So I'm watching the news reports on this story, both from MSNBC and also on FOX (for comedy's sake)...and I noticed that both stations failed to talk about the big elephants in the room. The first one of course is religion, which I don't need to go into here, since everyone here can easily see that bunch of blatant insanity.

The other elephant that no one is bringing up is why Mr. Psycho was in the military in the first place. He was clearly not happy, since he faced discrimination because of his name and religion. So why would he place himself in that hostile atmosphere which led to his eventual breakdown?

Well he wanted an education, he wanted to make something of himself. And here in the great nation of America, if you want to get a decent education you have to go into massive debt. The cost of college in the US grows every year, it pales in comparison only to healthcare, but don't get me started on that subject, that's a whole different rant.

Our system encourages young men and women to join the military, since it helps pay for college. I think this is a flawed system, for I don't view the military as a particularly honorable institution. The military fights wars for economic interests, not for the things it tries to convince people it cares about, things like humanitarian aid and protecting innocent people from not so innocent people.

If the military were concerned with protecting lives and doing away with 'evil' people, then we would have invaded Darfur and not Iraq. It's obvious to anyone with half a brain that our invasion of Iraq (using our invasion of Afghanistan as a prelude) was done for many reasons, but the primary ones had nothing to do with protecting innocent people or revenge for 911.

Hasan disagreed with our illegal occupation of Iraq and dreaded being sent there, but he knew this was a consequence of the decision he made to 'serve'.

Why won't anyone point out that in other countries college education is provided to citizens that prove they are working hard towards graduating? If the USA were as enlightened as other countries in this respect, Hasan could have chosen a career that he didn't fundamentally oppose. Why does our country saddle people with this debt?

Views: 125


You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by Nate on November 14, 2009 at 7:36pm
No nation in the world (that I know of) is so naive as to believe they don't need some form of defense against agressive nations.

Costa Rica's decision to do away with its standing army has worked out pretty well. It's kept them out of regional conflict and allowed them to devote more resources to education and cultural development.
Comment by Sarah Elle on November 11, 2009 at 6:12pm
Interesting post, I wonder the same things myself. Thanks, I enjoyed reading this, I hope to see you write more here!! :)
Comment by VendettA12 on November 7, 2009 at 9:29pm
And? Our presence there incites at least as much violence as we prevent, so I fail to understand what the point of staying is.
Comment by VendettA12 on November 7, 2009 at 5:14pm
My complaint isn't against having a military. I am not naive enough to think that countries shouldn't have armies. My issue is with the military industrial complex. Eisenhower was right, he saw this coming decades ago. If our military were actually defending us, I would see it as an honorable institution. Right now we are occupying a country that did not attack us. There is no honor in this. If you think there is, then please explain what the difference is between an Iraqi "insurgent" and an American "patriot" during the revolutionary war. If the British were wrong to occupy and unjustly rule the colonies, then why is it magically right for us to occupy and unjustly rule Iraq and Afghanistan? Because a few dozen terrorists attacked us? So the entire Middle East pays? That's disgusting.



Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service