Saturday, November 14, 2009

Will victims of Ft. Hood receive a Purple Heart?

Was the Ft. Hood massacre an act of terrorism--or was it merely the result of stress? If it was the result of a terrorist act, which the Obama administration is loathe to admit because it could damage the progress of Diversity in the Army, then the victims should receive the Purple Heart. But if it was only an act of stress relief, which seems to be the preferred theory of the military (and of the largely anonymous posters to this blog), then they should not receive Purple Heart.

Of course, since, according the Terrorism Denialists it is really Hasan who is the victim here, maybe he deserves an award of some kind.

HT: Roger's Rules

15 comments:

Susan Weston said...

The Cheney administration is to be commended for having identified Major Hassan's dangerous tendencies. Since they discharged him in 2005, he was unable to enter Fort Hood, and since they have had him under intensive surveillance since the week after his discharge, the FBI arrested him as soon he tried to enter the base with his weapons. Since they prevented the murders on their watch, no one was injured and no medals were earned.

Oops, sorry. It didn't happen that way. The folks in power before January 20 had nearly all the evidence available to those in power since. Neither team thought through the danger,and neither removed it. Everyone blew it.

Knowing that, maybe the partisan blame tossing isn't quite in order in the face of national sorrow?

Greg said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Lee said...

> The folks in power before January 20 had nearly all the evidence available to those in power since

I don't recall anyone in any of these threads putting all (any?) of the blame on Obama's administration. But if we're going to blame Cheney, certainly some of the doodah is going to splash on Obama's stainkless white tuxedo jacket.

> Knowing that, maybe the partisan blame tossing isn't quite in order in the face of national sorrow?

I suppose what's in order is to stand around and wonder why the hell Hasan's motive could have possibly been.

Apparently, it's all because the US Army was not quite successful in making its Muslims feel warm and cozy.

I put the blame squarely where it belongs: on the metastasized culture of political correctness, in which every culture, even the most foul and murderous, is entitled to love and respect.

Except for our own.

Martin Cothran said...

Susan,

I'm not at all averse to putting some of the blame on the Bush administration. I never voted for Bush/Cheney, and there were reasons for that.

But I would say that there is an important distinction between the two in terms of culpability for incidents like this, and it's this: the Bush administration was not pushing Diversity policies to the extent the Obama administration (and, pre-Bush, the Clinton administration) has.

Surely the parties who more actively and enthusiastically create the conditions for people like Hasan to continue serving in the military and to keep getting promoted are more at fault here.

Susan Weston said...

What diversity-victories did Clinton win in the military?

What diversity-victories has Obama won?

When you make this sort of case about civilian culture, you are sometimes right and frequently witty.

When you try to attach it to the culture of our armed-forces, I flatly don't think the connection is there. When you try to attach it to the Fort Hood deaths, amusing extrapolation for rhetorical flourish just seems unworthy.

So, in complete seriousness, can you pin down a bit how either Clinton or Obama or anyone they appointed within the Department of Defense made headway on any kind of diversity?

Lee said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lee said...

> What diversity-victories did Clinton win in the military?

Heard of Tailhook? Here's an article about the consequences on certain officers' careers. Interestingly, no women were disciplined at all. Presumably, then, all participated under duress.

http://www.cmrlink.org/social.asp?docID=159

How about Kara Hultgreen? Pentagon said we need a lady pilot. Promote one. She had failed her qualifying attempts, but somehow passed when the Pentagon's wishes were known. A victory for womankind, but unfortunately not for the late Ms. Hultgreen, who crashed and burned shortly after her new assignment.

Wikipedia claims it was a combination of things that caused the crash, one of them being "mechanical failure". But the Navy didn't release the results of the formal inquiry, and the so-called mechanical failure was inferred from the observed failure of the engine, with no speculation on what the pilot might have done to influence said engine. The savvy pilots I've spoken with and watched the videotape, to a one, said it was the worst approach to a carrier landing they'd ever seen. But PC ruled and Kara died.

Here's Elaine Donnelly on p.c. in the military:

http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=ZmJhMDE5NDk2NjUyMjNmNjA3NTBlZjhjMjhmOWJlMzY

The military will now let you sport a beard or a religious hair covering if you have a religious thing about it. Special rules for special people, I guess. Never heard of an Amish or Mennonite dude allowed to keep his beard. Or Jews. Some religions are more equal than others, I guess. Note the 1986 Supreme Court decision that denied Jews in the military the right to wear a yarmulke.

