I just read a news about swapping five Guantanamo detainees for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahi and I have mixed feelings. Part of me is happy that he can once more enjoy the company of his loved ones. However, I can't stop but think of the possible terror these five men might do after being released. Is one life worth putting millions in danger? Share your thoughts!
If he wasn't a coward deserter then it might have been arguable after 5 years that it was worth it.
However he is a deserter and a lot of good men died trying to find him. He should be brought up on charges under the UCMJ and court martialed and at minimum sent to a military prison for a very long time.
I saw today where CNN reports six soldiers died trying to find him after he walked off; and also that our government has already decided not to pursue charges. I hurt for the families of the rescue team; they died in vain for Bergdahl's actions.
Almost certainly more. Those six were directly involved in the search, soldiers report that Taliban attacks increased greatly after he deserted. Lord knows what intel he gave them they later used to kill our troops.
dailytop10, like you, I am happy that he is returning to his loved ones. But there is much about Bergdahl's particular case that I am not altogether comfortable with, starting with the fact he admitted to fellow soldiers that he went over to Afghanistan with the intent to help the Afghan people. And then the fact he willingly left his post.I've known a few POW's in my lifetime, and not a one of them willingly left his post. His father has also expressed sympathy for the detainees at Guantanamo - certainly not a crime, but where the heck is the empathy for Americans and others, worldwide, who have been victimized by the Taliban? Also, as this exchange falls on the heels of our gov's latest vow to pull troops out of Afghanistan, one can't help but wonder about the convenience in timing. Some say it was an exchange talked about for a couple of years, but Bergdahl was taken five years ago; couldn't our country have sent special forces to rescue him before now? With the President's acclaimed killing of Bin Laden, one would think a rescue mission could have at least been attempted. And then there's the fact the exchange was ordered without Congressional approval. This can't sit easy for many Americans. When we put all these considerations together with the knowledge that five terrorists will probably be back to their old hunting grounds in a year or so, yes I have mixed feelings, too. I suppose all we can do now is remain hopeful Sgt. Bergdahl is well -physically and mentally- and keep our fingers crossed that the release of these five Talibans won't come back to bite us all in the butt.
The Taliban has declared this a "huge victory". This man voluntarily left his post and then his father leaves tweets sympathetic to the Taliban (quickly deleted I might add). The entire process was an Unconstitutional and illegal action by our President. Other members of the military died trying to find this soldier who left of his own power. There is nothing good here at all.
sure there is! Good for cons: politically:https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BpTiBJeCUAAcsHb.jpg Money from every tragedy. Con-Way.Did you know before Obama got him, R's were pushing him to do everything he could to free Berghdal?Did u know that? Pathetic
So what? Just as I suspected....Alfred E Neuman syndrome.What, me worry?Blame it on the other guy,Not me.I'm looking right at YOU.Who started this d*m war in the 1st place?Who gave blessings?Mirror mirror on the wall....youze.Take some responsibility
A question: If your child, a solider, had been captured, and a prisoner swap was offered by the opposing country, would you want to wait 30 days before your son or daughter was release? I do not think you would.
Sassy Sun, you are mixing apples and oranges. We have our laws, other countries have their laws and rules. Sometimes, they do not exactly mesh, then the President has to act accordingly. If he had not brought the solider home, he would be blamed.
I stand to be corrected, the the "law" everyone is referring to is H. R. 3304. It is an House Resolution. I could find no action on this by the Senate or any presidential signature. Maybe there is a law. I would like to see the citation.
Thank you, found it, you should read it. Section 1035 sets forth some guidelines that conflict separation of powers clause of the constitution . You do not like Obama. I voted for McCain. I took Obama over Romney. Seems like the GOP-Race card at work
Yes---this was extra-legal and unconstitutional at best, and at worst, an act that has empowered international terrorists AND put the lives of virtually all Americans at risk for kidnap and ransom by terrorists---foreign and domestic.
