So after thirty years, neither of you guys seem to have any feelings of betrayal or upset from the way you were treated and weren't bitter at all. And of course that would blow my theory completely out of the water, because it was predicated on people actually having severe and long-lasting reactions to stuff like this that might last for long periods of time, and which might cause somebody to feel large amounts of resentment and bitterness.
I sympathize with both of you. At least one of the reasons that you didn't have members of the 442nd going off in this fashion is that they were not being sent to fight the Japanese, which might have caused similar conflicts; or perhaps not, of course, because I really don't know, any more than you do.
As for troops from Vietnam, I spoke of those in a different context than you are using here, that is, as a bunch of folks who were on the receiving end of unjustified ill treatment. I felt that at the time and I still feel that today. Your belligerent response is understandable, of course, and in many ways is one of the common responses of people who've been on the tough end of prejudicial comments. In your case you quote some, which I won't repeat here. It doesn't sound like you're happier with them now than you were at the time.
This would be one of the things you and Major Hasan would have in common, being on the butt end of nasty comments with minimal connection to reality.
Major Hasan went on to change that. You didn't.
One other distinction between you and the Major is that both of you, as I understand it (correct me if I'm wrong) served overseas in combat, and Major Hasan did not. My understanding is that combat troops by and large are a much more disciplined bunch of people, less given to such things, than are less experienced troops. So the example you would be searching for is sort of an apples and oranges sort of thing, combat troops versus non-combat troops.
The example you'd be looking for is probably more famously portrayed in the incident at Kent State, where a detachment of National Guardsmen killed five students. I don't know what the number of wounded ran to, if any. If you wanted to look at returning soldiers, you might consider Tim McVeigh, who killed 168 government workers in attempting to start a race war by following the scenario laid out by the Right Wing White Supremacist novel The Turner Diaries. The casualties were higher, the right wing christian fundamentalist religion connection seemed to be fairly direct and it was a terrorist attack. That flowed out of the First Gulf War, as I recall.
McVeigh, if I understand correctly, was hoping to get the administration to use the army to crack down on right wing gun owners to get the gun owners to rise up in a civil war. The fact that there were no large number of military folk killed (were there military inside the building at the time? I don't remember) if any was not the point. Had McVeigh had his way, large numbers of them would have been.
McVeigh could have had a V-8 instead.
If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, then it's — a terrorist?, a religious nut?, a man who felt he had nothing to loose?, a guy with secondary PTSD? — what?
Which of these is your "Duck," John? All of them? part of them, something I haven't thought to mention yet?
Or are you simply using the word "duck" as a semantically meaningless placeholder for something approximating a political thing you loathe but don't know how to describe?
I don't see anybody saying Major Hasan is a swell fella, and one that you ought to raise your kids to emulate. So what are you trying to say?
It sounds like you're trying to say that only a Muslim could be this bad. If you're saying that, I disagree with you. It sounds like you're saying that nobody else has done stuff like this before. If you're saying that, I disagree with you. It sounds to me like you're saying that only Major Hasan bears responsibility for this. If you're saying that, I disagree with you. I won't say that he shouldn't be tried, and that the amount of his responsibility shouldn't be determined, and that appropriate action shouldn't be taken. It should be.
To lay all responsibility at Major Hasan's feet, however, is irresponsible, because it leaves the institutional conditions that can lead to this sort of thing in the future untouched. Even if you wish to focus narrowly on the good of the service — and this is not a bad place to focus, though limited — it's a good idea to be able to see where the service can change policy to make incidents like this less rather than more likely in the future.
And Mike, you're talking about Kerry and Obama. I happen to find both guys interesting, but I think you forgot the Millard Fillmore connection. I think all three of them were talking with the Illuminatti about the xyz affair. Please, fill me in on how this all ties in with Ralph Peters vs. Deadly Political Correctness when you get a few moments. Inquiring minds are waiting with bated breath.