The only thing worse than mass murder at a US military base is mass murder at a US military base followed by unwise comments from the nation’s top general. In my opinion, General Casey’s comments following the tragic events at Fort Hood made the situation worse, not better.
General Casey said: “As horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse.” In other words, taking action against potentially hostile members of the military because of their radical religious beliefs and extreme ideologies is worse than mass murder at Fort Hood.
It appears the nation’s top general has jumped aboard the runaway diversity bandwagon. The diversity bandwagon is the belief that we must be tolerant of all races, ideologies, and religions even if it means putting our own nation’s security and morality at risk. Enough already. Has Casey forgotten his history? Desperate times call for desperate measures.
During the early stages of WWII thousands of Japanese Americans were rounded up and put into camps. Sounds extreme, doesn’t it? But for many Americans living back then it wasn’t extreme. Were we living back then? Were we old enough to remember the fear the Japanese nation caused in America? If not, then perhaps we should not pass judgment on the government’s decision. Today we have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight which is that the camps were not needed. Yet we cannot fault the US government for taking what it saw as appropriate action against Japanese Americans during a time of national crisis.
During the mid 1800’s the US government sent thousands of soldiers to Utah to prevent Mormon uprisings. Johnson’s army settled in a valley southwest of Lehi called Camp Floyd. 20/20 hindsight says that the army was not needed, yet we cannot fault the US government for taking action. The government thought the Mormons presented a national security risk. I’ve visited Camp Floyd several times. When I look at the graves of the soldiers who died there during their stay at the camp, I harbor no resentment as a Mormon. They were doing what they felt was needed given the circumstances.
Today there are radical factions of Islam that are hostile toward the US government and the US Constitution. Given current circumstance, I think it appropriate to seek out members of the US military who might be sympathetic toward these radical factions. Those who harbor hostile feelings or actively affiliate with groups that are hostile toward the US should be retained until they are no longer a threat. Let history decided whether such actions were necessary. For now we’ll act in the interest of national security.
Anytime members of a particular race, religion, nationality, and ideology repeatedly demonstrate hostility toward the US government and the Constitution, it has given up freedoms and must subject itself to closer scrutiny. However, rather than take such tough measures, General Casey wants to move forward with the blinders on as if there are no problems. According to Casey’s bandwagon diversity, searching out potentially seditious soldiers is worse than the slaughter of American soldiers at a military base.
General Casey said: “As horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse.” In other words, taking action against potentially hostile members of the military because of their radical religious beliefs and extreme ideologies is worse than mass murder at Fort Hood.
It appears the nation’s top general has jumped aboard the runaway diversity bandwagon. The diversity bandwagon is the belief that we must be tolerant of all races, ideologies, and religions even if it means putting our own nation’s security and morality at risk. Enough already. Has Casey forgotten his history? Desperate times call for desperate measures.
During the early stages of WWII thousands of Japanese Americans were rounded up and put into camps. Sounds extreme, doesn’t it? But for many Americans living back then it wasn’t extreme. Were we living back then? Were we old enough to remember the fear the Japanese nation caused in America? If not, then perhaps we should not pass judgment on the government’s decision. Today we have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight which is that the camps were not needed. Yet we cannot fault the US government for taking what it saw as appropriate action against Japanese Americans during a time of national crisis.
During the mid 1800’s the US government sent thousands of soldiers to Utah to prevent Mormon uprisings. Johnson’s army settled in a valley southwest of Lehi called Camp Floyd. 20/20 hindsight says that the army was not needed, yet we cannot fault the US government for taking action. The government thought the Mormons presented a national security risk. I’ve visited Camp Floyd several times. When I look at the graves of the soldiers who died there during their stay at the camp, I harbor no resentment as a Mormon. They were doing what they felt was needed given the circumstances.
Today there are radical factions of Islam that are hostile toward the US government and the US Constitution. Given current circumstance, I think it appropriate to seek out members of the US military who might be sympathetic toward these radical factions. Those who harbor hostile feelings or actively affiliate with groups that are hostile toward the US should be retained until they are no longer a threat. Let history decided whether such actions were necessary. For now we’ll act in the interest of national security.
Anytime members of a particular race, religion, nationality, and ideology repeatedly demonstrate hostility toward the US government and the Constitution, it has given up freedoms and must subject itself to closer scrutiny. However, rather than take such tough measures, General Casey wants to move forward with the blinders on as if there are no problems. According to Casey’s bandwagon diversity, searching out potentially seditious soldiers is worse than the slaughter of American soldiers at a military base.
Continue reading at the original source →