With Mumbai attacks fresh on everyones mind and, if anything positive can be made of it, maybe it will be a jarring eye opener of just what is at stake with the war on the West. But one constant theme has been played through it all from the Bush administration and that theme has been a very proactive, security first, bad guys last, approach to national security.

The Defense Department announced that 20,000 uniformed U.S. military troops will be trained and operating in the United States by 2011 to assist local authorities against possible terrorist attacks and other catastrophes. This is a measure that the President Bush as been pushing for a few years now.
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.
The concern is that civilian authorities may not be able to adequately respond to nuclear/chemical catastrophes or a coordinated assault using advanced and high-powered weaponry. The carnage that unfolded before our teary eyes in India amplifies those concerns. There are just too many that refuse to acknowledge the seriousness and the deadliness of the war against civilizations. These weaklings on the left want to reason, share the blame, and excuse the murderous acts and ignore the climbing body count of innocent non-muslims.
The critics of the bill, mainly ACLU, cite issues with the protective measure that the President is putting into place. They say it undermines the the Posse Comitatus Act, a 130-year-old federal law that restricts the military’s role in domestic law enforcement.
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.
The liberal drivel and cooky paranoia shared by these types really shows their ignorance and refusal to accept the reality that has been dumped in our laps. By assigning an active combat brigade to northern command does not transform our country into a police state. The measure simply calls for a more robust response force to those units already assigned for that duty. It allows the planners and officials of Homeland Security the luxury of having a better capability to get to a situation and supply relief, support and, if need be, an overwhelming force in case of a coordinated attack in one of our U.S. cities.
The country doesn’t have the stomach to watch another Katrina-like disaster unfold. Accept, the next disaster won’t be mother nature’s doing. The threat is real. The bad guys are out there. They aim to target, rape, torture, mangle, kill and control the lives of the West. We need to provide the necessary planning that will prevent any chance of sharing the same fate that unjustly fell on our Indian, Jewish, Christian, Hindu, British, American brother and sisters.
It is past time we come to from out of our stupor. The game is real and they already started playing.
Jeff Emanuel
Neil Stevens
Caleb Howe
You'd think that...
Amy Miller (Diary) Monday, December 1st at 4:49PM EDT (link)…the ACLU would be okay with an expansion of executive authority, considering who is gearing up for his historic inauguration.
“I’m a conservative, I’m a textualist, I’m an originalist, but I’m not a nut.”
~Scalia, J.
In the world of extraordinarily BAD ideas
mbecker908 (Diary) Monday, December 1st at 5:09PM EDT (link)this one is at the very, very top. I can’t think of a move that I would be more opposed to, including nationalizing heath care and expanding the Department of Education.
The job description of the US military is to kill people and blow up things. It most certainly is not to be worrying about anybody’s constitutional rights to do anything other than die.
This really stupid idea will not only degrade our ability to project military force – not that the Congress and the Courts haven’t already done enough with the detainee rulings – but it will give the federal government virtually unlimited power to project force internally.
If you really think that the people in Washington DC are worthy of being trusted with this kind of power, you live in an alternate universe. This measure might get me to donate to the ACLU.
That is a typical reactionary reply
Loozianajay (Diary) Monday, December 1st at 8:43PM EDT (link)It’s not calling for road blocks, checkpoints, and 20,000 troops in all 50 states.
It is simply a very energetic proposal to give National Guard commanders and HS the necessary forces available to head off and prevent, what otherwise could be preventable, catastrophe.
It does not such thing as you claim “give the federal government virtually unlimited power to project force internally.”
Who do you think bore the brunt of Katrina and the recovery, and police assistance? The national guard.
If a major attack or some other disaster occurs, we’ll be thankful to have them.
Like hell it doesn't.
mbecker908 (Diary) Monday, December 1st at 9:36PM EDT (link)You open the door, they’ll own you. This is most dangerous thing I’ve ever heard. There was and is a very good reason for posse commetadus. It’s the same as the reason for 2nd Amendment. Government cannot and should not EVER be trusted.
If Bush pushes this, I hope both he and his reputation rot in hell.
That's what the National Guard is for.
mbecker908 (Diary) Monday, December 1st at 9:42PM EDT (link)And, if you live in any reasonable sized city you’ve already got a paramilitary force in your town. They’re called police SWAT.
Any Congressman or Senator who votes for this should be recalled.
Duly Noted
Loozianajay (Diary) Monday, December 1st at 9:44PM EDT (link)Still think you are a bit off.
But I do understand the principles of your argument. Still, we’re not talking about 20,000 troops in 50 states. There would be vast oversight and would fall under the already established doctrine of the National Guard and national recovery.
100% agree with mbecker908
Cowboy (Diary) Monday, December 1st at 9:51PM EDT (link)This is the LAST thing we need and should resist with everything we have.
No way do we need anymore federal anything. We have the right to bear arms, the National Guard and the local ande state police.
A national force will be the final nail in the coffin of freedom.
I've got some great land in the desert you
mbecker908 (Diary) Monday, December 1st at 9:51PM EDT (link)can pick up for next to nothing if you believe that one.
It's funny
Loozianajay (Diary) Monday, December 1st at 10:51PM EDT (link)I’m arguing against those who support even stronger measures than what this proposes on another blog that has this same piece on their site. There are those who seem to support more federal control enforced by the military to combat immigration and terrorist activities.
Of course, I disagree strongly. Just as I disagree with some of you. Perhaps, I should introduce all of you and let the two wings flap it out.
There is a benefit and necessity of having a quicker and more adaptive force to the dangerously thin one we have in place. It would do you good to re-read the article and search this subject. You’ll see that this does nothing outside the lines of what has already been established. This isn’t a new thing. We have military personnel both active and guard on the books should such a situation arise.
Ever been around the feds when they take over a wildfire?
Cowboy (Diary) Monday, December 1st at 10:57PM EDT (link)I have and it ain’t pretty. They lock up about five times as much land as they need to with road blocks and guards and keep it locked up until the fire is dead out.
You can’t enter to check on livestock or irrigation water that is 20 miles away if they decide to keep you out. This can go on for weeks if they say so and they are damned arrogant about it.
Now picture an armed force loyal to our leader coming into your town to “protect” you. Kinda gives you a warm and fuzzy eh?
For the love of Pete
Loozianajay (Diary) Monday, December 1st at 11:07PM EDT (link)You’ll never see them outside of a cataclysmic event. We aren’t talking about replacing the State Police with the 2nd ID.
Believe me when something horrible happens you’ll be glad they showed up. Do you remember Katrina?
The Feds, Schmeds. I’m talking about a friggin military force to come in and take control of situation in the event of a massive terrorist attack. Do you think the NYPD or the NOPD can handle that?
I really believe we just have two different visions of what is being presented. Surely, there is just a misunderstanding. Because I don’t see how this exchanged has continued
If something happens that bad
Cowboy (Diary) Tuesday, December 2nd at 1:21AM EDT (link)we need to have a plan to deploy state side troops to help with what we already have.
To hell with a permanent force. There is a reason we haven’t allowed it for a couple of hundred years.
I'll stand up in favor of this
Finrod (Diary) Tuesday, December 2nd at 11:16AM EDT (link)I’m not quite the paranoid that mbecker908 and Cowboy are; I think this is a good idea, with a couple of provisos. First, the President should have to notify the governor(s) of the state(s) that this force is being deployed to; second, the President should be required to keep said governors up-to-date on the status of said troops.
In other words, the President should never be able to use these troops in a stealthy manner; if the situation’s bad enough that these troops are needed, then there’s no need to keep their activities quiet.
PETA and the ASPCA are pure evil. See here and here.