Thought Piece: Is it a war crime?

Marauder06

Marauder06

Intel Enabler
Verified SOF
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
12,959
Location
CONUS
Most of you know (and all of you should know) that US Army major Nidal Hasan is on trial over allegations that he shot and killed or wounded dozens of his unarmed Army colleagues at Fort Hood, Texas.

For this thought piece, assume that the JAG attorney currently prosecuting Hasan is contemplating abandoning charges under the UCMJ, and is contemplating charging Hasan with war crimes instead (this is NOT really happening). If you want to participate, simply respond to this thread with "I'm in," and I will assign you to debate a side of the following statement:

"The crimes committed by Nidal Hasan were committed while he was acting as the agent of Al Qaeda, an organization currently involved in a global conflict with the US. As such, his actions are such that he should now be charged with War Crimes as defined by the International Criminal Court and the United Nations."
Click to expand...

Points of View:
1) Hasan's actions can be considered war crimes.
2) Hasans's actions are not war crimes.

Here is a link to details of the shooting
Here is a link to what constitutes "war crimes"

Important details:
1)If you want to participate in this exercise, your first post in this thread should be, "I'm in" or something related. After that, I will assign you to one of the two points of view above. You can request to be assigned 1 or 2, but that doesn't mean you'll get it.

2)You are not allowed to provide an opinion in this thread unless you have previously been assigned a point of view by me. I assign points of view so not everyone chooses one over the other and to keep the level of outside commentary down. If you comment on something related to the topic without being assigned a point of view first, I'm just going to delete your post. Sidebar commentary (i.e. "peanut gallery" comments) are allowed from people not participating in the debate, but providing your own opinion or substantively commenting on the posts of others participating in the debate is not allowed unless you, too, are in the debate as defined above.

3) Me assigning points of view means that you may have to debate this topic from a point of view that is different than what you currently believe. THAT IS THE POINT OF THIS EXERCISE.

4) You do not need to caveat your posts with something like, "I don't believe this in real life" or words to that effect. That immediately undermines your argument and taints everything you say afterwards. If you do that, I'm going to delete your post. Act like you believe it; you'll do better research and make a better argument. There will be plenty of time to say what you really believe later.

5) We have done several of these exercises in the past, and people learn a lot. So keep it civil, keep it fun.

... and with that, game on!
 
JAB, HoosierAnnie and goon175 - I changed the rules after you three made your initial posts (see above). I thought all of you had good points but to keep this thread on track I soft-deleted what you wrote. I'm assuming that because of your earlier posts you're "in," so you're the first to be assigned points of view and can now make your arguments in support of the POVs listed below. If you don't remember what you wrote initially, let me know and I'll PM it to you. Goon, sorry but I hard-deleted your post, my bad brother, I hope you remember what you wrote.

POV 1:
JAB
dirtmover
CDG

POV 2:
HoosierAnnie
Goon175
SOWT
 
From Wikipedia:
Nidal Malik Hasan, USA (born September 8, 1970) is a United States Army officer and sole accused in the November 5, 2009, Fort Hood shooting, which occurred less than a month before he would have deployed to Afghanistan.

Born in Virginia to parents who moved to the United States from a Palestinian town near Jerusalem,[5] Hasan joined the Army while in college and became a psychiatrist at Fort Hood, Texas. Prior to the shooting, Hasan had expressed extremist views which had been brought to the attention of his superiors and the F.B.I. Hasan was discovered to have exchanged emails with the late Imam Anwar al-Awlaki asking for spiritual guidance regarding violence. Al-Awlaki has since been linked to other attacks by radical Muslims, and he quickly blessed the Fort Hood operation because it was against a military target. Al-Qaeda spokesman Adam Gadahn also praised the "Mujahid brother" as a "pioneer, a trailblazer and a role-model.

The attack was described by a Senate report as "the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil since September 11, 2001."General Jack Keane testified before a Senate committee that his first reaction was "...just how unacceptable the military’s failure to deal properly with Major Hasan’s radicalization to violent Islamist extremism was."
Click to expand...

Okay I am using this as my opening supporting “research” and I also firmly understand that Wikipedia is not a 100% accurate source. However, I do believe the content quoted above to be accurate.

I think that Maj. Hassan was sleeper operative of the AQ network, through his close connection to al-Awlaki. I also think that through his connections to AQ, through al-Awlaki and with the understanding of al-Awlaki’s further direct involvement in other attacks on American forces/people throughout the world. That it sets a clear example that Maj. Hassan, joined the US Army with the intent to not support the war efforts against AQ or AQ-I. I also belief that his ability to situate himself as Medical Officer of psychiatry, allowed him to further conduct espionage type activities, under the radar of the general counterintelligence apparatus. He was able to interview “combat veterans” directly home from the war, and was most likely exposed by proxy to classified/sensitive information on many levels.