I am very happy he has been returned to his family. In my mind it is irrelevant whether he walked off on his own or if he was taken. He was a US soldier that wanted to come home. This whole concept that in order to be an American we must agree with our military tactics and government is BS! Our military is forced to do many immoral things. Do we expect that to never bother them? I find it odd that we talk so poorly of the Taliban when their actions are no different than much of our own USA government. The difference is we as Americans are taught that it's ok for us to go around dropping bombs on everyone else but when those people do it, then it is wrong. What those 5 men do might be bad, but I'm sure no worse than what our own government will do. People should get informed about how many innocent people die at the hands of our government while everyone is being directed by our media to focus on other things.
peeples, there is much truth in what you say. There are also a lot of military personnel that die (are sacrificed) for wars that benefit petty political endeavors. The circumstances surrounding this exchange is a reminder of this, not a contradiction
In the last 5 years alone our drones have killed over 2000 people, with an estimated 500 to 1000 of those being innocent people. That's not counting the 20+ other countries we have bombed, But because we are the USA we are right and all others wrong.
He endangered the lives of every soldier there by his actions. That isn't about agreeing with anything - no you do not have a right to do that. Six other soldiers lost their lives as a direct result of his actions. No he had no right to do that.
Actually: Bergdahl disappeared on June 30, 2009. A Pentagon investigation concluded in 2010 that the evidence was "incontrovertible" that he walked away from his unit, said a former Pentagon official who has read it." http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/
He left his weapon and his kit at the FOB. He mailed some books and additional uniforms home to his parents. Kids in the vill told of an American walking unarmed and asking where the Taliban where. He is a deserter and a traitor.
he can disagree. he cannot simply ignore the oath he took when he voluntarily joined up and endanger the lives of his entire platoon. he is accountable for those lives lost. and no he is not worth endangering more lives if those 5 rejoin the fight.
What about the four in Benghazi that Muslims killed and Obama did not even allow help to go to? They were guilty of nothing. Strange he has a conscience and a heart when it come to 5 hardened criminals of the same nationality of his father and brothe
It was a CIA outpost. CIA let them die. Stevens was anti-Zionist: Enuff said. And just WHO gives orders in the military? The higher-ups, yes? It is a DUTY to protect fellow soldiers. Unless you're Tillman, then you kill him. USA USA USA
The world is a tough arena to play in. What our country says and does may be two different things, at times. I spent 20 years in the military and the view is much different than from the safe, "cheap seats", at home.
How can you say that terrorists responsible for the murders of thousands of innocent people globally---who exist to terrorize civilians and destroy everything that you know---do things that are "no worse than what our own government will do"? How?
Answer my question: How can you claim that the actions of the US are analogous to those of terrorists? Who taught you this false equivalency? What evidence do you have that enables your acceptance of such nonsense?
mbuggieh, please google "how many people has USA killed with drones and in wars" and read. We've killed far more than the Taliban. I have no respect for them,but we shouldn't act like USA is any better when it comes to killing.Numbers prove we aren't
Please read up. Most of the times we have bombed countries they have done nothing wrong except protect their land from our big businesses. Mostly the A.U.F.C. Most of our killing is outside of the "big" wars.
You can't count wars and soldiers. How about we count civilians. ""The Taliban are responsible for nearly 90 percent of all civilian casualties, according to ISAF statistics." That's just currently in Afghanistan but there is a difference.
Why shouldn't we count wars? We make up any excuse we can to invade other countries! We always stick our nose in everything. So yeah wars should count, especially when we lack the ability to know when enough is enough.
When you liken it to murder, then you count civilians, not soldiers. And then you have to count wars for the other side as well. You don't get to skew statistics just to make a point. Terrorists take far more lives, most of them civilian.
No you want to count soldiers on opposing sides as deaths by the US but ignore the same from the other side to say ours are greater or equal. That is skewing statistics.And completely ignoring the obvious difference between a soldier & a civilian
A soldier is an ARMED someone trained in combat and aware they are a target. A civilian is someone going about their day, unaware they are being targeted and usually unarmed. Vast difference. Soldiers died btw so you would be free to defame them.
Say what you want about them but they DO kill innocent people. I come from a military family. I'm quite aware what they do. Most of the time they are following blind orders that many don't even agree with. Justify killing all you want. I won't.
Your comment: peeples: "A soldier is just someone paid to follow orders, including murdering innocent and guilty people." is not only uninformed, but shameful and speaks volumes of the ideologies that form your "thought" and politics.
