EDITORIAL: Domestic military response

EDITORIAL: Domestic Military Response 12/2/08 Congress has erred badly by permitting presidents to usurp so many of its powers over the years, thus creating imperial presidencies. We like to think of our presidents as our Big Daddies, but absolute power corrupts absolutely. Also, imperial presidents are under tremendous strain. Often they have illnesses which they conceal from the public, and they take medicines which alter their judgment. The nature of today's power politics causes them to sell out the best interests of the country to gain or hold on to the presidency; a close reading of our political history is truly shocking. Therefore I think it would be bad business to keep a force of 20,000 troops on hand specifically trained to deal with "civil disorders," to be deployed at a moment's notice by the president whenever and wherever he sees fit. On this one point, I agree with the ACLU. However, if the federal government still has any slight interest in discharging its primary duties, it will bring back those 20,000 troops; train them thoroughly in border-defense tactics; arm them suitably; deploy them on our nation's southern border; and seal that border against any but lawful traffic.

The Posse Comitatus Act forbids active-duty military forces from functioning as law enforcement personnel, but it doesn't prevent troops from being seconded to National Guard units (just as National Guard units are called to military duties) and serving under the command of governors. Also, they could be seconded to the U.S. Coast Guard, which in peacetime is part of the Dept of Homeland Security and already has law enforcement authority. These steps probably would require national legislation, but they would finesse the Posse Comitatus Act without revoking it.

Comrade Obama is going to need this capability. Once he is president, and comrades Harry and Harry start pushing their marxist agenda there will be resistance. He must have the authority to selectively implement marshall law to supress these futile attempts. BOHICA

20,000 troops! Stationed inside the USA! To protect us in a terrorist attack! Outrageous! Who would have thought of such a thing! US troops to be trained and ready to handle a terrorist (military) attack inside the US. Don't they know our Armed Forces are only to be used to defend foreign countries and foreign administrations? The nerve!

It is very very very alarming!! Are we becoming Soviet Union? or worse? Soviet Union........ didn't have to protect Wall St interest? MSNBC: MARSHALL LAW?????? http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=PlXH8o6Ylg8&feature=related Remember: Those who sell their freedom for safety, ................... they deserve no freedom neither safety. They were preparing long time ago: URBAN TRAINING SINCE april 12 2000!!!!! http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=71Jux68F_AQ&feature=related Now they are ready to use it and abuse our precious freedom. THE FOUNDING FATHERS ARE TURNING IN THEIR GRAVES!! IS GATES PART OF IT?? WHY HE HAS TO STAY? DOES HE HAS AN EXECUTIVE PLAN? God help us! God Help the USA!

Your editorial goes in the right direction but is much too soft. This is dangerous stuff being proposed. It has little to do with security and everthing to do with control. It is later than the Washington Times thinks and the Congress should demand detailed explainations from our short term president, et al.

I find this dangerous as well. Beef up the National Guard perhaps, but don't use regular military for this.

Suppose we were attacked by Canada or Mexico, Just as examples of a foreign nation not as a real threat, would you maintain that our troops could only fight the war in their countries? Actual fighting in our country would be done by the National Guard? And of course we would have the ACLU to sue the foreign attackers, come to think of it they would probably sue the National Guard, that makes me feel better.

Dittoman: a little History: The United States WAS invaded by Mexico on March 9, 1916. Pancho Vila crossed the border and attached Deming NM. The first thing he did was take over the local Armory where the National Guard stored all their guns thus preventing them from defending the town. The National Guard left (went for help). Meanwhile the citizens of Deming who's guns were not in the armory but over the mantle and under their beds defended the country and drove Vila back across the border before the Guard returned. Lesson learned - It was the people who took care of themselves that solved the problem not the government - no standing army in the US. Let people take care of and defend themselves. Almost every National emergency the people chipped in and helped each other...the federal government was never supposed to be a first responder - churches and volunteer organizations do it better and more efficiently than the government over could.