Furthermore, we know that he remained in contact with his handler al-Awlaki, via email (and possibly through other means of communication) and was under investigation by the FBI almost 6 months prior to his attack on FT Hood. I think this paints the picture that Maj. Hassan was in fact a AQ operative, and was working with a know AQ cell leader al-Awlaki.

Also from Wikipedia:

While the west remains divided on the question of Hasan's motives, many individuals and groups supported the operation in Islamist terms. After the Fort Hood shooting, on his now temporarily inoperable website (because the web hosting company took it down),[125] al-Awlaki praised Hasan's actions:[126]
Nidal Hassan is a hero. He is a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people.... Any decent Muslim cannot live, understanding properly his duties towards his Creator and his fellow Muslims, and yet serve as a US soldier. The U.S. is leading the war against terrorism which in reality is a war against Islam....
Nidal opened fire on soldiers who were on their way to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. How can there be any dispute about the virtue of what he has done? In fact the only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the US army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal.
The heroic act of brother Nidal also shows the dilemma of the Muslim American community.... The Muslim organizations in America came out in a pitiful chorus condemning Nidal's operation.
The fact that fighting against the US army is an Islamic duty today cannot be disputed. No scholar with a grain of Islamic knowledge can defy the clear cut proofs that Muslims today have the right—rather the duty—to fight against American tyranny. Nidal has killed soldiers who were about to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan in order to kill Muslims. The American Muslims who condemned his actions have committed treason against the Muslim Ummah and have fallen into hypocrisy....
May Allah grant our brother Nidal patience, perseverance, and steadfastness, and we ask Allah to accept from him his great heroic act. Ameen
Click to expand...

Maj. Hassan’s attack on unarmed soldiers was a war crime:

Lawful conduct of belligerent actors

Modern laws of war regarding conduct during war (jus in bello), such as the 1949 Geneva Conventions, provide that it is unlawful for belligerents to engage in combat without meeting certain requirements, among them the wearing of a distinctive uniform or other distinctive signs visible at a distance, and the carrying of weapons openly. Impersonating soldiers of the other side by wearing the enemy’s uniform is allowed, though fighting in that uniform is unlawful perfidy, as is the taking of hostages.
Click to expand...



He wore our uniform, to gain intelligence and position to attack, at which point he:

Main article: Fort Hood shooting
In the Fort Hood shooting, on November 5, 2009, a gunman reportedly shouted "Allahu Akbar!" ("God is greatest")[76][77][78] and opened fire in the Soldier Readiness Center of Fort Hood, located just outside Killeen, Texas, killing 13 people and wounding 29 others in the worst shooting ever to take place on an American military base.[4]

Sergeant Kimberly D. Munley encountered the gunman exiting the building in pursuit of a wounded soldier. Munley and the gunman exchanged shots; Munley was hit two times: once in her thigh and once in her knee, knocking her to the ground.[79] In the meantime, civilian police officer Sergeant Mark Todd arrived and fired at the gunman. The gunman was hit and felled by shots from Todd.[80][81] Todd approached the gunman and kicked a pistol out of his hand. Hasan was placed in handcuffs as he fell unconscious.[82] The incident lasted about 10 minutes.[83]

He was to be deployed to Afghanistan, contrary to earlier reports that he was to go to Iraq,[84] on November 28. Prior to the incident, Hasan told a local store owner that he was stressed about his imminent deployment to Afghanistan since he might then have to fight or kill fellow Muslims.[85] According to Jeff Sadoski, spokesperson of U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, "Hasan was upset about his deployment".[86]

Hasan gave away furniture from his home on the morning of the shooting, saying he was going to be deployed on Friday.[87] He also handed out copies of the Qur'an.[88] Kamran Pasha wrote about a Muslim officer at Fort Hood who said he prayed with Hasan on the day of the Fort Hood shooting, and that Hasan "appeared relaxed and not in any way troubled or nervous". This officer believed that the shootings may have been motivated by religious radicalism.[89]
Click to expand...

So Maj Hassan, calmly, took off that uniform, put on his jihad outfit, loaded up his weapon, concealed it, went and prayed and used his military status to access a group of unarmed soldier, and proceeded to shoot them down in cold blood and was only stopped when he was shot and incapacitated himself. He has since maintained a Pro-AQ statement, and has continued to voice his beliefs in completing his mission for god aka AQ.

Just going off of the modern laws of war, he is guilty of war crime's, but to get real clear, "Murder" is covered under the modern laws of war, and at least we can all agree that he did do that.
 
