It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Can Governors say no to Obama trying to send National Guard members to Libera (Ebola)

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc


You are right about the IRR which he is calling up.

For those of you who don't know, the IRR is retired personnel who by virtue of taking the retirement (pension) are obligated to be ready to be called back to active duty in times of national emergency. This almost never happens. Also, retiree's are basically promised that if recalled it will only be to fill vacancies in the US to free up the active duty people to go off and fight.

So he is basically forcing military retirees to go to a foreign country on a suicide mission.

This is truly unprecedented, but the President does have the power over the IRR, until I believe their 60 or 62nd birthday. Unlike the National Guard who are normally under the command of the governor of their state.




posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 04:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: charles1952

The national guard was never really part of the state government.

Their uniforms are no different than mine and I'm active duty.

They have state emblems for unit patches, I have division emblems on mine.

Otherwise they both say US ARMY on the chest.


I was a dependent of the military for over 50 years. My husband did some time in the National Guard. The National Guard is under the command of the governor of the state in which they reside.

Their uniforms may look like yours but they are separate from active duty and under a different chain of command.



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 05:53 PM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw

Dear grandmakdw,

I don't want to be misunderstood. This is, quite possibly, a deadly mission for the troops. The DoD says they can get sufficient training if they take a group of 50 and give a four hour class. I can't imagine anyone thinking that's adequate. It's reckless and irresponsible to call them up. I hope the president reconsiders, or never calls them up.

Given that, as you said:


Unlike the National Guard who are normally under the command of the governor of their state.


I completely agree. Sadly, the president has announced that this is not "normal," and he's reading the laws in a way to give him authority to do it. I think this is a bigger lie and setup than anything Bush ever did. But regardless, the president is handling this incorrectly in every step he's taken that I can think of. It's just not technically illegal.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 05:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: the owlbear
Ebola could be argued to have the potential to affect US assets and infrastructure, with the hysteria, what governor would say "no"?
Better to stop the fire at the source instead of pissing when it gets close.


Anything can be argued to have a potential affect on national security. This right-stealing practice with the commerce clause in the constitution is how so many nation-killing really bad laws have been put in place in the US. So, yeah, with a dash of maleficence in the interpretation...you can argue that point. And I'm almost certain we'll hear them do it.



posted on Oct, 17 2014 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

What is the bio protective level of a MOPP suit when stacked up to medical protocol anyway?



posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: charles1952

Thank you for your responses.

I definitely think what Obama is doing is immoral in sending troops into what is certain to end up being a suicide mission for at least some.
You can't give a 19-21 year olds 4 hours of instruction and expect that all will be safe when nurses and MD's who are well versed in protecting themselves from the virus contract it and die from it.

Obama is the Commander In Chief of the first US suicide mission.



posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw

I know it is rude to answer a question with a question but:

Where was this particular question in 2003 when ( another president ) sent members of the National Guard into Iraq as part of an "invasion of a sovereign foreign nation"?



posted on Oct, 18 2014 @ 06:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: teamcommander
a reply to: grandmakdw

I know it is rude to answer a question with a question but:

Where was this particular question in 2003 when ( another president ) sent members of the National Guard into Iraq as part of an "invasion of a sovereign foreign nation"?



That was a military action.

This is a humanitarian and medical mission.

The National Guard is not supposed to be called up for foreign humanitarian aid, only humanitarian aid on US soil.

Especially when it is certain that some will die from catching the disease.




top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join