Originally posted by Muaddib
I don't know exactly from where you got that quote, since i can't find it on their site,
www.northcom.mil...
but the national guard has been in use for quite a long time to help areas which are hit by natural disasters... We have used military
equipment through the National guard to help in such disasters...
The national guard doesn't have it's own CIA attatched to it. The National guard is not a standing force- it is part-time. And perhaps above all,
the national guard is decentralized. Northcom is a unified regular military command answering to the DoD and has access to the DoDs intelligence
aparatus.
The site does specifically say that Northcom does not supersede, in any way or form the civil first responders... they are the ones who have
the expertise on these situations...
Then why is one of Northcom's goals to provide expertise. Northcom clearly exists to supplement the ability of civil authorities to do things they
are not normally trained or equipped for. At best this represents the undertraining and under-equipping of our civil authorities, which is nearly
criminal in its own right. At the worst it represents preparation for the military and law enforcement to cooperate in activities in our country which
more closely resemble military operation than law enforcement, also known as martial law.
There is absolutely no reason to establish this Northern command without instituting very specific and comprehensive rules which ensure that it can
never be abused.
but like the coast guard military manpower can be used to help the first responders in case there is a crisis.
Except that the coast guard has a nice limited mission, which is exactly how it should be. By its very nature the coastguard can not threaten civil
liberties in the way the army can. The army must be given additional restraints to keep it as benign as coastguard assisstance in law enforcement.
Waco Texas happened under the Democrat's watch....and so did the case of the Cuban child which was taken by force because the Democrats wanted
to "maintain better relationships with the Cuban dictatorship.....
Apparently this is in response to that quote where I said "Only conservatives ever do anything bad for civil liberties"? (for those of you who
aren't paying attention, I never said any such thing.) Neo-conservatism is making some serious mistakes in the name of corporate globalism, but they
by no means have the market cornered. As I have said before, we hardly even have a two party system. We have a one party system divided in to parts.
We've got a nationalist part and a socialist party. Put them together and what have we got? THATS RIGHT!
The site does mention the limitations of northcom and what they are there to do.....
Those limitations are grossly insufficient. They do not explicitly prevent assetts such as the SSB from working against US citizens for example.
You are basing your opinion because of a couple of movies....
Actually I was using movies to illustrate possible abuses of Northcom. I understand that you have no respect for me and would rather try to undermine
me than have a real discussion, so I'm not surprised that you stooped to such a ridiculous mischaracterization of this illustration. You can be
assured that I hold you in the same regard, although I would never degrade myself by twisting your words to avoid a legitimate arguement.
Ok, have you seen "The Sum of all Fears"?..... or the movie "Volcano".... in both movies there was military help to the civilian first
responders..mostly by supplying equipment and helos to combat the lava or finding and helping find people who were hurt.....and afterward the military
did not take control of the US....
And in both of those movies the military's role was logistical. Perhaps more importantly, in both of those illustrations the problem arose by
complete surprise, necessitating the use of the only large standing force at the government's disposal. The very fact that we are planning and
preparing to empower civil authorities for such circumstances means that we could just as easily train and equip civilian agencies in a mission
specific way to prevent abuses and to ensure that the DoD doesn't mismanage funding and leave us unprepared. (for those of you who haven't been
paying attention, the DoD was caught under-investing in armor while contractors in Iraq got away with highway robbery.)
Northcom is there to help civic first responders...not to take the power away from them and control the US.
Northcom is there to help the first responders do what they aren't trained and equipped to do. Northcom represents a needless redundancy and
additional bureaucracy. It would be easier to just better train and equip the first responders directly. The only reason not to do so would be if this
training and equipment was ultimately going to be used for something first responders aren't supposed to be able to do.
Oh and let's not foget one of my favourite movies... "Independence Day."
Yeah, that was a great one. The Secretary of Defense sat on classified information and watched a disaster unfold. That part probably isn't such a
relevant illustration to be honest, but if it were it would illustrate that you can't trust the DoD as far as you can throw it.
hey, you are the one basing your opinions because of movies.....
[edit on 3-3-2005 by Muaddib]
Yeah you're right. I'm a total friggin numbskull. The movie gave me these ideas. I wasn't using it as an example, I wasn't just saying "hey, that
was some awful stuff, and the bad things seen in that movie are similiar to the bad things that you could see if we let our military get too powerful
and too independent." Why don't you just call my mother names next time; it couldn't be much less intelligent than what you're trying to do now.
