Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm able to access the WSJ journal article. Policy changes were made under Obama.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324024004578171561230647852

American soldiers should brace for a "social-cultural shock" when meeting Afghan soldiers and avoid potentially fatal confrontations by steering clear of subjects including women's rights, religion and Taliban misdeeds, according to a controversial draft of a military handbook being prepared for troops heading to the region.

That is the best source that I've ever seen regarding this topic. But, as the other poster pointed out, is there any evidence that this was ever anything more than a draft? Given the opposition it generated, I'd be surprised if it made it past draft status.

There at least two facing discharge and/or charges. Obama has done what?

+1 Thats the proof right there staring you in your face.

Not necessarily proof of anything. They only discharge and/or charges that can come have to come as due process in accordance with the UCMJ and if the soldier in question assaulted the Afghan policeman that is likely why he would be charged. I suspect he did a bit more than merely "push" the Afghan. There is nothing in the UCMJ that supports the story of "being punished for calling out a pedophile."

The manual appears to have never made it beyond draft and the commanding general in Afghanistan has said he never supported or ordered any such doctrine or policy.

yes keep asserting yourself it is some procedural thing when now more major newspapers are picking this up and saying otherwise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This happened with ethnic Pashtuns when the British were there over 100 years ago. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/21/world/kandahar-journal-shh-it-s-an-open-secret-warlords-and-pedophilia.html

I guess we are to understand that's Obama's fault too.

Too much irrational conservative thinking going on around here...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm able to access the WSJ journal article. Policy changes were made under Obama.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324024004578171561230647852

American soldiers should brace for a "social-cultural shock" when meeting Afghan soldiers and avoid potentially fatal confrontations by steering clear of subjects including women's rights, religion and Taliban misdeeds, according to a controversial draft of a military handbook being prepared for troops heading to the region.

That is the best source that I've ever seen regarding this topic. But, as the other poster pointed out, is there any evidence that this was ever anything more than a draft? Given the opposition it generated, I'd be surprised if it made it past draft status.

There at least two facing discharge and/or charges. Obama has done what?

+1 Thats the proof right there staring you in your face.

Not necessarily proof of anything. They only discharge and/or charges that can come have to come as due process in accordance with the UCMJ and if the soldier in question assaulted the Afghan policeman that is likely why he would be charged. I suspect he did a bit more than merely "push" the Afghan. There is nothing in the UCMJ that supports the story of "being punished for calling out a pedophile."

The manual appears to have never made it beyond draft and the commanding general in Afghanistan has said he never supported or ordered any such doctrine or policy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The draft says that Afghan Security Forces are dishonest, lack personal integrity, gutless and basically stupid. So we let this trash (monster) in as immigrants and refugees?

yeah..actually its a concern. With the stream of refugees flooding in, some of them from afghanistan, wonder whether the naive germans realize they're importing a culture of paedophilia into their own land.

Anonymous wrote:This happened with ethnic Pashtuns when the British were there over 100 years ago. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/21/world/kandahar-journal-shh-it-s-an-open-secret-warlords-and-pedophilia.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The draft says that Afghan Security Forces are dishonest, lack personal integrity, gutless and basically stupid. So we let this trash (monster) in as immigrants and refugees?

yeah..actually its a concern. With the stream of refugees flooding in, some of them from afghanistan, wonder whether the naive germans realize they're importing a culture of paedophilia into their own land.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm able to access the WSJ journal article. Policy changes were made under Obama.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324024004578171561230647852

American soldiers should brace for a "social-cultural shock" when meeting Afghan soldiers and avoid potentially fatal confrontations by steering clear of subjects including women's rights, religion and Taliban misdeeds, according to a controversial draft of a military handbook being prepared for troops heading to the region.

That is the best source that I've ever seen regarding this topic. But, as the other poster pointed out, is there any evidence that this was ever anything more than a draft? Given the opposition it generated, I'd be surprised if it made it past draft status.

There at least two facing discharge and/or charges. Obama has done what?

+1 Thats the proof right there staring you in your face.

Anonymous wrote:The draft says that Afghan Security Forces are dishonest, lack personal integrity, gutless and basically stupid. So we let this trash (monster) in as immigrants and refugees?

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm able to access the WSJ journal article. Policy changes were made under Obama.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324024004578171561230647852

American soldiers should brace for a "social-cultural shock" when meeting Afghan soldiers and avoid potentially fatal confrontations by steering clear of subjects including women's rights, religion and Taliban misdeeds, according to a controversial draft of a military handbook being prepared for troops heading to the region.

That is the best source that I've ever seen regarding this topic. But, as the other poster pointed out, is there any evidence that this was ever anything more than a draft? Given the opposition it generated, I'd be surprised if it made it past draft status.

There at least two facing discharge and/or charges. Obama has done what?

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm able to access the WSJ journal article. Policy changes were made under Obama.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324024004578171561230647852

American soldiers should brace for a "social-cultural shock" when meeting Afghan soldiers and avoid potentially fatal confrontations by steering clear of subjects including women's rights, religion and Taliban misdeeds, according to a controversial draft of a military handbook being prepared for troops heading to the region.

That is the best source that I've ever seen regarding this topic. But, as the other poster pointed out, is there any evidence that this was ever anything more than a draft? Given the opposition it generated, I'd be surprised if it made it past draft status.

Anonymous wrote:I'm able to access the WSJ journal article. Policy changes were made under Obama.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324024004578171561230647852

American soldiers should brace for a "social-cultural shock" when meeting Afghan soldiers and avoid potentially fatal confrontations by steering clear of subjects including women's rights, religion and Taliban misdeeds, according to a controversial draft of a military handbook being prepared for troops heading to the region.