Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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...

Noone said anything like that. We are saying that turning a blind eye to it on our military bases and punishing soldiers who say otherwise is tacit condoning of child rape which is fundamentally against basic human rights and american values. Be it conservative or liberal. And yes, this is happening under obama's administration.

It has not been demonstrated let alone proven that anyone is condoning this, nor that it's the reason anyone is being punished. It's also not been demonstrated that any specific policy or doctrine change happened under Obama. The only thing anyone has shown was a draft manual that someone in Fort Leavenworth produced, which doesn't appear to have ever been adopted.

Interesting that only suddenly now do we care about it, when it's been going on for hundreds of years. That's what makes this nothing but bullshit conservative partisanship.

No the reason why we care about it is the NYtimes wrote an expose on it and then followed up with an Op ed.

Its like nail salons have been abusing their workers for years, why do we care now?

Your own partisanship has clouded your humanity. Shame on you.

Again, you have not addressed the two fundamental problems with your story.

1.) The NY Times never got beyond the "draft" manual, which appears to have never been issued or adopted.

2.) The NY Times never got beyond the fact that the Commanding General in Afghanistan never gave any order or promoted any doctrine for those in his command, to "condone" or "turn a blind eye" to child rape.

Nobody has.

That is a HUGE PROBLEM with your narrative.

I suggest you actually read the new york times article.

I did and it didn't at all answer those two questions for me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's deconstruct this once and for all with an analogy:

If soldier A found out that soldier B was a wife beater, and then soldier A beat the crap out of soldier B for it, guess what, soldier A would be charged under the UCMJ for beating soldier B. The fact that soldier B beat his wife doesn't change anything about how soldier A acted inappropriately. Soldier B's situation with his wife beating is a separate issue from soldier A's beating soldier B up, both are issues that would get charges filed. Soldier B's behavior does not excuse soldier A's behavior. Got it?

I'd hate to have you in my family - sibling, spouse, child.

Let's not break a "rule" to save a life. sheeple asshole

Hey, FUCK YOU too. Are you willfully stupid, or what?

Lemme explain this one last time: If you beat your wife, and I come over and beat the shit out of you for it, that's a choice I make, and if I get arrested and charged with assault for it, that's a consequence I accept. The problem is not with me not wanting to "break rules." The difference is that I am aware of the consequences, and I would accept them, and I would PROUDLY take my court date and whatever sentence for it, rather than thinking I could just beat the shit out of someone and get away with it, regardless of what a scumbag you are. I damn sure wouldn't be sitting around WHINING about it the way you pathetic scumbags are.

Look, I wouldn't want you in my family either. You'd be the FIRST to just sit around and whine as opposed to doing anything at all.

And since you seem to love procedure so much:

The Geneva Conventions and federal law also impose an obligation on the United States to investigate and prosecute violations of the laws of war under its jurisdiction, including military bases in Afghanistan. “There are no gray areas here,” said John Sifton of Human Rights Watch.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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...

Noone said anything like that. We are saying that turning a blind eye to it on our military bases and punishing soldiers who say otherwise is tacit condoning of child rape which is fundamentally against basic human rights and american values. Be it conservative or liberal. And yes, this is happening under obama's administration.

It has not been demonstrated let alone proven that anyone is condoning this, nor that it's the reason anyone is being punished. It's also not been demonstrated that any specific policy or doctrine change happened under Obama. The only thing anyone has shown was a draft manual that someone in Fort Leavenworth produced, which doesn't appear to have ever been adopted.

Interesting that only suddenly now do we care about it, when it's been going on for hundreds of years. That's what makes this nothing but bullshit conservative partisanship.

No the reason why we care about it is the NYtimes wrote an expose on it and then followed up with an Op ed.

Its like nail salons have been abusing their workers for years, why do we care now?

Your own partisanship has clouded your humanity. Shame on you.

Again, you have not addressed the two fundamental problems with your story.

1.) The NY Times never got beyond the "draft" manual, which appears to have never been issued or adopted.

2.) The NY Times never got beyond the fact that the Commanding General in Afghanistan never gave any order or promoted any doctrine for those in his command, to "condone" or "turn a blind eye" to child rape.

Nobody has.

That is a HUGE PROBLEM with your narrative.

I suggest you actually read the new york times article.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's deconstruct this once and for all with an analogy:

If soldier A found out that soldier B was a wife beater, and then soldier A beat the crap out of soldier B for it, guess what, soldier A would be charged under the UCMJ for beating soldier B. The fact that soldier B beat his wife doesn't change anything about how soldier A acted inappropriately. Soldier B's situation with his wife beating is a separate issue from soldier A's beating soldier B up, both are issues that would get charges filed. Soldier B's behavior does not excuse soldier A's behavior. Got it?

