More like this
Hasan: why the US Army missed all the omens
If Hasan was hoping for the reward of virgins, their gender might have been an issue
On official Pentagon statistics about one per cent of members of the US armed forces today are Muslims, though the quotient is probably higher. The Army high command bristles at demands from the Christian right that there should be some sort of loyalty review or even winnowing.
General George Casey Jr, the Army chief of staff, said firmly last Sunday that his concern was that Major Nidal Hasan's lethal rampage at Fort Hood - he was charged yesterday with killing 13 - might "cause a backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers." Casey went on earnestly to the effect that "it would be a shame - as great a tragedy as this was - it would be a shame if our diversity became a casualty as well" and that a "diverse Army gives us strength."
The general obviously doesn't have Edward Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire on his bedside table. Gibbon wrote flatly that the introduction of foreigners into Roman armies "became every day more universal, more necessary and more fatal. Rome was captive before she was taken."
The last time we heard rumblings about the dangers of ethnic or confessional diversity in the US military was during the Vietnam war, particularly after World Heavyweight boxing champion Muhammad Ali announced in the spring of 1967 that he was refusing to be drafted. In words that echoed round the world Ali said, "I ain't got no quarrel with them Viet Cong... they never called me nigger. You want me to do what the white man says and go fight a war against some people I don’t know nothing about - get some freedom for some other people when my own people can't get theirs?"
At the time Ali gave the US government this wallop on the chin, 12.1 per cent of enlisted men in the US Army were black. There were innumerable reports of refusal to obey orders, acts of sabotage, assaults on officers and kindred acts of mutiny through the military, white and black.
His military colleagues have displayed a touching eagerness to give Hasan the benefit of the doubt, regarding all-round steadiness of temperament. Why, on every topic aside from religion he was as meek as a lamb. Granted, he would use the occasion of medical seminars to rail angrily against the US war on Islam, to laud suicide bombers as endowed with the courage of Japanese kamikaze pilots, to declare "I am a Muslim first and an American second"; to say – if we are to believe the Daily Telegraph’s report - that unbelievers should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats (a process plainly requiring the most exquisite timing), but withal, a "polite and gentle nature... when not discussing religion".
At Walter Reed hospital some of his colleagues thought the budding psychiatrist was possibly "psychotic" but decided to head off disaster by sending him to university lectures on terrorism, Islam and the Middle East "in the hopes of redirecting his increasing preoccupation with the conflicts felt by Muslim American soldiers on the front lines".
This optimistic posture towards possible omens offered by Hasan's political and psychic profile stretched from the FBI - which saw no excessive cause for alarm in his emails to the radical Imam Anwar al-Awlaki, now based in Yemen, and a vocal enthusiast for jihad in its most violent forms – to his medical colleagues in the military. In early 2008 they discussed Hasan's indifferent performance and, in the words of an AP report, "saw no signs of mental problems, no risk factors that would predict violent behaviour". They seized on "other factors" that suggested Hasan would continue to thrive in the military.
"Don't ask, don't tell", the famous summation of the Clinton-sponsored Army posture on gays, seems to have become a sweeping maxim, whether it was the intercepted emails to the Imam, the praise for suicide bombers, the business card announcing him cryptically to be "a soldier of Allah", or even the Arabic bumper sticker ('Allah is love') which got his car scored with a key by a vet fresh back from the Crusades.
Talking of "Don't ask", it does seem reasonably clear that somewhat akin to some members of the Hamburg cell carrying out the 9/11 attack, if Hasan was hoping – a vulgar myth, to be sure - for the reward of virgins in the aftermath of martyrdom, their gender might have been an issue. No girlfriend; local virgins not pious enough for marriage; fainted while watching childbirth during medical training; killed a pregnant woman in his lethal rampage (her dead embryo may constitute the fourteenth charge of homicide in the string for which he faces the death penalty); mentored 18-year old Duane Reasoner, a convert to Islam he met at the local mosque and with whom he seem to have cemented ties of loyalty and affection. (Reasoner, who was with Hasan at his apartment not long before the major’s excursion, declines to condemn him, saying fiercely in a BBC interview that Hasan's victims "were troops who were going to Afghanistan and Iraq to kill Muslims".)
