What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

At least seven killed at Fort Hood

Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

it is strange though - those who hear about so much suffering cause more of that suffering themselves.
 
Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. A condition which manifests itself after people are exposed to traumatic stress. Being a psychiatrist who counsels PTSD patients isn't traumatic stress. You can't "catch" PTSD from other victims. "Dr." Hasan had not undergone any, repeat any, traumatic stress.


Hearing people tell stories about what it's like to have their friends blown to pieces is not the same as having your friends blown to pieces. "Dr." Hasan is an MD who specializes in mental illness and disorders. His duties with patients (the ones he didn't argue with) in no way explain or condone his behavior last Thursday. This talk of pre-PTSD is from people who either through ignorance or malice are trying to explain away his actions.
 
Last edited:
Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

it is strange though - those who hear about so much suffering cause more of that suffering themselves.

Their brains go into overload. Not a lot of impulse control. Not a lot of clear thinking going on. They get focused on the cause of the pain and forget that the folks they go after have people connected to them.
 
Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

oh no! please! the pre-PTSD was a joke. lame. I know. sorry!!!!

No intention to rip you here. When I mentioned "pre-PTSD" much much earlier it wasn't in response to your post, it was a response to the notion that you can suffer from PTSD prior to experiencing traumatic stress.
 
Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

Another day, and the news doesn't get any better. I guess we already knew he was a neon sign, but with each piece of evidence about his history, the sign gets a little bigger.
 
Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. A condition which manifests itself after people are exposed to traumatic stress. Being a psychiatrist who counsels PTSD patients isn't traumatic stress. You can't "catch" PTSD from other victims. "Dr." Hasan had not undergone any, repeat any, traumatic stress.


Hearing people tell stories about what it's like to have their friends blown to pieces is not the same as having your friends blown to pieces. "Dr." Hasan is an MD who specializes in mental illness and disorders. His duties with patients (the ones he didn't argue with) in no way explain or condone his behavior last Thursday. This talk of pre-PTSD is from people who either through ignorance or malice are trying to explain away his actions.

Amen. If he was incabale of fulfilling his duties as a psychiatrist perhaps he should have been a proctologist or some other specialty. He made the choice and i might add was being paid rather well for his work.
 
Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

Amen. If he was incabale of fulfilling his duties as a psychiatrist perhaps he should have been a proctologist or some other specialty. He made the choice and i might add was being paid rather well for his work.

With pay, benefits, allowances he made around 100K a year. He had no wife nor children, free medical care, and no college loans. Yet he chose to live in a $350 a month rat hole like some sort of derelict.
 
Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

Another day, and the news doesn't get any better. I guess we already knew he was a neon sign, but with each piece of evidence about his history, the sign gets a little bigger.

Ain't that the truth. The guys stands up in front of peers and says Muslim #1, duties as major in the army #2 and no one turns him in. Infidels should burn and have oil poured down their throats. Can't believe diversity keeps a guy like this in the army
 
Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

"No faith justifies these craven and murderous acts; no just and loving God looks upon them with favor."



--Barack Obama--


Amen, Mr. President
 
Last edited:
Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood


It could be infiltration via recruiting assets with special access to enemy facilities. Part of espionage is seeking recruits with ideological sympathies to steal secrets, plant false clues, commit sabotage, create subversive cells, etc.

He's a mass murderer either way, but perhaps he is quite literally an enemy agent, or perhaps he is a sort of horrible "wanna be." Or... maybe he just flipped his wig.
 
Last edited:
Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

Transplanting our conversation from the other thread:

So setting the record straight against inaccurate charges is "reactionary." Hmmm. So much for a free flow of ideas. You are evidentlly so consumed with moral equivalence and politically correct cant that it's impossible (in your mind) to offer any criticism of Muslim killers.
Who said anything about not being able to criticise Muslim killers? It's a little odd to look at people who thought your comments were bigoted and automatically assume that they're defending the killer somehow. I'm just pointing out the very notable difference between saying that he did this because he's a Muslim (which is undeniably bigoted) and saying that he did this because he's a psycho Muslim. Take note of what phrase I was nitpicking about when I jumped into the conversation:

"And adherants of Islamism believe they need to kill as many Americans as possible"

You've explained yourself on it, and that's fine. I'm just saying that my jumping in had nothing to do with anyone defending the criminal or preventing you from criticising him because that is not in any way what is happening.

