Respect for military
Respect for military
As a nine-year veteran of the Army, I have been following the Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl issue closely, along with the VA scandal. During my tenure in the military, which occurred right at the end of the Vietnam War, I would not and could not have justified the swap of this soldier for five high-level enemy combatants.
I'll let the military deal with Sgt. Bergdahl, which we all should do. But recent events at the Pakistan airport show that our enemies have been emboldened by this swap. History will undoubtedly show that this political mistake by this administration will put other Americans in harm's way.
This Democrat administration has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that it cannot and will not show respect for the men and women, and their families, who defend this country.
I recall, with great angst, how veterans were treated after Vietnam and during the Carter administration. History shows we are repeating some of the same political mistakes we made back then.
I pray that the citizens wake up soon and bring America back to a position of strength and never, never let progressive Democrats gain a political foothold again.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Biased? Guilty as charged
- It’s not personal
- ‘Food fight’ lamentable
- Today’s technology
- Cockpit safety stalled
- More than one hero
- UMW fighting EPA regulations
- Misinformation persists
- Unhappy returns
- Zionist view
- Amendment levels playing field