You've yet to provide anything to back up your ludicrous claims. Do you have any sources? links? Or are you just spouting rhetoric with no basis in fact? Are there bad soldiers who kill innocents? Yes. Is it the norm? No. The Taliban target innocents
And I already provided you with the information that over 94% of the civilian deaths in Afghanistan are contributed to the Taliban. Discounting your claim against the US military. It isn't about disagreeing, it is about truth, which you are lacking.
And you are blinded by false statistics the government force feeds you. I will end my side of the conversation. My views nor yours will change per this conversation so it is pointless. Feel free to have the last word!
Why we there in 1st place? Taliban kill civilians...why you care? Number one killer of people is guns...more than all wars put together.Those people are civilians too. Face it: killing is all politics too.You justify anything if it fits your beliefs.
SassySun1963: All solders are not armed. My brother was in the Air Force, outside of basic training he never handled a gun. My best friend was in Thailand during Vietnam. He fixed things. He did not carry a gun. You have a stereotype view of soliders
I never said anything about the negotiating with terrorists. As for the law part - your own link says the following: "Whether the White House’s interpretation is correct remains a matter of debate in the legal community." He's on shaky ground.
My point in providing the link was to show that the issue is not as black and white and some, including you, try to make it and there is a lot of terminology in laws, briefings, etc. that can have an impact on understanding what was actually required
I am sure Sgt. Bergdahi is very pleased with this. This is a debacle that doesn't quite fit anywhere. It could be construed as a "prisoner exchange" but this is not an, "army v army" scenario. To the untrained eye, neither Bergdahl or the GITMO dwellers are POWS.
To the same untrained eye, this looks like a case of we just paid a ransom for kidnapee (I just made that word up, all rights reserved).
If It works for the Somali pirates then why not the Taliban? If they make a movie about this I wonder if Hanks will play Bergdahl?
Bergdahl certainly has some 'splainin' to do at a Courts Martial and hopefully we will find out the outcome while we still remember what happened. As for the country and our soldiers overseas? We just passed Jimmy Carter's administration for the weakest administration bragging rights and our military personnel are even in MORE danger.
Most def glad he's been released. War on terror is BS from the getgo. "Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld knew the "vast majority" of prisoners captured in the so-called War on Terror were innocent and the administration refused to set them free once those facts were established because of the political repercussions that would have ensued."--Wilkerson ****I'm embarrassed by all these arm-chair "patriots" . Know nothings. trouble makers. And war mongers!
Who's talking to you? I do serve my country... by exposing the traitors here in her midst. Don't take it personal..unless you're one of them. No matter: I'll leave it to those who saw it 1st hand. Not that you'll listen, but enough of us will.
Guess the big O had to get his brothers set free somehow behind everyones back, be looking over your shoulder cause they are planning our deaths this minute no doubt with a little help from their friend. O well the books will be out about this commy
It is no secret and you nor anyone can deny it. Muslim father, stepfather and commy mother; that is who he is! In charge of America and people like you are not that blind so I can only guess about you.
Oh come on--you know what it is! You people labeled me from day one: America hating anti-semite. That's what I've had to deal with from the goon squad. So, Ill call you an America hating Islamophobe. Nice, huh?
I am embarrassed by those who have never served their country; fail to understand the intent terrorism; use language like "armchair patriots" and who are, in fact, know-nothings who for some reason unknown to me hate my country.
Aren't you glad you live in a free country where men and women have died in domestic and foreign wars to protect your freedom of speech; even your freedom of speech to claim that they were criminals killing innocents for a corrupt government?
An American solider has been returned home. Five people who have not been tried were released.
If the American solider was a deserter or did anything to endanger his comrades, violate our security or any similar act, then he should be tried and punished in accordance with the laws of the government and the procedures associated with military justice.
Innocent until proven guilty is not an empty phrase, regardless of how much evidence may allegedly be available, due process for all, even people we do not like, is something that separates the United States from much of the world and has help to maintain our civilization.
I know there have been abuses of due process, going back to Abraham Lincoln and probably before that and is continuing today because of provisions in the Patriot Act. We need to work to fix the system and while doing that we must remember that our system of justice was intended to apply to all people.
They don't need to be tried, they were found taking up arms against the US while wearing no identifiable uniform nor belonging to any legitimate military force. As for the traitor, in another era he would be facing a firing squad, and rightfully so.
I was only speaking of the U.S. solider and true he may had been executed by a firing squad in the past, but there would be court martial proceedings first. It we want to preserve the freedoms we all cherish, they must be applied equally.
