Obviously the Bowe Bergdahl deal was a bad trade. In return for five terrorists, four of whom are expected to rejoin the fight, we got a deserter, and several men were killed trying to find the worthless piece of crap. But at least the military has ignored all the poltical hoopla from the White House and seems (surprisingly) to be doing the right thing:
Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, the U.S. soldier who was recovered in Afghanistan last spring after five years in captivity, faces charges of desertion and misbehavior before the enemy, according to his lawyer.
Eugene Fidell, Bergdahl’s attorney, told The Washington Post that his client was handed a charge sheet on Tuesday. Army officials announced they will provide an update in his case at 3:30 p.m. at Fort Bragg, N.C., but declined to discuss new developments ahead of the news conference.
Desertion I get, but "misbehavior before the enemy" is a new one on me. I've heard of "aiding and abetting" the enemy and providing "aid and comfort" for the enemy, but "misbehaving" before the enemy seems, I don't know, like the way you'd describe rowdy kids in the schoolyard. (Here it is described in Article 99 of the UCMJ, and it turns out to be more serious than the label might suggest.)
Then, alas, there is this:
But it still remains uncertain whether Sergeant Bergdahl will be court-martialed, the Defense Department official said.
Another question is whether the Army will give Sergeant Bergdahl an honorable discharge if he is found guilty of desertion. For members of the military, an honorable discharge is no small matter, and not getting one can hinder not only a veteran’s job prospects, but the entirety of how a service memberlook back on his or her career.
Perhaps given an honorable discharge even if found guilty of desertion? Nope, don't see that, although life in prison is probavbly a remote possibility as well. And lack of an honorable discharge could hinder his job prospects? Awww. Poor baby.
