Is the US Army politically correct re: jihadists?

Given that we are engaged in two wars that are all about defeating Islamic extremists (the Taliban and Al Quaeda) it seems a little hard to see that we are not taking the threat of Islamic radicalism seriously.

And given that the military is right now busily killing as many Islamic radicals as it can - it seems political correctness is not what they are about.

I think we need to keep in mind that we can play into the hands of those who wish to destroy us. Anti muslim rhetoric justifiably will alienate Muslims who are not part of any radical plan to destroy the heathens and can be a tool used effectively by the radicals to recruit people to their cause. So attempts on the part of government to chill the rhetoric make good sense.

What some may call political correctness looks to me like 1) abiding by the laws of this nation which require that people have the freedom to worship as they please and 2) recognizing that Muslims are Americans too and have dutifully served in the military.

Given that we have already heard that some Muslims encounter concerns expressed by other soldiers about their loyalty - it doesn't seem like political correctness is the issue here. As for the Army failing to take the potential for a Muslim soldier to be a traitor seriously, I do not see this case as being indicative of any such breakdown. By all accounts this man expressed serious reservations about the role of Muslims in the Army but he continued to do his job and continued to appear committed to both the Army and his country. Doctors educated by the military who then try to get out of their service requirement are a common phenomena.

I recall that in the immediate aftermath of the Columbine shootings there was all this discussion that the shooters were fans of Hitler and also that they were unpopular kids who had been bullied by the popular kids. And there was all this chatter in the media about bullying and the neo Nazi's. But once the investigation was done - it turned out that these kids were not Hitler fans nor were they bullied unpopular kids. In short - people got all hyped up and speculated away over stuff that was never a factor. For all we know at this time, this guy freaked out because his girlfriend dumped him.
We really do not know yet what his motivation was nor may we ever really know.

White supremacists are present in the military - some believe they too represent a real threat and that the military is lax about dealing with them. Is it just political correctness that prevents the Army from dealing with them?

First Amendment. Heard of it? People are allowed to be pious in the military. People are allowed to be black and white with their faith in the military. People are even allowed to proselytize other members of the military, as long as its unofficial. These rules protect tens of thousands of Evangelical and Fundamentalist Christians in the military every day.

You need more than being a rigid, orthodox religious believer to be under investigation in the military, as it should be, unless you want fellow Christians to be under investigation for being pious, rigid, evangelizing Christians with strong viewpoints on politics

It's not political correctness. It's called America and the First Amendment, the things Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Pagan, and Athiest soldiers are fight for

Applauding your stand, Rod. You see the issue clearly. There is a difference in some in the public not getting it and those those have access to the intelligence - like the government and the military - not seeing what is clearly under their nose.

How far are we willing to take this game of ignoring the inconvenient truths? Will we wait until attacks are happening weekly? It seems we are already seeing these attacks on a monthly basis? Where is the tipping point?

If white supremacists had expressed serious reservations about defending America against Nazi enemies, or defending black Americans, or serving with with them, do you believe that they would be tolerated for one minute? In reality, they are not recruited.

Au contraire.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/06/15/neo_nazis_army/

Kenya

There is this thing ya know - called free speech. Any member of the military is guaranteed the right to expres opinions - we DO NOT KNOW - that this guy expressed any opinion other than his reservations about Muslims fighting against other Muslims. There was nothing treasonous about this.

If we abandon our own freedoms in the name of fighting the enemy - then we have lost.

Posting "white pride" on an internet chatroom doesn't begin to compare with the guy's actions before he did the actual shooting.

Actually, it's exactly the same.

One irony is that radical Muslims may serve in the US military but patriotic gay men and women are still banned.

One irony is that radical Muslims may serve in the US military but patriotic gay men and women are still banned.

Largely to appease pious, dualistic, orthodox religious believers who proselytize in uniform. Ironic, no? White supremacists like Stari's comrades are allowed to serve, but not openly gay and lesbian servicemembers.

White supremacists like Stari's comrades are allowed to serve, but not openly gay and lesbian servicemembers.

Brian, let me assure you that if your commanding officer got wind of you being at a klan meeting or whatever "neo-nazis" have, you would find yourself in for a very serious talking to, if not actually being processed out. That is, if you engaged in open, white supremacist or separatist action while on active duty, it would not be tolerated.

