Attempted Ft. Hood attack

[mikegideon]

Of course irregardless of this individuals target the fact remains that the military's stance on active shooters is asinine and idiotic.

Yep, I don't get it. You're fully vetted with weapons, and would be armed under normal circumstances. You would think that, after the last Ft. Hood incident, the military would realize that Gun Free Zone = Shooting Gallery. I'm thinkin' the world has just gone to hell in a hand basket.

[Guest Victor9er]

I made my post before his intent to bomb a restaurant became public. Also, his plan was to bomb the restaurant and then gun down any survivors as they emerged from the wreckage. If one were to survive the initial blast being armed yourself would be very important when confronting an armed assailant, wouldn't you think?

Of course irregardless of this individuals target the fact remains that the military's stance on active shooters is asinine and idiotic.

I don't remember reading anything about him planning on gunning down survivors, but I agree with everything you said here.

[Grunt67]

I don't remember reading anything about him planning on gunning down survivors, but I agree with everything you said here.

I did see that mentioned either in print or TV, but can't find it now. The article in today's Tennessean

didn't mention it, so.....maybe true or not. Can't always believe everything in the press, especially

early on.

[Mr. Brooks]

I don't remember reading anything about him planning on gunning down survivors, but I agree with everything you said here.

http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=14179096

Here is one article that mentions it.

[Guest Victor9er]

Fort Hood Plot: AWOL Soldier Planned Dual Bombing, Shooting, Officials Say - ABC News

Here is one article that mentions it.

Ok, found it...

"He hoped to detonate both at the target location before using a pistol to shoot survivors, according to the documents. Abdo had gone AWOL over the July 4 weekend from Fort Campbell's 101st Airborne Division in Kentucky over 800 miles away."

Yeah, none of that was in the other article that I read.

[hipower]

No flack intended. I was just insuring your reply was as bigoted as I took it to be. I guess the old saying is true: "All men are created equal, some are just more equal than others." Who needs that pesky 1st Amendment anyway.

The day that this country establishes a state sponsored religion (which is essentially what you are advocating but will never happen) is the day that liberty ends.

Bigotry has absolutely nothing to do with it. Profiling...maybe. But I still think a creed that literally demands the killing of non-believers has to be judged as a threat to those non-believers. And as such, a devoted follower of that creed has no place in the fighting arm of the latter.

[hipower]

“Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" -Benjamin Franklin

Next point. How is this relevant? I made no comments about the taking or giving up of liberty from anyone.

[MacGyver]

Bigotry has absolutely nothing to do with it. Profiling...maybe. But I still think a creed that literally demands the killing of non-believers has to be judged as a threat to those non-believers. And as such, a devoted follower of that creed has no place in the fighting arm of the latter.

What about those believers who realize that the immans calling for death to non-muslims are being intellectually dishonest and purposefully either selectively choosing verses our taking scripture entirely out of context to suit their own need for power? I don't guess Christians have a lock on taking passages out of context to fit their needs.

There has been a lot of good done in this war on terror by Muslims wearing the U.S. uniform who refuse to sit on the sidelines and see their religon be perverted.

[MacGyver]

It seems to me that we need more of these guys, not fewer.

I read an account by a older German recently who was a shop owner in the 30's when Hitler was coming to power. His account was that most Germans thought this guy was a fool and certainly didn't speak for them. They just didn't have any reason to care at the time. But, then Hitler committed them to a fight, and through their silence, they were sucked into something they certainly didn't believe in Naziism.

There seem to be a lot of parallels here. Most muslims are like you and me. They haven't historically cared much. But now, the radicals are defining the dialogue, and they don't really have a voice. It would seem to me that they guys putting on our uniform are part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Can we do better on detecting anomalies? Yes. Definitely. But hatred isn't a purely religous value.

Look at this guy in Norway last week. Or Timothy McVeigh. This guy was an Eagle Scout, a decorated Gulf War veteran and still killed 168 people.

