• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Fort Hood - Terrorist Attack?

Terrorist or Not

  • Yes, A terrorist Attack

    Votes: 38 54.3%
  • no

    Votes: 32 45.7%

  • Total voters
    70
Psychologically, we teach soldiers to marginalize and hate the enemy. What if a Muslim is being taught to kill Muslims? Wouldn't that drive him nuts?

Not only that but he is uniquely singled out to counsel traumatized vets who have returned from the Iraq war with all their unfinished business about Iraq Muslims and terrorists.

Soldiers are not taught to hate - my husband's been a soldier for almost 20 years, he doesn't hate anyone *shrug* So I don't know where you got that from.

Right now they're actually teaching soldiers to understand the enemy, to see what separates an extremist from a traditional member of the Islamic faiths and so forth ... etc.

They're taught cultural awareness (lots of it) and other things so they can understand and identify with the cultural and other differences before deployment.

However - I understand your point and I agree to an extent. *If* he was constantly hearing people's prejudice or bigotry - that amount of "I hate people like you" from soldiers - with or without them knowing that he was Islamic (Muslim, etc) - would be an extreme emotional burden and likely to make anyone bend or break.

If I was a psychologist and I had a lot of men telling me "I hate women, women are the bane of my existance and I want to kill them all" I'll probably crack rather quickly, regardless of my education and status as a psychologist.

For Hasan I can see this being very applicable - it's not like you have a choice when you're assigned a Dr. If someone had a problem with Muslims, etc, and they were assigned to him then, evidently, their issues are going ot be discussed.

But that might be beside the point - they haven't quite pinned down anything in particular. Maybe he had other issues that haven't even been rumored around, yet.
Sometimes it's just foolish to try to understand the mind of the criminally insane.
 
At some point thought DOES become 'probable cause' or 'imminent danger' among other things - when it comes to soldiers this is crucial. You're mental balance and focus is extremely important in regards to deployment and functioning on the battlefied.

As soon as we can read minds this will be relevant. Until that time we cannot just go locking people up with no evidence or crime being committed.

He wasn't a regular doctor - he was cleared for deployment and if he was having obvious problems in the US then what would have happened if he DID deploy?

Irrelevant if he had committed no crime, or showed a mental diminished capacity, but he did not. He was still able to preform his duty's without any apparent problems.

A soldier might not show signs of "being homicidal" or "suicidal" - but still be considered unstable enough ot the point that *more* stress could cause too many problems. It's just a fact that going TO a theater of war CAUSES problems even with people who were squared away before they left.

We have solders in the field still serving with PST and all other kinds of problems, and they did not go on a killing rampage.

We are not magician's, no magic pill etc here. It is the military and **** happens. Welcome to the real world.

We're not talking about civilian issues, here - we're talking about military duties and the unique problems tied directly with it's nature. There's a huge difference.

I was in the military, the only difference is you are under orders the majority of your military career. You still have your freedom to not be detained or accused of a crime without one being committed. We don't throw solders into Leavenworth for thinking about something wrong.

While it might not be such a concern to intervene with a civilian who had these types of issues it is important to do EXACTLY that for a deploying member of the military.

Yea needle in a haystack, that always works. :roll:
 
Last edited:
Soldiers are not taught to hate - my husband's been a soldier for almost 20 years, he doesn't hate anyone *shrug* So I don't know where you got that from.

Right now they're actually teaching soldiers to understand the enemy, to see what separates an extremist from a traditional member of the Islamic faiths and so forth ... etc.

They're taught cultural awareness (lots of it) and other things so they can understand and identify with the cultural and other differences before deployment.

However - I understand your point and I agree to an extent. *If* he was constantly hearing people's prejudice or bigotry - that amount of "I hate people like you" from soldiers - with or without them knowing that he was Islamic (Muslim, etc) - would be an extreme emotional burden and likely to make anyone bend or break.

