At least seven killed at Fort Hood

[amherstblackbear]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

Something that's been gnawing at me for the last few minutes: if this guy were a real jihadist, doesn't anyone think that more people would be dead today?

Compare what this guy did to the VaTech shooter, who was by all accounts not a religious zealot at all. The level of preparation that went into Cho's rampage is on a completely different level than what went on at Ft. Hood.

If I had to, I'd make two guesses. First, this guy didn't wake up insane one day. He descended into madness over time. There seems ample evidence of that. That's why I'm not dismissing the mental health angle. Second, this guy was not a "true" Islamic radical. More like a dilettante. He dabbled in it, and it became an outlet for his hate/madness, and we're starting to see lots of evidence of it. But I just don't buy that he was driven more by religious fundamentalism than by "plain" madness.

Finding a silver lining in anything like the Ft. Hood shootings is pretty distasteful. Even for me. But there it is. If the worst fears about the shooter were true, I can't help thinking that there'd be a lot more people dead right now.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

There are 13 people dead. I find that amazing that he could get that many people killed with all those guns around. Isn't that part of the point of conceal/carry etc, is to keep that number down?

 

[SIOUX4EVER]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

There are 13 people dead. I find that amazing that he could get that many people killed with all those guns around. Isn't that part of the point of conceal/carry etc, is to keep that number down?

Conceal/carry does not apply on a military base unless it is part of your issued equipment, which is mostly limited to Security Forces personnel (i.e., cops). I thought it was a SF troop that shot him, IIRC.

 

[amherstblackbear]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

There are 13 people dead. I find that amazing that he could get that many people killed with all those guns around. Isn't that part of the point of conceal/carry etc, is to keep that number down?

But if his goal was to shoot up as many people as possible -- given the element of complete surprise, don't you think it could have been far worse?

 

[Old Pio]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

Something that's been gnawing at me for the last few minutes: if this guy were a real jihadist, doesn't anyone think that more people would be dead today?

Compare what this guy did to the VaTech shooter, who was by all accounts not a religious zealot at all. The level of preparation that went into Cho's rampage is on a completely different level than what went on at Ft. Hood.

If I had to, I'd make two guesses. First, this guy didn't wake up insane one day. He descended into madness over time. There seems ample evidence of that. That's why I'm not dismissing the mental health angle. Second, this guy was not a "true" Islamic radical. More like a dilettante. He dabbled in it, and it became an outlet for his hate/madness, and we're starting to see lots of evidence of it. But I just don't buy that he was driven more by religious fundamentalism than by "plain" madness.

Finding a silver lining in anything like the Ft. Hood shootings is pretty distasteful. Even for me. But there it is. If the worst fears about the shooter were true, I can't help thinking that there'd be a lot more people dead right now. [/QUOTE

We're all groping around here, trying to explain the inexplicable. As I'm sure you know, "insanity" is a legal term, not a medical one. And in the context of a trial, a finding of "insanity" means he would be found not guilty. I don't exect that to happen. A lay person could certainly make the case that based simply on what we know; an educated man opening fire in a room full of other people, is "insane" under any circumstances.

I don't know that I can differentiate between a "real" jihadist and a guy who shoots around 50 people, 13 of whom die. Seems like he was doing his best to kill as many as possible. We should be grateful he didn't have an M-16 or a grenade launcher. He bought his weapons (which he was not authorized to have on base) at a gun store. Was he into target shooting? Or were the purchases part of a plan? I'm inclined to the latter.

I agree that he didn't descend into madness in a day or two. I would argue he's not "insane" in any sense of the word, legal or clinical. This is an American, born here, who benefitted tremendously by his association with the US Army, who at the end of the day stated that he had a greater loyalty to his religion than his country--notwithstanding the oath he took to become a commissioned officer.

To speculate that he was "dabbling" in jihadism and to offer as evidence that the body count could have been higher just doesn't make any sense to me. Of course the body count could have been higher, he could have comandeered a tank or a helicopter or something. The buried premise is that a "real" jihadist would have been a more efficient killer. Well, what he did was horrific enough.

You're right, there are some similarities between Woo Tang Klan at Va Tech and "Dr." Hasan: both were obviously people who needed to be separated from their environment. Neither was. And dozens of people are dead as a result. The difference, however, is that Klan's actions weren't motivated by a murderous religious belief that anyone not agreeing with his take on things deserved to die. A murderous religious belief that's killing people around the world even as we speak.