I don't care. i know the military is able of turning a blind eye to things they don't find pleasing. You think everything in the military runs like clockwork? Someone meant to make an example of of these men who were brave enough to stand up for what is right.

We go ape shit over pedophiles in the US but somehow because these men are allies it is okay? the hypocrisy.

Again, NOBODY here has ever said it was "OK"

Again, the Afghan pedophile is ONE thing. And the Afghan's behavior is something NOBODY here has condoned.

The soldier's assault on the Afghan is a SECOND thing. You need to stop muddling both together.

If he wanted to make an example of the Afghan, then so be it - BUT - he also knew the rules, and knew full well that beating the Afghan would get him in trouble. Thus, the whining about it doesn't cut it. He knew what he was getting into, and chose to do it anyhow.

Allowing this to take place on a US military base is condoning this behavior.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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...

Noone said anything like that. We are saying that turning a blind eye to it on our military bases and punishing soldiers who say otherwise is tacit condoning of child rape which is fundamentally against basic human rights and american values. Be it conservative or liberal. And yes, this is happening under obama's administration.

It has not been demonstrated let alone proven that anyone is condoning this, nor that it's the reason anyone is being punished. It's also not been demonstrated that any specific policy or doctrine change happened under Obama. The only thing anyone has shown was a draft manual that someone in Fort Leavenworth produced, which doesn't appear to have ever been adopted.

Interesting that only suddenly now do we care about it, when it's been going on for hundreds of years. That's what makes this nothing but bullshit conservative partisanship.

No the reason why we care about it is the NYtimes wrote an expose on it and then followed up with an Op ed.

Its like nail salons have been abusing their workers for years, why do we care now?

Your own partisanship has clouded your humanity. Shame on you.

Again, you have not addressed the two fundamental problems with your story.

1.) The NY Times never got beyond the "draft" manual, which appears to have never been issued or adopted.

2.) The NY Times never got beyond the fact that the Commanding General in Afghanistan never gave any order or promoted any doctrine for those in his command, to "condone" or "turn a blind eye" to child rape.

Nobody has.

That is a HUGE PROBLEM with your narrative.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's deconstruct this once and for all with an analogy:

If soldier A found out that soldier B was a wife beater, and then soldier A beat the crap out of soldier B for it, guess what, soldier A would be charged under the UCMJ for beating soldier B. The fact that soldier B beat his wife doesn't change anything about how soldier A acted inappropriately. Soldier B's situation with his wife beating is a separate issue from soldier A's beating soldier B up, both are issues that would get charges filed. Soldier B's behavior does not excuse soldier A's behavior. Got it?

I don't care. i know the military is able of turning a blind eye to things they don't find pleasing. You think everything in the military runs like clockwork? Someone meant to make an example of of these men who were brave enough to stand up for what is right.

We go ape shit over pedophiles in the US but somehow because these men are allies it is okay? the hypocrisy.

Again, NOBODY here has ever said it was "OK"

Again, the Afghan pedophile is ONE thing. And the Afghan's behavior is something NOBODY here has condoned.

The soldier's assault on the Afghan is a SECOND thing. You need to stop muddling both together.

If he wanted to make an example of the Afghan, then so be it - BUT - he also knew the rules, and knew full well that beating the Afghan would get him in trouble. Thus, the whining about it doesn't cut it. He knew what he was getting into, and chose to do it anyhow.

He is a hero. He deserves to be commended.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's deconstruct this once and for all with an analogy:

If soldier A found out that soldier B was a wife beater, and then soldier A beat the crap out of soldier B for it, guess what, soldier A would be charged under the UCMJ for beating soldier B. The fact that soldier B beat his wife doesn't change anything about how soldier A acted inappropriately. Soldier B's situation with his wife beating is a separate issue from soldier A's beating soldier B up, both are issues that would get charges filed. Soldier B's behavior does not excuse soldier A's behavior. Got it?

I don't care. i know the military is able of turning a blind eye to things they don't find pleasing. You think everything in the military runs like clockwork? Someone meant to make an example of of these men who were brave enough to stand up for what is right.

We go ape shit over pedophiles in the US but somehow because these men are allies it is okay? the hypocrisy.

Again, NOBODY here has ever said it was "OK"

Again, the Afghan pedophile is ONE thing. And the Afghan's behavior is something NOBODY here has condoned.

