American Muslim soldiers -how should they be treated?

[Bonobo]

I was talking over this whole terrible situation with my mother yesterday and I came to a staggering realization.
That is, I realized that I had not, in all this time (last 7 years) given much thought to the terrible conflict and turmoil we must be putting Muslim US soldiers through in forcing them to go and fight fellow Muslims.
I know that sounds odd and it sounds odd to me as well! When I realized it, I tried to think about WHY. WHY had I not given the subject full consideration.
Again, just to remind, the subject is:

Since US Muslim soldiers are facing a terrible gut-wrenching dilemma in going to the M.E. to fight their fellow Muslims, should the US military have some sort of system by which those most troubled by it, those that CANNOT do it morally, have a way to serve in some other fashion?

When I tried to think about WHY I had not considered this, I realized it might partially be due to the fact that I was reflexively arguing AGAINST any claims that US Muslims should be treated differently. I was stupidly working under the thought that to "play color blind" would be the best way to be fair. In other words, I was thinking that in order to single out Muslim soldiers as a potential special category, would be to unfairly target them and place them under suspicion of 'disloyalty'.

But in light of what has happened, I am beginning to think this was a very naive and ill-considered approach.

Muslims in the military at this time DO deserve to be treated differently --and they must. HOW to do it is the difficult question.

I would like to hear other's opinions, please, as I am still working this out in my mind.

Do American Muslim soldiers get treated exactly the same as everyone else and we ignore their 'special needs'? OR, do we attend, with sensitivity, to the position they are in.

PS. If you are having trouble with this question, consider how you would feel as a Jewish-American going to war with Israel, or as an Italian-American going to war with Italy, etc.

[piratefish08]

1. The same as any other soldier. Frankly. I'd be more afraid of the batshit crazy fundie

soldiers.

There's a SHITLOAD more of them.

[piratefish08]

2. Either way, as long as this world continues to fight about who's god has the bigger

dick, it can only get worse.

[slackmaster]

3. Any person who is against fighting in the Middle East or any other place should not enlist

When you join the military you agree to go wherever you are told. It's that simple.

[Bonobo]

4. What about those that enlisted before it started?

Your answer isn't really an answer to the problem. See?

[slackmaster]

6. I mean ANY place - Even a place where there is no conflict right now.

If you would be morally opposed to fighting a war in New Zealand or Ireland or Canada or Japan or Argentina, you don't enlist.

The Middle East has been a hotbed of conflict for all of my life. Of all places where a conflict might be expected, it's at the top of the stack.

[Bonobo]

10. I understand the ideal, of course.

But if only for pragmatic reasons, it seems clear other factors should be considered.

[slackmaster]

13. Any soldier who is morally opposed to any particular conflict should get a general discharge

And be out of the service forever.

[Bonobo]

14. And is such a thing currently possible?

How difficult is it?

So you would advocate for the military to make it easier to get a discharge for moral reasons?

[slackmaster]

18. I don't know how hard it is

So you would advocate for the military to make it easier to get a discharge for moral reasons?

Yes, but there should be a price to pay (e.g. loss of benefits). I expect people to work out their moral convictions before enlisting. Having someone enlist and take up resources in training, then have a revelation and quit, costs us all money.

[Bonobo]

23. Yes, quite right.

I heard that the Fort Hood shooter offered to pay back all the loans he had received 15 or whatever years ago.

[MiniMe]

5. The same way as everybody else

[NYC_SKP]

7. Great and courageous post. Hard questions, but these must be asked.

It is, IMO, naive and reckless to "look the other way" in deference to maintaining an appearance of politically correct impartiality.

It would not be unreasonable to watch service members very carefully with respect to their beliefs as they relate to those with whom we make war, and we should consider releasing from service, or exempting from deployment, those with strong beliefs against the particular actions in which the military is engaged.

Hasan exhibited, apparently, many warning signs and should not have been scheduled for deployment, and perhaps should have been discharged.

:patriot:

K and R

[Bonobo]

11. Thanks.

It was really eye-opening when I realized that in my struggle to not treat them differently, to be sympathetic, I realized I was not being very sympathetic. That I was, in fact, being thoughtless.

[eleny]

8. During WWII my FIL was given a choice

He was born in Germany and his family came to the U.S. when he was 3 years old. He enlisted in the army during the war as soon as he was old enough. When the time came to decide where to deploy him he was given the choice of Europe or the Pacific. He chose Europe and the bottom line is that it was his choice.