[hipower]

A lot of you who have flags, patriotic emblems and other nationalistic symbols or quotes in your avatars really ought to think about what your America stands for.

For those of you with religious icons in your avatar, possibly with some patriotic flair, you might actually go back to the question of "who is my neighbor?' Is that a Sunday morning platitude, or should it actually define how we live our lives?

America is still a "city on a hill" to the rest of the world. We were founded on the principle that ALL men are created equal. We've fought a war about it. We've struggled with it for our entire existence. We've had some dark times, and made some mistakes. Yet, this single principle defines more than anything else our existence. That red, yellow, black or white you can come to these shores and become an American.

We're bigger than this.

Mac, as you'd guess, we won't always agree, and I have to say here that I believe you've misinterpreted my opinion. I have not insinuated that any man is unequal or one is better than another. I simply state that where one man's belief system calls for the subjugation and extermination of another; that putting the former in positions where there exists extreme examples of both sides in close contact; i.e., the military, that some restraint must be used.

As for your comments about 'patriotic emblems and other nationalistic symbols" and "with religious icons in your avatar, possibly with some patriotic flair"; how do you equate these symbols as condemnation of anything? The showing of pride in ones' country, and expressing a standing relationship with our God. How does this express inequality or insinuate bigotry towards anyone?

I believe I'll stop here. This is getting periously close to the edge.

[East_TN_Patriot]

I think something that needs to be mentioned here is that not all Muslims are radicals who want to do harm to us. There are plenty of peaceful Muslims in the US and we should not drag them into the same net we are casting for the radical ones. Many nations in the Middle East have been hijacked by radicals who follow a very specific interpretation of their faith. One Muslim academic here in the US described it as if the Aryan Nations and the Ku Klux Klan was able to take over the US government and spend decades integrating their radical views into every aspect of American society, including the law, education, and media. These groups follow a very specific and radical interpretation of the Bible, just as the radical Muslims have done with the Koran. It would only take one or two generations before our citizens would be as radical as the Muslim terrorists we are dealing with now. Where I do lay some blame is at the feet of peaceful Muslims who are not more vocal in speaking out against their radical counterparts.

I also think the military's response is absurd and just another reason why the US has become vulnerable to terrorist attacks. We trust our service members to go to foreign lands with the most advanced weapons humans have devised, yet when they are home, they are instructed to run away, hide, and throw objects in the face of an armed attacker. It's absolutely absurd.

Finally, I applaud the mods for opening this back up. I think it's an issue we need to talk about even if it results in some name-calling and insults. We certainly won't reach any sort of consensus on these sorts of hot-button issues if the debates get cut off as soon as any sign of incivility breaks out.

[Guest ArmyVeteran37214]

[Guest bkelm18]

We certainly won't reach any sort of consensus on these sorts of hot-button issues if the debates get cut off as soon as any sign of incivility breaks out.

One thing I've learned in my time here, on hot button issues, a consensus is never reached regardless.

[MacGyver]

Mac, as you'd guess, we won't always agree, and I have to say here that I believe you've misinterpreted my opinion. I have not insinuated that any man is unequal or one is better than another. I simply state that where one man's belief system calls for the subjugation and extermination of another; that putting the former in positions where there exists extreme examples of both sides in close contact; i.e., the military, that some restraint must be used.

As for your comments about 'patriotic emblems and other nationalistic symbols" and "with religious icons in your avatar, possibly with some patriotic flair"; how do you equate these symbols as condemnation of anything? The showing of pride in ones' country, and expressing a standing relationship with our God. How does this express inequality or insinuate bigotry towards anyone?

I believe I'll stop here. This is getting periously close to the edge.

HiPower, thanks for your participation. Don't let the fact that a moderator is actively participating in the thread discourage you from participating if you have something to say. So long as everyone follows the Code of Conduct we're fine. I just encourage people to base their argument on something tangible. If you've got something to say, say it. I hope everyone knows that they don't need to fear recrimination from me.

