Pentagon to detail military

[JohnP]

I just got back this morning and am catching up on the new when I caught these excerpt in the Washington Post:

Pentagon to detail military to bolster security
Plan would dedicate 20,000 uniformed troops inside U.S. by 2011.

The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by 2011 trained to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe, according to Pentagon officials.

The long-planned shift in the Defense Department's role in homeland security was recently backed with funding and troop commitments after years of prodding by Congress and outside experts, defense analysts said.

There are critics of the change, in the military and among civil liberties groups and libertarians who express concern that the new homeland emphasis threatens to strain the military and possibly undermine the Posse Comitatus Act, a 130-year-old federal law restricting the military's role in domestic law enforcement.

Last month, McHale said, authorities agreed to begin a $1.8 million pilot project funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency through which civilian authorities in five states could tap military planners to develop disaster response plans. Hawaii, Massachusetts, South Carolina, Washington and West Virginia will each focus on a particular threat -- pandemic flu, a terrorist attack, hurricane, earthquake and catastrophic chemical release, respectively -- speeding up federal and state emergency planning begun in 2003.

U.S. forces are already under heavy strain, however. The first reaction force is built around the Army's 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team, which returned in April after 15 months in Iraq. The team includes operations, aviation and medical task forces that are to be ready to deploy at home or overseas within 48 hours, with units specializing in chemical decontamination, bomb disposal, emergency care and logistics.

Am I missing the obvious here?

[PhilK]

So, will this 20,000 be in addition to the Civil Support Units we already have?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...my/wmd-cst.htm

Plus several states are already creating Joint Interagency Task Forces within thier National Guard units to ensure that there is a streamlined response between several state agencies to natural disasters in the state or neighboring states.

[JohnP]

The article is vague on your question of this being an addition to the units in place. I copied more of the article to see if it could give you a better answer.

The Pentagon's plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces to be ready for emergency response by September 2011. The first 4,700-person unit, built around an active-duty combat brigade based at Fort Stewart, Ga., was available as of Oct. 1, said Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., commander of the U.S. Northern Command.

If funding continues, two additional teams will join nearly 80 smaller National Guard and reserve units made up of about 6,000 troops in supporting local and state officials nationwide. All would be trained to respond to a domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive attack, or CBRNE event, as the military calls it.

Military preparations for a domestic weapon-of-mass-destruction attack have been underway since at least 1996, when the Marine Corps activated a 350-member chemical and biological incident response force and later based it in Indian Head, Md., a Washington suburb. Such efforts accelerated after the Sept. 11 attacks, and at the time Iraq was invaded in 2003, a Pentagon joint task force drew on 3,000 civil support personnel across the United States.

My problem with the whole item it using active duty to to a National Guard job and the possible infringement into Posse Comitatus. After the 1st Gulf War, there was a war declared on drugs. They activated sever Air and Army National Guard Units to patrol the borders along with Border Patrol. This was done strictly to stay within the gray area of Posse Comitatus. (As of October 2008 funding in TX was no longer available to this. Hence the Guard is no longer on our borders.)

[PhilK]

Originally Posted by JohnP

My problem with the whole item it using active duty to to a National Guard job and the possible infringement into Posse Comitatus. After the 1st Gulf War, there was a war declared on drugs. They activated sever Air and Army National Guard Units to patrol the borders along with Border Patrol. This was done strictly to stay within the gray area of Posse Comitatus. (As of October 2008 funding in TX was no longer available to this. Hence the Guard is no longer on our borders.)

But, our Counterdrug Program is still going strong. (http://www.agd.state.tx.us/cd/)

The plus up of the Border Patrol using Guardsmen was a nice PR event, but most of our people sat behind desks to free those agents up to go out.

Plus once you get into the whole Title 10 vs. Title 32 issue...things get interesting.

EDIT: Thanks for posting the rest of the article, it does give a little clearer picture of what is going on.

[JohnP]

I miss the units that were out in this part of Texas. They provided me a chance to communicate with the outside world. Does Camp Mabry still have "Headquarters of the Army of the Republic of Texas" on its entrance?

Now back to the meat...

There is still an inherent problem of using Active Duty to do a National Guard job. I've been into Title 10 and Title 32. They were developed not to violate Posse Comitatus but still leave the Guard to defend and respond to emergencies within the borders of its own states.

[03_SHOOTER]

Link to Washington Post Story

My thought on this is that the training of troops for supplemental assistance in a time of emergency is a prudent action given existing Title 10 authority for using Federal troops in case of "Major Public Emergencies".

