Arabic Muslims in the Military

[tstew]

I was having a discussion in another place about whether there are legitimate conflicts that an American soldier with Arabic and Muslim backgrounds would have that we need to take into consideration.
Disclaimer: I know some on AFF so let me just get this out of the way: I am not in any way looking to defend, minimize, or justify the shootings at Fort Hood or any other type of attack like this.

However, I do think that there is sufficient enough legitimate concern to look into it. Here is a post I made in that discussion:

I think it is something to consider. I would imagine that we would have conflicted soldiers who are practicing Jews if we were ever fighting against Isreal. The issue is that not only is it an ethnic connection, but a religious one as well. Both of those can be powerful connections.

When you factor in that, like in all wars, there are innocent casualties and that many people are conflicted about our right to be involved in some of the situations and our blanket support of Isreal, I think it is a discussion that needs to be had.

[rgcraig]

I was having a discussion in another place about whether there are legitimate conflicts that an American soldier with Arabic and Muslim backgrounds would have that we need to take into consideration.
Disclaimer: I know some on AFF so let me just get this out of the way: I am not in any way looking to defend, minimize, or justify the shootings at Fort Hood or any other type of attack like this.

However, I do think that there is sufficient enough legitimate concern to look into it. Here is a post I made in that discussion:

I think it is something to consider. I would imagine that we would have conflicted soldiers who are practicing Jews if we were ever fighting against Isreal. The issue is that not only is it an ethnic connection, but a religious one as well. Both of those can be powerful connections.

When you factor in that, like in all wars, there are innocent casualties and that many people are conflicted about our right to be involved in some of the situations and our blanket support of Isreal, I think it is a discussion that needs to be had.

But, the Jews' God has never told them to KILL AMERICANS!

[tstew]

But, the Jews' God has never told them to KILL AMERICANS!

That is not my point. I'm not talking about the virtues of Muslim vs. Jew. I'm talking about whether there would be a natural and legitimate conflict if you were having to fight a people that you are so closely connected to and whether we need to address that somehow.

I was using those in the military who are very connected to their Judaism as an example of the conflict they may face if we were ever having to fight Israel. I just think that the combination of ethnic and religious connection is not something that should be ignored.

For example, would I as a devout Apostolic have a problem fighting a place that was known and recognized as the birthplace of the Apostolic movement where virtually all of the people were practicing Apostolics...particularly if I didn't feel like those people attacked me and my country first.

[Ferd]

Stew I hear ya. It has to be pretty tuff. I think in the fort hood instance we didnt take time to consider this conflicted reality and being PC allowed this to unfold.

At the same time, I suspect there are some very good people who are muslim in the Military that deserve to be given what ever help they need to work thru the conflict this causes them ....

I wonder if we are too worried about "not discriminating" to the point that we wont confront danger signs or conversly we wont offer respectful assistance to some who may have honest conflict?

[tstew]

Stew I hear ya. It has to be pretty tuff. I think in the fort hood instance we didnt take time to consider this conflicted reality and being PC allowed this to unfold.

At the same time, I suspect there are some very good people who are muslim in the Military that deserve to be given what ever help they need to work thru the conflict this causes them ....

I wonder if we are too worried about "not discriminating" to the point that we wont confront danger signs or conversly we wont offer respectful assistance to some who may have honest conflict?

That's my point. If we are too afraid to address the real and legitimate conflicts that this situation presents for them (and would likely present for us)...and they are too afraid to discuss their legitimate conflicts for fear of being seen as unAmerican, there will be no resolution.

[Pressing-On]

That's my point. If we are too afraid to address the real and legitimate conflicts that this situation presents for them (and would likely present for us)...and they are too afraid to discuss their legitimate conflicts for fear of being seen as unAmerican, there will be no resolution.

Stew,
Why would they join in the first place if they felt conflicted? They know they are going to end up in the Middle East, so what's the point of enlisting?

[dizzyde]

I was having a discussion in another place about whether there are legitimate conflicts that an American soldier with Arabic and Muslim backgrounds would have that we need to take into consideration.
Disclaimer: I know some on AFF so let me just get this out of the way: I am not in any way looking to defend, minimize, or justify the shootings at Fort Hood or any other type of attack like this.

However, I do think that there is sufficient enough legitimate concern to look into it. Here is a post I made in that discussion:

I think it is something to consider. I would imagine that we would have conflicted soldiers who are practicing Jews if we were ever fighting against Isreal. The issue is that not only is it an ethnic connection, but a religious one as well. Both of those can be powerful connections.

