POV: A Vietnam Vet's response to the Ft Hood attack

From my friend Mike:

It was an act of terror and our illustrious leader, our commander in chief, small c and small c, will not use the word terror in his lexicon, had it down-played immediately because he knew it was a Muslim. The FBI determined it was not an act of terror immediately, and they were not even on the scene. In fact, the FBI was not covering up, but rebranding what the attack was called. News this morning is validating my impressions.

The politicians already knew, so they tried to dispel our reaction to the news we would get ultimately. As the evening has evolved, we have learned he is a radical, and was reported for his comments, and nobody would deal with him for fear of the impact on their careers. That was implied, but career officers live and die with the political will in D.C. and the upper echelons of a treacherous bunch of people in our government. Those of us left with our heads in our hands in Nam, in the Gulf, and now in Iran and Afghanistan, know what that means. Since 2006 this country has softened its stance on defending itself from terrorism in many ways. The training camps on our own soil have grown and the cells are often observed but not shut down, even to and including the very radical Muslim school in Alexandria, Va.

His cousin says he is a good American and is trying to paint him as a PTSD sufferer. Then he should not have been a counselor. We paid him to be a doctor, and paid for him to go to college. He preached against fighting his Muslim brothers and said outright that Muslims should rise up against the aggressors here in this country. He praised the shooters in Little Rock for killing the soldiers at the induction center. I do not believe his family should be blamed, but they do not know him like those who lived with him in the Army. If he could not stand hearing harsh stories he was in the wrong business. He should not have decided to be a doctor. Cry me a friggin' river.

He is a terrorist by definition. The dictionary says that is " to carry out a threat of terror, an act of violence, or intimidation, or subjugation, demoralization, by force...one who terrorizes..." He killed a bunch of unarmed people. Just like a person with an IED, or a dirty bomb, or a satchel bomb, or any other weapon capable of killing multiple targets, he killed and intended to kill more than one person.

Mass---- a large quantity or number. How many does it take to make a number large? More than one? Is twelve dead and 31 enough to qualify for "mass?" It is for me. That is why I get sick of hearing the news, and the politicians blow smoke about no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iran. What the hell is a chemical weapon...bomb, rpg, cannon and ammo, rockets, automatic weapons that are drum fed, ad infinitum? Are they intended to kill one person or lots of persons? That is the most stupid comment I have ever heard. The people willing to give the order to use the damned weapons on other human beings, like Saddam, on his own people or any other people, are the real weapons of mass destruction.

Destruction---- the act or process of destroying; demolition or slaughter.

The guy was a terrorist. I may be nuts, but he killed 13 and wounded 30. He fits the definition. He was a damned Muslim. They were unarmed. We are at war. He did not want to fight the enemy. He is a traitor. How should he be treated? Obama will want his ass kissed just like he wants to kiss the ass of those at Gitmo.

I ask you why?

Michael D. "Moon" Mullins
Vietnam Veteran, Delta 3/7, 199th Light Infantry, '68-'69.