Posted on 01/31/2007 7:07:42 AM PST by CrawDaddyCA
PHOENIX — Armed men who prompted four National Guard members to pull back from an observation post at the Arizona-Mexico border probably weren't trying to test the reaction of the troops, the head of the Arizona National Guard said Monday.
They likely happened upon the soldiers while walking across rocky terrain from Arizona into Mexico, said Maj. Gen. David Rataczak, speculating that the gunmen were carrying drug money south across the border.
In the face of criticism that the troops set a bad precedent for border security, Rataczak told a homeland security committee at the Arizona Legislature that the troops acted properly in relocating to a nearby site and calling in the Border Patrol to respond.
"They did exactly what they were told to do," said Rataczak, adding that the actions of the soldiers prevented an international incident from occurring.
The four National Guard soldiers from Tennessee were on the lookout at a post near Sasabe on Jan. 3 when they spotted four to eight gunmen who were approaching.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Total BS. Anybody with any type of military training would see this 'incident' for what it is, a test of security.
And, to be honest, General, you and your 'superiors' failed miserably.
I agree...total BS. That border is well defined both by the downed wire. the posts and the mounds of litter that begin there. Its even visible from the air and these guys are sharp enough to know where the "unsafe" part of their illegal activity begins. Back to school General!
This is disgusting.
Armed men are now "known" to be crossing the border, & our armed forces retreat by order from superiors.
This IS Bush's fault!!!
Armed men are now "known" to be crossing the border, & our armed forces retreat by order from superiors.
This IS Bush's fault!!!
Mr. Bush, build that wall!
"They did exactly what they were told to do," said Rataczak, adding that the actions of the soldiers prevented an international incident from occurring.
And that seems to be our motus operandi, don't upset the Mexicans!
This commander and his superiors, up to the top, are idiots.
They did NOT "prevent" an "international incident from occurring". They stood by and watched it occur. ARMED MEN crossing our borders FOR ANY REASON is an "international incident".
To be fair to the soldiers, the ROE prevented them from firing unless fired upon.
1. Without force as an option, the Mexican nationals were allowed to advance until they were 35 feet from the soldiers.
2. Being that close and outnumbering the soldiers 2:1, they had the option of firing on the Americans first with impunity. The soldiers would have been SOL if something had happened.
Both the governor, the state AG and the NG brass should be held accountable for putting the soldiers in that position. They basically made them targets on a live fire range.
they spotted four to eight gunman? how close were they?
Without taking anything away from the soldiers, and with respect to your reply, the commander and his superiors are still idiots.
How is that the ROE prevented the siting of the armed group when they were still more than a mile away (binoculars???).
How is that such an early siting did not result in radioing for other nearby guard units to join/reinforce the unit most capable of siting the armed group?
If George Bush is just sitting in the White House praying that the decoys he has standing in defensive-only positions on our southern border do not get shot, then I am afraid I do not see his prayers being answered and so far I see nothing but spineless political genuflection in the entire National Guard effort.
It was done for political reasons and for appearances only, at the 11th hour ahead of the November elections (hoping the entire GOP base did not desert). It continues as a sham political effort and nothing more. If the National Guard cannot actually defend the border then get them the hell out of there before one of them gets shot FOR NOTHING.
They need to be allowed to actually defend the border or go home.
I can't disagree.
Their leadership, ALL THE WAY UP, put them in unnecessary danger and prevented them from performing their "mission" (whatever that truly is).
Imagine getting stuck with that duty.
B/S. The armed intruders created an international incident, the soldiers just kept it from escalating.
IMHO, their ROE are wrong-headed and should be upgraded. This ain't a law-enforcement issue, rather, it's an issue of national security.
I saw the General on TV and it sounded like his troops were just to be standing around doing nothing. Pretty pathetic rules of engagement in my opinion.
If Hillary gets elected in '08 get used to more of this type of useless ROE.
Given the ROE, the soldiers did the only possible thing.
Whoever accepted the ROE should be fired. No doubt Bush gave the ultimate orders, but no commander should have allowed his troops to be endangered like that without protest.
It doesn't make a pin's worth of difference whether the NG unit was being deliberately or accidentally "tested." They were tested, publicly, and they revealed that they were a pushover. That means less respect in the future, and probably more deaths necessary before that sorry lesson is unlearned.
NEVER GO TO WAR UNLESS YOU INTEND TO WIN. Never put troops in harm's way unless they can defend themselves. Every incident of this kind weakens our reputation and increases the sense all over the world that the U.S. is a Paper Tiger.
How do you fire when you have no ammo? These troops had their M-16s but they did not have any ammo!
I've heard that they did have ammo, but the ROE was prohibitive. The Mexicans can run home with impunity, but a NG soldier is gonna get screwed by the NG and his state if he takes the initiative.
I think we have found our new Army Chief of Staff for when Hillary becomes President...
So you have that training, and the Major General doesn't?
The NG troops aren't supposed to engage. They are extra eyes on the border. The Border Patrol agents are the ones that are supposed to engage.
The National guard is not trained as border agents.
What danger were they in? There is no indication that the "armed men" threatened them in any way. And if they HAD felt threatened, the reported rules of engagement would have allowed them to respond with force.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.