It’s the rationale most respectful to Hasan. No kook he. Of course, amid the thunderings of the right about the army’s hospitality to a gay Palestinian terrorist, General Casey retreats into the well-mannered sanctuary of 'diversity', even if there are no doubt enlisted men in Afghanistan saying right now, "No Muslims in my foxhole".
In Fort Hood the war came home, as it has been doing at regular intervals with the suicides of vets driven crazy by what they’ve done in the service of Empire. ·
Comments are now closed on this article
Comments
Holly Cox, you miss my point. It may well be that "new facts may have emerged in the interim," but it would seem that these "new facts" make rather a nonsense of Mr Bremer's report. I am not criticising him at all; I'm just struck by how inaccurate -- unavoidably so, to be sure -- the impression given by the earlier article seems to have been.
There has not been an investigation or trial and he is already been found guilty, not even the suggestion that he is the "alleged" killer, there could well have been another shooter, who knows? The so-called barbarians quoted by Gibbons happened to be Christians the same as the Romans, albiet arians.
Stephen Glynn, are you really that stupid? The clue may be in the dates of the articles. Mr Bremer wrote his article on November 6, the day after the shootings. Cockburn wrote his a week later. I imagine some new facts may have emerged in the interim.
Nice piece indeed--of homophobic xenophobia and right wing imperialistic hate mongering. Sorry to see such a thing in a British online source. Thought you were above all that.
The endorsement of the politically controlled social engineering of the US forces by army spokesmen (puppets) is totally predictable and their use of the all embracing PC word 'diversity' to justify their sorry state of affairs is pathetic. Some years ago I wrote to a very high ranking British naval officer regarding the employment of women on board ships. He wrote back enthusiastically supporting their newly designated roles, disagreeing with my own sentiments that no matter how dedicated and loyal these women might be, they would ultimately weaken the capacity of a vessel to fight to its utmost, due to their physical differences. A fifty kilo shell still weighs fifty kilos whether it is lifted by a man or a woman. I was baffled by his apparent lack of common sense and copied his letter to a retired (now deceased) Admiral of The Fleet at the House of Lords. This old sea dog agreed with some of what I had to say but pointed out that I shouldn't necessarily attribute the other Admiral's words as representing his own opinions. Yes, our armed forces have to be held accountable to the public and unfortunately at this moment in time, it is through corrupt war mongering politicians but they should have far more leeway to speak out against the increasing signs of madness demonstrated in our so called leaders and their hotchpotch Noah's Ark style armed forces.
Hmm. And I read in Jack Bremmer's article dated November 6 at http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/55714,news-comment,news-politics,fort-hood... that "he is said to have been a devout Muslim, no evidence has surfaced of his being a fundamentalist and terrorism has been ruled out."
Which of your distinguished contributers has got it wrong? Mr Bremer or Mr Cockburn?
Nice piece. @Justuju: Casualties certainly weren't "friendly fire" - as @Peter Simmons says, the victims other than the base police were not armed. And it's hard to equate the shooter crying "God is great!" while shooting American soldiers as equivalent to the Anglo-Saxon "Jesus!" when you stub your toe or spill a mug of tea... but nice try.
First poster seems a little unhinged, bending over backwards to maintain it was nothing to do with Islam [even attempting to make out he didn't realy kill that many people, it was just friendly fire that killed them, despite personnel on US Army bases not being allowed to carry weapons, which was why he was shot by civilian police], but fails. It's clearly to do with Islam; why else would he dress in 'traditional muslim clothing' [he was born in the USA] to go shopping before his suicide mission? Why else would he say Allah Akbar before opening fire? Just because there are other psychotics who kill people doesn't invalidate the claim this was Islamist inspired, as anyone with a rudimentary grasp of logic would know instinctively. Apologists for this toxic cult are never logical though. 9/11 wasn't a one off, the world suffers murderous events on a daily basis from deranged muslims, only difference is this happened in the US, and the US army at that. The attempt by apologists to claim all criticism of Islam is Islamophobia won't wash, it's the most dangerously deranged, mysogenist and xenophobic of all religions, targets the ignorant and uneducated and propogates a fifth century view of the world that just won't fit with the 21st century. The US is certainly guilty of major crimes around the world, but knowing that doesn't make others become suicide bombers of shooters. Chomsky has detailed the excesses of US foreign policy in Latin America for instance, but we don't hear of Latino suicide bombers.