When you factor in that, like in all wars, there are innocent casualties and that many people are conflicted about our right to be involved in some of the situations and our blanket support of Isreal, I think it is a discussion that needs to be had.

I agree that this is a discussion that needs to take place, in the very least, in considering placement of these types of situations.

It amazing really, considering how careful the military has been in placing other groups of people. The military does not permit women to serve on submarines, and women enlisted soldiers not permitted to serve in Infantry, Special Forces, etc. (last I checked, some of these may have recently changed) Also, as of this moment in time, the "don't ask, don't tell" rule still applies.

The military obviously has no problem in applying labels, and handling people differently in certain situations, why shouldn't the same rules apply in these areas?

[rgcraig]

That's my point. If we are too afraid to address the real and legitimate conflicts that this situation presents for them (and would likely present for us)...and they are too afraid to discuss their legitimate conflicts for fear of being seen as unAmerican, there will be no resolution.

And how would you resolve it anyway.

[Ferd]

Stew,
Why would they join in the first place if they felt conflicted? They know they are going to end up in the Middle East, so what's the point of enlisting?

PO, people join the military for many reasons. I served with one guy who was a devout pacifist.

yea I know....

but the Navy gave him a chance to go to college.

[Pressing-On]

PO, people join the military for many reasons. I served with one guy who was a devout pacifist.

yea I know....

but the Navy gave him a chance to go to college.

That is so much different, IMO, than a Muslim or Jew joining. A pacifist might think he/she can do their stint and go on to college. The global war is more personal, IMO, for a Jew or a Muslim.

[tstew]

Stew,
Why would they join in the first place if they felt conflicted? They know they are going to end up in the Middle East, so what's the point of enlisting?

I know career military people who are Muslim and or Arabic who didn't join assuming they would be fighting in the Middle East. I know some who joined for the same reasons that many other people join...because they love America and would like to defend her. I don't think it's as simple as saying no Arabic or Muslim should join the military. We went years and years without these types of wars in the Middle East. If we would have attacked one of the other Axis of Evil like North Korea should our only approach be "why did you join"?

When you have so many Americans wondering why we get involved in certain things, you have to recognize that Arab American Muslims are that much more conflicted.

I think that there are legitimate things that should be candidly explored.

[tstew]

That is so much different, IMO, than a Muslim or Jew joining. A pacifist might think he/she can do their stint and go on to college. The global war is more personal, IMO, for a Jew or a Muslim.

My point is the same in both of these situations. If we were ever (God forbid) in a situation where we attacked and occupied Isreal, I think that the conflict of the soldiers should not be ignored. My approach then would not be "why did an Israeli or Jew join the military". And now that they're in I would look to find ways to address it.

[tstew]

And how would you resolve it anyway.

Pretending that it doesn't exist is irresponsible and a little insensitive in my opinion. I would certainly consider allowing those who legitimately did not want to serve in that theater the option of not doing so.

[Pressing-On]

I know career military people who are Muslim and or Arabic who didn't join assuming they would be fighting in the Middle East. I know some who joined for the same reasons that many other people join...because they love America and would like to defend her. I don't think it's as simple as saying no Arabic or Muslim should join the military. We went years and years without these types of wars in the Middle East. If we would have attacked one of the other Axis of Evil like North Korea should our only approach be "why did you join"?

When you have so many Americans wondering why we get involved in certain things, you have to recognize that Arab American Muslims are that much more conflicted.

I think that there are legitimate things that should be candidly explored.
Yes, but we are talking about now and not years ago. I think there probably are some Muslims that want to fight because they love America. Human beings love life and if they look at the country they could be a part of and don't agree with it and know they can come here to gain freedom from that - let them fight.

I personally believe that mistakes are made in war and life that teach us. We never thought someone would drive planes through buildings, but NOW we know, so we watch for that.

We are at a point where the American people are fed up with the "politucal correctness" and this Killeen incident is a good example. If someone has any legitimate signs of siding with the enemy, they need to be pulled.

[rgcraig]

Pretending that it doesn't exist is irresponsible and a little insensitive in my opinion. I would certainly consider allowing those who legitimately did not want to serve in that theater the option of not doing so.

I believe they ignored a lot of red flags on this guy for sure.