If I was a psychologist and I had a lot of men telling me "I hate women, women are the bane of my existance and I want to kill them all" I'll probably crack rather quickly, regardless of my education and status as a psychologist.

For Hasan I can see this being very applicable - it's not like you have a choice when you're assigned a Dr. If someone had a problem with Muslims, etc, and they were assigned to him then, evidently, their issues are going ot be discussed.

But that might be beside the point - they haven't quite pinned down anything in particular. Maybe he had other issues that haven't even been rumored around, yet.
Sometimes it's just foolish to try to understand the mind of the criminally insane.

Well, maybe they aren't taught to hate any more as official military training policy. But it happens in many cases, as a consequence of war, I'm thinking of WWII and the way the Japanese Americans were hated.


I was a social worker once for a senior housing project. Most of the senior were survivors of WWII and it was very mixed Japanese and European Americans. Here they lived side by side with the same people who were on opposite emotional sides during the war.

So many years later the wounds of the hatred were still present with people who had lived in internment camps and had lost relatives in Hiroshima and people who had survived being POW's in Japanese camps or had relatives who had been killed at Pearl Harbor.

The loyalty of Japanese Americans was questioned in the same way we question Major Hasan's loyalty after this tragedy.

Just sayin'.......
 
Last edited:
I think what Wind may be trying to say....

In war generally, it is common to foster an environment that is black and white with little gray. The enemy is bad, you are good. The enemy deserves to die, your allies don't deserve to die. The enemy is fighting for bad reasons, you are fighting the virtuous fight.

This is not speaking to the U.S. Military, but to war, long standing combat, killing whatever in a broader sense.

In those situations its hard to create a situation where you can allow shades of gray to come in. Its much more difficult to pull that trigger when you're thinking you're looking across at "Enemy X" who may have 2 kids back home, a wife that he truly loves, has a dog he's raised since was a stray puppy, and secretly as a child would harbor dreams of going to America and play for the yankee's than looking across at "Enemy X" who wants to destroy your way of life.

Sometimes this black and white distinction can happen from dehumanizing the enemy to a point, ala the degrading attitudes towards asians in some of the more recent wars. Sometimes its just bold concrete stereotyping of anyone that's part of the enemy and now allowing in your mind to go beyond that.

This generalized tactic of detaching yourself is present at times from something as simple as an MMA fight all the way to war. The best way to detach yourself, to keep from hestitating or feeling guilty or sympathetic, is to black and white paint the guy across from you as an enemy fully and completely and nothing else.

I think what's wind is saying is that she thinks part of the way this "us vs them" thing is being imparted here is in part using muslim faith/arab ethnicity as part of the method.

I don't agree with Wind's notion completely, but the general philosophy isn't unheard of.
 
Psychologically, we teach soldiers to marginalize and hate the enemy. What if a Muslim is being taught to kill Muslims? Wouldn't that drive him nuts?

Not necessarily. It depends on whether or not he identifies more with his religion or his national patriotism in circumstances of war. In many wars throughout history, Christians have killed Christians on a broad scale, just as Muslims have killed Muslims.
 
I was a social worker once for a senior housing project. Most of the senior were survivors of WWII and it was very mixed Japanese and European Americans. Here they lived side by side with the same people who were on opposite emotional sides during the war.

So many years later the wounds of the hatred were still present with people who had lived in internment camps and had lost relatives in Hiroshima and people who had survived being POW's in Japanese camps or had relatives who had been killed at Pearl Harbor.

The loyalty of Japanese Americans was questioned in the same way we question Major Hasan's loyalty after this tragedy.

Just sayin'.......

These weren't soldiers. You implied that SOLDIERS are taught to fear and hate.
 
Well, maybe they aren't taught to hate any more as official military training policy. But it happens in many cases, as a consequence of war, I'm thinking of WWII and the way the Japanese Americans were hated.


