7 Thoughts to “President Obama Address: A Crime Against Our Nation”

  1. Last Best Hope

    I am encouraged by the mature, non-panicked response to this tragedy, at least from what I have seen from mainstream radio and television with only one exception. I have not read all the comments on this blog, but I trust that there have not been many posts that attempt to denigrate the Muslim faith, or to justify unequal treatment of Muslim Americans. I hope it is not too soon or too insensitive to point out that, just a man who loses his mind and becomes a mass murderer should not be used to denigrate any particular ethnicity or religion, neither should such a tragedy be used to denigrate any particular political party or point of view.

  2. I think the discussion has been rather even, Last Best Hope.

    Any denigration is at extremism and radicalism.

  3. Last Best Hope

    Good, and let’s remember the same should apply when the psychopath is a neonazi or white supremacist. Sensitivity goes both ways, and yes most people appreciate that, but at times it is easier for some to appreciate that, at times it is easier for others.

    Interesting to me is the fact that President Bush felt it was neccessary to be more explicit about this than President Obama has been (that I have seen). Could it be a sign that we have progressed as a society, and perhaps learned from our over-reaction 8 years ago?

  4. Wolverine

    I would suggest that, rather than focus somehow on this flawed man’s religious beliefs per se, we should take a long, hard look at the way in which we are making mistakes in keeping such people in uniform and, incredibly, processing them for duty in this particular combat zone. If the man’s religious faith becomes part of a negative psychological assessment, so be it. That should apply regardless of the specific faith. Although we are still getting details only in bits and pieces, one thing did stand out for me. Some claim that he may not have felt comfortable going to a battle zone where he might have to kill co-religionists. Others retorted that, as a psychiatrist treating battle weary and troubled soldiers, he would not be involved in combat. Big mistake in my view. (1) Neither Iraq nor Afghanistan is a normal battlefield. The nature of both conflicts has made all personnel susceptible to attack; and, therefore, all personnel, regardless of job category, may find themselves in a position of firing back. There is, in reality, no place in either country which reminds one of the safer “rear echelon” behind the battle lines which we saw in other wars. (2) Perhaps this Muslim soldier might not have had as a matter of a primary task to kill the enemy but his job, in part, would have been to heal soldiers so that most could go back into battle to do just that. Some very blurred distinctions here, to my way of thinking. Somewhere, somehow, someone should have addressed this issue much more thoroughly in this case and sought some better answers.

    It is not as if we have never faced this kind of thing. As I recall, in World War II we decided for the most part ( out of security fears as well as cultural sensitivity) to send Japanese-American soldiers to the European Theater, where they would not face the prospect of killing those of the same ethnic background, perhaps even family. As a consequence, these Japanese-American soldiers, so feared at the outset of that war because of issues of security and espionage, became some of our best and most heroic combat soldiers. I would think that we should readdress this same issue in cases of this kind of possible religio-cultural inner conflict, not on a broad level but at least on an individual basis. This in no way excuses what the Major did at Fort Hood; but I have to wonder if the Fort Hood incident would have happened if the Major had been assigned to duty stateside or in a theater such as Korea instead of the Middle East. Now, some may claim that this is a display of religious prejudice; but, hey, sometimes you have to do what you have to do for the good of all concerned.

  5. Wolverine you bring up some interesting points. Do we know for certain he was being deployed?

    There will always be rotten apples. There will always be people who snap. Someone dropped the ball here. Hopefully this will be a learning experience rather than the usual fall guy mentality we have seen in the past.

    Thanks for your insight, Woverine.

  6. Wolverine

    Moon-howler, the details about this case are flying all over the place and rather hard to pin down. My impression was that he was either slated to be deployed to the Middle East or perhaps at the least thought he was going to be so deployed. It also looks like he was himself trying to wrangle his way out of the military. That the authorities lost track on this one is really disturbing. The result of trying to deal simultaneously with personnel demand for two war zones, I would guess. Things can get lost in the shuffle.

    The UK Telegraph recently came out with a story claiming that this guy attended the same mosque in Fairfax as a couple of the 9-11 conspirators and at about the same time. This mosque was said to have been under the leadership of an imam with radical tendencies and a penchant for advocating jihadist-style violence. The imam was wanted in Britain for this reason and is now believed to be operating out of the Yemen, where he is still spouting such views. I think we are going to see a lot of stuff like this in the days to come and find it very hard to separate the wheat from the chaff. We need a fast and definitive report from the authorities on this one — and I mean fast.

  7. That certainly adds a new twist to things, doesn’t it? And it isn’t very reassuring. Please keep us posted on this case. You seem to be locating that which cannot be pinned down real well!

Comments are closed.