[Pressing-On]

My point is the same in both of these situations. If we were ever (God forbid) in a situation where we attacked and occupied Isreal, I think that the conflict of the soldiers should not be ignored. My approach then would not be "why did an Israeli or Jew join the military". And now that they're in I would look to find ways to address it.
Well, I think we could take an example from the Bible - if they will kneel down and lap water like a dog - they get to fight. Otherwise, you are released.

But, seriously, I don't know the process when they take that oath. At some point, it needs to be especially expressed to all that we don't have to voice what religion we are, but if this is ever a conflict for you, then you need to rethink it because this is America, you live here, you have taken a pledge to uphold that and to guard this country with your life, if you can't do that, you need to get out. We will come after you, if you look like you are turning on us.

[tstew]

Yes, but we are talking about now and not years ago. I think there probably are some Muslims that want to fight because they love America. Human beings love life and if they look at the country they could be a part of and don't agree with it and know they can come here to gain freedom from that - let them fight.

I personally believe that mistakes are made in war and life that teach us. We never thought someone would drive planes through buildings, but NOW we know, so we watch for that.

We are at a point where the American people are fed up with the "politucal correctness" and this Killeen incident is a good example. If someone has any legitimate signs of siding with the enemy, they need to be pulled.

I'm not talking about extremist. I'm talking about decent hard-working military men and women who may have legitimate conflict. I think often the extremes get in the way of addressing the middle where most of us live. On one hand you have political correctness forbidding a legitimate discussion. On the other hand you have extreme fear of being considered unAmerican forbidding a legitimate discussion.

If I step back and objectively put myself in the shoes of a practicing Muslim of Arabic background I can see myself being legitimately conflicted. Heck, I'm a black Apostolic and I'm conflicted about our Middle East policies and our involvement.

[Pressing-On]

I'm not talking about extremist. I'm talking about decent hard-working military men and women who may have legitimate conflict. I think often the extremes get in the way of addressing the middle where most of us live. On one hand you have political correctness forbidding a legitimate discussion. On the other hand you have extreme fear of being considered unAmerican forbidding a legitimate discussion.

If I step back and objectively put myself in the shoes of a practicing Muslim of Arabic background I can see myself being legitimately conflicted. Heck, I'm a black Apostolic and I'm conflicted about our Middle East policies and our involvement.

Even if they are not extremist - they have taken an oath. America places a great deal of comfort in the fact that they have taken an oath. So, IMO, there are no excuses. Either do it or get out.

[tstew]

Even if they are not extremist - they have taken an oath. America places a great deal of comfort in the fact that they have taken an oath. So, IMO, there are no excuses. Either do it or get out.

Yeah, we give all politicians an oath to uphold the constitution, etc...how's that working out for ya :)

I'm just saying that often things are multi-layered and not so simple. Getting out is not always an option. And like I said this is not just a Muslim thing to me, I would be saying the same thing if we had to fight Israel. I think it is something to consider.

Having taken the oath, how would I as a devout Apostolic feel about fighting other devout Apostolics in the birthplace and epicenter of Apostolism(is that a word?). When you factor in the opinion that many have that we should not be there or that most of the people that are dying did not attack us, it leaves a lot of room for legitimate concern that should be addressed IMHO.

Of course, I never expect PO to agree with MHO. LOL

[tstew]

The aversion of the media to mentioning Islam in connection with Hasan is crumbling. This is becoming less an issue of a man's conflicted psychology and more an issue of the man simply being a terrorist. ABCNews has in interesting article about this now. (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/hasan-multiple-mail-accounts-officials/story?id=9065692)

There was no doubt in my mind that he did become a terrorist. He may have been a man who was always an extremist, I do not know. But I do think that it is also possible for conflicted psycholgy to lead to terrorism. In fact, if I had more time I would be interested in looking into situations that may reflect that.

Either way, I was not just talking about those who go to the extreme that he did, but about the many other who probably won't.

[Pressing-On]

Yeah, we give all politicians an oath to uphold the constitution, etc...how's that working out for ya :)

I'm just saying that often things are multi-layered and not so simple. Getting out is not always an option. And like I said this is not just a Muslim thing to me, I would be saying the same thing if we had to fight Israel. I think it is something to consider.

Having taken the oath, how would I as a devout Apostolic feel about fighting other devout Apostolics in the birthplace and epicenter of Apostolism(is that a word?). When you factor in the opinion that many have that we should not be there or that most of the people that are dying did not attack us, it leaves a lot of room for legitimate concern that should be addressed IMHO.

