Sunday showdown: Both parties look to sway fence-sitters for this weekend's healthcare vote 
Click to Print
Include Comments
More Muslims in the military
Robert Kaplan writes at the Atlantic that in the United States’ current battles abroad, having more Muslims in the ranks is vital.
Inevitably, a minute percentage of these Muslim recruits may be influenced by jihadist propaganda, which certainly seems to have been the case with Maj. Hasan. So what do we do?
Better security surveillance and background checks, as well as better coordination within the defense bureaucracy to ferret out troublesome individuals, make sense.
He concludes:
More Maj. Hasans may lurk in the barracks and public squares. The way to find them out is not in a shrill witch hunt, but quietly, methodically, and legally, even as we open up our military to a wider spectrum of recruits.
But wouldn’t extra surveillance of Muslims entering the military be a deterrent to the Muslim recruits who Kaplan’s hoping join up? Thoughts?
back to top26 Comments to “More Muslims in the military”
They didn’t have to witch hunt this guy. He was quite open about it. They should have acted.
Report comment to moderator
Not all muslims are jihadis but all jihadis are muslims.
A friend terminated a good dialogue on facebook about the risk managemt issue inherent in having a big influx of muslims into the military when we are (at least according to the jihadis) fighting against Islamic control/domination of two nations.
At first a case-by-case interview and screening process makes sense. That would divert a big portion of army G2 types to conduct interviews and act on the results. Meanwhile loyal non-jihadi muslims would no doubt feel as though they were under continual surveillance. That alone might “turn” them or make the susceptible to jihadist appeals.
The real unmentionable here? The Holy Quran is an all-encompassing political manifesto for a militant, expansionist oppressive theology and therefore wholly inimical to pluralism, modernity and diverstiy of belief or free thought. For MAJ Hassan and its other hard core adherents it supercedes any other loyalty to constitution or service oath.
Report comment to moderator
” For MAJ Hassan and its other hard core adherents it supercedes any other loyalty to constitution or service oath.”
And he was raised here. There’s no loyalty to the US in him at all. No feeling about being an American.
Report comment to moderator
NJLawyer, folks tend to forget that the British citizens accused/convicted(?) of the subway bombings were UK-born muslims as well. In our rush to celebrate multi-culti nonsense, both US and UK have failed to truly assimilate newcomers.
I more and more think Hassan was probably mentally unstable and perhaps the jihadi imam he gravitated to sorta put a match to the psychiatric gasoline in Hassan’s mind.
But the Hassan case bothers me for several reasons. A US-born non-muslim Washington state guardsman contacted a bogus AlQaeda site. Offered info on where best to detonate a bomb to destroy a tank and kill the most crewmen. Needless to say, the Guardsmen was caught and tried.
I think with Hassan, authorities feared running afowl of the “ethnic profiling” canard even when they learned of his contacts and links with radicals.
Report comment to moderator
I agree with that last part, Sawgunner. The evidence was there. Challenge him, dismiss him from the service, and if he doesn’t want to go, have a hearing, give him due process. But don’t put the other military people in jeopardy because of PC.
Assimilation is a two-way street, but I think the newcomer has the duty to change.
Report comment to moderator
Two words, Trojan and horse. nuff said.
Report comment to moderator
This is not the first time the nation has faced such a problem. In WW I, Germans (and Dutch) were suspect (example, Berlin MI became Marne, MI). More directly we had to wrestle with the same problem with Japanese Americans in WW II. And way back in Great Lakes history the US faced considerable difficulties in the 19th C worrying whether the Native Odawa tribes would be more loyal to the US, or take side with England (and Canada), because of relations on Manitoulin Island in L Huron.
So I think it a real concern. But the categorical oppression of a people doesn’t seem called for. We know better, and do better.
Report comment to moderator
Harris #7,
Excellent points. Everything old is new again.
During WWI and WWII, my maternal grandmother and family went by Roden, rather than their full last name of Rodenhoffer, so strong was suspicion of anything that sounded German. At that point, the family had been here for 3 generations!
Report comment to moderator
RoyClay,
My maternal grandfather changed the family name also, for the same reason. As it happens, they were (non-observant) Jews, but their name, Ansbacher, was German. (And I suppose at the time, shortly after WWI, German Jews were considered just as German as anyone else.)
I guess there was nothing good to shorten Ansbacher to, so my grandfather opened a New York phone book (they lived in Manhattan, where he was a lawyer) and found a nice English-sounding name.
Report comment to moderator
No one is trying to repress anyone in general society, but we do have a right to make sure that those who are putting their lives on the line are not infiltrated from within.
And I think the neighbors had every right to call the FBI on my uncle who was playing the German National Anthem (under the Weimar) on his phonograph. He had a star in the window to prove his brother was in the army. Nothing happened to him. It was war time. Asking a question is NOT necessarily “profiling.” Don’t stick your head in the sand.
Report comment to moderator
I think that someone’s religion is an even stronger part of their identity than their nationality (or should be). I do things the way I do, culturally, because of being an American, but when I know of a conflict, I’m a Christian first. (Today’s American singles usually have an active “sex life,” for instance, but I’m a Christian before I’m an American.) So, the comparisons of Germans and Japanese in WWII are relevant, but not the same thing.
Report comment to moderator
I think they should still allow Muslims to serve in the military but there needs to strict guide lines and extensive background checks.