It's obvious that when you take soldiers who are trained to KILL and retrain them in non-lethal methods of tasers, batons, shields, and bean-bag guns,and the redeploy them to the United States,...that they are here not for terrorist, but Americans. For those who don't know, in 1932 over 100,000 veterans made what they called the 'Bonus March' to Washington DC, in hopes of recieving their 'bonus' promised them by the US Government early. They set up camp and lived there until President Hoover ordered Gen McArthur to run them out of town. And so our supposed heros, McAthur, Eisenhower, and Patton chased our veterans, their veterans, out of town and burned their camps to the ground. A proud day to be an American.

I will argue for the second amendment right to bear arms by citizens, and not just shotguns, but I really don't think we have the means over our mantles to deal with dirty bombs and the like. Look at what went into 9/11. Americans are too busy trampling each other to death shopping and worrying about offending someone with speech (also a Constitutional right) to deal with terrorists. Do you realize what the panic factor alone would be if two major cities are attacked at once? I don't disagree that Americans should have the means and the courage to defend themselves, I just think it is beyond the average citizen's capability. I appreciate the history lesson, but much has changed since Ponch Vila. I thin we are closer than apart in our basic principles.

This article was not only written in a very sympathetic manner toward domestic military policing and federal government intrusions, but is also sadly lacking in information. There already exists a combat force permanently positioned inside the U.S. The 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team (the U.S. Army's most elite combat brigade) began day to day operations on October 1st of this year. They are an on-call federal response team that can be called to action for virtually ANY reason deemed legitimate by the executive branch of government. Bush put this in place, but now Obama will retain this naked power. This atrocity was not mentioned in this article nor was it written about in any mainstream publication. Now, an additional 20,000 more federal combat troops are to become domestic police within the next two years. Where will this end? These military units can be used, according to the Army Times, for civil unrest, crowd control or any emergency, including natural or manmade emergencies, deemed necessary by one man, the president. The government will talk more about the need for domestic force for terrorism purposes, but is this what they really believe? I think not. Does Martial Law come to mind? All preventitive measures put in place to stop an assault on liberty of this magnitude have been destroyed by the Bush administration. Our Founders fully understood not that the threat of monsters from abroad should be feared but that the most dangerous threat would come from our own government. If one believes this, as I do, then this policing by federal combat troops should send chills down your spine. The adverse implications of this policy are almost unimaginable. Few apparently are treating this invasion as a direct threat to American citizens and their natural rights. God help us should this act of aggression against the American populace be allowed to go forward!

I think folks are missing the point. We have military bases in practically every state in this country already. And there is concern for a 20,000 specialized unit to deal with terrorism that may happen here. The President can already declare marshal law and command the troops we have at our bases. The President has always had the right to use troops in the country. It is not new. Ever hear of Hurricane Katrina? Who responded for the Feds?

In response to dittoman You are correct, dittoman, that the U.S. government (not we) has military bases positioned all over the country. The president does not and should not have the power to declare Martial Law; not in a free (so-called) country. Posse Comitatus and The Insurrection Act severely limit (deny) the president to use the national military as domestic police. The fact that he has done this in the past, Katrina for example, does not change the fact that it is a direct violation of the freedom philosophy and against the law. Bush purposely weakened these restrictions on the executive, and all should be very concerned about this usurping of power. And, NO, the president has never had the power or the right to use federal troops domestically. Your beliefs here are naive and dangerous. That the president and his administration use bastardized reasoning to justify tyranny is a very important issue. If this is allowed, regardless of any perceived danger, we will all lose dearly. Our liberty is our salvation and without it we become nothing more than serfs bent to the will of a master. I believe this is called slavery. What the president can get away with and what is right and constitutional are two different things. This should be painfully obvious considering everything going on today. Don't just give the government a pass; hold it to task. Your knowledge here is limited and your aquiescence and complacency are typical of the now sheeplike American mind.