Of course, I never expect PO to agree with MHO. LOL
LOL!

Well, I am going to have to cut and run so that I can prepare dinner.

But, my husband and I have talked a bit about civil unrest or a civil war that is rising in this country. We've talked about what we thought the army would do if the gov't called for them to fire on American citizens like at Tiananmen Square.

I think that Apostolics, on this very forum, pit themselves against each other on a number of issues, so I don't see the army doing anything any different. :D

Maybe it will end like on All Is Quiet on the Western Frontier. We'll be in the trenches, stand to view something of beauty and get shot - dead as a hammer!

Goodness, Ferd has effected my mind today. I better go cook something!

:toofunny

Let me think more on this subject and see if there is some agreement we can come to. :D

[tstew]

LOL!

Well, I am going to have to cut and run so that I can prepare dinner.

But, my husband and I have talked a bit about civil unrest or a civil war that is rising in this country. We've talked about what we thought the army would do if the gov't called for them to fire on American citizens like at Tiananmen Square.

I think that Apostolics, on this very forum, pit themselves against each other on a number of issues, so I don't see the army doing anything any different. :D

Maybe it will end like on All Is Quiet on the Western Frontier. We'll be in the trenches, stand to view something of beauty and get shot - dead as a hammer!

Goodness, Ferd has effected my mind today. I better go cook something!

:toofunny

Let me think more on this subject and see if there is some agreement we can come to. :D

I had to fight hard against making a "cut and paste" joke to really get you going.

[Pressing-On]

Yeah, we give all politicians an oath to uphold the constitution, etc...how's that working out for ya :)

AND BTW - you are right - but there are more things being done in this area than ever before. Tea parties! Independents on the rise. Enough is enough!

WE THE PEOPLE! :thumbsup

[TulsaDavid]

The aversion of the media to mentioning Islam in connection with Hasan is crumbling. This is becoming less an issue of a man's conflicted psychology and more an issue of the man simply being a terrorist. ABCNews has in interesting article about this now. (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/hasan-multiple-mail-accounts-officials/story?id=9065692)

The reader comments are as interesting, if not more.

[Pressing-On]

I had to fight hard against making a "cut and paste" joke to really get you going.

Don't do it now! I don't have the time and I would especially need to get you back!!! :smack

Later! Good discussion!!! :thumbsup

[tstew]

I'm going to have to run too. If I can't run up PO's blood pressure, what's the point?

Seriously, I have to run, but I did want to put this out there as something to discuss and consider.

[TulsaDavid]

There was no doubt in my mind that he did become a terrorist. He may have been a man who was always an extremist, I do not know. But I do think that it is also possible for conflicted psycholgy to lead to terrorism. In fact, if I had more time I would be interested in looking into situations that may reflect that. Either way, I was not just talking about those who go to the extreme that he did, but about the many other who probably won't.Sorry if you see my posting now after your reply. I zigged when I meant to zag (lol). It would be interesting, and quite a gesture of good will, if the Muslim community would start bringing to light those within their own ranks that they know are holding traitorous alliances.

[Praxeas]

I was having a discussion in another place about whether there are legitimate conflicts that an American soldier with Arabic and Muslim backgrounds would have that we need to take into consideration.
Disclaimer: I know some on AFF so let me just get this out of the way: I am not in any way looking to defend, minimize, or justify the shootings at Fort Hood or any other type of attack like this.

However, I do think that there is sufficient enough legitimate concern to look into it. Here is a post I made in that discussion:

I think it is something to consider. I would imagine that we would have conflicted soldiers who are practicing Jews if we were ever fighting against Isreal. The issue is that not only is it an ethnic connection, but a religious one as well. Both of those can be powerful connections.

When you factor in that, like in all wars, there are innocent casualties and that many people are conflicted about our right to be involved in some of the situations and our blanket support of Isreal, I think it is a discussion that needs to be had.
Everyone going in understands that their job could entail war against other nations. So if they have issues they should never join in the first place. They were not being honest therefore when they enlisted

The issue of not fighting other muslims: Muslims fight other muslims all the time, Muslims kill muslims in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran and other places. And on the issue of the recent events...why would his conflict with not wanting to fight other muslims make him murder people that had no control over whether or not he did? He should have rather been insubordiate and gone to the brig than be a murderer.

Any war with any nation could involve muslims of either nation.