I have seen no credible proof that President Obama is a Muslim. That is the same as playing the race card. Regardless of his skin color or religious beliefs, he is bound by the laws. Congress and the Courts are to maintain the checks and balance.
If we are going to play the blame game and that what this thread has been about, then both chambers of Congress have done more harm than any president through their petty party politics, undeserved seniority and a system of rules to hide behind.
I do not believe this was a good decision. We base ourselves on not negotiating with terrorists, due to past results. Example, in mid-1939 Hitler moved onto Poland. everyone was very upset and fearful that Germany may attack their homelands as well. However, Hitler spoke with Britain and more of Europe explaining that he was simply attempting to reunite the Germans that were living in half of Poland, and that if he could do so willingly he would not take over any more of Poland or attack anyone. President Roosevelt knew not to negotiate and attempted to reason with Britain and fellow European allies not to agree to Hitler's terms. However, they would not listen and allowed Hitler to possess half of Poland willingly. I assume you all know what Hitler did next. After that everyone learned one lesson, not to negotiate with terrorist.
In a political stand point Obama's action in making this "negotiation" without any form of consult with congress or any other form of government displays is lack of respect of our government system. His actions was not that of democracy or of a president, but a dictator that answers to no one.
Obama will not be impeached over this--it is neither treason or high crimes--bring a solider home, regardless of what he did, is a responsibility that cannot be ignored. Holding prisoners in Gitmo is not right either.
So a president who breaks the law and circumvents congress time and again is just 'no big deal' huh? There was no exigent circumstance here. For 5 years they housed and fed him, now, suddenly, he's in danger? Hardly.
Lincoln suspended the right of habeas corpus in the Civil War, FDR imprisoned Japanese Americans during WWII, Kennedy gave us the Bay of Pigs, Nixon Provide Watergate and you are mad because Obama made a prisoner exchange without notifying congress?
Not to mention AUMF(2001) and the Patriot Act(2003)...which were promptly used to attack a nation which had NOTHING to do with 9/11, and secured the true end of our 4th amendment rights. PRISM, etc. Bush Good Patriot, Obama Evil Muslim. BLAH!
You are perfectly free to criticize anyone you want. Don't let the fact that are almost always wrong in between spouting your conspiracy theories deter you. In the US one is free to be as utterly stupid and ignorant as you care to be.
RIIIIIIIGHT.That's why your guys jumped on the jobs bill, didn't they? Boy-they were SO hyped to join Obama on that. That's why their 1st legislative act was anti-abortion legislation. lot o jobs in that huh? DOIYYY
No they did not make the right decision. The administration has put more Americans in jeopardy with these 5 released Taliban leaders. The administration has gone against the rule of never negotiating with terrorists. They did not consult with Congress according to the law and have put America at risk. Do you think these leaders will return home and forget about their experience at Guantanamo for the last several years and just forgive us? Unlikely. News is now coming out that this young man may have been a deserter, has converted to Islam and became friends with his captors. This swap is a disaster. The precedence has now been set that American's can be captured and used as ploys to free Islamist terrorists. Sad day for all Americans.
ummm,Congress was URGING him to release Berghdal for 5 years. Of course they knew.And they kept the operation secret for the safety of that man-you know, the American soldier prisoner of war. All of Gitmo will be freed. Finally, that blight will end.
They were urging the Administration to obtain his release. They were not urging him to trade prisoners nor to break the law to do it. They have not condemned him coming home, only the Pres. breaking the law.
Bulloney. They have called him a traitor, a deserter, and compared his father to the Taliban and Muslims-their catch-enemies of the decade.Just as they question Duckworth's loyalty and called Cleland a coward. Despicable! Oh yes, "draft-dodging prez"
All of Gitmo will not be freed. When it is closed those remaining will be transferred to facilities on the mainland. They are not POWs. They are detainees not affiliated with any country's military. US may hold them forever.
I think Carter and Reagan negotiated the release of the hostages held by Iran. That was after a failed military assault by the U.S. We negotiated with Khrushchev about the Cuban missile crisis. There are all sorts of terrorists.
300 TOW Missiles - that's what Reagan paid Iran in 1986 for 3 hostages. Immediately after they were released Iran took 3 more. Reagan's favorability dropped to 15 percent, but by the time he left office the country had forgotten all about it.