Let's hope muslims around the world start getting some education, and make the long journey to modern times, rather than constantly making reference to the distant past and their so-called prophet, who was in reality just another man with some weird ideas who hated women.
Justuju-, What you are saying might sound true, that any-one can run berserk regardless of religion, but when we look at this particular case, it had every-thing to do with religion and indoctrination, remember this psycho, said, "these soldiers are going to kill the muslims."He personally made reference to religion before going on his senseless rampage.
American army needs diversity as a strategic and calculated step. It is not for any kind of love for Islam. When you fight with Islamists, like in Iraq and Afghanistan, you need some people who can share a common thread during a battle or in its aftermath: say during a debriefing of an enemy combatant. Playing a good cop, bad cop game ... during such episodes.
While Nidal's actions are condemnable to say the least, a cause and effect analysis of another incident in Orlando, Florida, says what! People can go berserk, no matter what their religion, when they feel belittled and betrayed for some reasons. Has anybody talked about the faith practiced by Rodrigues, the latest American fratricide committer? Similar cases in Texas, and at other places in USA, like Oklahoma bombing for instance, have taken place, and no one has ever talked about "their' faith.
One should hold judgment, until a far reaching alarming warning signs of dissent are seen among any given group of individuals, who do not agree with a war continuum by USA. The foot soldiers are tired now, and they need some rest.
About Hasan, this is surprisingly a case of human resources management failure. Motivation to do his job was lacking: he was getting disenchanted, and at this point in time, he needed to be relieved of his duties, as an unwilling soldier is nothing else than a danger to his own comrades! People like him should be let gone .... with the first hint of a deep dissent to the military objectives.
One needs to scrutinize as to what took place during his morning shopping and the afternoon hours that he went berserk! Also, it needs to be closely investigated as to how many people he was able to personally shoot before collapsing. It is highly improbable that he fired as many as 32+13= 45 shots! These many would probably not fit in common US pistol magazines ... Looks like in the ensuing confusion some friendly firing took place .. The nature of wounds would speak for themselves.
It is amazing to see as to how little US forces have learned even after being the most experienced fighters in the world since world war II. They have been in every pie. Arab Israeli wars, Lebanon civil war, Iranian operations post 1979 revolution, Iraq 1991, Afghanistan 1998, Afghanistan 2002, Iraq 2003, Grenada incursion, Bosnian battles, Afghanistan Russian battles over a very long period from 1979 to 1989, the Korean war, to name a few. Still the psychological effects of war both on its own military personnel and on its own enemies and the world at large have not been analyzed in sufficient detail.
Hasan Nidal's shout of Allah o Akbar should not be taken as a Jihadist's battle cry! It is a very common sentence, if you will, used by a common Muslim during his daily chores, just saying a praise to Allah. Like one says, oh my gosh, or Jesus Christ in amazement or in excitement. This is just one of those Islamic values that could be misinterpreted in the background of this horrible incident.
Also it needs to be seen that Hasan was a true Loner. No girl friends, no love life. Most probably he was not even a gay, as is suggested by some. A pious Muslim does live 'clean' and a true 'virgin' until he is religiously allowed after a solemnized marriage. He probably loved his car more than anything, as he got it scraped by a war and 'crusade' veteran. This is one thing very difficult to understand in a heavily sexually oriented society. So what was his motivating factor to carry on in a tough military life, or the social life itself! Not to shoot his comrades one day to get 72 virgins in Paradise - for sure.
This is a more complex medico-socio-psycho and 'environmental hostility' episode, that probably could never be fully understood, especially when an anti-Islam media drive persists since 9/11. That is a quality of human beings: Un-predictability. His backlash in revenge (supposedly) is what can be attributed to the basic human nature (jungle laws oriented), and not to a religious indoctrination.
Let the American dream live on. When wars are over one day, all would be quite on the western front! "Insha Allah, Allah o Akbar." Live and let live. Let the world issues where drastic violations of human rights are taking place be resolved without blood letting. Do we need to name those places? Darfur, Palestine, Kashmir, Burma,,,,, and the cruel American isolation policies towards Cuba!!! There must be more ... you name them.