[scotty]

Could this not be said also in terms of ourselves ? How would our troops respond if some of the states activated their National Guard troops for the purpose of Civil War against the Federal Government ? Or if the American people did rise up against the government could our troops stand up and fight the armed citizens ?

[Pressing-On]

Sorry if you see my posting now after your reply. I zigged when I meant to zag (lol). It would be interesting, and quite a gesture of good will, if the Muslim community would start bringing to light those within their own ranks that they know are holding traitorous alliances.

Just popping in to say that this is where the greatest conflict arises and why the American people cannot trust the fact that there may be some loyal Muslims. We just don't know - at the end of the day.

Someone, in the Muslim community, needs to stand up against these people. If they don't have a strong voice, then they are looked upon as ALL guilty. We are made to not trust any of them.

[NewWine]

Stew,

This is definitely a discussion that needs to take place. It is ignorant for anyone be it military or civilian to think otherwise. What occurred at Ft. Hood, hit very close to home for me; being a mil-spouse. When one joins the armed forces they are not ignorant to the fact they will probably at some point in their military career in a war against another sovereign nation. If one has any inhibitions about that then they should not enlist in the armed forces. Many people join for the educational benefits or no other means of employment. Well when one joins for those reason they assume all the risks and responsibilities that come along with such a commitment. It is also asked if the person enlisting has any religious reasons that would preclude them from fulfilling their duties in the armed forces. Even for those that are Christian's have to ask themselves if they are okay with serving for religious reasons. Namely, thou shalt not kill. However, God is a god of war. So, this discussion must be addressed across the board. Thoroughly questioning people that want to enlist should be done. For example, there are those that are in gangs that join the Army and Marines to learn combat fighting. There are serious problems that need to be addressed. What happened at Fort Hood is unfortunate and quite sickening, but on the other hand this incident has in my opinion forced people to take a pause and forget about political correctness and address the issues of the war that our nation is fighting. As we can see those we are fighting will stop at nothing to attack our country.

[Praxeas]

I've been saying this for years and I know some of you guys have too. But this is where it started. This happened in Lebanon. It happened to the Romans. It's happening right now in Britain. We already lost. We already lost because we have a government that has their heads in their rear ends metaphorically speaking.

They KNEW this guy was bad....the Feds had tracked emails from him to a radical cleric. They did nothing...fear

They KNEW he was a loose canon spouting off about the war and stuff...they did nothing...fear.

What are we afraid of? Offending someone. Offending Muslims. They come to our Nation knowing what it is and what it is about. Recently a man ran over his daughter because she was too "western"....he is a devout muslim. They KNEW what American culture was like before arriving. What they want is to change America. Make it Islamic.

That is their goal, always has been, to make the entire world Islamic. Some nations they take over in a bloody jihad. But others they take over by immigration and then appealing to the liberals to change laws and accommodate them, rather than them conforming to their new nation, culture and laws

Rome lost. It was a great nation. It lost because of political corruption. It lost because of immorality and it lost because of invading armies...some of which were origianlly welcomed into the nation as cheap labor and warriors. They learned how to fight by the Romans and then they fought against the Romans.

Britain has a HUGE islamic population and many of them are radicalized.

Lebanon was a Christian nation. They took in a lot of islamic refugees and offered them to become a part of their nation and government. Today Lebanon is not a Christian nation. They are a minority and there are a lot of islamic radicles there. It all started with appeasement.

Our immigration policies. Our liberal appeasement...Our fear of offending...all that stuff is the greatest Trojan horse...we have an enemy within. Feds have been warning of home grown terrorism and we have caught many here in the states planning on terrorist acts. They are all Islamic.

People want to misdirect and say Christians have done this or that, that is just another part of the whole danger that will leave our nation in ruins. Rather than face reality and look at the problem we try to avoid it by misdirection. All terrorism, all religious radicalism that leads to violance needs to be stopped, but right not the greatest thread in numbers is not Christian radicals but Islamic

[Pressing-On]

I've been saying this for years and I know some of you guys have too. But this is where it started. This happened in Lebanon. It happened to the Romans. It's happening right now in Britain. We already lost. We already lost because we have a government that has their heads in their rear ends metaphorically speaking.

They KNEW this guy was bad....the Feds had tracked emails from him to a radical cleric. They did nothing...fear

They KNEW he was a loose canon spouting off about the war and stuff...they did nothing...fear.