Report comment to moderator
wow we have Muslims in the military?
Report comment to moderator
Sawgunner, I was looking for you on WV. Mumsee tipped me off that you were here.
In WWII, loyal Japanese troops were sent to Italy, where they did well. It was wise not to send them to Siapan.
I would trust a Muslim soldier if we were fighting Japanese or Germans. But not against Muslims. As Cheryl says, the religious commitment is stronger than the national identity. And Muslims are warned not to fight with infidels againse each other. I can’t find the exact warnings, but the following approximate the commands.
Sura 9:29, 33, 74, and 124, which says:
“Believers! wage war against such of the infidels as are your neighbours, and let them find you rigorous: and know that God is with those who fear him.”
I would not want a Muslim watching my back in Afghanistan!
Report comment to moderator
Chas – “As Cheryl says, the religious commitment is stronger than the national identity. And Muslims are warned not to fight with infidels againse each other.” that is a major problem.
The question is how do you address the issue?
Report comment to moderator
Again I hope we all realize that Dr Malik Hasan was a threat not because he was an ethnic Arab/Palestinian. He was a threat because he had loyalty to a creed which has only enmity for the USA. I can’t equate muslims in your armed forces today to the Nisei (2nd and even 3rd generation Japanese-Americans of the WWII years).
The Nisei had no connection to imperial Japan.
There were German-Americans who briefly were part of the Bundist movemt in the preWWII US. They were a threat not because of their last names or lederhosen rallies or old country nostalgia and beerfests. They were a threat because they could’ve been manipulated by Axis agents in the USA (Luckily the Nazis were inept at infiltrating the US govt and military. Though lets not forget the German spies who were captured, tried by a tribunal and executed!)
Until the American people identify the enemy in this war as a hostile creed (and not an ethnic group) we will have officials too timid to risk “profiling” men like Dr Hasan.
Report comment to moderator
Sawgunner- the problem the ethnic group in question and the hostile creed in question are connected. Just look at what happens to Isreal when they are attacked. An how this ethnic group in question react to the attacks.
Report comment to moderator
Roy, One way to address the issue is to permit conscientious objections for Muslims. That’s a complicated issue because it’s a volunteer service. But I would not send a Muslim to a war zone.
Also, there should be no reprocussions against reporting un-american activity; no matter what the cause. The signs were all around. I’m sure there are others out there.
What really fears me is the first couple of chapters in Tom Clancy’s Teeth of the Tiger. It could happen. I could think of even worse scenarios. And we couldn’t stop it.
Report comment to moderator
Chas – do you thing the ACLU would have a law suite waiting the first time we do not send a Muslim to combat. The reason is soldier with combat experinece ten to get promoted before soldier with no combat experence.
Report comment to moderator
The issue I struggle with is, does our Muslim Soldier have a problem with the way the Muslim Leaders treat their people over there. An do they have a problem with Muslim strapping bomb to them selves and killing other (like kids on a school bus)
As a Christian I get upset over people who take the Christian Faith an use it as a weapon to kill someone. I do not see this anger in the Muslim Community, I see them happy when it happens.
Report comment to moderator
We had a family member who was ethnic German and spoke German fluently, who was very effective in the US Army in Germany during WWII. I don’t think it’s the ethnicity, race or religion that’s the problem as the heart.
No one has commented on how difficult it would have been for Hassan to get out of the military-you don’t just resign when you have years of obligation after medical school. Perhaps Sawgunner can address that at some point.
He got low marks on his evals, which means someone was paying some attention, but apparently not enough. The whole case is very curious.
Report comment to moderator
My father had a fine “career” in the Army, too. They took advantage of his skill as a cabinetmaker and his language skills, so the military knows how to handle the “problem” — or at least they did.
You have to pay the schooling back, but Hassan did try to get out. They were aware of the communications he was making and that should have been a red flag. Work evaluations are one thing, those communications are another. They have a duty to the other soldiers, not just one guy. They dropped the ball on this guy, and I fear it was because of political correctness.
Report comment to moderator
Reading Mein Kampf doesn’t make one a Nazi. Reading Das Kapital doesn’t make one a Marxist. Reading the Qur’an doesn’t make one a terrorist.
However, someone who is openly supportive and fanatical about the ideologies espoused by those books is being fairly transparent. It is beyond ridiculous for anyone to guess about the motives of terrorists who are crystal clear about what they intend to do and gloat about it when they succeed. Muddle headed politically correct people in authority who ignore the obvious endanger us all.
Report comment to moderator
Yeah, and still end up with people like Aldrich Ames, who worked for the CIA and sold information to the KGB, and Robert Hanssen, who worked for the FBI and sold information to the Soviet Union as a mole. Oh well. Liberals love playing with fire.
Report comment to moderator
#24
The better surveillance and background checks idea only works when you have a huge cadre of snoops and soldiers or would-be soldiers willing to cooperate and “fink” on their comrades. With Ames and Hanssen I think they were in an “old boy” network and this blinded their colleagues to their shady dealings.
Far better to exclude all muslims (yes, even native born ones)and give them the same status we extend to Amish.
As I said earlier, if you have a creed or belief more important to you than an oath to defend the constitution or an enlistment pledge/commissioning oath, you flat out ought not be in the uniform of the US Military.
Report comment to moderator
This timidity about putting troop safety before political correctness is going to kick the stuffing out of military morale. You think you have enlistment problems now…
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!