Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis
Apparently the dude even left a note saying he was deserting.
Hard to believe how mind-bendingly effed up this is. You could maybe believe they wanted to reel him in as a collaborator, but there's no way he was high level enough to justify the price we paid in terrorists we let go.
Not sure what the motive for this deal could've possibly been. Or was it so poorly constructed that the administration literally didn't ask the Army what the story was?
If he was a deserter and reportedly "hated" America wouldn't it be more important to get him back in US custody?
If our enemy has a captive who is loyal to the US I would be much less worried about it from a national security perspective than I would be if they captured a turncoat with inside information who's not only likely to give up information, but actively aid said enemy.