Military folks and whoever else wants to speculate

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Why did I read this in the Army Times? Does anyone have any insider info on why we're having a combat team here? Why Oct. 1? In time for... what, exactly? Twelve months? Why? Just to see if we like seeing combat boots on duty patrolling our streets? Has this ever happened before in peacetime?

 

Am I just being paranoid to find this strange? What the heck?

[shell in SC]

Don't know why, but I do have some insight into the timing. The fiscal year runs 1 Oct-30 Sept. So funding could be an issue. Lots of new money is available 1 Oct that wasn't available the day before.

 

Just my take on it. . .now if I could just get the "why" figured out:confused:

[Guest Virginia Dawn]

It doesn't make sense to me. The national guard is supposed to protect, maintain security and help with national disasters at home. But of course many guard units are not being allowed to do their job in the U.S. and have been deployed.

 

It was slightly creepy to read that. I'll have dh take a look at it.

[hsmamainva]

I have no idea! Very interesting.

 

Where's my tinfoil hat and colander??? :willy_nilly:

[In The Great White North]

It was OK til they mentioned crowd control with non-lethal weapons.

 

Emergencies and natural disasters are Guard missions, not active duty. Since Guard units keep getting deployed and we keep having disastrous hurricanes, I could see why Homeland Security might want one "on call." Since it apparently counts as "down time" instead of deployed time, the troops are NOT going to like it. They have too much to do in their "down time" already.

 

I have a vague memory of it being illegal to use US military forces as a domestic police force on US soil, but I'll have to look it up. Think I'll start with the Constitution.

[Parrothead]

I have no idea! Very interesting.

 

Where's my tinfoil hat and colander??? :willy_nilly:

:iagree:

[Apiphobic]

NorthCom? NorthCom? Sounds familiar. Does it have something to do with Blackwater? (Caution: Bush/McCain supporters may not want to click on this.)

 

Went to google Northcom and Blackwater. Found an interesting summary at The Internet Post called "Here to Stay, 14,000 Strong and Armed With Non-Lethal Weapons - America, Meet Your New Local Military." (Caution: Palin is mentioned in this piece and not in a positive light.)

 

This from the site: "Our blog covers world news on a varity of topics that we feel the main stream media in the US doesn’t cover." Just for clarification, I think this site is a Ron Paul supporter from what little I've read.

 

I did notice the piece lambasting Frank about the Fannie Mae connection.

 

I also noticed the roll call on votes for and against the bill "(t)o amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide earnings assistance and tax relief to members of the uniformed services, volunteer firefighters, and Peace Corps volunteers, and for other purposes (emphasis added).

Edited September 30, 2008 by Apiphobic
missing comma

[asta]

Ya'll do know that we have combat troops stationed all over the United States, right?

 

Everyone is freakin' on this because of the way it is being portrayed in the press. Yet the 82nd Airborne is stationed in NC, the 101st Airborne is stationed in KY; we've got troopies all over the place.

 

Where did you think they lived/worked when they weren't deployed?

 

 

asta

 

 

PS: NorthCom is short for Northern Command. It doesn't have jack to do with Blackwater, which is a private security firm. The US also has SouthCom, PacCom (Pacific), SOCom (Special Operations) EUCOM (European Command) and AfriCom (Africa). If anyone is interested in the military commands of the US, Jane's Defence is a good place to learn.

Edited September 30, 2008 by asta

[Slartibartfast]

Ya'll do know that we have combat troops stationed all over the United States, right?

 

Everyone is freakin' on this because of the way it is being portrayed in the press. Yet the 82nd Airborne is stationed in NC, the 101st Airborne is stationed in KY; we've got troopies all over the place.

 

Where did you think they lived/worked when they weren't deployed?

 

 

asta

 

 

The 101st and 82nd are STATIONED here, they do not DEPLOY to the US. (well..they did during Katrina but that was a mess) that is a completely different situation.

 

IMO this is National Guard territory and I don't like it "State's Rights blah blah blah blah"

Edited September 30, 2008 by Sis

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Ya'll do know that we have combat troops stationed all over the United States, right?

 

Everyone is freakin' on this because of the way it is being portrayed in the press. Yet the 82nd Airborne is stationed in NC, the 101st Airborne is stationed in KY; we've got troopies all over the place.

 

Where did you think they lived/worked when they weren't deployed?

 

 

asta

 

 

PS: NorthCom is short for Northern Command. It doesn't have jack to do with Blackwater, which is a private security firm. The US also has SouthCom, PacCom (Pacific), SOCom (Special Operations) EUCOM (European Command) and AfriCom (Africa). If anyone is interested in the military commands of the US, Jane's Defence is a good place to learn.

 

Yes, I do, actually. I'm a military wife (retired now). But that's not what this is.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Don't know why, but I do have some insight into the timing. The fiscal year runs 1 Oct-30 Sept. So funding could be an issue. Lots of new money is available 1 Oct that wasn't available the day before.

 

Just my take on it. . .now if I could just get the "why" figured out:confused:

 

That's the first thing I said to my dh for the "when," too: Fiscal year.

 

I remember wondering if we would get paid in Oct when the budgets were delayed, lol!

[Mamagistra]

Thank you for posting this, Alpha P. And remember: just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you. ;)

 

:bigear:

[hsmamainva]

Thank you for posting this, Alpha P. And remember: just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you. ;)

 

:lol:

[Mrs Mungo]

The 101st and 82nd are STATIONED here, they do not DEPLOY to the US. (well..they did during Katrina but that was a mess) that is a completely different situation.

 

IMO this is National Guard territory and I don't like it "State's Rights blah blah blah blah"

 

But I think the mess after Katrina is exactly why this is being implemented. I know some of the people who were sent down after Katrina. They were sent too late and not were not ready, capability-wise.

 

Yes, it is supposed to be the job of the Guard and Reserves but too many of them are deployed and they can't be relied upon.

 

I agree that the Guard and Reserve should be used only for their intended purpose but then we don't have enough soldiers to support OEF, OEF-P, OIF, GWOT, etc.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

My FIL is a fire chief who has been involved with the fire service on a national level for many years. He is currently upsetting folks by pointing to the list of activities that the fire service has said they will do in the case of a homeland security crisis and saying that there are not enough people in the entire fire service to do all those missions (not to mention enough trained people, equipment, compatabilty of communications etc).

 

We have a tendency to look to the military to solve the impossible problem. In one way, it is an incredible complement to the military that they are seen as so capable. It is an arm of the government that most people view favorably (in terms of ability to do their job well) even when they dislike how government runs other things.

 

This is one reason why we tend to talk about change in terms of war (War on Poverty, War on Drugs).

 

But you can't ask the military to come in and do something like enforce an evacuation, patrol against looters or quarantee in case of pandemic without giving them the skill set to do that.

 

So I don't view it as an attempt to get the military more involved in homeland missions. I see it as a recognition that they are already called on and need to be ready with an infrastructure and training to do those jobs.

 

[bTW, it is a role that not all in the military are comfortable with either. This article was published by the Army War College quarterly over 15 years ago. It envisions a possible disastrous outcome to overreliance on military competence for missions that should rest in other quarters. It is fiction, along the vein of 1984. It is not anyone's plan of action.]