Please point out the domestic policing duties.moga said:Personally, I've suspected it since the story in the Army Times about the Third Infantry Division being reassigned to domestic policing duties broke a while back. Many that voiced concern were labeled as tin-hatters then. Now it doesn't seem so implausible.
I say we attack!!! Oh wait...what do *you* plan to do about it?kestak said:http://www.theblaze.com/stories/pentagon-has-been-war-gaming-for-economic-disaster-since-early-09/
What do you plan to do? Sit on your butt and wait?
There are exclusions that apply. One of them is that the President may call upon Federal forces to put down a rebellion per the Insurrection Act of 1807 .18 USC Â§ 1385. Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus
Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
10 USC Â§ 331. Federal aid for State governments
Whenever there is an insurrections in any State against its government, the President may, upon the request of its legislature or of its governor if the legislature cannot be convened, call into Federal service such of the militia of the other States, in the number requested by that State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to suppress the insurrection.
10 USC Â§ 332. Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority
Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.
10 USC Â§ 333. Interference with State and Federal law
The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if itâ€"
(1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, 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 are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or
(2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.
In any situation covered by clause (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.
10 USC Â§ 334. Proclamation to disperse
Whenever the President considers it necessary to use the militia or the armed forces under this chapter, he shall, by proclamation, immediately order the insurgents to disperse and retire peaceably to their abodes within a limited time.
That comment is from recollection; I'd have to search here I guess for the original story. I remember your participation in a series of discussions involving the subject. Just curious: are you disputing whether 3ID were assigned to a domestic role, or are you objecting to the use of policing? Because, in honesty, I used the latter colloquially, but I don't believe that it constitutes a misuse of the word.gruntpain1775 said:Please point out the domestic policing duties.moga said:Personally, I've suspected it since the story in the Army Times about the Third Infantry Division being reassigned to domestic policing duties broke a while back. Many that voiced concern were labeled as tin-hatters then. Now it doesn't seem so implausible.
The placing of 3rd ID on those operations were not "policing", as in conducting LE Operations. The mission was to provide support in the event of an Emergency. That emergency could be a terrorist attack using Nuclear, Biological or Chemical weapons, Natural disasters, etc. The Army has a huge source of equipment and resources that LE, National Guard or any civil/private entity out there. They are also able to provide such support as medical personnel and facilities on short notice in the event of something such as I listed above. They have the resources to set up and operate housing facilities for displaced persons, can feed them, supply them with fresh water, even have the resources to generate electricity for an entire town (Like Atlanta).moga said:Then there is www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/pub890.pdf+known+unknowns+unconventional+strategic+shocks&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiH-Tn5wRZTjBW3J2_3afVSNM3j-7REsGYTVXluFvF6PULkyfzSA_UJq1GY87jms9gUB3QeesjSfVpG3iYZDeavkmR1ZWIWwfkAOdhz623TfXRFvz9qCYSMPq1hcWxS5SCXmPbt&sig=AHIEtbQu3hGAaf3GggMtYqu-R_A46fOiZg]this tidbit of bedtime reading[/url] to consider
Also the Army Times story of Sept 8 2008 in which Northcom announced but later retracted that the 3ID would be aimed at tackling "civil unrest and crowd control." I'll see if I can locate a copy of the story in its original form.
Washington Post: 20,000 More US Troops To Be Deployed For "Domestic Security"
US Army Field Manual FM 3-19.15, Civil Disturbance Operations
Taken together, that sure fits the general idea of domestic policing to me.
The LA riots, as I mentioned above. And yes, the NG is subject to the governors orders for that state. Point I was making was the resources the Army have far exceeds the capabilities of the Guard.moga said:BTW, has their ever been a riot or civil unrest that any states' NG couldn't control? Just curious, as I don't know the answer.
EJR914 said:Karl Denninger is the real deal. He knows what he's talking about, and I wish our government and Fed would listen to him more, but there is no way that is ever going to happen.
I am not among those who fear the people. They, and not the rich, are our dependence for continued freedom. And to preserve their independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debts, as that we must be taxed in our meat and our drink, in our necessities and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses; and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and potatoes; have no time to think, no means of calling the mis-managers to account; but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers. Our landholders, too, like theirs, retaining indeed the title and stewardship of estates called theirs, but held really in trust for the treasury, must wander, like theirs, in foreign countries, and be contended with penury, obscurity, exile, and the glory of the nation.
â€œThis example reads to us the salutary lesson, that private fortunes are destroyed by public as well as by private extravaganceâ€¦.A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for a second; that second for a third; and so on, till the bulk of the society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery, and to have no sensibilities left but for sinning and suffering. Then begins, indeed, the bellum omnium in omnia [war of all against all], which some philosophers observing to be so general in this world, have mistaken it for the natural, instead of the abusive state of man. And the fore horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression
+1moga said:For the rest of us, we have to use powers of deduction to figure out what to expect using the crumbs that we find in the public domain and by keeping a keen eye on what's happening around us. What most citizens see unfolding economically and politically doesn't look or feel very good. The additional news of the Army getting ready to control crowds and quell civil unrest just doesn't come as a comfort given the current state of the union. History shows that the combination of the two usually turns out badly for members of the public.
Nope. Read my past posts. Thanks for this post, kestak.kestak said:http://www.theblaze.com/stories/pentagon-has-been-war-gaming-for-economic-disaster-since-early-09/
What do you plan to do? Sit on your butt and wait?