In the wake of the Ft. Hood tragedy, I keep hearing about the need for diversity in the military. As a resident of San Diego, I've heard "diversity" used to justify everything from campus riots to illegal immigration, and I'm rapidly growing tired of the term.

 

It's been close to 40 years since my Recruit Training experience, but it seems to me that diversity was one of the things the training attempted to eliminate, or at least minimize. Wasn't one of the points of shaving our heads, sticking us in uniforms, and generally treating us all like dogs to force us to forget our differences and bond as a unit? Isn't that what we want in a fighting unit? Or has political correctness taken us to the point where all opinions and voices must be heard and considered before the unit acts on its orders. What's next? Maybe voting on wether to carry out orders would be a good idea, after an airing of all diverse viewpoints of course.

 

God help us all.

 

Buddha

I place the blame of the Fort Hood incident squarely on the "diversity" zampolits, and the commanding officers afraid to cross them. The warning signs were there, Major Hasan already had the attention of the FBI. Some of the statements that he made should have been enough to strip him of his commission and send him to the brig under UCMJ. Yet he was on the presidential transition team. Was he on the radar then? If so, why was he allowed within any proximity to the then President-Elect?

I saw on the news this morning that the Imam at this nutcase's mosque was in Yemen due to being kicked out of Saudi Arabia for being too radical. Having lived in the KSA for 6 years, I can tell you he must really be around the bend for that to happen.

 

Buddha