What are we afraid of? Offending someone. Offending Muslims. They come to our Nation knowing what it is and what it is about. Recently a man ran over his daughter because she was too "western"....he is a devout muslim. They KNEW what American culture was like before arriving. What they want is to change America. Make it Islamic.

That is their goal, always has been, to make the entire world Islamic. Some nations they take over in a bloody jihad. But others they take over by immigration and then appealing to the liberals to change laws and accommodate them, rather than them conforming to their new nation, culture and laws

Rome lost. It was a great nation. It lost because of political corruption. It lost because of immorality and it lost because of invading armies...some of which were origianlly welcomed into the nation as cheap labor and warriors. They learned how to fight by the Romans and then they fought against the Romans.

Britain has a HUGE islamic population and many of them are radicalized.

Lebanon was a Christian nation. They took in a lot of islamic refugees and offered them to become a part of their nation and government. Today Lebanon is not a Christian nation. They are a minority and there are a lot of islamic radicles there. It all started with appeasement.

Our immigration policies. Our liberal appeasement...Our fear of offending...all that stuff is the greatest Trojan horse...we have an enemy within. Feds have been warning of home grown terrorism and we have caught many here in the states planning on terrorist acts. They are all Islamic.

People want to misdirect and say Christians have done this or that, that is just another part of the whole danger that will leave our nation in ruins. Rather than face reality and look at the problem we try to avoid it by misdirection. All terrorism, all religious radicalism that leads to violance needs to be stopped, but right not the greatest thread in numbers is not Christian radicals but Islamic

POTD!!!!!!!

:thumbsup

[NewWine]

QUOTE=Praxeas;832906 I've been saying this for years and I know some of you guys have too. But this is where it started. This happened in Lebanon. It happened to the Romans. It's happening right now in Britain. We already lost. We already lost because we have a government that has their heads in their rear ends metaphorically speaking.

They KNEW this guy was bad....the Feds had tracked emails from him to a radical cleric. They did nothing...fear

They KNEW he was a loose canon spouting off about the war and stuff...they did nothing...fear. This is what being politically correct does. The Army should be ashamed right now for not taking the concerns of those soldiers serious. :foottap

What are we afraid of? Offending someone. Offending Muslims. They come to our Nation knowing what it is and what it is about. Recently a man ran over his daughter because she was too "western"....he is a devout muslim. They KNEW what American culture was like before arriving. What they want is to change America. Make it Islamic. I heard about this story. About two years ago I was listening to a show on the radio and they were having a discussion about this very thing. There has been a dramatic increase of these "honor" killings in the U.S.

That is their goal, always has been, to make the entire world Islamic. Some nations they take over in a bloody jihad. But others they take over by immigration and then appealing to the liberals to change laws and accommodate them, rather than them conforming to their new nation, culture and laws

Rome lost. It was a great nation. It lost because of political corruption. It lost because of immorality and it lost because of invading armies...some of which were origianlly welcomed into the nation as cheap labor and warriors. They learned how to fight by the Romans and then they fought against the Romans.

Britain has a HUGE islamic population and many of them are radicalized.

Lebanon was a Christian nation. They took in a lot of islamic refugees and offered them to become a part of their nation and government. Today Lebanon is not a Christian nation. They are a minority and there are a lot of islamic radicles there. It all started with appeasement.

Our immigration policies. Our liberal appeasement...Our fear of offending...all that stuff is the greatest Trojan horse...we have an enemy within. Feds have been warning of home grown terrorism and we have caught many here in the states planning on terrorist acts. They are all Islamic.
The immigration policies of the US are honestly a joke. We've got people becoming US citizens, yet, have no desire to live in our country. I shouldn't even discuss the issue because then I get too upset and have to go pray. You know that whole be angry and sin not scripture. :irate

People want to misdirect and say Christians have done this or that, that is just another part of the whole danger that will leave our nation in ruins. Rather than face reality and look at the problem we try to avoid it by misdirection. All terrorism, all religious radicalism that leads to violance needs to be stopped, but right not the greatest thread in numbers is not Christian radicals but Islamic You ain't neva lied

[pelathais]

I was having a discussion in another place about whether there are legitimate conflicts that an American soldier with Arabic and Muslim backgrounds would have that we need to take into consideration.
Disclaimer: I know some on AFF so let me just get this out of the way: I am not in any way looking to defend, minimize, or justify the shootings at Fort Hood or any other type of attack like this.