I was a social worker once for a senior housing project. Most of the senior were survivors of WWII and it was very mixed Japanese and European Americans. Here they lived side by side with the same people who were on opposite emotional sides during the war.

So many years later the wounds of the hatred were still present with people who had lived in internment camps and had lost relatives in Hiroshima and people who had survived being POW's in Japanese camps or had relatives who had been killed at Pearl Harbor.

The loyalty of Japanese Americans was questioned in the same way we question Major Hasan's loyalty after this tragedy.

Just sayin'.......

That was then, this is now - things are different. We have evolved past the Jim Crow laws and other social injustices that were "law" during that time.

At least out government now tries to dissuade fear mongering, racial hatred, prejudice and religious bigotry and they make efforts to protect those from such reactions without sequestering them into detention camps.
 
At least out government now tries to dissuade fear mongering, racial hatred, prejudice and religious bigotry and they make efforts to protect those from such reactions without sequestering them into detention camps.

We still teach young men and women to kill without thought. To kill on a superiors orders without question. Do you really think that does not have an effect on a young man or woman?

We want you to respect the enemy, but kill him when needed. We were taught the enemy was the enemy and the idea is to kill him so he cannot kill you. Stupid politicians and bleeding heart civilians running the military when they have no ****ing clue.

This is why our military today is so ****ed up today. We are not preparing them for war. We are preparing them for some kind of deranged social experiment.
 
We still teach young men and women to kill without thought. To kill on a superiors orders without question. Do you really think that does not have an effect on a young man or woman?

We want you to respect the enemy, but kill him when needed. We were taught the enemy was the enemy and the idea is to kill him so he cannot kill you. Stupid politicians and bleeding heart civilians running the military when they have no ****ing clue.

This is why our military today is so ****ed up today. We are not preparing them for war. We are preparing them for some kind of deranged social experiment.

Taught to kill without thought?

If we were cleared to kill without thought this whole Middle East issue would be resolved by now.
 
Taught to kill without thought?

If we were cleared to kill without thought this whole Middle East issue would be resolved by now.

I suppose you missed the second sentence huh? In fact you seem to have missed the entire point. :roll:
 
Last edited:
I suppose you missed the second sentence huh? In fact you seem to have missed the entire point. :roll:

I actually got the point and disagree - perhaps I just consider my husband and others to be more human than thoughtless animals, even on the battlefield.
 
I actually got the point and disagree - perhaps I just consider my husband and others to be more human than thoughtless animals, even on the battlefield.

Nice Red Herring. No one said anything about any kind of thoughtless animals. If you just "disagreed" why did you try to use my comment out of context? So dishonest.

You can ignore the reality of the situation and the fact it is hurting our military all you like. The only people who will pay is our solders. A military made of solders not ready to fight a real war.
 
Last edited:
My dogs are always very thoughtful. They happily greet me when I arrive home, sit when I tell them to, help dispose of bones and table scraps, and alert me if someone walks by the house. I think they are thoughtful and considerate!
 
My dogs are always very thoughtful. They happily greet me when I arrive home, sit when I tell them to, help dispose of bones and table scraps, and alert me if someone walks by the house. I think they are thoughtful and considerate!

My dog is an asshole. :(
 
Nice Red Herring. No one said anything about any kind of thoughtless animals. If you just "disagreed" why did you try to use my comment out of context? So dishonest.

You can ignore the reality of the situation and the fact it is hurting our military all you like. The only people who will pay is our solders. A military made of solders not ready to fight a real war.

See, now you're just trying to pick at a scab that isn't even there.
Very well. . . .Fully quoting to get you back on track:

We still teach young men and women to kill without thought. To kill on a superiors orders without question. Do you really think that does not have an effect on a young man or woman?

We want you to respect the enemy, but kill him when needed. We were taught the enemy was the enemy and the idea is to kill him so he cannot kill you. Stupid politicians and bleeding heart civilians running the military when they have no ****ing clue.