". . .the whole complain about PC thing is an excuse." An excuse for what, continuing to look the other way at a Muslim nutball in the heart of America's Army? Ask yourself this: if "Dr." Hasan had been spouting white power nonsense, dropping N-bombs, going to David Duke meetings, wearing SA uniforms in his off duty time, etc. How long to you think it would have taken the Army to get rid of him? Well, that's how long the Army should have taken to bust this guy back to his recruiter's office. And it's clear that because he is a Muslim, they didn't.
I absolutely agree with this half of your argument. And I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who doesn't. Assuming that the Army knew about his connections/activities, there is no exuse on their part.

Your last sentence is an interesting one. Do we really know why they didn't do anything? I suppose there's a myriad of reasons, including your PC reasoning. Were they trying to build a case for a court marshall and run out of time? Was it really a PC issue? Did they perhaps not know the full extent of his activities? I haven't been paying enough attention to the aftermath to know what they did and didn't know about him, so I am looking for clarification there.
 
Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

Transplanting our conversation from the other thread:

Who said anything about not being able to criticise Muslim killers? It's a little odd to look at people who thought your comments were bigoted and automatically assume that they're defending the killer somehow. I'm just pointing out the very notable difference between saying that he did this because he's a Muslim (which is undeniably bigoted) and saying that he did this because he's a psycho Muslim. Take note of what phrase I was nitpicking about when I jumped into the conversation:

"And adherants of Islamism believe they need to kill as many Americans as possible"

You've explained yourself on it, and that's fine. I'm just saying that my jumping in had nothing to do with anyone defending the criminal or preventing you from criticising him because that is not in any way what is happening.

I absolutely agree with this half of your argument. And I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who doesn't. Assuming that the Army knew about his connections/activities, there is no exuse on their part.

Your last sentence is an interesting one. Do we really know why they didn't do anything? I suppose there's a myriad of reasons, including your PC reasoning. Were they trying to build a case for a court marshall and run out of time? Was it really a PC issue? Did they perhaps not know the full extent of his activities? I haven't been paying enough attention to the aftermath to know what they did and didn't know about him, so I am looking for clarification there.

As to YOUR first point: I wasn't aware that you were representative of a committee. And, in fact, "Dr." Hasan DID do it because he was a Muslim. In addition to everything the shouting of "God is Great" in Arabic, just before he began murdering, pretty much makes the argument in my eyes. You're entitled to think he did it because of "stress" or "anti-Muslim bigotry" or anything else you chose. And, by definition, Muslims who behave in this way are psycho.

I suggest you read the hundreds of articles on this creep and his activities before you embarrass yourself any further with talk of a mysterious "investigation." The whole problem here is that despite months and months of warning signals, complaints from G.I.'s, lecturing other doctors about beheading non believers, and what appears to be months of planning, absolutely nothing was done to separate this "Dr." from the Army. That is the scandal here. A scandal which we're likely to repeat unless we quit worrying about offending "the vast majority of Muslims who are peaceful," and deal with the reality that some are not
 
Re: At least seven killed at Fort Hood

It could be infiltration via recruiting assets with special access to enemy facilities. Part of espionage is seeking recruits with ideological sympathies to steal secrets, plant false clues, commit sabotage, create subversive cells, etc.

He's a mass murderer either way, but perhaps he is quite literally an enemy agent, or perhaps he is a sort of horrible "wanna be." Or... maybe he just flipped his wig.

Perhaps, but wouldn't his actions be a huge waste of a valuable asset? I mean anybody can open fire in a room full of unarmed people. The actual details of his crimes will, I hope, become clear in the fullness of time. Although at some point, the "why" of his rampage is not of primary concern to me. Although I confess it would be endlessly entertaining if it turned out he was some sort of rogue agent. Perhaps an application of Occam's Razor is in order. What is of concern is doing more to make sure he's the last G.I. who murders other soldiers because of his religious fanatacism.

And it occurs to me we're going to be in for a real treat when and if he's court martialed. Because we'll give this monster a platform to spout more of his jihadi nonsense.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top