Moreover, I don't think the military is monitoring gay chatrooms to hunt down homosexuals. When I was in there were a few folks that everyone knew was gay, even a "couple" consisting of a lesbian and male homosexual that got married and thus drew housing benefits while us single guys shared tiny barracks rooms. The only case I know of someone being "hounded" out was a guy who wanted out after finishing a year at a very expensive school. Now, this was a while ago, but I am sure that things have gotten even more tolerant. But you know, I'd rather not show with a guy I know is gay -- call me homophobic if you will.

"Indy
November 7, 2009 4:39 PM
Kenya, Hasan enlisted in 1997, by some relatives' accounts, he mostly was secular then and did not become very pious until after the death of his mother in 2000. Unverified at this point.

Rod, have you considered that this may be more of a resource than a PC issue? ... The Army needed psychiatrists and may have been blinded more by its investment in Hasan than by political correctness. Despite Steyn’s certitude and the predictable government bashing, we do not yet know what was known about Hasan and by whom in the military decision making chain. Most discussions of this have been largely speculative. I myself have confidence in Bob Gates, let’s wait and see what investigators uncover."

I think Indy's called it here. The Army needs everybody it's got. It regularly extends people for more than a year past their contract end or retirement dates. It recalls people who have been discharged to serve on additional combat deployments. The Army has had to lower some standards for recruits, until recently when unemployment reached 10%. Everyone knows that joining the Army now means multiple trips to Iraq or Afghanistan.

The Army DESPERATELY needs psychiatrists, social workers, counselors, and Chaplains. Military officers who serve in these fields are often burnt out fast. Many serve IN Iraq and Afghanistan, with impossible caseloads, traveling around to remote FOBs and outposts, in no little danger themselves from IEDs and ambushes. MAJ Hasan's education was completely paid for by the military, further lowering his chances of getting out of the military.

It's always been hard to get out of the military. They have to make it as painfully impossible as they can, in order to discourage people from trying. This starts in Basic Training: recruits who try to quit are publicly humiliated, singled out, and ostracized. They are often kept for weeks, and forced to serve as traffic directors on the day the rest of their platoon graduates, before they are finally sent home. The mantra is, the quickest way out of here is the right way.

Once you report to your first unit, it becomes much harder to get out of service. ESPECIALLY when your unit is deploying. The commanders are pretty harsh at this point: exceptions are only made if a soldier has a life-threatening medical condition, or an immediate family member who is terminally ill. Other than that, get your gear on, you are getting on that plane.

At any rate, as Indy has pointed out, the Army is good at learning on its feet and reversing course when necessary. What matters is what works, in combat, and the Army has been in combat constantly for the past 8 years.

There are regulations and laws on the books which can be applied more carefully in the future. For example, it is illegal to incite or support sedition against the government or the military. Counterintelligence and the Army's Criminal Investigation Division pursue these cases, which haven't been a priority since the Cold War. Now would be a good time to focus on that again. Another regulation requires that commissioned officers (like MAJ Hasan) never criticize or disrespect any senior officer or elected or appointed official, nor criticize their policies.

Brian, let me assure you that if your commanding officer got wind of you being at a klan meeting or whatever "neo-nazis" have, you would find yourself in for a very serious talking to, if not actually being processed out.

Stari - maybe in the past but no longer - read the Salon article. There has been a lot of concern expressed lately about the increasing presence of white supremicists and neo nazi's in the military. As Indy and AB note - this is a resource issue. The standards in the military have declined due to a shortage of personnel. Stuff not tolerated in the past is tolerated now.

I do agree that retaining Hasan was a resource issue - the military has a very great need for mental health professionals now and they have a shortage of psychiatrists. Hasan would have been very valuable to them so there MAY have been a willingness to overlook something. I emphasize "may" as we do not really know what information was available to them.

Why are people complaining?

This is vibrant diversity in action! We are so fortunate to be able to experience the magically vibrant vibrancy of Palestinian culture first-hand.

What's a few corpses in comparison to life lessons in the magic of Diversity?

I've said it before: all that blood on the floor is the undeniable, real-life price that is paid for the Diversity Worship religion that is practiced by the US Government. In any decent society, if the Army got even a whiff of an indication of terrorist sympathies by one of its own, he'd be detained, certainly not allowed access to guns.

