MSNBC reports that Army Secretary John McHugh has ordered disciplinary action against nine officers who allegedly failed to take note of or action regarding behavior by MAJ Nidal Hasan prior to the Ft Hood shooting spree that left 13 dead and 32 wounded. The MSNBC report indicates that “non-judicial punishment” will be taken against the officers, but an Associated Press report indicates the actions will be administrative in nature.

12 Responses to “SECARMY orders disciplinary action against nine in connection with Ft Hood shootings”

  1. Butch Bracknell says:

    A step in the right direction. Hasan had his radicalization on display for months before this incident, and apparently peers and seniors turned a blind eye. I’m not suggesting a per se leadership culture defect in certain of the military support services, as things like this happen in line units, too (leadership and peer accountability failures — not massacres) — witness the debacle aboard the Enterprise two months ago which ultimately led to the relief and discipline of a handful of senior Captains and flag officers. But it certainly gives one pause about whether the tenets of military professionalism are alive, well, and robust throughout the force, not just in combat units.

  2. Bill C says:

    Of course, if anybody had said anything they would undoubtedly been labelet racist and written up for an EEO violation.

  3. Christopher Mathews says:

    Bill, that might be true if their remarks fell into the “eek! a scary Muslim!” category, but MAJ Hasan was apparently displaying more overt and specific behavior that should have given cause for concern.

  4. Dew_Process says:

    And, a good boost for the “insanity” defense!

  5. soonergrunt says:

    Judge Mathews,
    If any Army officer had ever said “eek!” about anything since getting commissioned, that would’ve been grounds enough for relief in my book.
    But to your other point, yeah, they should have done something when he was giving lectures about how Muslims in the US Army have a duty to go AWOL or refuse to deploy. I’m pretty sure they’d have had an iron-clad case for relief for cause after he started coming to work with the “I’m a Jihadi, ask me how!” button pinned to his ACUs.

  6. Ama Goste says:

    The other issue is that the military is desperate for docs, particularly those in the mental health field, and it sure doesn’t like to lose those the military has spent years (and tons of $$$$) training, no matter how bad.

  7. bill almett says:

    The lack of action here is a direct product of our touchy feely, PC culture that has made its dastardly way into the military. The PC pussies are responsible for this, not some poor schmoes who were trying to fight wars on one hand and not hurt someone’s poor, wittle feewings on the other. A pox on the the Army leaderships’ houses for this gutless decision to punish the end users of the Army’s broken PC product…

  8. Christopher Mathews says:

    BA, I think the point of the disciplinary action is to ensure that officers can’t shirk their individual responsibilities. Blaming the “culture” rather than the individuals for their actions … or lack thereof… seems to be exactly the wrong response.

  9. bill almett says:

    CM, their actions were influenced by the culture…that’s the point. The culture these days is to look out for the (pick your cause de jour). F the backers of this, and F the nutless wonders who claim to wear the brass these days…I piss in their general direction.

  10. Michael Korte says:

    As Judge Advocates, we have the ability and obligation to advise our Commanders on actions similar to the one these Officers faced. In my world, a Commander can tell me we’ve got a Soldier who is spouting off pro-jihad, ask us whether he can take action to prevent something like this from happening, and we can assist him/her in legal support that would do something about this Soldier without harming the Commander.

    I hope we reach that world someday. We don’t really have to throw our hands in the air and say “gosh, this daggone PC world is going to get us killed.” Help Commanders take the right action legally. And if the rules of the game prevent Commanders from taking the right action, work to change those rules so that they soon can.

  11. Charles Gittins says:

    These guys were trying to do something about Hasan. But higher leadership needed psychs to badly to cut their losses on one who was near graduation. This a sequelae of the Army COO program (Consideration of Others) that compels leaders not to be able to speak candidly to their personnel for fear of offending some minority. Mostly, the Army can blame is culture, not these guys one of whom had tried to have Hasan dropped from the program.

  12. Michael Keyes says:

    I’ve been out of the Reserves for 15 years now, but at the time I left, very few physicians, active or reserve, had any military training, even at the O-6 level. That was changing with the advent of field military units that were not just on paper, but if LTC Lakin is any example, the Medical Corps and BUMED are still not teaching military skills to the docs.

    I was halfway through Command and General Staff school when Desert Storm happened. None of the doctors in the active duty unit I was assigned to had even taken the Advanced officers course that outlined the basic command structure of a medical unit in wartime. (We did well because the commander had a lot of experience and one of the docs was a West Point grad in addition to my training.)

    I suspect that a lot of the push for docs to have more military training has gone by the wayside due to need. This may be one of the reasons that the duty to evaluate MAJ Hasan went by the wayside.