It's already been reported that the man was a psychiatrist who was being taunted because of his background. It has also come out that he was effectively being forced to deploy to Iraq despite his attempting to not be deployed. He would have resented the taunting and, combined with his being forced to fight people of his own religion, may have found it too much to handle. That is potentially, if not in actuality, an explosive mix. He may have felt that his view was being run roughshod over and reacted more out of fear than anything else.

For everyone's sakes and FWIW, incidents such as these should make the US military look much more carefully at how they deal with people of very different cultural backgrounds. As has already been said on our media today, people should not be forced to fight who really do not want to. Better psychological testing is needed to identify those who are best suited to the task.

RobP,

Nobody is forced to join the US military and also you do not choose where and when you go. You know that before you join. Being taunted. I know all about that. I had to leave the situation, I did not stick around. If he had requested a release and that was denied maybe the US has some thinking to do. On face value at this stage just sounds like a cold blooded nutty murderer.

Robp

Yours is one spin that could be put on it.

Another could be that the US army's man management policies and procedures that could have eased this unsuitable recruit out of the service may well have been frustrated by possible allegations of discrimination or racism if any proactive action had been taken.

In a litigious environment, harassed management is sometimes compelled to bend rules and turn a blind eye to less than satisfactory performance from an employee rather than be subjected to the maelstrom of 'racism', 'sexism' or whatever victimhood accusations of an 'aggrieved' person.

Aside from that, it is a pity that some of the army's own guards were not carrying loaded firearms. It is a foolish policy that relies on contracted security guards and police to guard a military base.

Just talking about Australia, an ex-ADF friend of the family commented that when his company guarded an airport for a heads of government meeting, they were not issued with bullets and the breach blocks were also removed from their rifles. These were seasoned soldiers with overseas experience and it was during the heyday of a certain PM's fear campaign about terrorists. Maybe a few renditions of that tiresome dirge Advance Australia Fair would have been enough to hold a hardened terrorist at bay until the civvy cops arrived (and the cops then managed to call in the 'real' cops - the ones in the dark gear who can actually shoot a gun!).

This miserable bastard is obviously insane. No sane individual would start shooting innocent people indiscriminately anywhere - let alone on America's largest military base,

Stevenlmeyer's right again. What religion and ethnicity was Martin Bryant?

I agree with the general thrust of C J's concluding remark.

However I don't think that this perpetrator nor Bryant, nor (say) the Hilton Hotel bomber are/were insane and all exercised choice in committing their crimes. Bryant suffered from marginal IQ, the Hilton Hotel bomber was intelligent but very naive and idealistic, seemingly incapable of accepting the areas of 'grey' that are a natural part of life and this current perpetrator, well, he seems a different kettle of fish to the other two.

All we say with any certainty is that there is no way we can entirely remove risk from our lives (eg by bans) and isolated calamities will happen despite the best risk management strategies and best efforts of all. I believe it is the rarity of such events that should advise us that there aren't mad people everywhere waiting to wreak havoc if they get a chance (C J didn't say that or infer it might be the case).

What will happen now of course is that the media will continue to sensationalise this story to sell advertising, while the usual social commentators will make hay out of it for secondary gain. The politicians will feel obliged to enact some new law that does nothing except cost money and unnecessarily restrict normal, law-abiding people from going about their normal business.

Blaming religion be it -
Islam, Catholicism, Judaism, Protestantism,
Hinduism, or Buddhism, for the actions of
some of their followers is simply wrong.

Fundamentalists exist in all walks of life.

As far as the shooting in Texas is concerned -
I also read that the man was severely
harrassed by his fellow soldiers because of
his middle-eastern appearance. We read about
the consequences of bullying all the time -
who knows what kind of bullying trigged this
guy's meltdown. What happened is a tragedy -
but fear-mongering and blaming all Muslims -
does not honour the memory of those who died.

Further fear-mongering regarding the
Tamil boat people - reminds me of the "yellow
peril," fear that existed several decades
ago. It appears that some people simply need
to spread hatred and fear. This confirms the
fact that, "nothing in the world is more
dangerous than sincere ignorance and
conscientious stupidity."