John, it looks as if you and I hold differing views on the government related issues on which you are commenting. However, I did want to provide an update on one factual point. Law enforcement sources now believe Hasan only used one weapon. ABC news reports that

"Federal agents, military investigators and Texas Rangers are investigating whether the gun used in the Fort Hood massacre was purchased at the "Guns Galore" shop in Killeen, Texas, according to the store co-manager."

Well duh....you wanna send a devout Muslim to the middle east to kill other devout Muslims. Sounds like a plan to me!

The the first thing First Sergeant said to us this morning at Drill, that we are not to single out anybody for their faith, that as members of the same unit and people in the same uniform, we are brothers. He also told us we are to remain vigilant about people who need psychiatric help.

In the face of crisis, the response among military members ks with their own. "Closing ranks" historically means stepping up into the gap left by a fallen fellow soldier, to continue the fight. In modern context it means we draw close to each other, we look out for each other, we defend each other.

I don't think some of you understand diversity in a military context.

It doesn't matter if a soldier is Muslim. He wears the uniform. He goes through the same intense training and experiences. He is one of us. The fact that he can explain some tenets of Islam when we are deployed to a Muslim country is helpful for operations. If he understands and speaks a local language, that skill is invaluable. But leaving that aside, he is still ONE OF US.

The bonds between people in combat units are genuine: this is no "diversity appreciation" program. This is trusting people with your life, regardless of their background, and being forced to do that forces you to understand what a great variety of people can be good patriotic Americans.

For this reason, I feel a great distance and growing distance from all people who demonize people of faiths and political beliefs different from their own. I can tell you for a fact that people from all walks of life have given their lives for each other on battlefields thousands of miles away, people who held beliefs that you are so quick to dismiss as unpatriotic, dangerous, deluded, or evil. Each one was one of you. E pluribus unum.

I was an Army Arabic linguist, too. My experiences in the Army, working with Muslims, helped revolutionize my worldview. I'd also previously spent over a year living in Turkey, when my Father was a headmaster of the American school in Izmir. I've since spent a year in Egypt, abortively pursuing a MA in Arabic Studies at American University Cairo..

I've had too many radical experiences to count. I have too many friends now, who are Muslim.

I was in Arabic class at DLI on 9/11 with a half dozen Arabs. We watched the the towers fall on Al- Jezeera.

I've been welcomed as a guest by Arabs, Turks, and Kurds in places as diverse as a Kurdish village on the Armenian boarder, tenements in the slums of Cairo, an agricultural village inhabited for 5,000 years on the upper Nile, where half the populace is Coptic and the other Muslim..

My brother has married a Turk. Daughter of Ataturk's revolution, far more ferociously secularist than any American I know.. She makes the ACLU look like the mildly disaffected Unitarian- Universalist pikers that they are..

In all of this, my experience of Muslims, of the Muslim world, has convinced me that narratives like that of Mark Steyn's are profoundly corrupt, amounting to a type of hysterically reductive propaganda.

For while it is true that there is strain of rabid Islamism out there, I have to say that to focus on the extremes, while ignoring the counter- narratives that our actions in the Muslim world create is profoundly bigoted and irresponsible..

Next time you hear about one of our air strikes taking out a wedding party in Afghanistan, play a little thought exercise out, and see what you think.. Replace "Afghan" with "American," "Mazar-e- Sherif" with "Minneapolis- St Paul." Imagine if your loyalties were reversed, and think seriously how that story would make you feel if the wedding that had been taken out were Lutheran.

This is not in any way to justify Muslim violence against us. It is, however, merely to put it in a different light.

I've been playing this very thought game for years now. Friends of mine taught me to see the cycle of violence as two sided. Everyone remembers the violence done them, while discounting the violence dealt out in response as being a justifiable response.

I guess what I'm saying is that I've finally started taking the Beatitudes seriously.

Muslims don't have them, we do. They generally believe in an eye for eye.

So then, what's our excuse? I say we American Christians, especially the Chicken Hawk variety, betray our faith. We're full of it.

I've decided to break with the cycle. I'm done.

As for me and my house, we will follow the LORD.

I pray for all perpetrators of violence. Most especially Major Nidal Malik Hasan. As well as all victims. His and ours.

May God have mercy on him. Upon them.

May He have mercy upon us all.