In November of 2009 Maj Nidal Hasan fatally shot 13 and wounded 32 others at the Ft Hood medical processing center where, in his role of clinical psychiatrist, he was assigned to counsel service members both pre and post deployment. The JAG prosecutor intends to argue that the crimes committed by Maj Hasan were committed while he was acting as the agent of Al Qaeda, an organization currently involved in a global conflict with the US. As such, he should now be charged with War Crimes as defined by the International Criminal Court and the United Nations. This argument intends to prove that the actions taken by Maj Hasan, while premeditated and prosecutable under the UCMJ, are not war crimes.

While it is conceded that Maj Hasan did indeed, at minimum, maintain an email correspondence with a known al-Qeada sympathizer, the late Imam alAlawaki, nothing beyond Hasan’s seeking spiritual guidance in regard to violence has been proven in court. Maj Hasan is noted on numerous other occasions to have struggled with the conflicts of his Muslim faith and serving in the US military. No concrete link between al-Qeada and Maj Hasan has been established to date.


The crux of this entire argument hinges on establishing the actions as war crimes. For an action during an international conflict, as the prosecution maintains this is, to be deemed a war crime, then one of six conditions must be met:

The following acts as part of an international conflict

    1. Directing attacks against civilians
    2. Directing attacks against humanitarian workers or UN peacekeepers
    3. Killing a surrendered combatant
    4. Misusing a flag of truce
    5. Settlement of occupied territory
    6. Deportation of inhabitants of occupied territory
Only one, "directing attacks against civilians" could have any possible bearing on Maj Hasan's actions. Many of the eyewitness accounts of his actions that day specifically point out that he seemed to be scanning the occupants of the room, passing over those obviously in civilian dress. In fact of the 13 killed, only 1 was a civilian.
At this point, this argument will make a counter assertion. That the actions of Maj Hasan are in fact not war crimes at all. Rather it is asserted that they are terriorist attacks on US service members by one of their own.
The FBI defines domestic terriorism as "the unlawful use or threat of force or violence by a group or individual based entirely in the US without foreign direction, committed on persons or people to intimidate or coerce the government of civilian populace thereof in furtherance of a political or social agenda".
Three international incidents, all with proven al-Qeada connections, the Mar '04 Madrid train bombings, the Jun '05 London bombings and the US Dec '01 Richard Reid "shoe bomber" have all been termed terriorist actions. Mr Reid was tried and later convicted in US Fed Court of "8 counts of terriorism". Even the US Senate's own report into Maj Hasan's actions have termed them "the worse terriorist attack on US soil since Septenber 11th."
The actions of Maj Hasan on that November day will be proven to be premeditated acts of extreme violence against his fellow service members. However reprehensible those actions are, they are not war crimes but more appropriately the acts of a domestic terrorist.
 
Compliments to both JAB and HoosierAnnie for thoughtful and well-researched pieces. I think both of you have great points. I have to go to bed soon but I'm looking forward to seeing how this thread develops and I hope more people get involved in the discussion.
 
To show Maj. Hassan’s crimes are in fact “war crimes” we only need to prove the following:

· That the acts he carried out were against the laws of war.
Murder is the easiest one to prove.
· He was bound by the laws of war.
All US Military personnel are bound by the laws of war.
· He was fully aware of the laws of war.
He was trained annually on the laws of war, as required by all US Army personnel.
· That he was free of any mental defect.
The hardest IMHO to prove at this point without knowing the particulars to the evidence being used in his trial. However, many mental health professionals have stated on the record that he was carrying out a radical Islamic attack and that was not due to his mental health.
· That he made a clear minded decision to break the laws of war.
I think the fact that he was observed by many as he gave away his furniture, took time to go pray and stroll on up to FT Hood. And that the people who all observed him and all agreed that he looked calm and collected, even some stated he seemed totally relaxed, proves that he was in fact. Clear headed and fully aware of the crimes he was about to commit.
 

Similar threads

Marauder06
War Books: Professional Writing and the Modern War Institute
Replies
2
Views
499
Marauder06
Marauder06
Marauder06
Thought Experiment: The Political/Media Complex
Replies
13
Views
981
ThunderHorse
ThunderHorse
B
A gun that doesn’t allow anyone but you or other allowed people to fire it.
Replies
8
Views
394
Vulky
Vulky
Blizzard
New Officers: Are We Getting Our Best and Brightest?
Replies
9
Views
746
Devildoc
Devildoc
BlackSmokeRisinG
Major Heists, Murders, and Other Unsolved Crimes
Replies
3
Views
304
AWP
AWP
Back
Top