"War is not an adventure. It is a disease. It is like typhus." (St.Exupery)

.....The "debate" about the exchange of five "terrorists" for our last remaining soldier in Afghanistan was arriving at a ridiculous length at the comment section of my previous post. I thought it best, that if I still had thoughts about it, I could continue on this post, rather than on another comment.  And I still have thoughts about it.  First of all Bergdahl was a prisoner of war, not of terrorists.  Terrorism is about the exploitation of civilians, not soldiers. Critics of the exchange are ignoring the precedent that's really at stake here: keeping our promise to bring home our troops.

.....Critics of Obama's decision to honor this precedent at the first opportunity believe the negotiation for Bergdorf sends a dangerous message to terrorists. But they're ignoring the larger message his abandonment would have sent to our troops, their families and prospective recruits.  It would have betrayed our pledge that if you are captured in the service to our country, we'll free you.  The Foreign Relations Authorization Act defines "terrorism" as "...premeditated politically motivated violence perpetrated against NONCOMBATANT (CAPS MINE) targets by subnational groups".  The Taliban were our combatant enemies in a war; Bergdahl, is a soldier. He was a POW, not a civilian hostage.

.....They say that he left his post without authorization provoking a search and rescue mission that led to several deaths, etc.,etc. None of the claims against him have yet to be adjudicated. But our allegiance to our soldiers has to be as solid as their allegiance to us. We don't have to love their character. Loyalty transcends personality--and loyalty works both ways.  The men and women who put their lives on the line (as did I) look to their government for meaningful support, and to be loyal to the crucial message "I'll cover you. You cover me. We're here for each other. We'll get you out."