Thanks for that Charles.

I have to second everything that you say.

It's a dangerous thing, learning another language, isn't it? To truly understand it, you're invited inside a whole new way of thinking. Take that invitation and you will change. It's inevitable. You and I have had contact with Islam as it is lived by normal people.

One of the most important lessons I learned in the military's Arabic Basic Course came early in the Iraq war. We were watching Al Jazeera (The Defense Language Institute, unlike most other Arabic courses, does not dwell on textbooks for long - it moves to source material as soon as possible.) Al Jazeera displayed still images shot by a local on scene, of dead U.S. servicemen lying in pools of blood. I can't remember whether they were soldiers or Marines. Their faces were blurred out. Regardless, we were infuriated. Incensed. Horrified. We identified with those dead men, and couldn't believe anyone would air footage of them like that.

Our tiny veiled Syrian instructor told us to hold on for a minute. She asked us to switch places in our minds. To really FEEL our anger and pain, and then imagine that that must be what Arabs feel, whether Iraqi or Palestinian, when members of their own families, tribes, and towns are killed in military operations.

And just like that, a room full of military men and women, serving in uniform and training for war, could suddenly feel a kinship and an understanding with a distant and, up to that point, alien population.

This is important: Arabs, Afghans, Muslims, REALLY aren't that different from you and me. They are human beings. Some are misguided. Some are violent. Some are brave, some are selfless. Most are ordinary. Like you and me.

"O God, whose Son commanded us to love our enemies: Lead them and us from prejudice to truth; deliver them and us from hatred, cruelty, and revenge; and in your good time enable us all to stand reconciled before you; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen."

Thanks Another Believer, Charles and Indy - great posts. E pluribus unum Great reminder - why do so many forget this? If there is any good to come out of this horrible event, I do hope it will that Americans understand better the terrible stress we have placed on our military and the enormous sacrifice their families are making. Andrew Sulliovan has been highlighting the children of the military - with videos and personal comments. Hits home just how much has been asked of the military and their families.

Thanks, Cecelia. I, too, have been following Sullivan’s posts this past week of videos of and comments regarding the children of troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. It speaks well of him that he posted them. Indeed, I have to say that between CC and The Daily Dish, Sullivan wins the past week due to the way he cleared space on his blog for the essays about the children of military families in a week when a cause he strongly believes in suffered a setback. A more self-absorbed person than Sullivan might not have had the capacity to do that. In fact, the postings about military families at DD were the highlight of my blog reading week until yesterday evening, when AnotherBeliever and Charles Crist surprised me with the thoughtful postings here under this essay. I had resigned myself to less illuminating discussion and was pleasantly surprised.

As to the sense of unity, I believe it was there in great measure right after 9/11. It was the political environment that ultimately made that sense of E Pluribus Unum very hard to sustain. We citizens played a part in that but the real problem lay with the players on the political landscape. They weren’t up to the challenge of inspiring. The military understood the strength of bonds and unit cohesion but after 9/11, not all of our political leaders and operatives did. It’s not clear whether everyone who acted in ways that eroded our sense of being one people did it with that in mind. Lack of self awareness and short sightedness may have been factors more than anything else. So, too, the sheer immaturity which drives the tone of a lot of political presentations. Politics too often involves hyperbole and posturing which are far removed from what is required to do the real, hard, work needed to confront the nation’s challenges.

It was refreshing to see such adult conversation here among commenters.

The core mesage of islam is, has been, and always will be: "INFIDEL, CONVERT OR DIE." Even a casual student of World history can see that.

T Jefferson, you are obviously a VERY casual student of world history. I suggest you read God's Crucible: Islam and the Making of Europe by David Levering Lewis, before making remarks which are obviously contradicted by historical events. It is of course possible to extract from the Qu'ran the principle "infidel, convert or die," just as it is possible to extract from the Torah that every adulterous woman should be stoned to death, and somehow a good number of conquistadors managed to extract from the Gospels the principle "infidel, convert or die" also. IF it is true that either Christianity or Islam must triumph militarily across the entire earth, we had better get busy exterminating each other, and may the last man or woman standing declare what is to be The Law. If we are not prepared for that (and we could lose, after all), then we might better cultivate every sect and mosque which does NOT teach "infidel, convert or die" and isolate those who do.