The Military Is Not The Solution
I like the military as much as the next guy. I’ve got “Support the Troops” and “Freedom Isn’t Free” bumper stickers. I belong to the local chapter of United States Submarine Veterans, Inc. But I’m also an amateur scholar of American history. As such, I have a real problem with the discussion currently taking place in Washington on repealing the Posse Comitatus law.
Regardless of your opinion on the origin of Posse, the law does in fact adhere strictly to principles near and dear to the heart of the Founding Fathers. Even a cursory examination of the Federalist Papers will reveal that the Constitution expressly and specifically separates the military authority from that of the National Guard (in those days called the militia). The Patriots knew that a military in the hands of a tyrant was a tool for abolishing civil rights. Thus, they made it clear that the States were authorized to equip, train, and maintain para-military units as a check on Federal Power. The Federal Government retained the right to call the militia units into the service of the regular Army in times of extreme need.
No one is suggesting that the President wants to do this to curtail civil liberties; the issue rather is whether the military or the National Guard is better equipped to carry out the mission. While it is certainly true that a natural disaster on the scale of hurricane Katrina is a time of extreme need, we must be cautious of blindly calling the military into the relief effort. The power of the President to call the militia into national service was intended only when the additional troops were needed to quell insurrections or battle foreign aggressors.
I believe that the US Military is the best trained, best equipped fighting force on the planet. The troops have a singular goal of getting the job done, and at least at the unit level, will do whatever is necessary to ensure success. This training makes former military personnel exceptional leaders in the civilian workforce as well. It is natural to want to bring this talent and resolve to bear on relief work. In the process, however, we must ensure that the resources of the military are not spread so thin as to reduce the effectiveness of the domestic units in supporting the overseas forces that are ensuring our freedoms here.
The War on Terror has resulted in the majority of soldiers being trained in urban warfare. Although this training could be adapted to urban rescue and relief work, it must be noted that the National Guard has from the beginning focused solely on local response. Thus, the Guard is better suited for the mission of local relief. More fundamentally, however, is the fact that natural disasters are for the most part State issues. Sending in the Army or calling the Guard into Federal service would remove control from the local officials and place it squarely in Washington. This is patently a violation of State’s rights.
Clearly, if the US Government is going to fund relief efforts, they do have some right to participate in them. This right, however, is purely administrative and advisory in nature. Congress and the President must work for the greater good of the nation as a whole. They should be given the right to control the federal monies spent in relief work. Thus, New Orleans’ desire for billions of dollars to fund projects that are of State or local value only (think sugar cane research institute) should be vetoed. At the State’s request, the resources of the US, including the military, could be utilized in specific manners such as additional law enforcement aid (much as they did in L.A. in 1992) or logistical support. That is the proper role for the Federal Government.
It’s not rocket science. Although the leadership and dedication to the mission of the US military is the finest in the world, it is not the solution to FEMA’s problems. Congress should reject any attempt to repeal or revise Posse Comitatus.
Regardless of your opinion on the origin of Posse, the law does in fact adhere strictly to principles near and dear to the heart of the Founding Fathers. Even a cursory examination of the Federalist Papers will reveal that the Constitution expressly and specifically separates the military authority from that of the National Guard (in those days called the militia). The Patriots knew that a military in the hands of a tyrant was a tool for abolishing civil rights. Thus, they made it clear that the States were authorized to equip, train, and maintain para-military units as a check on Federal Power. The Federal Government retained the right to call the militia units into the service of the regular Army in times of extreme need.
No one is suggesting that the President wants to do this to curtail civil liberties; the issue rather is whether the military or the National Guard is better equipped to carry out the mission. While it is certainly true that a natural disaster on the scale of hurricane Katrina is a time of extreme need, we must be cautious of blindly calling the military into the relief effort. The power of the President to call the militia into national service was intended only when the additional troops were needed to quell insurrections or battle foreign aggressors.
I believe that the US Military is the best trained, best equipped fighting force on the planet. The troops have a singular goal of getting the job done, and at least at the unit level, will do whatever is necessary to ensure success. This training makes former military personnel exceptional leaders in the civilian workforce as well. It is natural to want to bring this talent and resolve to bear on relief work. In the process, however, we must ensure that the resources of the military are not spread so thin as to reduce the effectiveness of the domestic units in supporting the overseas forces that are ensuring our freedoms here.
The War on Terror has resulted in the majority of soldiers being trained in urban warfare. Although this training could be adapted to urban rescue and relief work, it must be noted that the National Guard has from the beginning focused solely on local response. Thus, the Guard is better suited for the mission of local relief. More fundamentally, however, is the fact that natural disasters are for the most part State issues. Sending in the Army or calling the Guard into Federal service would remove control from the local officials and place it squarely in Washington. This is patently a violation of State’s rights.
Clearly, if the US Government is going to fund relief efforts, they do have some right to participate in them. This right, however, is purely administrative and advisory in nature. Congress and the President must work for the greater good of the nation as a whole. They should be given the right to control the federal monies spent in relief work. Thus, New Orleans’ desire for billions of dollars to fund projects that are of State or local value only (think sugar cane research institute) should be vetoed. At the State’s request, the resources of the US, including the military, could be utilized in specific manners such as additional law enforcement aid (much as they did in L.A. in 1992) or logistical support. That is the proper role for the Federal Government.
It’s not rocket science. Although the leadership and dedication to the mission of the US military is the finest in the world, it is not the solution to FEMA’s problems. Congress should reject any attempt to repeal or revise Posse Comitatus.
posted by exsubdriver at 9:24 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home