This is why our military today is so ****ed up today. We are not preparing them for war. We are preparing them for some kind of deranged social experiment.

And my reply still applies to the whole entire point you tried to make - whether I quoted the whole thing or not:

Taught to kill without thought?

If we were cleared to kill without thought this whole Middle East issue would be resolved by now.

Followed with:

perhaps I just consider my husband and others to be more human than thoughtless animals, even on the battlefield.

So you seemed lost, you're picking it apart too muchb. . .

My view:

We USE to encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy.
We NO LONGER encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy - and I feel we shouldn't because it's not necessary.

Not that complicated of a sentiment, there.

Your view:

We USE to encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy.
We NO LONGER encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy - and you feel we should because we are really preparing our soldiers for some sort of "derranged social experiement"

and, apparently, you feel that Hassan is an example of your view.

But you're overlooking the fact that flippants like Hassan have been found in every army - throughout history - he's not the first - so obviously it's not a product of something like "pc warfare" which coincides with our modern era.

If a soldier has serious moral issues that impare their views and they do NOT agree with what they're expected to do there are outs - ALWAYS have been - they're given based on religious and other issues and they're implimented all the time.

So that's what Hassan should have done - This whole "we're messing up our soldiers by NOT teaching them to hate everyone" is a bit skewed in this regard.
 
We USE to encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy. We NO LONGER encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy - and I feel we shouldn't because it's not necessary.

Not that complicated of a sentiment, there.

And as I stated before it's liberal ***** thinking like that, that gets our solders killed.

And people wonder why we can't win wars anymore. :roll:

We USE to encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy.
We NO LONGER encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy - and you feel we should because we are really preparing our soldiers for some sort of "derranged social experiement"

Yes.

and, apparently, you feel that Hassan is an example of your view.

Please point out where I said anything of the sort, or even implyed it?

But you're overlooking the fact that flippants like Hassan have been found in every army - throughout history - he's not the first - so obviously it's not a product of something like "pc warfare" which coincides with our modern era.

How am I overlooking it? I have not even mentioned him in the last what, 4 posts?

Truth is I know this, so what?

I think your own statement sums up my position...

"If we were cleared to kill without thought this whole Middle East issue would be resolved by now." - Aunt Spiker

If a soldier has serious moral issues that impare their views and they do NOT agree with what they're expected to do there are outs - ALWAYS have been - they're given based on religious and other issues and they're implimented all the time.

Solders have had "moral" issues since the beginning of time. today It is part of a mixed race, sex, religion modern military. It has been and will continue to be a problem.

Discharging or locking up people who disagree on whatever grounds is illegal if you have no evidence. Thought is still not a crime.

So that's what Hassan should have done - This whole "we're messing up our soldiers by NOT teaching them to hate everyone" is a bit skewed in this regard.

No it's not. He should have been relieved as soon as a problem was seen for his own safety. They did not see a problem legitimate or not. So for this argument it is irrelevant.

The military is not perfect and people will fall through the cracks. Welcome to reality and human fallibility.
 
Last edited:
My view:

We USE to encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy.
We NO LONGER encourage "blind angst" towards our enemy - and I feel we shouldn't because it's not necessary.

Not that complicated of a sentiment, there.

r-lee-ermey1.jpg


Gunny would like to remind you that there is no place in WAR for sentiments like that.
 
Blackdog - you represent the classic alpha-male. Where pride and arrogance support the aged and dying thought that men cannot have feelings, cannot think, and must be drones - lest they be "******s."

I, however, believe that they can function just fine as soldiers while being very much in touch with their "selves" at the same time - no borge collective or sheepism necessary.
 
Blackdog - you represent the classic alpha-male. Where pride and arrogance support the aged and dying thought that men cannot have feelings, cannot think, and must be drones - lest they be "******s."

I, however, believe that they can function just fine as soldiers while being very much in touch with their "selves" at the same time - no borge collective or sheepism necessary.

