I have no idea why we traded this guy for accused terrorists. It's not something I really think about much. My gut tells me there's more than meets the eye here, and that this trade merely represented something in return, like information. But again, I have no idea. One should assume the Obama Administration knew this guy may have abandoned his unit, and that a firestorm would begin because of it. So there had to be a reason they did it.
I will say this though: It's easy to be a reactionary, cancel parades, call this guy a traitor, all while he can't defend himself. That's easy. It makes people look like tough guys. It gives cover to people who nearly always support the military by allowing them this one time to say, "I wasn't for THAT guy!" It's easy.
What's hard though is asking why this guy may have abandoned his unit, if he in fact did. What made him take this course of action? Was it a mental issue? Was he always going to do this, or did the war do it to him? Did he show signs of "weakness", or an indication that he was "cracking?" And if so, did someone monitor him, or was he expected to go out onto the battlefield and shoot people, regardless of how he felt? Maybe had he gone back out there he would have killed some of his own? Sure, he signed up as a soldier who wanted to defend the country, but maybe he started to break during the war?
I ask these questions because what he did wasn't common, or seemingly normal. So if it was abnormal, why don't we start addressing the reasons that caused this in the first place before we place this guy behind bars?
Oh, I know why. Because those making the noise were the ones that put out soldiers there in the first place. An issue they've been ignoring since the war began.
I'm tired of listening to people who never fought in a war, and avoided serving in them, discuss how a war may have affected an individual.