Finally, here is an Army officer's opinion about what p.c. has accomplished:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/11/12/connect_the_dots__redux_99127.html

Every once in a while, someone in the military actually does do something other than feather his own hat and care for his own career. This article almost certainly spells the end of his military career. Money graf:

> Jihadist rhetoric espoused by Hassan was categorically dismissed out of submissiveness to the concepts of tolerance and diversity. The Army as an institution has been neutered by decades of political correctness and the leaders in Hassan's chain-of-command failed to act accordingly out of fear of being labeled anti-Muslim and receiving a negative evaluation report. The counter-terrorism agencies knew this guy was communicating with Al-Qaeda and dismissed it as academic research instead of delving deeper into the probability that a terrorist had infiltrated the ranks.

Martin Cothran said...

Susan,

Or maybe we could talk about Shannon Faulkner, the first female cadet at VMI, who in 1990, with the support of the Clinton Justice Department, argued that women were just as qualified for military service and could do the same thing that men could do.

VMI resisted the attempt until threats from the government forced them into accepting women. Then they accepted them, at which point, faced with having to shave her head (one of the things everyone else had to do), she refused (ironically, with the support of NOW)

Since then, more women have entered VMI, and the military institute, reluctantly, and despite continued claims that women can handle the same thing men can, have had to "gender norm" their physical standards--like every other such institution has had to do.

Martin Cothran said...

Well, shame on me. The Faulkner debacle was during the senior Bush administration. I guess that administration was even worse than I remember it.

Susan Weston said...

Tailhook and a cadet who didn't want to be bald?

I thought we were talking about serious men, serious women, and serious military service to protect a great nation.

Our country needs something more serious than a bunch of cry-baby boys whining that someone made them play with girls.

Fortunately, we have exactly that in the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines.

If you gents want to spend your energy claiming otherwise, please put a sign on the door that says "stag party in progress" and I'll stay away.

Martin Cothran said...

I'm just trying to figure out how someone who claims she just wants to be one of the boys and then gets upset because she has to cut her hair too short is going to respond to live fire combat.

Lee said...

> Tailhook and a cadet who didn't want to be bald?

What do you want? Someone to sit and list example after example all day? You asked for "diversity-victories", you got 'em.

> I thought we were talking about serious men, serious women, and serious military service to protect a great nation.

We were, in fact, discussing entrenched p.c. in the military. What are you discussing?

> Our country needs something more serious than a bunch of cry-baby boys whining that someone made them play with girls.

Characterization is much easier than argument. Oh, you've noticed.

Why are the men who notice the deterioration of the military to p.c. "cry-baby boys"? And why aren't the girls who want to break down the doors to the military boys' club "cry-baby girls"?

> If you gents want to spend your energy claiming otherwise, please put a sign on the door that says "stag party in progress" and I'll stay away.

Here's how it works.

Certain standards were set for the men. If the standards aren't important, they shouldn't exist. But they do. Presumably, they are objective standards created to meet the demands of the profession.

Women walk in and (cry-babies?) boo-hoo that *qualified* women ought to be allowed to participate.

Then they get in. But can't, or won't (in the case of the haircut), meet the standard set for the men.

So the standards are changed to make it easier for them.

But not for the men.

Did the objectives change? Did the demands of the profession change?

No. They're still there. Only now, women can participate, and they don't need to meet the same standards, which is not how their initial request was billed.

Same is true with other forms of p.c. Held to a looser standard. It's easier to fire a white male Christian than an openly Islamic officer. Speech and behavior that would never be tolerated from one is tolerated in the other, to the point of catastrophe.

Susan Weston said...

"As she pulled up to the center, the officer, Sgt. Kimberly Denise Munley, spotted the gunman, later identified as Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, brandishing a pistol and chasing a wounded soldier outside the building, said Chuck Medley, the director of emergency services at the base."

"Sergeant Munley — a woman with a fierce love of hunting, surfing and other outdoor sports — bolted from her car, yanked her pistol out and shot at Major Hasan. He turned on her and began to fire. She ran toward him, continuing to fire, and both she and Major Hasan went down with several bullet wounds, Mr. Medley said."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/07/us/07police.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Kim%20Munley&st=cse

'nough said.t

Martin Cothran said...

Susan,

Lol. I'm trying to figure out whether to surrender at this point or find a stronger female somewhere to come to my defense.

Martin Cothran said...

Susan,

Lol. I'm trying to figure out whether to surrender at this point or find a stronger female somewhere to come to my defense.