It's because women killed Chivalry that we act this way.


:lol:
 
It's because women killed Chivalry that we act this way.


:lol:


:rofl Damn straight! We ruined all that primitive "gender-place" trype.

Completely unrelated - As always we can look to Rollins for input on this subject.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5S74dB6oXc&feature=related"]YouTube- henry rollins women[/ame]
 
Blackdog - you represent the classic alpha-male. Where pride and arrogance support the aged and dying thought that men cannot have feelings, cannot think, and must be drones - lest they be "******s."

No. I (unlike you who have no clue about warfare) represent the reality of war. This over the century's has not changed, and probably never will.

I, however, believe that they can function just fine as soldiers while being very much in touch with their "selves" at the same time - no borge collective or sheepism necessary.

:roll:

And I can rest my case.

This is part of the reason my battle brothers are still dying over there. They are doing everything in their power to kill us, but we have to be careful not to damage the mosque or cause any kind of collateral damage!

I guess after what happened to the Red Coats we still have not learned that war in not a "gentleman's" sport.
 
Last edited:
No. I (unlike you who have no clue about warfare) represent the reality of war. This over the century's has not changed, and probably never will.



:roll:

And I can rest my case.

I nominate that we elevate Blackdog to the DP Pantheon as the Patron Saint of War.
 
I nominate that we elevate Blackdog to the DP Pantheon as the Patron Saint of War.

I am not Catholic. :lol:

Although you could nominate me for Forum Overlord of War?

Hell after all the time I spent as a cop and in the military I probably earned it.
 
No. I (unlike you who have no clue about warfare) represent the reality of war. This over the century's has not changed, and probably never will.

And I can rest my case.

This is part of the reason my battle brothers are still dying over there. They are doing everything in their power to kill us, but we have to be careful not to damage the mosque or cause any kind of collateral damage!

I guess after what happened to the Red Coats we still have not learned that war in not a "gentleman's" sport.

I'm not a soldier, true - but my husband is and I've tended to all his wounds due to this whole issue and unlike some soldiers who come back and MOVE ON post debilitating injury he's actually continued to care for soldiers who've returned in an effort to help them put their pieces back together - eventhough his injuries are at the point where he can't do his former duties, which he loved just as much as you, his heart is still very much in it.

My husband's fought, and I've nurtured, our children were raised without a father for countless years.

My view might be a little "Athena-esque" but I'm not a pacifist nor am I against what we've been doing, etc etc.

Don't worry, though - his views are just like yours and he and I have had this same arguement every deployment, every mission and amid every sacrifice we've ever had to make.

So - while we all sit at our computers debating these feelings we have over what's happening over there and over here my husband deals with everyone's PTSD's - all the "could be Hassan's" and "possible Sherwoods" and "is disturbed" there is under his watch. Day in and day out.
 
Last edited:
I'm not a soldier, true - but my husband is and I've tended to all his wounds due to this whole issue and unlike some soldiers who come back and MOVE ON post debilitating injury he's actually continued to care for soldiers who've returned in an effort to help them put their pieces back together - eventhough his injuries are at the point where he can't do his former duties, which he loved just as much as you, his heart is still very much in it.

This is a great thing.

Unfortunately war is hell, it is not nice and cozy. I am not trying to be condescending here so forgive my simple language. War is the last resort to a problem and it has horrible consequences that we MUST be willing to take and accept or it is pointless to even try.

My husband's fought, and I've nurtured, our children were raised without a father for countless years.

My view might be a little "Athena-esque" but I'm not a pacifist nor am I against what we've been doing, etc etc.

That's great. It is to bad allot of wifes and girlfriends don't realize how important that is to a solder miles from home.

Don't worry, though - his views are just like yours and he and I have had this same arguement every deployment, every mission and amid every sacrifice we've ever had to make.

I hear you sister. Being married to a GI can be a real challenge on the home front and I salute your efforts.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom