Theodore's World: Pentagon to Detail Troops to Bolster Domestic Security

« A Constitutional Crisis | Main | Michelle Obama Gets Her " Pie" For Being Supportive Wife »

December 02, 2008

Pentagon to Detail Troops to Bolster Domestic Security




Pentagon to Detail Troops to Bolster Domestic Security

Washington Post

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.

But the Bush administration and some in Congress have pushed for a heightened homeland military role since the middle of this decade, saying the greatest domestic threat is terrorists exploiting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000 troops to domestic response — a nearly sevenfold increase in five years — “would have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable,” Paul McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said in remarks last month at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. But the realization that civilian authorities may be overwhelmed in a catastrophe prompted “a fundamental change in military culture,” he said.
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.

In 2005, a new Pentagon homeland defense strategy emphasized “preparing for multiple, simultaneous mass casualty incidents.” National security threats were not limited to adversaries who seek to grind down U.S. combat forces abroad, McHale said, but also include those who “want to inflict such brutality on our society that we give up the fight,” such as by detonating a nuclear bomb in a U.S. city.

In late 2007, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England signed a directive approving more than $556 million over five years to set up the three response teams, known as CBRNE Consequence Management Response Forces. Planners assume an incident could lead to thousands of casualties, more than 1 million evacuees and contamination of as many as 3,000 square miles, about the scope of damage Hurricane Katrina caused in 2005.

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.

Last Monday, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates ordered defense officials to review whether the military, Guard and reserves can respond adequately to domestic disasters.

Gates gave commanders 25 days to propose changes and cost estimates. He cited the work of a congressionally chartered commission, which concluded in January that the Guard and reserve forces are not ready and that they lack equipment and training.

Bert B. Tussing, director of homeland defense and security issues at the U.S. Army War College’s Center for Strategic Leadership, said the new Pentagon approach “breaks the mold” by assigning an active-duty combat brigade to the Northern Command for the first time. Until now, the military required the command to rely on troops requested from other sources.

“This is a genuine recognition that this [job] isn’t something that you want to have a pickup team responsible for,” said Tussing, who has assessed the military’s homeland security strategies.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the libertarian Cato Institute are troubled by what they consider an expansion of executive authority.

Domestic emergency deployment may be “just the first example of a series of expansions in presidential and military authority,” or even an increase in domestic surveillance, said Anna Christensen of the ACLU’s National Security Project. And Cato Vice President Gene Healy warned of “a creeping militarization” of homeland security.

“There’s a notion that whenever there’s an important problem, that the thing to do is to call in the boys in green,” Healy said, “and that’s at odds with our long-standing tradition of being wary of the use of standing armies to keep the peace.”

McHale stressed that the response units will be subject to the act, that only 8 percent of their personnel will be responsible for security and that their duties will be to protect the force, not other law enforcement. For decades, the military has assigned larger units to respond to civil disturbances, such as during the Los Angeles riot in 1992.

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.

The one-year domestic mission, however, does not replace the brigade’s next scheduled combat deployment in 2010. The brigade may get additional time in the United States to rest and regroup, compared with other combat units, but it may also face more training and operational requirements depending on its homeland security assignments.

Renuart said the Pentagon is accounting for the strain of fighting two wars, and the need for troops to spend time with their families. “We want to make sure the parameters are right for Iraq and Afghanistan,” he said. The 1st Brigade’s soldiers “will have some very aggressive training, but will also be home for much of that.”

Although some Pentagon leaders initially expected to build the next two response units around combat teams, they are likely to be drawn mainly from reserves and the National Guard, such as the 218th Maneuver Enhancement Brigade from South Carolina, which returned in May after more than a year in Afghanistan.

Now that Pentagon strategy gives new priority to homeland security and calls for heavier reliance on the Guard and reserves, McHale said, Washington has to figure out how to pay for it.

“It’s one thing to decide upon a course of action, and it’s something else to make it happen,” he said. “It’s time to put our money where our mouth is.”




Wild Thing's comment.........

I read this twice and did not see any mention of putting troops on the border. The illegals coming in is not what this is about. What on earth was I thinking, I forgot for a second that Bush loves the illegals coming in. So this article is not about that at all.

I love and respect our military- and our police...it’s just our politicians I don't trust. THEY are the ones who don't realize they are playing with fire. Under a conservative President this would be harmless news, good news, a feeling of being safe kind of news. Under Obama this takes on a whole different feel to it.

The various articles I have read since Obama's trip to Germany tell a lot about how the Pentagon is no fan of Obama. Add in to that fact Obama's friend the terrorist Ayers and his history with our Pentagon. Maybe that is why he has Gates on his team to try and get in better with the Pentagon, I am not sure.

The attempted attacks on our country happen every day all across the USA. I watch the incident map online and see the many things that our law enforcement have stopped. So that might also have something to do with this as well.

I still cannot get over that Barack Hussein Obama is the elected one.

http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/category/incident_reports/


https://www.globalincidentmap.com/user.php



Posted by Wild Thing at December 2, 2008 04:50 AM


Comments

Yes, WT. Put the troops on the border with strict orders to stop illegal immigration and out from under the jurisdiction of the likes of John Sutton.
Eliminate the border patrol and integrate those officers into local, county or state police systems.