As to not being driven principally by religious fundamentalism, how do you explain shouting Allah Akhbar before he started shooting? How do seemingly normal people wind up doing the most horrific things? Nothing in Reinhard
Heydrich's life was predictive of his being the architect of the "final solution," but he was. Was Heydrich insane? Not in the commonly accepted sense of the word. He was evil. And so is "Dr." Hasan.

 

[amherstblackbear]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

Of course what he did was horrific enough. No argument there.

By "real jihadists," I mean people who put months, if not years, of preparation into their attacks against the U.S. (and other Western countries). Those guys may have "crazy" goals, but their ability to plan things in advance and act strategically is definitely not crazy.

I didn't see a lot of evidence of that sort of behavior. Thankfully.

 

[geezer]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

However well prepared he was for the role (long or short, planned or not), he was/is a terrorist. And it bothers me a little that AP is leading with a story quoting his praises from some dingbat "imam". Is is necessary that we know that this idiot wants to award him with the Medal of Honor? There's an implication by printing them that his are legitimate views. What kind of kooks will pick up on this sort of positive coverage of a lunatic terrorist?
I don't think we should censor the press. I just wish the AP (which is HUGE) was smarter about who is a newsworthy religious leader. I don't care to read about how heroic he is.

 

[huskyfan]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

if by insane we mean truly mentally disturbed - hearing colors, seeing music, the TV sending you private messages, voices in your head, etc etc none of these people are "insane" - the Columbia killers, the VTech guy, this Hasan guy.

some sects of Islam teach violent jihad. this a55 learned his lesson well.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

Of course what he did was horrific enough. No argument there.

By "real jihadists," I mean people who put months, if not years, of preparation into their attacks against the U.S. (and other Western countries). Those guys may have "crazy" goals, but their ability to plan things in advance and act strategically is definitely not crazy.

I didn't see a lot of evidence of that sort of behavior. Thankfully.

I've got my fingers crossed that you're right. However, his communications with other jihadi types has me concerned that he may have gotten guidance, suggestions etc. from somebody/somewhere else. And it looks like he's been preparing for a minimum of six months, perhaps longer. That's why this investigation is so important.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

However well prepared he was for the role (long or short, planned or not), he was/is a terrorist. And it bothers me a little that AP is leading with a story quoting his praises from some dingbat "imam". Is is necessary that we know that this idiot wants to award him with the Medal of Honor? There's an implication by printing them that his are legitimate views. What kind of kooks will pick up on this sort of positive coverage of a lunatic terrorist?
I don't think we should censor the press. I just wish the AP (which is HUGE) was smarter about who is a newsworthy religious leader. I don't care to read about how heroic he is.

I do to. It sometimes seems like they're willfully unable to make a common sense judgement in the name of "fairness." During the kidnappings in Beirut, I remember one of those videos where the American dude is reading from a prepared script in a one shot. Dan Rather (I'm sure you remember him) says words to the effect that we don't know if this statement was made under duress. Now since the guy with the AK-47 wasn't actually in the picture, in Dan Rather's world that calls into question whether the dude was "under duress" or not. Are you bleeping kidding me? 'Course Dan Rather is the guy who later thought it didn't matter whether documents he put on the air were forgeries or not, so consider the source. Was Rather (and by extension CBS) worried about "fairness" for Muslim kidnappers? I think we see that same pig headed hewing to journalism 101 standards today.

Let's take the example of the Malmedy massacre (which that idiot O'Reilly thinks was perpetrated by Americans on Nazis). If we were reporting it today would we want to "balance" the piece with a sound bite from Sepp Dietrich or Jochen Peiper?

IMHO, Hasan is a Muslim psycho terrorist, period. Although to be devil's advocate, I read a short piece today by Jonah Goldberg saying that his understanding of the term terrorist was someone who kills civilians to advance his cause. Most of the victims here, obviously, were soldiers. Something to consider.

 

[huskyfan]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

and now we have the word Hasanity.

 

[huskyfan]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

word is he "acted alone and without outside direction".
don't know if that changes much. certainly not for the families involved.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

word is he "acted alone and without outside direction".
don't know if that changes much. certainly not for the families involved.

No, no consolation whatsoever. I hope it's true, but the central question remains: how on earth did this clown remain in uniform? ScottM posited that the Army tries to hang on to highly trained professionals, in whom they have a huge investment. There's merit to what he says. And I think officers are not inclined to think a brother officer is capable of this kind of violence. Clearly there needs to be some attitude adjustment on that point.

I don't envy base commander Gen. Cone one bit, he's got so many balls to keep in the air. But when I heard him this morning talking about "stress" in "Dr." Hasan's case and efforts to identify "stress" in the lives of his troopers, I threw up in my mouth a little. General Cone knows very well this incident was not related to "stress." I suspect his remarks have been influenced by people higher in the chain of command. I'm guessing General Cone, left to his own devices, would resolve this problem quickly.

