Some of my recent thoughts have wandered around two recent American Military trials, with different circumstances and outcomes.
These contrasting cases are those of Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan and Army Staff Sargent Robert Bales. Major Hasan was an American Muslim who killed American soldiers. Sargent Bales was an American Christian who killed foreign Muslim civilians. Hasan was sentenced to death and Bales was sentenced to life in prison.
Is the lesson from this that the Army (and American Society) values American lives more than others, or that an American killing Muslims is less wrong than a Muslim killing Americans? Of course it is more complicated than that; but certainly these are possible perceptions of the different outcomes of these trials.
On November 5, 2009, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, went on a rampage at the Military Base in Fort Hood Texas, killing 13 and injuring 30 others. He was wounded during his attack and became a paraplegic. Major Hasan had become increasingly radicalized by hearing stories told by returning troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. He corresponded with radical Islamist Cleric Anwar al-Awlaki (killed by a U.S. drone strike in September 2011). Major Hasan stated that he considered himself to be a “Soldier of Allah” and undertook the attack to further Isalm.
At the conclusion of his Military Trial on August 28, 2013, Major Hasan was sentenced to death.
This caused me to reflect on the recent outcome of the Military Trial of Staff Sargent Robert Bales, who on August 23, 2013 was sentenced to life in prison.
On March 11, 2012, Staff Sargent Robert Bales made two separate late night sorties from his base in Fort Lewis, Kandahar, Afghanistan to two villages where he killed 16 people and wounded 6 others. Nine of his victims were children. Sargent Bales pleaded guilty in his Military Trial and was sentenced to life in prison. At the time of his conviction Sargent Bales said that he did not know why he killed the civilians. This verdict outraged many people in Afghanistan who believed that he deserved death.
The U.S. Government accepted responsibility for Sargent Bales’ actions by paying $860,000 in compensation to the families of those who were killed and the survivors.
By contrast, the Army has not accepted responsibility for the actions of Major Hasan and the families of his victims are suing the Army for negligence.
I believe that nothing can undo the devastation caused by the violence in both of these cases. I also believe that the U.S. Government should accept responsibility for both cases and offer compensation.
I wonder why death is appropriate in one case but not in the other? Is killing anyone ever justified? I believe that further killing only debases us and does not bring justice and healing – but most other people in this country do not agree.
What do we gain from our recent wars abroad? Are Iraq and Afghanistan better off after thousands upon thousands of deaths? Does our violence blow back on us in unforeseen ways?
I have not reached comforting conclusions from my thought experiment comparing these two cases. I am left with too many questions with out clear answers and lingering feelings of fatigue and sadness.
I look to others for encouragement that our efforts to promote peace and understanding will bear fruit someday.
Randy Best
Leader, Ethical Huamnist Society of the Triangle
