Originally posted by Surtur
But you aren't thinking about this in context: this is a part of their culture. So why would the commander think the guy was joking? If part of your culture is raping kids and you have an army guy come confront you about raping kids..well, laughing does make you seem guilty.You also spoke of innocent until proven guilty. But nah, screw that. It shouldn't apply to people from places where their culture accepts this. Also here is the kink in the plan of informing the authorities: they put a dude in jail for one day for raping a girl and then forced her to marry him. Those are the authorities you'd hand him over to?
I think you missed the point... the point being if the American Soldier was wrong then he just beat up an innocent man. Which is a problem. The context as presented in the article is that the Soldier confronted a man then attacked that man. We don't know based on that article if the soldier was correct or not.
Would you harm a person simply for having an accusation brought up against them?
I'm not saying ignore a potential problem but you just can't beat people up because you think they might be guilty. That kind of action is exactly what we are trying to change in the middle east. The article itself make no mention of whether or not it was proven the committed the action.
And this is a major problem with the article. It condemns a man and raises another on a pedestal without this Afghan getting a trial or any other form or chance to defend. He was subject to one man's judgement before he got beat up/