However, I do think that there is sufficient enough legitimate concern to look into it. Here is a post I made in that discussion:

I think it is something to consider. I would imagine that we would have conflicted soldiers who are practicing Jews if we were ever fighting against Isreal. The issue is that not only is it an ethnic connection, but a religious one as well. Both of those can be powerful connections.

When you factor in that, like in all wars, there are innocent casualties and that many people are conflicted about our right to be involved in some of the situations and our blanket support of Isreal, I think it is a discussion that needs to be had.
Those are important considerations in my opinion. However the United States was founded as a secular state. Everyone is free to worship as they see fit, however everyone is expected to also see the importance of the common good. There are also Conscientious Objector classifications that protect those who are morally opposed to war.

I'd say, think very carefully before you join the all volunteer U.S. Armed Forces. No one has to serve.

Also, for Muslims the "I can't kill fellow Muslims" argument is pretty weak. Name one Muslim nation that has not sent it's forces onto the field of battle to do war with fellow Muslims.

From that standpoint alone we aren't asking Muslim volunteers to do anything that their fellow Muslims haven't required, even demanded them to do at the tip of a sword for the last almost 1,400 years.

Far, far more Muslim blood has been shed by fellow Muslims than by all of the armies of the world combined. And that includes the grandsons of Genghis Khan who tried to kill every Muslim on the planet - until they met up with their cousin who had converted.

[pelathais]

This is what being politically correct does. The Army should be ashamed right now for not taking the concerns of those soldiers serious. :foottap

To be fair to the Army investigators, they may not have had all the information that the FBI had gathered, and vice versa.

Makes you wonder too, how many "innocent" and nonviolent people have tripped similar alarms in the system? Trying to predict who is going to go off and start shooting is easy when you're doing it in hindsight. Trying to predict human behavior is a whole lot tougher.

[Praxeas]

To be fair to the Army investigators, they may not have had all the information that the FBI had gathered, and vice versa.

Makes you wonder too, how many "innocent" and nonviolent people have tripped similar alarms in the system? Trying to predict who is going to go off and start shooting is easy when you're doing it in hindsight. Trying to predict human behavior is a whole lot tougher.
but, you'd think they would have all the information. What in the world is happening when the FBI knows something about a guy in the military that the military should know about but does not tell them...

Can you say ABLE DANGER all over again?

[n david]

Because of this and other incidents, were I in the military, I would request out of a unit that included a Muslim, or refuse orders that would place me near any Muslim.

If that's wrong, oh well. People need to wake up and see the war for what it really is.

[tstew]

All I'm saying is that I think that this is a reality and, like most other realities, should not be ignored. I'm not talking about what I think should be the case or what would be the case in a perfect world. The issue with this series of wars is that many Americans of all race and creeds question whether we should be there and whether we are handling things fairly. I'm just saying that this is likely multiplied within those who relate more closely to those in the Middle East than we do. Once again, I point out that I think the same conflicts would exist if we were in Israel fighting wars that many people did not think was clearly justified. As a matter of fact, I would imagine that many Christian Americans would be conflicted about fighting against Israel because of their religious beliefs regardless of what oath they took.

Conservative estimates put civilian death in Iraq at over 100,000 and civilian deaths in Afghanistan at over 10,000 and possibly 20,000.
I already know the standard "civilian deaths are a part of war", but to think that that would not create personal conflict is naive in my opinion.

[Pressing-On]

The issue with this series of wars is that many Americans of all race and creeds question whether we should be there and whether we are handling things fairly.
Outside of the Muslim or Jewish issue on combat or service, this point you made here is probably the biggest issue of all! A religious war at the heart of the matter - can we win it?!

As a matter of fact, I would imagine that many Christian Americans would be conflicted about fighting against Israel because of their religious beliefs regardless of what oath they took.

That is a valid point, Stew. Sometimes I'm conflicted on that issue, especially after reading so much in the Jerusalem Post. Makes you wonder about the people there. LOL!

Conservative estimates put civilian death in Iraq at over 100,000 and civilian deaths in Afghanistan at over 10,000 and possibly 20,000. I already know the standard "civilian deaths are a part of war", but to think that that would not create personal conflict is naive in my opinion.

I've thought of that as well. There is so much political maneuvering that it's hard to grasp the sense, fairness or efficiency of it.

I talked to a guy in the armed forces a couple of weekends ago. He said they need to bring the troops home and take care of what is going on here on American soil more than anything else right now.