[Bonobo]

9. My great, great uncles didn't want to serve in WW1 because they were from there.

They were from the Austria-Hungarian Empire and did not want to fight against it.

In the end, they did, but it was gut-wrenching.

[slackmaster]

15. My grandfather was sentenced to life in prison because his CO status for WWI was denied

He refused to accept "non-combatant" duty because even non-combatants (e.g. medical people) were expected to carry weapons and fight if they came under attack.

His refusal was based on religious grounds. He was a Mennonite. The church elders couldn't be bothered to go all the way from Kansas to Chicago to defend him.

He was sentenced to life along with about 40 other young men of various sects. Their sentences were reduced to 25 years. At the conclusion of the war, President Wilson pardoned them all.

That's why I am alive.

[Bonobo]

16. Wow. And did this affect your decision to join in any way?

[slackmaster]

21. It affected my religious beliefs. I am a third-generation Agnostic.

I wanted to enroll in the Naval Academy but was unable to qualify because of physical conditions. My vision in particular.

My brother is a Naval officer.

[TwilightGardener]

12. If Muslim soldiers come forward requesting to leave the military,

particularly those who joined up before our ME wars, then perhaps exceptions should be made. Perhaps require additional security clearances on Muslims who are exhibiting signs of extremist beliefs. That sounds unfair, and may not work, but the one thing the military is known for is not being fair--and you don't have the same privacy either. Everything is and can be monitored. They can listen in to your phone calls on base, read your mail, etc.

[hayu_lol]

25. They should be treated exactly like any other soldier...

there are no provisions in an army/air force/navy/marine corp/coast guard unit to treat any member differently. Most individuals learn this fact quickly and easily in basic training.

If the pod people don't like that treatment, they shouldn't have enlisted in the first place. Having freely enlisted, their obligation is to do what they are told until their hitch runs out.

[TwilightGardener]

31. They should be--except when there are signs of trouble, as in Hasan's case.

Hasan was deeply conflicted, was being harassed at least a little, AND was showing evidence of his religious views impinging on his work performance. This is one guy for whom an exception should have been made. He should have been investigated or medically screened and allowed to take a general discharge.

[cali]

17. No, I don't think that's the answer.

and I don't think you can generalize as to how Muslims serving in the Armed forces feel. Nor are we forcing Muslims to fight Muslims. Don't join if you're conflicted. My guess is many, if not most, aren't conflicted.

Yes, Muslims in the army should be treated the same as all others. And any anti-Muslim bigotry should be dealt with severely.


Oh, and Italian Americans fought in Italy in WWII and German Americans fought against Germany.

[Bonobo]

19. "Don't join if you're conflicted"

Many joined BEFORE we were involved in M.E. wars.

"Nor are we forcing Muslims to fight Muslims."

How are we NOT?

[cali]

26. As someone pointed out upthread, the mideast has been a possible war zone

for well over a generation. The possibility of the U.S. going to war with Muslim majority countries existed well before 9/11. Surely you aren't arguing that these "many" you're referring to all joined 20+ years ago.

Don't join the armed forces if you don't want to kill people.

You also didn't respond to the points I made in my first post.

[Bonobo]

27. Responding...

"Muslims in the army should be treated the same as all others. And any anti-Muslim bigotry should be dealt with severely."

-Yes, but blindly ignoring differences and feigning color-blindness is not an enlightened way to deal with bigotry.


"Oh, and Italian Americans fought in Italy in WWII and German Americans fought against Germany."

Yes, true, but it doesn't mean that ALL of them did. Those opposed and morally conflicted to the point of insanity were left out, I assume.

[cali]

28. What?? You think that an Italian American who was morally opposed

to fighting Italy was just allowed to stroll off into the sunset? Not likely.

[Bonobo]

33. Well, the Japanese were marched off to internment camps because of distrust.

Other Italian-American and German-American soldiers were subjected to scrutiny, I imagine.

Those were different times, in any case, and I don't think you are advocating that we return to those (relatively) unenlightened times.

For pragmatic and for humane reasons, I am saying people should not be forced to fight against their own conscience for whatever reasons.

I think the tragic event itself points to this fact.

I don't think he was 'crazy'. I think he represented 'the perfect storm' in a manner of speaking. His particular circumstances made it more likely that this would happen. Inevitably, this was going to happen. And it will happen again. So how many are you condemning to death because of a rigid ideal?

[cali]

42. as long as there is no draft , no one is forced to join.