Title 10, Section 333

Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law

(a) Use of Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies.—

(1) The President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to—

(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that—

(i) domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order; and

(ii) such violence results in a condition described in paragraph (2); or

(B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrection, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition described in paragraph (2).

(2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition that—

(A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or possession, as applicable, and of the United States within that State or possession, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or

(B) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

(3) In any situation covered by paragraph (1)(B), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.

(b) Notice to Congress.— The President shall notify Congress of the determination to exercise the authority in subsection (a)(1)(A) as soon as practicable after the determination and every 14 days thereafter during the duration of the exercise of that authority.

As far as concerns about Posse Comitatus, that is addressed in the following;

Title 10, Section 375 USC

Restriction on direct participation by military personnel

The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that any activity (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.

None of this is to say that I do not find the prospect "unsettling", merely that the authority to do so has existed for quite some time now (predating 9-11), and therefore it comes as no real "shock" to me. Also, given the widespread damage that the use of WMD's would cause should they be utilized in an attack, and the fact that most, if not all, of the civilian "first responders" in the area would be disabled along with the rest of the population, as well as the fact that very few, if any, civilian "first responders" from any nearby region would have the training and equipment to be able to handle an emergency of this type, the use of properly trained and equipped Federal forces from outside the region is only prudent. Let us all pray however that none of us ever see a time when their use would be necessary.

EDIT: Also, none of this is to say that I would not much prefer that each State have it's own WMD response teams, each fully capable of assisting in an attack, if for no other reason than those personnel from a State will be much more familiar with the terrain and people of their own State, as well as being reassuring to the victims that it is "their own friends and neighbors" who are taking care of them, and not some "outside force" invading their Sovereign State.

[PhilK]

Originally Posted by JohnP

I miss the units that were out in this part of Texas. They provided me a chance to communicate with the outside world. Does Camp Mabry still have "Headquarters of the Army of the Republic of Texas" on its entrance?

Heh....

No. I guess they took that down before I got stationed here.

The entrances and exits have chabged so much since 9-11 that I'm not sure what the arch says anymore.

[JohnP]

Too bad, it gave the old post a splash of color.

[JohnP]

"under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law."

From your active duty days, as a line troop, were you taught "Shoot, Don't Shoot", or were you trained to "Shoot to Stop the Action?" I admit there was some cross-training with civilian law enforcement, but the bulk of the training was to eliminate a threat. National military units, ie line troops, should be taught the fine arts of war. Putting the man with the bayonet on top of the hill to control the terrain.
The National Guard should be used as it was intended, as the primary emergency response for the state first and as supplemental force for active military second.

[03_SHOOTER]

Originally Posted by JohnP

"under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law."

From your active duty days, as a line troop, were you taught "Shoot, Don't Shoot", or were you trained to "Shoot to Stop the Action?" I admit there was some cross-training with civilian law enforcement, but the bulk of the training was to eliminate a threat. National military units, ie line troops, should be taught the fine arts of war. Putting the man with the bayonet on top of the hill to control the terrain.
The National Guard should be used as it was intended, as the primary emergency response for the state first and as supplemental force for active military second.

I agree fully, and was merely pointing out the fact that the provisions were already in place under Title 10 for the use of AD personnel to assist civilian LEO's and disaster relief teams should the need arise.

In a perfect world, I would love to see the entire AD component of the DoD (sans the Department of the Navy, as it is specifically enumerated in the Constitution) reduced to pre-WWII levels, and have the bulk of the money and resources taken up by the Air and Army National Guards, answerable only to the Governor of their respective States unless they were called up under Title 10 authority should the nation be attacked.

Then again, if I had my way, each State would still mandate an ACTIVE Militia, and that "all able bodied males, between the ages of 17 and 45, to age 64 if they had served in the Armed Forces" would be required, by law, to present themselves, with their privately own weapons (that are "part of the normal military issue" as per US v Miller), ammunition, and full accoutrement's, for a one day training session every other weekend, and at least two one-week sessions of "active" duty per year.

Using your Texas as an example, if the "active Militia" were enforced as per the Militia Act of 1789, that would mean that Texas would have a minimum of 4.75 MILLION members of the Texas Militia, under arms, and ready to report at a moments notice. There are 1,254 miles of border between Texas and Mexico, which means that even if you put one member of the Texas Militia every 100 ft. (average) along the entire border in 8 hour shifts, it would only take 66,211 to completely cover the entire border per shift, or 198,633 per day, or a total of 15 days per Militiaman, per year on the border.