OK, So the Federal Gov't Wants to Deploy 20,000 Troops Stateside for Security

[Waitone]

Lots of flapping around on the right and left.  I've read media reports which indicate the deployment is specialty capability units-CBW, nuke sniffers, and such.  Not being one who confuses media reports with reality I would like to see some original documents.

Current and ex-military/governmental types--what kind of government documents would I have to review to get a picture of what is really going on?

[Gewehr98]

I dunno.

You could always do a Freedom of Information Act request.

I will add, however, that nuke-sniffers have been traversing and monitoring the skies over CONUS since 1947 or thereabouts. 

Y'all just didn't know it. 

[longeyes]

Maybe time to raise the citizen militia issue...?

[Jeff B.]

From what I have seen here and there on the 'net, it is simply a commnad & control issue that is tasking one of the Brigades from Ft. Carson to be at Northcom's disposal in the event they are needed for support or disaster relief operations inside the Continental United States.  BTW, a Brigade is about 3,000 folks, attachments adn force structrue depedant.  A 20,000 man force would be about the size of the 101st Airborne with supporting Corps level units.

I don't think it is anything to be alarmed about.  Besides, the military is not what you need to worry about.  They know what the Constitution is about.  Its the various federal "law enforcement" agencies that have and continue to ride roughshod over the Constitution.

Jeff B.

[MicroBalrog]

Besides, the military is not what you need to worry about. 

I'm not sure the Founders would agree.

[Lennyjoe]

So what is the National Guards role then?

[longeyes]

It's nice to know that our Government has accepted the inevitability of nuclear attack by terrorists.  I feel much better now.

[roo_ster]

It's nice to know that our Government has accepted the inevitability of nuclear attack by terrorists.  I feel much better now.

They consider a nuke attack a reasonable trade-off to keep border & port security lax so as to allow illegal aliens to enter our country.

[longeyes]

They consider a nuke attack a reasonable trade-off to keep border & port security lax so as to allow illegal aliens to enter our country.

I believe you've nailed it; good thing we have our national priorities straight.

[Balog]

Anyone have a source for this? I've not seen anything about it.

Wouldn't this conflict with the whole Posse Comitatus thing?

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

ianal but i believe there is a conflict only if they perform law enforcement functions

[Modifiedbrowning]

I have no problem with this as long as all 20,000 are stationed on the Mexican border. Of course, that will never happen.

[MicroBalrog]

ianal but i believe there is a conflict only if they perform law enforcement functions

As far as I understand, the PCA only bars the US military from performing as a LE agency. There are ways around it, and it is only a law - in the sense that Congress can repeal or amend it, and has done so in the past.

[ArfinGreebly]

Prevents them from doing LE duties?

Not a problem.

They'll only be used to deal with them evil terrorists.

Y'all wouldn't be terrorists now, would ya?

[Waitone]

Rumor has it DoD et al issue a large report detail what/where/when/why.  No luck in finding it.

[Perd Hapley]

Response 1:  Wait, I thought Iraq had our military stretched to the breaking point.  How could this be true?

Response 2:  Haven't we been saying that we needed to move our troops out of Germany/Japan/Korea/wherever? 

 

[Gewehr98]

It's nice to know that our Government has accepted the inevitability of nuclear attack by terrorists.  I feel much better now.

Huh?

Who said they accepted the inevitability of that particular type of attack?

Sources, please.

I'm one of the guys who was tasked with flying those nuclear debris collection and analysis sorties over the CONUS. There are Army units tasked to do something similar, albeit at ground level, and we've been training for that possibility for over 50 years. 

There was no defeatist "accepting" of anything.  We were (are) a DoD capability ready to assist if the S quite literally HTF, and proceed to blow with the winds towards heavily populated areas.  Were we not ready to do our thing at the drop of a hat, the American people would be some sort of pissed off because we couldn't protect the populace against a domestic incident of terrorism.  Jeebus. You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. 

[Jeff B.]

I'm not sure the Founders would agree.

Well, I'm not sure the founders would agree with having a literal Federal Army made up of FBI, ATF, HSA, IRS and various and sundry other federal leo's that operate quite freely and with little or no responsibility or accountability for their actions.

Additionally, the US Military is not a monolithic force that is loyal to a leader or party.  If ordered to react to "internal disturbances", I feel the military would respond as ordered.  If/when it became apparent to the force structure (PVT to GEN) that they were being told to engage in either unconstitutional or illegal acts against the American public, at the very least you would see them sit on theri hands.  Not to go back to a weak arguement, but if you've not served in our military, you don't understand.  We really do have a "citizens" military with many, many very sophisticed folks from top to bottom that can think and analyze situations independently.

I stand by my statement that the US Military is not what is to be feared, but the Federal "law enforcement" agencies are.

Jeff B.

[longeyes]

Huh?

Who said they accepted the inevitability of that particular type of attack?

Sources, please.

Maybe you weren't listening to Ridge and Skeletor?  We have been in a reactive mode for years when it comes to WMDs employed here.  We have been told again and again to prepare for the worst--not told how to prepare for it, just to prepare.  Some of us would have like some public pronouncements aimed at possible perpetrators of catastrophe, warning them of dire consequences, even at the expense of political correctness.

And, let me add, there are people who believe that national disaster would be a great opportunity to impose authoritarian control over the nation as a whole.  I'm not saying I'm one.  Yet.

[MechAg94]

Didn't Washington send the army to put down a tax revolt? 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion

What was that about the Founding Fathers?

[buzz_knox]

Didn't Washington send the army to put down a tax revolt? 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion

What was that about the Founding Fathers?

For more recent examples, consider the dispersal of the Bonus Army in 1932 and Operation Northwind in/around 1960.

[RevDisk]

I'm one of the guys who was tasked with flying those nuclear debris collection and analysis sorties over the CONUS. There are Army units tasked to do something similar, albeit at ground level, and we've been training for that possibility for over 50 years. 

Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (WMD-CST's) are the primary DoD units for domestic WMD events.  On the ground, at least.  They're moreso a detection/evaluation/training unit.  Basically, they arrive, identify the incident, and then work with normal type units in dealing with whatever the incident requires.  During 'down time' (hopefully, all times) they train DoD elements on how to respond to NBC events. 

IMHO, I think it's a better approach for ground pounders than to take than full units being tied up with NBC specialization.  Let's face it, dealing with WMD's is uncommon for soldiers.  They shouldn't be untrained, of course, but overtrained has its downsides too.  Limited time/budget.


Nuclear Emergency Support Team is a Department of Energy team of eggheads and engineers that can be deployed anywhere in the world, but strictly for radiological incidents.

[MicroBalrog]

For more recent examples, consider the dispersal of the Bonus Army in 1932 and Operation Northwind in/around 1960.

So you're telling me the Anti-Federalists were actually right?

[taurusowner]

So you're telling me the Anti-Federalists were actually right?

Of course they were (mostly) right.  Pretty much every one of the bad things the anti-federalists said would happen, has happened.

[seeker_two]

They consider a nuke attack a reasonable trade-off to keep border & port security lax so as to allow illegal aliens to enter our country.

....and cheap Chinese goods for the local Wal-Mart...we can handle D.C. being nuked, but not having a Wii under the tree on Christmas morning would be a catastrophe....