Fort Hood Shooting: Workplace violence or Terrorist attack?

[Naxere]

This trial is scheduled to wrap up in the near future. How could this possibly be considered workplace violence rather than a terrorist attack? These soldiers that were injured should be afforded the same level of care as those wounded on the battlefield.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Hood_shooting
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...ce-by-u-s.html

According to eyewitnesses, Hasan had taken a seat at an empty table and bowed his head for several seconds when he suddenly stood up, shouted "Allahu Akbar!" and opened fire.

According to testimony from witnesses, Hasan passed up several opportunities to shoot civilians, and instead targeted soldiers in uniform. These soldiers were not allowed to carry personal firearms on the base due to military policy. At one point, Hasan reportedly approached a group of five civilians hiding under a desk. He looked at them, swept the dot of his pistol's laser sight over one of the men's faces, and turned away without firing.

But the Purple Heart has been denied the soldiers who were killed or wounded at Fort Hood. And, because they were classified as victims of simple calamity rather than of combat, they and their families have been denied the accompanying benefits. A number of them say they have not even been able to secure adequate care for their wounds.

During the first day of the trial on August 6, Hasan—who was representing himself— admitted that he was the gunman during the Fort Hood shootings in 2009 and stated that the evidence would show that he was the shooter. He also told the panel hearing that he had "switched sides" and regarded himself as a Mujahideen waging "jihad" against the United States.

[Spectral]

How could this possibly be considered workplace violence rather than a terrorist attack?

Because it was violence. That occurred... in a workplace.

[Deleted]

Hang on, serving soldiers were wounded on their own base, and they are not being given adequate care for their wounds? How can people stand for that?

[Spectral]

Hang on, serving soldiers were wounded on their own base, and they are not being given adequate care for their wounds?

Note that the phrasing is "a number of them say ____", not that it's factual.

[zephid]

I would classify it as workplace violence and not a terrorist attack. I do however think they should get adequate care, which is something everyone should get.

[Naxere]

I would classify it as workplace violence and not a terrorist attack. I do however think they should get adequate care, which is something everyone should get.

I'd argue if the guy says he "switched sides" and now considers himself a Mujahideen waging jihad, at that point it becomes a terrorist attack.

[Spectral]

I'd argue if the guy says he "switched sides" and now considers himself a Mujahideen waging jihad, at that point it becomes a terrorist attack.

I'd regard that as an illegal act of war, not as terrorism. While some definitions of terrorism includes attacks on militaries, this seems to me to dilute the word into meaninglessness.

[TooMuch]

Everything is a terrorist attack these day

[Deleted]

If it was a terrorist attack it was the worst thought out one in a very long time, it caused people to distrust muslims in the military even more, if a Major can turn on you, why not that new guy that has been here for 6 weeks?

[zephid]

I'd argue if the guy says he "switched sides" and now considers himself a Mujahideen waging jihad, at that point it becomes a terrorist attack.

Not every attack in a war is a terrorist attack. For me terrorism are attacks directed specifically at civilians to create panic and fear.

[Elegiac]

I'd regard that as an illegal act of war, not as terrorism. While some definitions of terrorism includes attacks on militaries, this seems to me to dilute the word into meaninglessness.

Oooh, that means treason, yes? Levying War against the United States?

[caractacus]

Everything is a terrorist attack these day

True, there is probably some new workplace law the government wants rushing through.

A question; so if an American soldier goes crazy and kills a load of Afghan civilians is that a terrorist attack too?

[Spectral]

Oooh, that means treason, yes? Levying War against the United States?

I guess I hadn't thought about it, but I'd be fine with calling a soldier that shoots up a bunch of other soldiers treasonous, particularly if his own statements indicate that it was intended as a strike against the military.

[Deleted]

True, there is probably some new workplace law the government wants rushing through.

A question; so if an American soldier goes crazy and kills a load of Afghan civilians is that a terrorist attack too?

Technically yes, but good luck getting them to admit it.

[Spectral]

A question; so if an American soldier goes crazy and kills a load of Afghan civilians is that a terrorist attack too?

I don't really see why it wouldn't be.

[Naxere]

A question; so if an American soldier goes crazy and kills a load of Afghan civilians is that a terrorist attack too?

It's happened. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...97J04120130820

[caractacus]

It's happened. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...97J04120130820

Yea I remember it vaguely that's why I brought it up, I just wondered if it would be classified as terrorism although it does appear that, after researching, there is no clear definition.

[zephid]

It's happened. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...97J04120130820

And not once was the words terrorist or terrorism used. How surprising...

[smelltheglove]

If it was a terrorist attack it was the worst thought out one in a very long time, it caused people to distrust muslims in the military even more, if a Major can turn on you, why not that new guy that has been here for 6 weeks?

objectively not a bad plan actually. if muslims feel ostracized they wont serve in the military, and a few might get their feelings hurt enough to join the cause. fucked up, but still a strategy that can pay off. this was never about "let muslims and american people be friends", it was totally about creating an "us and them" type of division

[Deleted]

objectively not a bad plan actually. if muslims feel ostracized they wont serve in the military, and a few might get their feelings hurt enough to join the cause. fucked up, but still a strategy that can pay off. this was never about "let muslims and american people be friends", it was totally about creating an "us and them" type of division

A better long term plan would be to use infiltrators that will leak information, something that is much more difficult to do since this Major shot the place up.