This is not a simple as partisan politics as those from the Left and those who fail to grasp the reach of international terrorism suggest. Laws were broken; Congress intentionally circumvented; terrorists empowered. Not politics, but reality.
I do not think Obama broke the law. Congress cannot command the president and I think the word shall and not will was use. Any lawyer will tell you that shall is not binding, it is a preferred possibility. It was a minor infraction at best.
Do you mean to say Bush notified them 520 times 30 days in advance? I highly doubt it....let me guess, this is a new law made just for Obama by this congress, right?...cause you know: "you white, you allright!" You black...get back.
so, Obama made a law all by his lonesome? I thought congress made laws? And so, did Bush notify congress 520 times before he released, or was he allowed to do as he pleased? How many Americans kidnapped after Bush released gitmo prisoners? waiting.
So, just as I thought...a new law for Obama, while Bush was free to do as he pleased. Black and white, in'it? Oooooh, now that those 5 are released...they will cause far more damage than the 520 of Hero Bushman. USA USA USA.
There's a word for you sure enough, starts with ess-tee and ends with upid. You just don't have the brain power to understand, it would be like explaining relativity to a sparrow. No matter how well I explained it your brain just isn't big enough.
uh huh...you and your superior intelligence.....funny all you cons think you're superior. Just remember your book: pride goeth before a fall. And patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. We all are equal. Try and comprehend that if you can.Heart
what meaning do you expect your delusionally self-important statements of unknowing, inexperienced opinion to have with us? What fantasy do you hold that you would believe that your tiny-fisted tantrums would have more weight than that of a leprous d
This has turned into the most Childish discussion I have seen on Hub Pages. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and can express it and even give incorrect information. It is possible to disagree without being disagreeable. We have not been successful.
So, the Law was not around during Bush's release of 520. But the law on torture was. What do you say about that? And I'm glad you are ok with releasing 500, but get outraged about 5.Can you see this makes zero sense? Hence, the name-calling begins.
The only way Obama and Hegel can possibly justify this apparently shameless exchange is IF (and I strongly doubt this) they are able to extract useful information from Bergdahl; information they could not extract had he remained with the Taliban.
Oh please!There never should have been a Gitmo at all.It's dumb Cheney playing war games because he never went to a real one.Macho crap/Cowboy crap.Bush released 520 "dangerous to American security prisoners"-NO consulting congress. NO impeach. And?
Uhm: Cheney is dumb. And a draft-dodger--something youuze crucified Clinton for.Yes-Gitmo is dumb and evil.You do know we were paying for prisoners, don't you? "Just find me one--I don't care if they're guilty" 2 bil worth of 1 dollar bills..Bremer
Other than to say that the Iraqi mismanaged the funds, I don't know what point you're trying to make. First, it was Iraqi money from frozen assets so it wasn't a payment. Second, it was the Iraqis who mismanaged it (or stole it) not us. Point?
WRONG. It was Bush adm who mishandled funds...Waste,mismanagement and fraud. Haliburton, KBR, Panorama, Blackwater: THAT was greed and corruption..big time. Overchargging, breaking the law by making shell corps to hide money.It was USA.Iraqfollowlead
Wrong. Read your own link. Expand your mind get over your Bush vendetta. Join the rest of us in the here & now. Regardless, past wrongs do not excuse current wrongs. That isn't how it works. If someone commits a crime, you can't excuse yours.
Exactly.Whatever may or may not have happened in past administrations or with past US Secretaries of Defense is entirely unrelated to any current problem and actions. Obama is not right because you deem Bush wrong or vice-versa.
Watch the video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZVAFssWtoI. Nobody can talk because of GAG ORDERS. It makes ALL the difference. Bushco still walks free, and YOU want to crucify Obama. Not 2 sets of standards...one. NO ONE is above the law...even Reps
lol please stop. you're only embarrassing yourself. gag orders are just that, an order. where is the copy of such an order? nowhere because it does not exist. besides, irrelevant to events in the here and now.
Only an imbecile could say that Iraq is irrelevant to the here and now. Tell that to the moms and dads that lost sons and daughters. Tell that to the dead Iraqis. And forget that your gvt caused it, profited from it, and never paid. Dis-honoring USA.
