Military troops to be used in the US

I’m sure they will only be here to “help” and fight “terrorists”.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27989275

Pentagon to detail military to bolster security
Plan would dedicate 20,000 uniformed troops inside U.S. by 2011

Stephen Chernin / Getty Images File
Army National Guard members stand watch near the Holland Tunnel on New York City’s Canal Street on May 28, 2003. Security has been more visible since the federal government heightened the terrorism alert from red to orange.
The Washington Post
Labor Dept. Accused of Straying From Enforcement
Pentagon to Detail Troops to Bolster Domestic Security
Jury Selection Begins in Case Connected to Abramoff
Judge Postpones Hearing on Witness in Stevens’s Trial
Bombings in Iraq Kill at Least 31
By Spencer S. Hsu and Ann Scott Tyson

updated 8:46 p.m. PT, Sun., Nov. 30, 2008
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.

Story continues below ↓
advertisement | your ad here

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.

“OK”.

Sweet, more people to help with directions and such.

we used to call these kinds of things “Parades”

Extraordinary times require extraordinary measures. We cannot bury our heads in the sand and wish this stuff away. There are certifiable crazy people out there and countries that will use them as covert weapons. How do we defend against them, especially when they target civilian populations?

^We roll the military out all over America and have checkpoints and wiretap domestic phone lines and get bomb sniffing dogs everywhere. CUZ WE LOVE AMERICA!!!

what’s the alternative, a defenseless population burning, falling from skyscrapers?

what’s the price of freedom? it used to be just the soldiers who died for it, but the game has changed. will be innocent civilians, men, women and children who will die so that the society stays open?

it’s a very real and very difficult question, and the power brokers use the possibility to implement these control tactics even if the real threat isn’t there. but what if it is? who calls this shot? who risks YOUR life for the rest of us?

Hey, if it’s in the name of keeping this country safe, they can search me all they want, just as long as they catch the people who are trying to destroy this country.

I got nothing to hide, or do I :wink:

“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

  • Benjamin Franklin

/thread

^

Thanks buddy.

How about this one?

Theo: I mean, you’re a doctor and mom’s a lawyer, but I don’t love you any less because you’re my dad. So instead of being disappointed that I’m not like you, maybe you should be happy and love me anyway, because I’m your son.

Cliff: Theo…thats the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard! No wounder you get Ds and everything. You’re a afraid to try, because you’re afraid your brain is going to explode and its going to ooze out of your ear. Now you are going to try because I said so. I am your father. I brought you in this world and I will take you out.

Doesn’t really apply, but you gotta love the Cos.

This is exactly why I have a stockpile of automatic weapons and explosive devices inside my compound. When these fascist heathens show up to to impose their babylon imperialism upon me and my wives, they will suffer the wrath of our righteous lord! I ain’t goin out like a bitch, I don’t know about you guys.

The alternative is having a FORENSIC investigation of the terror attacks all over the world, investigating who trained these people, who bankrolled these people and who may have had attacks such as these planned for a long time and go from there. Unfortunately this is not presently happening.

The 2nd amendment was provided so we don’t need the military. When governments roll out the military domestically, historically it’s NOT to keep you SAFE.

The first question good detectives ask themselves in regards to crimes, terrorism or otherwise is: “Who stands to gain” from the crime?

So I ask you, who stands to gain from the terror attacks? the terrorists or…??

^the terrorists attacked us because they are evil-doers that hate freedom and want to make everybody else unhappy.

why else would we be enemies with them?

stop being so unpatriotic, dillweed.

^blind patriotism maybe