Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Congress is set to make victims of the 2009 Fort Hood shootings eligible for Purple Hearts and combat injury benefits after the Obama administration has denied them the status for the past five years.

House Republicans, working with the Democratic-controlled Senate Armed Services Committee, added a provision to the defense authorization bill that would give battlefield recognition for the victims of the deadliest attack on a domestic military installation in U.S. history. It passed on a voice vote with strong bipartisan support.

The measure, which is expected to pass Congress next week, also would end a five-year effort by Texas GOP Reps. John Carter, Michael Conaway and Roger Williams to give the victims the status, the Military Times first reported. Texas GOP Sens. Ted Cruz and John Cornyn introduced the bill in the Senate.

Link: Washington Examiner Article

My take?

Personally I'm all for this. They were wounded in the recognizance of an International Terrorist Attack (criteria 9 for potential award of the Purple Heart since 1978). Especially considering Hasan was a member of said international terrorist force, and the attack was planned in part with the help of Anwar al-Awlaki.

Language direct from SEVNAVINST 1650.1H* : (9) After 28 March 1973, as a result of international terrorist attack against the U.S. or a foreign nation friendly to the U.S.

The same language which allowed wounded crewmen of the U.S.S Cole, the victims of the Beirut Barracks Bombing, and 9/11 to get their due recognizance. This is not new policy, nor is it a diluting of the Purple Heart. This is recognizing the changing and fluid nature of modern warfare as we have for over thirty years. The only reason they weren't awarded prior, is political brinksmanship and so Dear Leader could avoid a black eye.

*Navy and Marine Corps awards manual

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Personally I'm all for this.

I also see nothing wrong with this.

Obama has to sign the bill still right....

Yeah, fingers crossed that he does one decent thing.

 Jihadin wrote:
Obama has to sign the bill still right....

Oh thank god I was worried someone wasn't going to find a way to make this partisan and let their personal feelings bubble up.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Obama has to sign the bill still right....

Oh thank god I was worried someone wasn't going to find a way to make this partisan and let their personal feelings bubble up.

I mention this before on the original Hasan thread

He has to acknowledge that "Combat" now exist in the US of A.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Yeah, fingers crossed that he does one decent thing.

If he veto it, Congress can still override it.

Is the court-martial still ongoing?

That's the only thing I could think off that might be a problem in my mind. What if (very unlikely event) he is found not guilty?

 d-usa wrote:
Is the court-martial still ongoing?

That's the only thing I could think off that might be a problem in my mind. What if (very unlikely event) he is found not guilty?

I guess it would depend on what exactly he was found not guilty for. But it wouldn't change the fact that the victims were all wounded in a terrorist attack, just that they couldn't pin the attack on Hassan specifically. The attack occurred, and the wounds are real. But I highly doubt they would revoke any awards that had already been given, if that's what you're asking.

 d-usa wrote:
Is the court-martial still ongoing?

That's the only thing I could think off that might be a problem in my mind. What if (very unlikely event) he is found not guilty?

Found guilty and sentence is death I believe

That's what I was wondering, if he is found guilty of anything other than a terrorist attack (or found not guilty at all) could that invalidate the award since you couldn't have a terrorist attack without a terrorist?

The other honest question I have is this: I think some of the folks here have complained that Obama shouldn't be able to say anything about this case (undue command influence I think?), so wouldn't him signing a bill saying "this was a terrorist" attack be considered the same if the court martial is still in progress?

An easy way to get around this would be to pass a bill with enough days left in session and not have Obama actually sign the bill.

Those are just some of my thought as a non-military person looking in. I do think that it was a terrorist attack and the wounded deserve the Purple Heart and any resources that come along with it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Is the court-martial still ongoing?

That's the only thing I could think off that might be a problem in my mind. What if (very unlikely event) he is found not guilty?

Found guilty and sentence is death I believe

That would solve all my concerns then, can't believe I haven't heard about the outcome!

 d-usa wrote:
The other honest question I have is this: I think some of the folks here have complained that Obama shouldn't be able to say anything about this case (undue command influence I think?)

That's old and busted. "Obama shouldn't say anything about anything that occurs in the US" is the new hotness.

Nevertheless this should have been rightly classified as domestic terrorism and any rewards and compensation due to the troops wounded should have been issued years ago.