Reuters announced today that it has conducted an "investigation" that finds that it is "murky" whether six soldiers in the company of Bowe Bergdahl were killed while searching for him. Unbelievable!
On the one side there are the many statements from about 15 soldiers who were members of that company. They say that their comrades were killed on missions to find Bergdahl. On the other side, according to Reuters, are army records that show that soldiers had been assigned to tasks like providing security for the Afghan elections in the area where Bergdahl disappeared. Only for a pro-Obama outlet like Reuters could this be called "murky". The soldiers in the field know what their mission was at the times when there fellow soldiers were killed in action. Are we to believe that all of these soldiers just came forward on their own spontaneously to lie? Are they all mistaken in their mission? Did they do this just because they all wanted to get on TV? What conceivable reason could have motivated more than a dozen veterans to go public with these stories? The only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn from such a sudden outpouring of testimony from so many sources is that these men truly believe what they are saying. That means we have witness statements from numerous credible witnesses who also happen to be the people with the most knowledge on the subject. On the other hand, though, we have those army reports that say that soldiers in the area were given other tasks. Of course we do! We know that American forces did not simply suspend the war effort across the entire country just because Bergdahl went missing. That, however, does not mean that there was not a major effort to find Bergdahl. Nor does it mean that the men who were killed in action were not looking for him.
The Reuters story is nonsense. That is the polite way to say it. My guess is that the soldiers would put it in other terms. And they would be correct!
On the one side there are the many statements from about 15 soldiers who were members of that company. They say that their comrades were killed on missions to find Bergdahl. On the other side, according to Reuters, are army records that show that soldiers had been assigned to tasks like providing security for the Afghan elections in the area where Bergdahl disappeared. Only for a pro-Obama outlet like Reuters could this be called "murky". The soldiers in the field know what their mission was at the times when there fellow soldiers were killed in action. Are we to believe that all of these soldiers just came forward on their own spontaneously to lie? Are they all mistaken in their mission? Did they do this just because they all wanted to get on TV? What conceivable reason could have motivated more than a dozen veterans to go public with these stories? The only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn from such a sudden outpouring of testimony from so many sources is that these men truly believe what they are saying. That means we have witness statements from numerous credible witnesses who also happen to be the people with the most knowledge on the subject. On the other hand, though, we have those army reports that say that soldiers in the area were given other tasks. Of course we do! We know that American forces did not simply suspend the war effort across the entire country just because Bergdahl went missing. That, however, does not mean that there was not a major effort to find Bergdahl. Nor does it mean that the men who were killed in action were not looking for him.
The Reuters story is nonsense. That is the polite way to say it. My guess is that the soldiers would put it in other terms. And they would be correct!
No comments:
Post a Comment