And the evidence I've seen points to him being very ill indeed. And cut the melodrama. I'm not condemning anyone to death. I think the army fucked up big time. this guy shouldn't have been serving in the armed forces and he sure as shit shouldn't have been providing psychiatric services in the armed forces. I think your assumption that all Muslims or even many Muslims serving in the armed services are like this man, is deeply insulting and condescending. Yucky.

[Bonobo]

48. I have no such assumption.

My 'assumption' is that this guy's position was totally ignored!

Not only in the military, but even here on DU, no one displays any sensitivity to the fact that a devout Muslim cannot kill other Muslims. It is a bedrock of Islam.

Also:

"I think your assumption that all Muslims or even many Muslims serving in the armed services are like this man, is deeply insulting and condescending. Yucky.

Who is being a drama queen now? Jeez, you would think I was a KKK member by your response.

[cali]

52. say what? devout Muslims kill other Muslims day in and day out

Obviously there are different takes on that.

[NYC_SKP]

30. And others develop dangerous viewpoints AFTER enlistment, and they should be found, dealt with.

And it's not by any means limited to Muslims or religious viewpoints.

There are white supremacists and gang members and others who should be investigated and dealt with.

:patriot:

[NYC_SKP]

32. And still others who may enlist PRECISELY because they want to stir shit....

Again, not limited to religious backgrounds but including gangs, bigots, etc.

I believe this has been the case throughout history, common sense should not give way to "sensitivity" and "tolerance".

[Codeine]

20. That's absurd.

Americans, mostly Christian, fought fellow Christians in WW2. If one's loyalty lies primarily to one's religion then not only does one nt belong in the armed services, but one might also reconsider choosing to live in a legally secular society.

[Bonobo]

22. Agreed. But...

"If one's loyalty lies primarily to one's religion then not only does one nt belong in the armed services"

We are DISCUSSING ways for such people to get OUT of the armed services. So does that mean that you agree there should be a methodology for allowing them to get out if they "don't belong"?

[Codeine]

24. I'd be open to that

as long as they paid back every single cent that was spent on their training, feeding, housing, equipping, and educating during their time period in the armed service, and with the understanding that choosing to identify themselves as religious extremists will carry appropriate repercussions in terms of increased surveillance, etc.

[EndersDame]

29. The Military Should Provide Sensitivity Training and Kick Out Bigots

also provide more counseling for everyone dealing with harasssment

[hayu_lol]

39. The crux of this thread appears to be ONE misguided Shrink...

who believes that he is/was above the laws. The man is not an enlisted guy, he is an Officer of the United States, holds a commission as such, and received his college and medical training at Uncle's expense. He is also a field grade officer, not just lower echelon cannon fodder.

Further, he is not a Line Officer, he is a technical officer. He would never serve in command of troops, never be assigned to the line as a warrior, but would pretty much continue to do what he did at Walter Reed. Read this carefully: He is not a Line Officer.

In none of the threads about this guy have I seen that he ever submitted his resignation. Officers resign, enlisted personnel get discharges.

The continuing question by the OP about what if, the guy joined before this fight started up...quite simply, he would have had to have joined over 8 years ago. Over 8 years, he has had ample opportunity to tender his resignation. He didn't.

[Bonobo]

41. I did not realize one could simply resign in his position. That changes everything if true.

I would like to confirm that point. You don't need to post a link, but I certainly would appreciate it.

[cali]

44. I believe that's true but then he would have had to pay back the hundreds of thousands

spent on his education.

[Bonobo]

46. I understood that he offered to do so. nt

[TwilightGardener]

49. You can resign your commission, but I'm sure there are limiting factors to that.

In a time of two wars, maybe he was stop-lossed, or the military wouldn't accept repayment of his medical training for some reason.

[hayu_lol]

51. There is nothing anywhere that I have found to date...

that shows that this Shrink ever attempted to submit his resignation to proper authority at Walter Reed. You might try and learn something about the military before trying to push a thread like this. The harassment this guy complained about could have come in the orders he was getting from officers appointed over him(colonels up)telling him how to do his job. It is possible that his resignation would have been returned stating that his specialty was a needed one.

He certainly did NOT refuse the promotion to Major, a field-grade designation.

Somewhere in this thread is a comment about one of the bedrocks of Islam: Muslims do not kill other muslims. Hmmmm. Doesn't seem to slow the car/truck bombings in busy markets does it? Muslims kill muslims all the time.

What you might try to do is contact some of the orderlys who worked for this man at Walter Reed. Perhaps they could fill you in on what this guy was really like.