People casting about trying to find some rational explanation for "Dr." Hasan's behavior (other than the obvious) have hinted that there may be something we would call "Pre-PTSD," they've also hinted that since "Dr." Hasan worked with PTSD patients, maybe it's contagious. I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this nonsense.

 

[Patman]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

No, no consolation whatsoever. I hope it's true, but the central question remains: how on earth did this clown remain in uniform? ScottM posited that the Army tries to hang on to highly trained professionals, in whom they have a huge investment. There's merit to what he says. And I think officers are not inclined to think a brother officer is capable of this kind of violence. Clearly there needs to be some attitude adjustment on that point.

I don't envy base commander Gen. Cone one bit, he's got so many balls to keep in the air. But when I heard him this morning talking about "stress" in "Dr." Hasan's case and efforts to identify "stress" in the lives of his troopers, I threw up in my mouth a little. General Cone knows very well this incident was not related to "stress." I suspect his remarks have been influenced by people higher in the chain of command. I'm guessing General Cone, left to his own devices, would resolve this problem quickly.

People casting about trying to find some rational explanation for "Dr." Hasan's behavior (other than the obvious) have hinted that there may be something we would call "Pre-PTSD," they've also hinted that since "Dr." Hasan worked with PTSD patients, maybe it's contageous. I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this nonsense.

I'm not sure which is worse... that they want to believe that war is evil so very bad or that they want to disregard other factors so very bad. Its almost like they're screaming "we want this to be so". Frankly, I think going down this PTSD line is sheer lunacy and is nothing more than the logic of a disconnected elite who have never known the real world.

I think we're seeing a convergence of both the frustrated out of touch 39-year old and the hardline Islamist factions in this one person. I don't think he boils down easily and clearly all factors blend into each other in what is a complex life. Nevertheless he used his religious principles in a conscious and premeditated decision to take action against his fellow soldier and to take life.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

I'm not sure which is worse... that they want to believe that war is evil so very bad or that they want to disregard other factors so very bad. Its almost like they're screaming "we want this to be so". Frankly, I think going down this PTSD line is sheer lunacy and is nothing more than the logic of a disconnected elite who have never known the real world.

I think we're seeing a convergence of both the frustrated out of touch 39-year old and the hardline Islamist factions in this one person. I don't think he boils down easily and clearly all factors blend into each other in what is a complex life. Nevertheless he used his religious principles in a conscious and premeditated decision to take action against his fellow soldier and to take life.

I mentioned earlier that on Thursday, Katie Couric was yammering (it comes so easily to her) about PTSD. What traumatic stress had "Dr." Hasan encountered? Somebody somewhere called him a raghead? Martinizing overstarched his shirts? But old Katie and the rest of her "play it down the middle" crew had settled on PTSD as the narrative here, and the facts be ****ed.

 

[huskyfan]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

yes, the military does like to hang on to those it educates. cost effective. but if the guy wanted out that bad a good talk with a commander about his beliefs and he would have had a general discharge. I don't think he was honest about his beliefs.

 

[amherstblackbear]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

I don't envy base commander Gen. Cone one bit, he's got so many balls to keep in the air. But when I heard him this morning talking about "stress" in "Dr." Hasan's case and efforts to identify "stress" in the lives of his troopers, I threw up in my mouth a little. General Cone knows very well this incident was not related to "stress." I suspect his remarks have been influenced by people higher in the chain of command.

All bureaucrats have an instinct for CYA. Even (especially?) those in the military.

 

[leswp1]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

I mentioned earlier that on Thursday, Katie Couric was yammering (it comes so easily to her) about PTSD. What traumatic stress had "Dr." Hasan encountered? Somebody somewhere called him a raghead? Martinizing overstarched his shirts? But old Katie and the rest of her "play it down the middle" crew had settled on PTSD as the narrative here, and the facts be ****ed.

Many people who treat folks affected by horrible trauma (war, molestation. survivors of violent crime) have an extremely difficult time reconciling what they hear being perpetrated by another human or the fact that the person they see is suffering and has no out.

Given that most of those who have trouble dealing with what they hear would be after the folks that caused that trauma to their patients(or more likely to harm themself) I don't buy the PTSD thing for him. Not sure how they are connecting the dots.

 

[huskyfan]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

pre PSTD?

 

[leswp1]

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

pre PSTD?

Never heard of that one. Have heard of people getting PTSD after heavy exposure to folks who have had bad stuff happen. Can't reconcile what they hear. But pre-PTSD?