What do you think about muslim psychiatrists in the army?

Post Reply New Topic

John Browning wrote:

Yes, I agree, and don’t forget the ones with ties to the Militia movement as well.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing

Assuming that Timothy McVeigh did it, which I strongly doubt, that would make 1 act of domestic terrorism from the militias in the last 14.5 years (which McVeigh did not act as a member of one), which makes it an isolated incident. In reality the government has something to hide about that bombing. Militia members in the military are harmless as long as their commanding officers do not use them against the American public. Muslims don't have such a good track record.

why does it matter if the psyhciatrists are Muslim or not.

Makes me think we should let gays in the military.

Is it me or are there many posts "Questioning the Muslim faith" ?

The question everyone should be asking is, "Should your child be teaching YOU?"

What a bloody stupid post!! !! a better question would ask what do you think of the support given to psychiatrists in the military. As far as we know this man had spent the last five years talking to returned soldiers, hearing their stories, seeing the major f**k up that deployment to a war zone had caused, then he himself is ordered over there. Is it any wonder his brain snapped.

whether or not he called out to god during his massacre of US troops is insignificant, what is important is why after years of service he cracked.

Indeed christian, muslim, hindu, jewish, celtic etc I would be suspicious of anyone trying to sort out the tangled morass that is my mind if they themselves thought that praying to a non existent supernatural being could improve their life

As a psychiatrist they may appreciate the placebo effect?

Hmm an interesting contradiction

A muslim psychiatrist in the US army today is like having a Lutheran Psychiatrist in the USA army in wwii- its no issue it all- despite the fact that we were fighting the largely Lutheran nation of Germany.

However it is coming to light that the man was not only a muslum but also an islamist who spouted jihadist sentiments- and that that all somehow slipped under the Army's radar.

If this turns out to be true it would be like having an army psychiatrist in WWII going around with a swastika armband and saying 'heil hitler" - and having the amry ignore it.

Except that all of that is almost completely propaganda BS, and the majority of that news about his religious beliefs and jihadist sentiments was on Fox News. The military is exceedingly quick and paranoid whenever anyone starts talking that way and acts normally quite overboard. You simply cannot classify a single person as a terrorist simply because of their religious background no matter how scared, how much BS is spouted, how much people say everything with this is wrong because a single person is still a single person. You have to take it on a case by case basis because that is humanity.

Using religion to say someone is automatically a terrorist is the exact same thing as saying every catholic priest rapes little boys, every buddhist monk is super martial artist master, and every jew is insanely good with money.

Football players are big and strong. Black people are big and strong. Therefore every football player is Black. (American football)

Exact same logic, exact same fallacy.

All of the stories about his sympathy towards terrorists that I've heard have come from the Associated Press and now they are saying that he had financial dealings with clerics in Pakistan.

I think he was just nuts. Shrinks usually are crazy themselves anyway.

The fiercest warriors in Western history were the Spartan hoplites who formed homosexual bonds. Guys who buggered each other also watched each other's backs in battle.

I would not mind having an army of warriors with the bravery and skill of the 300 who held the Persian masses at bay for three days at the Hot Gates. I could care less that they had homosexual bonds. If anything these bonds made them better warriors.

ruveyn

The Spartan hoplites were so tough because they did not fear death.
Like the japanese Samurai and the Knights Templar.

That would account for individual bravery. Now why did the Spartans fight co-operatively and in a manner to mutually defend their comarads? Partially because of the personal bonding promoting by homosexual practices.

The family that lays together, flays together.

ruveyn