomly happen to skew left-of-center? At most, comments tend to get around 20-30 votes total. That's not a very big statistical sample, and it wouldn't be abnormal at all that a sub-group like that would have a very different makeup than the larger group of people who read the Independent online, which very well might otherwise skew right-of-center.

11 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-09-14 11:43 AM

When the vote in the poll goes decidedly against the liberal agenda, I am pretty sure the Independent has staff log on and vote "disagree" with those who support the poll majority.

3 Agrees | 16 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-09-14 9:36 AM

Your correct sumyounguy always been something fishy about how the numbers add up here. I'll bet they use commoncore math. Westline is right, it doesn't matter what liberals think because logic and reason is not part of their thought process it's all about how they feel. The truth to liberals is something to avoid because it usually exposes the hypocrisy of their sacred cows, like abortion or global warming for examples. If you find yourself debating a liberal bear that in mind, it's like arguing with a cat. And if the liberal is losing the debate they will just call you a racist or homophobe and declare themselves the winner. Years ago my company CO, (a very conservative black man) told me, (in jest) that the only way to change the mind of a liberal was a rock.

5 Agrees | 16 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-09-14 4:07 AM

Sum you are right with liberal voting more then once. It even happens in elections.

6 Agrees | 16 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-08-14 11:04 PM

I agree. The agree/disagree tally on my comment slowly rose to about 4 agree-1 disagree, when within about 5 hours, there were 11 additional disagrees. Frankly it doesn't matter how many agree or not, when we are right, we are right.

4 Agrees | 16 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-08-14 10:33 PM

Scout, Kaptain, Rona, West, one of the liberals has multiple accounts for disagreeing with us, because the poll votes are a different story.

3 Agrees | 17 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-07-14 12:07 PM

The best use we could get from Obama's pen is for him to use it to write his letter of resignation.

8 Agrees | 20 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-07-14 12:03 PM

Take a look at the details of this illegal trade. Obama did not comply with the requirement to notify congress. He did it against the recommendations of the military and the intelligence community. He set free 5 terrorist leaders to go back and kill more Americans. When members of Bergdahls platoon started speaking out against the trade the White House staff began attacking them. So the White House supports a deserter and attacks the men who remained at their post and did their duty ! We have a disaster in the White House who will trade 5 terrorists for one deserter half way around the world but won't make a public statement about an honored Marine being held just across the border over a mistake.

8 Agrees | 20 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jun-07-14 11:55 AM

Excellent memory and logic Kaptain. Lefties like to confuse issues with random thought. Had Barry consulted Congress at least 30 days before, there would have been bi-partisan objection. But like any dictator, he does whatever he wants. It would be refreshing to see him use his pen or phone for a good cause, like freeing a prisoner in Mexico.

7 Agrees | 20 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 39 comments Show More Comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web