Hussein caused both by invading a country & then not complying. google is your friend. It is irrelevant in this topic of what Obama did. Smoke & mirrors you use to deflect from this disaster of a President Syria has WMDS btw. Had them all the
Complying with what, the central bankers?Nothing had anything to do with us, save profits for Chevron and Exxon, and Judeo-X-tian neo-cookery world domination fantasy.YOU may not remember AbuGharib,but I sure as he!! do. Stain on Good name of us all!
Obama broke the law and yes, he singlehandedly. without caring for Americas future safety, put every American at risk of being a victim of terrorism! If those men cause harm to come to any American I believe Obama should be arrested and charged as a conspirator!
The evidence that was available 5 years ago AND the evidence that persists today strongly indicates that this was yet another wrong decision by President Obama; wrong on several levels including being entirely wrong in terms of releasing any of the terrorists held by the US.
I must say that understanding what the President or his staff was thinking is very difficult---particularly in terms of the Rose Garden "ceremony" that was orchestrated to announce the release.
How long should we hold terrorists without providing the benefit of trial and due process. Even the Nazis had their day in court. I contend many people do not like Obama and will find something wrong with everything he does. I'll let ponder that.
They were due to be tried by a military tribunal and IIRC Obama put the kibosh on it and wanted them tried in a civilian court like a common murderer. The American people told him no way in hell and it has been in limbo ever since. IIRC again.
Those held at Guantanamo Bay are "enemy combatants" and the US Supreme Court determined during WWII that the cases of enemy combatants are NOT properly decided in criminal courts, but military tribunals. We need tribunals to decide these cases.
To begin with the US did not make this decision. As usual the Obama regime made this decision without consent of congress and without consent of senior military leaders who are “outraged” over President Obama’s decision.
Sure you can debate whether it was a good deal for whatever humanitarian reasons but you can't debate that it was right to break the law to do it. Obama was wrong because he broke the law to do it.
You can debate 'till the cows come home the pros and cons of such a deal but tell me how it is right for the president to break the law? And by the way this is not the first time he has positioned himself as above the law.
Shepard Smith asked Judge Andrew Napolitano whether or not the Taliban prisoner exchange was legal under the NDAA H.R. 1960 Statute.
The judge explained that the swap was illegal because taxpayer dollars were spent to remove these prisoners from Guantanamo Bay without giving Congress 30 days notice.
However, Napolitano goes a step further by pointing out that Obama has provided material assistance (human assets) to the Taliban, which has been identified by Congress to be a non-state terrorist organization. This is a crime punishable by imprisonment of 10 years to life, which covers all Americans–including the President.
I am glad that he was returned, and I know that his family is exponentially more satisfied with the decision than the average American likely is, which is what ultimately matters. If our positions were reversed, I know that I would not wish to entertain the notion that my own country might leave me behind. However, it seems as if we could have performed the exfiltration and subsequently exterminated the five terrorists that were exchanged as soon as the recovery team was sufficiently clear. The fact that there was even a negotiation seems somewhat ridiculous, as this could have been the perfect opportunity to set up an ambush in which a significant number of enemy combatants could have been eliminated and Sergeant Bergdahi could have been returned home alive, which would have been something of a double victory.
If you negotiate in good faith, you do not turn around and kill five people. That would just re-escalate the conflict and cost more lives. I am glad our solider was returned home, despite any misdeeds he may have done and no one else died.
They will keep trying to kill us, lacking an honor system and a concept of the benefits resulting from the hypothetical secession of hostility and violence. I agree that retrieving our man takes priority, but 5 less terrorists is always a good thing
In our position as a world leader, we are require to abide by self-imposed restrictions. Making a deal and then turning around and killing five men would be murder, not war, but murder. If the position had been reversed, and our people were killed...
Pres. Obama approved a Gitmo Taliban prisoner swap for U.S. serviceman Bergdahl's release from a Taliban Haggani terrorist group.The brief details are that the Obama Administration had been negotiating through the third...
What do you think of the announcement today that women will be allowed to serve in combat?Defense Secretary Leon Panetta made that announcement today, opening up thousands of frontline positions for women in infantry,...
The UK is now on it's own after David Cameron's decision to use his Veto, so preventing the new Euro treaty being signed. But has he made the right decision? I can't help but feel that rather than using the veto because...