Army kicking out decorated soldier for protecting Afghan child from rape.

Let's take this apart.

Headline: "Army kicking out decorated soldier for protecting Afghan child from rape". Present tense. Done deal.

First paragraph of the story: "A decorated Army sergeant who protected an Afghan boy from a child molester could find out any day whether his actions will end his career in the military." Could find out. Not will find out. Could find out. In other words, it's not even certain whether whether his expulsion is being considered.

Paragraph two: "Martland and Daniel Quinn were both disciplined for their actions." Fact but no detail. Were they disciplined for removing the rapist or giving him a damn good beating on the way out? Did they steal his boots and take a dump in them? The beating and the dump are justified but people in a position of authority don't have the same leeway we have.

Paragraph three: " it’s the Army’s turn to do the right thing and reverse the decision to expel him from the service" says a politician...contradicting the first paragraph.

The morality and ethics of the situation are beyond debate.

The article, however, reads like rabble rousing clickbait, one "Obama is to blame" away from a full house.

originally posted by: Whodathunkdatcheese
Let's take this apart.

Headline: "Army kicking out decorated soldier for protecting Afghan child from rape". Present tense. Done deal.

First paragraph of the story: "A decorated Army sergeant who protected an Afghan boy from a child molester could find out any day whether his actions will end his career in the military." Could find out. Not will find out. Could find out. In other words, it's not even certain whether whether his expulsion is being considered.

Paragraph two: "Martland and Daniel Quinn were both disciplined for their actions." Fact but no detail. Were they disciplined for removing the rapist or giving him a damn good beating on the way out? Did they steal his boots and take a dump in them? The beating and the dump are justified but people in a position of authority don't have the same leeway we have.

Paragraph three: " it’s the Army’s turn to do the right thing and reverse the decision to expel him from the service" says a politician...contradicting the first paragraph.

The morality and ethics of the situation are beyond debate.

The article, however, reads like rabble rousing clickbait, one "Obama is to blame" away from a full house.

You speak like a disinfo agent for the US government. How much do they pay you?

"After acting to protect a child from sexual assault from an Afghan commander, SFC Martland was punished and could be kicked out of the military at any time," said Jay Sekulow, of the American Center for Law and Justice. "What's equally disturbing are reports that the military has allowed Afghanistan forces to sexually abuse young children on U.S. bases.”

wtf are they doing there? raping anything that moves? some heros.

If that soldier isn't demanding a court-martial, he should be.

Bring it out before a court. Dare 'em to do something.

That the military, the army, is even thinking about doing something like this shows that something has gone seriously awry, and needs fixing.

That's our job.

They are in a career of 'protection' of people, all people who cannot defend themselves from 'bullies'

No, where did you get such a ridiculous idea? The job of the military is to destroy or take over countries.

I know why they are doing this, it's because they feel that we have to have the support of the Afghan people against the Taliban so they have a policy to not get involved in their business and risk losing their support.

It's sad but this is really one of those damned if you do damned if you don't situations.

He should've shot him right in the dick and then killed all who watched.