Questions I have after reflecting for a day:

1. His Chain of Command. Why was he being forced to deploy when (already in hindsight) their were numerous signals he was unfit, and a danger to other troops? It flows into the larger issue of the stress placed upon the services, particulary the USMC and Army, to provide the forces necessary for two wars, plus our other ongoing responsibilities. While I've seen this occur with rifle units, where Marines on the edge, who really shouldn't go back, do because there is no magic "Dr's note" and the units are under stress to find the bodies to flesh out their numbers. Haven't seen/heard it as much as a few years ago. But few realize it spreads beyond just the grunts. Two years ago, a Navy psychiatrist gave me the percentage of doctors the Navy was short in his profession. I don't want to quote the percentage because I can't recall the exact number, but it was shockingly, shockingly low. They did not have the bodies to offer the necessary services. Whether the Army psychiatry corps was similiary understaffed, and whether that caused them to cut corners and force this person to deploy when he should have been seperated from service is a question that needs to be asked.

2. Was this jihadist/religious/political statement, a result of the mental trauma from working with (it appears, but not confirmed by any means) numbers of troops with PTSD, another mental condition, or a combination of these factors? I've seen first hand how draining it is, both mentally, morally and physically on the providers who help these soldiers, sailors and Marines. It is not a figment of imagination or "physcho babble" as some idiot JAG was referring to last night on Larry King. It's real. But whether that was a contributing factor should be of interest if no other reason than...

3. What will be his reply to whatever charges are brought in court (military or civilian TBD)? If he really has been working for an extensive period of time with PTSD troops, undoubtably he has heard some disturbing, highly disturbing stories. Would he seek to introduce evidence of this as some sort of mental capacity defense or as mitigation at any sentencing. Beyond the legal questions of his doctor/client relationship, what if he uses a trial to turn the "issue" somehow to the conduct of our troops during the war?

So early, but this could turn a truely awful event and drag it through all kinds of worse. I hope not.