Bergdahl & GITMO. Politics Of POW's Or Politics As Usual?

Afghan detention center prisoner cells.

Guantanomo Bay Detention Facility, most commonly known as GITMO, is destined to remain one of the hottest issues in America for some time coming.  While prisoners of war and POW detention centers are hardly a new thing, terrorist wars that have no end are.  Despite our best efforts to be the nation shaped by the Geneva convention that we helped to construct, war has redefined itself and so must war standards.

Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is as good an example as any.  According to the military that accepted Bergdahl, AWOL and deserting one's post are common to the military.  Common enough that such behavior has rules and regulations surrounding it.  In the face of such behavior, Sgt. Bergdahl and all soldiers are subject to a military review and could potentially be discharged from the military.  Outside of that process, Sgt. Bergdahl, who became a Sargent. while in captivity, should be recognized as all soldiers are recognized...including his Sgt. status.

In the process of recruiting soldiers, it might become necessary to change our standards surrounding our credo, "no man left behind".  According to some American's, Bergdahl might not be worthy of what was done to provide for his release.  Stories tell an account of six men that died in the search for Bergdahl. The five GITMO inmates that are feared to return to the war could someday kill even more American soldiers or citizen's who travel abroad. Maybe they even craft the next 9-11 attack on American soil, but our values must remain intact.

Sometimes in an auction environment you want to wait for the field to bid and sneak in to capture the prize after a bloody bidding war. At other times, you need to end the auction instantly with an aggressive bid that insures success.  If Bergdahl was the figurative item for auction, Obama's team chose the "go big" approach, but they also did so in the spirit of old America, the place that still honors things like the Geneva Convention Agreement and the military terms of enlistment.

GITMO is our blatant failure of the Geneva agreement. Offering up a few prized inhabitants of the facility seemed an obvious means of avoiding the political ramifications of ending the war in Afghanistan and "leaving one behind".  Debating the terms of Bergdahl's release is a matter of domestic opinions. International relations are tied to the GITMO detention center and nations worldwide are looking to determine if prisoner of war standards have now changed.  American hostages have always had a uncertain international value, but prisoners of war are unique.  Killing a POW not only defies the Geneva accord, it leaves you without a valuable tool in the end of war exchange process.

Yet, would we be better if we refused to live up to standards that our enemies reject?  Would we be more humane if we left deserters deserted? Or how about if we simply slaughter the remaining GITMO detainee's and never worry about them in the field of battle again?   Is old war black and white but new war gray from the smoke of an uncertain battlefield or are we willing to use anything these days in the pursuit of politics?

This whole line of questioning makes me sick.