Please don't feel my posts above were calling you out per se. You have been one of a few to actually stand up and say, "here's what I think". I applaud you for that.

My comments about the avatars was simply something to think about. I am proud to be an American, and would give my life for this country tomorrow. That said, I think it's worth asking if "my country" is okay relegating people to second class citizens whether they be muslim, latino, african, refugee or any other downtrodden people. My country still welcomes the poor and the oppressed. I just encourage people to ask themselves the same question - what does my country stand for.

To the avatars with the flag draped crosses, etc... I think we have to be really careful there. From a personal standpoint I think it's pretty presumptuous to presume that we speak for God. Or that God is on our side. My question earlier of "who is my neighbor" wasn't just directed at everyone with an iconic avatar. That was directed at me as well.

I definitely agree that we can do a better job of identifying radicals - whatever the color of their skin or whatever their religious beliefs may be.

[MacGyver]

Finally, I applaud the mods for opening this back up. I think it's an issue we need to talk about even if it results in some name-calling and insults.

Glad to have the discussion. Let's just skip the name calling and insults.

[Capbyrd]

Has everyone forgotten that at one point, it was the Christians that were trying to eradicate non-believers for 200 years? And this was sanctioned by the Pope!

Since Christians once tried to kill everyone else, we should also not allow any Christians into the military. Only agnostics and atheists from now on.

The no muslims in the military is absurd. The two muslims that have been a problem are greatly outnumbered by the ones that fight for their country and their religion.

[QuietDan]

Of the muslims, the garden variety ones are not a problem. Some of them are no more religious than your average "I go to church once in a while" Christians. However, the wahhabi sect is real live, honest to goodness TROUBLE. They basically are the throwback to the 600's types, believing essentially that none of the changes in islam were any good after the first three generations. Unless they are lying to you, the infidel, they wear big thick scraggily unkempt uncut beards and a few other negative social indicators. The garden variety muslims are as afraid of them as anyone else. The saudi arabian monarchy made a Satan's Bargain with the wahhabi sect when the saudis were trying to unify the arabian peninsula. Nothing but trouble. Most of the 9/11 folks come from this ilk. Bad news, really bad news all around. If you don't believe me, look it up for yourself.

Edited August 2, 2011 by QuietDan
left out a 'none'

[Guest GunTroll]

Has everyone forgotten that at one point, it was the Christians that were trying to eradicate non-believers for 200 years? And this was sanctioned by the Pope!

Since Christians once tried to kill everyone else, we should also not allow any Christians into the military. Only agnostics and atheists from now on.

The no muslims in the military is absurd. The two muslims that have been a problem are greatly outnumbered by the ones that fight for their country and their religion.

I have forgotten. Could you please inform me of the events. And do tell exactly how they were Christian and how their God judged them for their actions which were not...Christ like.

The Pope is not God. Nor does he speak or order actions for God. The Pope would be...a man prone to all the shortcomings of being a man just like you and I.

Of course Muslims shouldn't be banned from service. I was more pointing out the fact that we refuse to profile in a pro-active manner. But rather we are re-active to attempts of terrorism. Following that current trend we should expect Muslims to be banned is all I was pointing out. I got a bit heated in the moment when I made my first post I'll admit. Of course any American of any religion should be allowed to serve with honor. I made a bad comment on that post.

Do I have reservations in general to Muslims? Damn right. I haven't lost any friends in uniform to violence lately committed by "Christians". Our generation now has the Muslims to resent as our fathers did the North Koreans/Chinese, and Germans, Japanese, etc. But I'm not calling for interment camps. Rather a common sense pro-active profiling and intense scrutiny to be put upon Muslim soldiers who are in ranks and are wanting to be, without violating their rights. I'm guessing the family members of these victims would feel the same way

Hasan Akbar case - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nidal Malik Hasan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Both of those cases are the ones I can think of committed by uniformed Muslim service members against other uniformed service members of any religion if any at all.

Edited August 3, 2011 by GunTroll