Cpl. Ali Hassoun - Deserter Back in US ...

[righteousdude2]

SEE: http://www.aol.com/article/2014/06/...id7|htmlws-main-bb|dl16|sec1_lnk3&pLid=495124

Let me see if I got this straight? Cpl. Wassef Ali Hassoun is being called a deserter, and Sgt. Bergdahl is maybe a victim of his deep emotional disdain for the military.

Hassoun's return had no WH hoopla and fanfare, while Bergdahls's mom and dad were invited to the WH, and in the Rose Garden when this president announced his release at the cost of five mid to high level terrorists held in Gitmo!

Can any of you tell me why one man is being treated differently than the other, especially since I, as a Viet Nam vet, see Bergdahl as a deserter and possible traitor?

Just when you think, things in DC couldn't get more confusing, they just did!

My question is .... what do you think of these men? POW or Deserter?

 

[robt.k.fall]

Don't know anything about Hassoun. But as for Bergdahl, I'd say he went UA, but he was taken by the Taliban before he was gone long enough to be AWOL. And as his movements were controlled by the Taliban, it's hard to make a case for desertion. He couldn't return to US control with out his captors allowing it, before his Unauthorized Absence became Absence Without Leave, which would have turned into desertion after the passing of another time mark.

 

[righteousdude2]

Take a minute ...

Don't know anything about Hassoun. But as for Bergdahl, I'd say he went UA, but he was taken by the Taliban before he was gone long enough to be AWOL. And as his movements were controlled by the Taliban, it's hard to make a case for desertion. He couldn't return to US control with out his captors allowing it, before his Unauthorized Absence became Absence Without Leave, which would have turned into desertion after the passing of another time mark.

and read the link I posted on the other man! That may help you!

As a vet, I think from what the witnesses have said about Bergdahl, he is a deserter. But, you are based in the liberal hemisphere of California, and I am in the more conservative hemisphere of California :smilewinkgrin: which would explain our difference :smilewinkgrin:

 

[Revmitchell]

Don't know anything about Hassoun. But as for Bergdahl, I'd say he went UA, but he was taken by the Taliban before he was gone long enough to be AWOL. And as his movements were controlled by the Taliban, it's hard to make a case for desertion. He couldn't return to US control with out his captors allowing it, before his Unauthorized Absence became Absence Without Leave, which would have turned into desertion after the passing of another time mark.

The men he served with and were there when he left would disagree with you.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Ali Hassoun - disappeared during time of fiercest battles in Fallujah. Reappears after coast is clear. claims to have been captured by an extremist group which the news has not confirmed as actually extant according to US military intel.

Disappears again because he did not want to be tried as deserter. Where'd he go ? Maybe in the US, maybe back to Lebanon, or Iraq. Then Sunni faction starts to wage war, he reappears.

Better safe in US where he has possibility of being acquitted, given his backpay (assuming he hasn't been collecting), and maybe, like his brother said, a few medals here and there, or if not acquitted, at least in a prison where he will emerge live.

'nuff said. give him the big "C" word.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

They're both deserters, and both likely traitors. They need to spend the rest of their lives in Fort Leavenworth's Disciplinary Barracks.

In answer to RD2's OP, the biggest difference is that Hassoun didn't need to have the top echelon of the pre-war Taliban leadership and military returned to their homes in order to be brought to justice. The price we paid to get Bergdahl was way too high, and is the result of incompetence if not additional traitorous behavior in the Oval Office.

 

[robt.k.fall]

All I'm going by is the definitions I find in Wikipedia for Desertion and UA\AWOL. So far, there's a slam dunk on the later. Desertion needs intent. And that's for a court martial to decide. Personally, I think he was going over the hill, but he got captured by the Taliban. So, think of the his Taliban time as time served.
FYI, back in the day, when I first registered to vote, I registered as American Independent Party and was a member of the John Birch Society.

and read the link I posted on the other man! That may help you!

As a vet, I think from what the witnesses have said about Bergdahl, he is a deserter. But, you are based in the liberal hemisphere of California, and I am in the more conservative hemisphere of California :smilewinkgrin: which would explain our difference :smilewinkgrin:

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

All I'm going by is the definitions I find in Wikipedia ...

That's your problem, using that miserable excuse for a resource. :laugh:

So far, there's a slam dunk on the later. Desertion needs intent.

Let's see ...

• Shipping every piece of personal gear home except a canteen and a compass. Check.
• Telling squad mates he wanted to "walk to China or India." Check.
• Leaving at 0300 on a night when there is no moon. Check.
• Squad mates searching for him hear of his seeking out the Taliban so he can "talk to them." Check.

That's desertion. Probably treason. That's your "slam dunk." It also proves you shouldn't go by anything Wiki says.

...that's for a court martial to decide.

With that evidence, the jury will be out about 47.2 seconds.

Personally, I think he was going over the hill, but he got captured by the Taliban.

Willingly captured, and despite yourself, you just gave all the evidence that is needed to prove desertion in an Article 32 hearing.

So, think of the his Taliban time as time served.

No thanks. I prefer time in the Disciplinary Barracks. Forty years or so ought to be sufficient.

FYI, back in the day, when I first registered to vote, I registered as American Independent Party and was a member of the John Birch Society.

And ... ? You think maybe you've been on the Left Coast too long?

 

[pinoybaptist]

All I'm going by is the definitions I find in Wikipedia for Desertion and UA\AWOL. So far, there's a slam dunk on the later. Desertion needs intent. And that's for a court martial to decide. Personally, I think he was going over the hill, but he got captured by the Taliban. So, think of the his Taliban time as time served.
FYI, back in the day, when I first registered to vote, I registered as American Independent Party and was a member of the John Birch Society.

He was not captured. He waltzed into their arms. Time served ? No way.
Pay him ? Yeah. With a noose around his neck or 5000 volts of zap or a steel jacket through the heart.

 

[robt.k.fall]

First, I haven't said he shouldn't be tried by a court martial. From the evidence thus far presented in the press, the court will probably sentence him to fairly lengthy term in prison. So what's five years credit on a fifty year sentence.
Secondly, I am a native San Franciscan. This is where God has called me to serve. Unless, you are suggesting I pull a Jonah and get on a ship for Tarshish?

SNIPForty years or so ought to be sufficient.And ... ? You think maybe you've been on the Left Coast too long?[/FONT][/SIZE]