Should victims of the Fort Hood attack receive Purple Hearts?

Congress has changed the criteria for Purple Heart recipients, expanding eligibility to include service members killed or wounded in a terrorist attack that was inspired or motivated by al Qaeda or another U.S. State Department-designated foreign terrorist organization, and one prior to which the attacker was in communication with the terrorist group. Should the Fort Hood victims be considered for the distinction and associated financial benefits?

Fort Hood soldiers unarmed by command in a worldwide war on terror, earned their Purple Hearts when they were shot by terrorist Nidal Hasan.

Command, especially the president, deserves the strictest punishment. Soldiers were unarmed on bogus concerns about discipline and safety, when command knew that our bases were targets. Unarmed soldiers did resist.

If a soldier is wounded by the enemy during a war, even if he is a noncombatant at the time and not in a recognized combat zone, and the enemy violated the laws of war, the wounded soldier earned the Purple Heart. This includes soldiers who don’t bleed but receive permanent internal injuries from IED’s.

— Edwin T. Lee, Fort Worth

For this former Vietnam combat soldier it is difficult to imagine standing in line at a clinic at Fort Hood being described as participating in combat.

Maj. Hassan, a mentally unstable officer decided that shooting U.S. soldiers was his religious duty. That makes him a nut case, not an enemy soldier.

Overcoming the fear of being wounded or killed in combat requires real courage. Texans who display a Purple Heart license plate have our highest respect.

How sad for those who earned a Purple Heart in combat.

— James M. McCollough, Arlington

Giving aid to non-fighting victims like at Fort Hood is absolutely the right thing to do. However, the means utilized were not justified.

Lawmakers should have created a new law that offers benefits for certain tragedies and kept far away from marginalizing the historically important Purple Heart honor given to victims in active fighting.

— Patrick Jenkins, Arlington

These men and women have sustained more hardship and humiliation from their own government than a gun-wielding radical could ever do.

For five years, these military members have endured not just the loss of income and benefits, but also the humiliation of being all but ignored because the Obama Administration and its minions care more about politics than justice.

Most shamefully, these victims have had to watch while a self-described radical with known ties to terrorist organizations has received the very things they themselves were denied due to its classification of “workplace violence.”

If nothing else, these Purple Hearts should be granted because of the wanton actions of their own government.

— Dorothy Blackman, Fort Worth

I have mixed feelings about service people in a non-combat area receiving the Purple Heart.

My dad received a Purple Heart because he was killed in WWII in Normandy.

There should be a different way for the folks injured or killed in non-combat zones to receive benefits for their service above and beyond, but a Purple Heart?

— Maurice Smith, Fort Worth

While the criteria for award of the Purple Heart has changed over the years, the basic intent of the award is to recognize those wounded in action against an enemy force.

Those wounded by terrorists on friendly soil should not qualify for the award. They should be given similar benefits, however, only without the medal.

— Clyde Picht, Fort Worth

No, the victims of the Fort Hood shooting should not be awarded Purple Hearts.

While they were serving their country, these men and women were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

— Lee Rogers, Fort Worth

I think there needs to be another award for those killed or injured during the 9-11 terrorist attacks and the Fort Hood attack.

What happened to them demands that we recognize the injuries and deaths, but we run the risk of diminishing what the Purple Heart stands for: “Combat Injuries and Combat Deaths.”

On my DD214 I was awarded three Purple Hearts for combat wounds in RVN.

I think I speak for many military members when I say another award needs to be created for those injured or killed in such terrorist attacks.

— John T. Martin, Fort Worth

A soldier puts their life on the line to protect our freedoms and workplace violence does not qualify the wounded to be awarded a medal just to satisfy the whims of modern society.

It does not matter whether the person or persons were in the military or not, what matters is that we might have a soldier somewhere in the middle of a field, bleeding and unable to save himself.

What matters is that that soldier was there because he was protecting our right to be free.

Let us not award someone at the office getting caught in a fire fight.

— Victor Santiago, Crowley

This story was originally published December 22, 2014 at 11:57 AM with the headline "Should victims of the Fort Hood attack receive Purple Hearts?."