Posted by: Bob A at December 2, 2008 06:57 AM


With the complete subversion of our economic system, the recent G20 accords and Bush giveaway's. The Democrats being in totalitarian control of both houses of congress and an avowed unrepentant Marxist usurper about to ascend to the presidency, surrounded by Clintonistas , this is a bad omen for all our freedoms. Beware of what you want or as quoted: Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security. Benjamin Franklin

We are in danger of becoming a militaristic police state by allowing the military to prosecute civilian laws, this is why we have the National Guard and The Coast Guard, one to protect the individual states the other to protect our shores, persecuting the Border Patrol does nothing to secure the borders, the laws are in place it only takes the initiative to enforce them. What is proposed is to revise the Posse Comitatus Act or eliminate it to fit Homeland Security's growing power.

"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."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_18_of_the_United_States_Code

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00001385----000-.html

Why have the both Bush Administrations and the former Clinton Administration condoned illegal aliens and the criminal cartels on the Southern border? 1.) The Canadians don't want the Mexicans on their border. 2.) Crime pays, and handsomely in the drug trade, it justifies drug war bureaucracies and 'enforcement' and legalizes their terrorism. 3.) Neither major party has the balls to enforce the laws out of fear of losing legal and illegal constituents.

The only time I have ever in my life seen law enforcement working was after the fact, meantime they are a revenue collection agency enforcing petty laws under the guise of public safety. Like the bigger government most are not working for you but to control you with the obligatory fleecing. BOHICA!

Posted by: Jack at December 2, 2008 10:29 AM


I have mixed feelings about this. The military has been used before in riots, forest fires and major natural calamities. But those have always been units pulled from other duties, never regular units dedicated to civilian use.

Like previous comments, I am not happy to have these units trained and in place under Obama. The ability to misuse them will be too easy. They could be used at the whim of the president to abuse civilian freedoms as in private firearms confiscation.

We should have sent regular troops to the borders on 12 Sep 2001 and kept them there. We are at war and the borders are being invaded. In that case the military would not be used to detain American citizens but to prevent foreign invaders from entering the US.

I agree with Jack. We are seeing our freedoms and our sovereignty erode. Economic summits, international treaties, foreign aid, government spending, nationalization of banking and probably big business and the government control by liberal socialists does not bode well for the free America we knew in the 20th Century.

Posted by: TomR at December 2, 2008 12:05 PM


Two words: posse comitatus, our constitutional scholar Obambi should look it up.

Two more words: Da BEARS.

Posted by: navycopjoe at December 2, 2008 01:02 PM


There was nothing the founders of this Nation feared more than a standing Army. They would not be happy that we are in Korea, Germany, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Africa. They sure as hell wouldn't approve of Obama's new elite guard. I think this is the Third Infantry Division and I'm sorry for its Generals and troops who are falling in between our sorry Government and its subjects. I was an armed citizen but now I'm just a subject against Strykers and gunships.

Bush puts insanity (Socialist bailouts and soldiers on the street) in place and Obama will raise the ante before his first year is out. My youngest grandchild is only six. He won't even remember America if and when he grows up.

Posted by: horace at December 2, 2008 01:53 PM


What disaster can't the cities handle, except as mentioned above. The national guard was sent in to New Orleans.

Sounds to me like 20,000 gun confiscators.

Posted by: Mark at December 2, 2008 02:13 PM


Bob A., that would be ok with me, but the sad thing is that is not what they are going to do.

Posted by: Wild Thing at December 2, 2008 05:21 PM


Jack, thank you for the information and those links too.

The military is still where Katrina hit and patrolling there. I got an email from a friend that lives there. She said they still have check points for the civilians in some areas that the military are in charge of.

I agree Jack, I am concerned especially with Obama being in the White House and his abuse of his power.

Posted by: Wild Thing at December 2, 2008 05:26 PM


Tom, that is just how I feel too. If they were being called because of terrorists alerts being overwhelming or other things like you said, that is great.

Heck if Sarah Palin was President I wouldn't be concerned at all, I would know there was something up, some danger we knew nothing about that we were being protected from. But Obama???? This is very scary.

Posted by: Wild Thing at December 2, 2008 05:31 PM


HI navycopjoe, good to see you. Yeesssss da Bears.

Posted by: Wild Thing at December 2, 2008 05:33 PM


Horace, DITTO and a big Amen to all you said.

I pray for our country every day, I pray too that your grandson and others will know the America we all have known and loved. I wish I could promise it to them but with this kind of thing, I am so fearful it is disappearing.

Wnat the heck got into Bush to do such a thing and knowing the kind of man Obama is to follow him. It is insane of Bush to do this, it is not necessary. It is dangerous and like you said it goes against everything our Founding Fathers would have been for in any way.

Posted by: Wild Thing at December 2, 2008 05:38 PM


Mark, yes it sure is concerning to say the least.

Posted by: Wild Thing at December 2, 2008 05:41 PM


The 20,000 troops being talked about are designated as rapid-response and not rapid or even slow prevent for that matter. So, bottom line, the United States will be vulnerable to a massive and destructive attack but we will have troops on the ground quickly AFTER it happens. That will really make me sleep better at night considering the border with Mexico will remain open with a bilingual "Welcome" sign and those capable to use surveillance to detect terrorists planning an attack will still have their hands tied because it would violate the terrorist's right to privacy.

Posted by: Les at December 2, 2008 06:53 PM


I have decided that expecting a war here with Armies in the field facing each other over a front line is unbridled optimism. We are in for endless guerilla war from 1.3 billion muslims whose book tells them to kill us by any means possible.

Posted by: horace at December 2, 2008 08:50 PM


Like they did on November 26, 1941, when Yamamoto's Attack Force departed the Kuriles for Oahu to sink our U.S. Pacific Fleet?
- TIGER...TIGER...TIGER!

Posted by: darthcrUSAderworldtour07 at December 2, 2008 10:45 PM