The soldier's assault on the Afghan is a SECOND thing. You need to stop muddling both together.

If he wanted to make an example of the Afghan, then so be it - BUT - he also knew the rules, and knew full well that beating the Afghan would get him in trouble. Thus, the whining about it doesn't cut it. He knew what he was getting into, and chose to do it anyhow.

Anonymous wrote:Let's deconstruct this once and for all with an analogy:

If soldier A found out that soldier B was a wife beater, and then soldier A beat the crap out of soldier B for it, guess what, soldier A would be charged under the UCMJ for beating soldier B. The fact that soldier B beat his wife doesn't change anything about how soldier A acted inappropriately. Soldier B's situation with his wife beating is a separate issue from soldier A's beating soldier B up, both are issues that would get charges filed. Soldier B's behavior does not excuse soldier A's behavior. Got it?

I'd hate to have you in my family - sibling, spouse, child.

Let's not break a "rule" to save a life. sheeple asshole

Other news agencies picking up this story

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/9/21/afghan-police-sex-abuse-charges-raise-legal-question-for-us-aid.html

Though the abuse of young boys by warlords or commanders has long been “known as something that happens in Afghanistan, what's shocking is the proximity it was taking place to U.S. soldiers and the allegations that those aberrant acts can apparently be ignored,” said Jonathan Horowitz, a legal officer for the Open Society Justice Initiative.

Leahy Law advocates call these “cultural” exceptions into question, however. “Child rape by a partnered security force member should not escape the gaze of the Leahy Law,” said Horowitz, of Open Society. “It’s not regarded as culturally relevant when it comes to definitions of war crimes, and the same should apply here.”

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/22/asia/afghanistan-boy-abuse-us-military/

Anonymous wrote:Let's deconstruct this once and for all with an analogy:

If soldier A found out that soldier B was a wife beater, and then soldier A beat the crap out of soldier B for it, guess what, soldier A would be charged under the UCMJ for beating soldier B. The fact that soldier B beat his wife doesn't change anything about how soldier A acted inappropriately. Soldier B's situation with his wife beating is a separate issue from soldier A's beating soldier B up, both are issues that would get charges filed. Soldier B's behavior does not excuse soldier A's behavior. Got it?

I don't care. i know the military is able of turning a blind eye to things they don't find pleasing. You think everything in the military runs like clockwork? Someone meant to make an example of of these men who were brave enough to stand up for what is right.

We go ape shit over pedophiles in the US but somehow because these men are allies it is okay? the hypocrisy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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...

Noone said anything like that. We are saying that turning a blind eye to it on our military bases and punishing soldiers who say otherwise is tacit condoning of child rape which is fundamentally against basic human rights and american values. Be it conservative or liberal. And yes, this is happening under obama's administration.

It has not been demonstrated let alone proven that anyone is condoning this, nor that it's the reason anyone is being punished. It's also not been demonstrated that any specific policy or doctrine change happened under Obama. The only thing anyone has shown was a draft manual that someone in Fort Leavenworth produced, which doesn't appear to have ever been adopted.

Interesting that only suddenly now do we care about it, when it's been going on for hundreds of years. That's what makes this nothing but bullshit conservative partisanship.

No the reason why we care about it is the NYtimes wrote an expose on it and then followed up with an Op ed.

Its like nail salons have been abusing their workers for years, why do we care now?

Your own partisanship has clouded your humanity. Shame on you.

Let's deconstruct this once and for all with an analogy:

If soldier A found out that soldier B was a wife beater, and then soldier A beat the crap out of soldier B for it, guess what, soldier A would be charged under the UCMJ for beating soldier B. The fact that soldier B beat his wife doesn't change anything about how soldier A acted inappropriately. Soldier B's situation with his wife beating is a separate issue from soldier A's beating soldier B up, both are issues that would get charges filed. Soldier B's behavior does not excuse soldier A's behavior. Got it?

Anonymous wrote:

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...

Noone said anything like that. We are saying that turning a blind eye to it on our military bases and punishing soldiers who say otherwise is tacit condoning of child rape which is fundamentally against basic human rights and american values. Be it conservative or liberal. And yes, this is happening under obama's administration.

It has not been demonstrated let alone proven that anyone is condoning this, nor that it's the reason anyone is being punished. It's also not been demonstrated that any specific policy or doctrine change happened under Obama. The only thing anyone has shown was a draft manual that someone in Fort Leavenworth produced, which doesn't appear to have ever been adopted.

Interesting that only suddenly now do we care about it, when it's been going on for hundreds of years. That's what makes this nothing but bullshit conservative partisanship.