[montanto]

34. Hmmm

Japanese Americans were put in concentration camps during WWII. On the other hand, The U.S. was a predominantly christian country when it went to war with Germany, another christian country, and Italy, yet another christian country. We've been to war with people like us a million times. We even killed our own christian brothers exclusively during the civil war.
I have never known christians to lack heart for killing each other for whatever reason, and it seems that muslims are not constituted any differently. The conflicts within islam are just as bloody as any christian vs. christian conflict imaginable.

BTW, Your post script is a different issue entirely. A muslim going to war against another muslim and an Italian-American going to war against Italy are not comparable scenarios. Put it this way, if I'm an ex-pat American living in Morocco, I wouldn't go to war against the U.S., no matter what. But if I'm a christian American ex-pat in Morocco, I wouldn't have a problem fighting other christians.

[Brooklyns_Finest]

35. Absurd

Your post is the most insulting thing I have read in a long time here. I signed up for the Marines when I was 18 years old, back in 1996. At that time, I knew that someday I might be called to war. If you do not want to go to war do not join the military. If you don't mind going to war, but don't want to fight Muslim countries, don't join the military. If you are already in the military, but don't want to fight in a Muslim country, well, tough shit. Your only way out is refusing to go and then an other than honorable discharge.

By the way, first and foremost, the military is not here to attend to the "special needs" of individual groups. Everyone has to go through the same ordeals. That is where the camaraderie is formed. In the Marine Corps, it is mission accomplishment first, then troop welfare.

Also, who are you to tell Muslims in the military how THEY need to be treated? Yup, that is what they want, some white man telling them that they need special treatment. Please, give that shit a break. The only thing Muslims in the military need is to be treated equally. They should be neither targeted for, nor given extra assistance due to their religion.

[Bonobo]

36. Tell the dead soldiers and their families how insulting my post was.

[Brooklyns_Finest]

45. What is your point?

The guy was a terrorist. If he did not kill all of these soldiers on base, it would have been a group of civilians in a mall.

I know plenty of Muslim people. A few in the military and many in the civilian world. These people are not looking for pity or extra help. They just want to be left alone.

[Bonobo]

50. He was not a terrorist.

He was a pissed off guy who was in terrible conflict who snapped.

Yes, he had mental problems. But NO ONE used any common sense it seems.

It was KNOWN that he was starting to flip out and had strong ideas about the 'war on terror'.

Why was it ignored?

Because people like you state that no special consideration should be given to circumstances. That's idiotic and it resulted in mass-murder.

[Glorfindel]

37. They are soldiers. They should go where they are sent and obey orders.

Christian American soldiers killed plenty of their fellow Christians in Europe in both world wars. They bombed and otherwise destroyed lots of churches, cathedrals, convents, and monasteries. To say that muslims must be treated "differently" is absurd. It is also insulting to them and to their fellow soldiers. If they feel incapable of fighting against their co-religionists, they should refuse, go AWOL, or desert and be ready to suffer the consequences of their actions.

[Bonobo]

38. "To say that muslims must be treated "differently" is absurd."

At THIS time, their position should be given consideration.

In another war, others positions should be given consideration.

Pragmatism. Sensitivity. These are not curse words.

[MattNC]

40. Equally

If any soldier begins the extremist rhetoric and actions we saw from Hasan, they should undergo a thorough investigation, and any pending deployment should be put on hold. Voicing disagreement with the war among colleagues is fine, but what Hasan was doing clearly crossed a line. But we don't need a separate policy for Muslims. Don't see what's so complicated here.

[Xenotime]

43. Sensitivity is a good idea. There is a horrible lack of understanding on our part.

[trayfoot]

47. I don't see it this way.......

I don't see Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Buddhis, Atheist soldiers - I just see soldiers. If you believe in the Separation of Church and State, I don't believe you reason according to religious affiliations. This is the problem with a philosophically sectarian populace - everything is framed in terms of religion.

[uppityperson]

53. Separation of Church and State.

Sending off people to fight in a Holy War against people simply because they are of a religion is different than sending people off to fight against people because of the country they are in.

I see issues with fighting Holy Wars against a religion, can see how people (depending on their religions) would have a problem with it.

However, the invasion/occupation of Iraq & Afghanistan is based on money and oil, with the peoples there being incidentally a different religion than the majority of the USA are. So, treat each soldier the same. Should any christian have been let out during WW2 from fighting in Europe simply because they were fighting people of the same religion? No. Same now.