Sources: Bush Plans National Guard on Border..

Drudge Report ^ | May 12, 2006 | Matt Drudge

[xjcsa]

Headline only so far...

[blaquebyrd]

"See - I knew I'd come here and people would STILL be complaining."

No complaints from me. I applaud the president for following Sheriff Arpaio's lead. I hope the Guard will have a presence on the border until a permament barrier is in place. Now let's start deporting illegals.

[Sender]

I can almost guarantee the troops will stay deployed on the border until November 4, 2006.

[TomGuy]

That should be the post of the day:

[reposted, with emphasis]

President Bush says there is no way we can deport 12 million people. It is just can't be done.

Mexico did.

--Ted Nugent

[Moonman62]

The Pentagon is looking at ways the military can help provide more security along the U.S. southern border, defense officials said Thursday, once again drawing the nation's armed forces into a politically sensitive domestic role.

Defending our border with another country isn't a domestic role.

[teddyballgame]

"I hope this is true!! GW would see his ratings go through the roof!!"

Sounds like a trial ballon. We'll find out Monday night. In the words on one, Ronaldus Maximus, "trust, but verify".

[teddyballgame]

"I hope this is true!! GW would see his ratings go through the roof!!"

Sounds like a trial ballon. We'll find out Monday night. In the words on one, Ronaldus Maximus, "trust, but verify".

[VictoryGal]

Oh PLEASE let it be really true and not just pretty words to put us back to sleep.

[Junior_G]

Sealing the border is a good move by Bush. It is the correct first step.

Yep.

[MineralMan]

"I've asked him not to post to me because it serves no purpose.

And obviously it's not a rule because he keeps posting to me."

---

Well, I was hoping for a ruling from someone in charge. I'm still hopeful that one will come along.

Here's the thing, as I see it. I haven't been on FR as long as you have, but it seems to me that public threads and messages are open for discussion. If I write something in a thread, I expect other FReepers to respond to it, if they choose to. Often, those reponses are in disagreement with what I wrote. There it is. I post in a public forum, and others respond.

FReepmail is another matter, of course, and I think you should be able to ask people not to send private messages to you. But, the public forum is just that...public.

As long as the basic Rules of Free Republic aren't violated, such as personal attacks and the like, it just seems off the mark a little to try to insist that people not address posts to you in a thread in which you are participating.

That's just my opinion, of course, and I'll certainly abide by any ruling from the moderator or from Jim. I'm afraid that such a rule, though, would tend to limit debate here, and that's something I think would be unhealthy.

[Bear_Slayer]

That would be Borders Books.

I highly doubt he would jeopardize the hispanic vote.

[EyeGuy]

As soon as there is a budget squeeze the first thing to be cut in DOD will be the resources for the NG on the border.

Then we will be back where we started, no fence and no security.

"But taking steps toward putting the NG on the border will mollify people like O'Reilly and enough conservatives to get the Republican leadership past the next election, then it will be back to business as usual.

BUILD THE FENCE!"

Shouldn't we have some spare troops from Germany coming back on line soon. They were "permanently" deployed in Germany, why not along on southern border.

But, better still, as you said a permanent fence-more effective and cheaper by far in the long run.

[Junior_G]

you really think it is going to be easy to find and remove by force 20 million? Hitler only got 13 million.

You ought to educate yourself on the difference between deportation and genocide before making such comments.

[Spiff]

That is only YOUR interpretation of the facts.

OK. What is YOUR interpretation of the facts then, Howlin? Post that and then we can debate it. That is what reasonable discussion is. It is not responding to the facts with, "You just want the Democrats to win!" and other ad hominem attacks and insults.

[trubluolyguy]

At least among those conservatives he had any chance of winning back to start with

---

If he uses the military to shut the illegal activity on our border down and then kicks the can of amnesty down the road a piece....he's got my full support.

[Coop]

Sorry Sweetheart, but this "liar" doesn't want open borders. But again, why address issues when you can just call names, right Sweetie?

[Wimpy329]

Rational thought, I like it!

I've noted some National Guard cheap shots here, (i.e. - "Will they be there to escort illegals?" and "Will they be there to keep tabs on the Minutemen?"). I'll take it as simply the result of being misinformed about the Guard or an opportunity to make a "cute" remark. I'm not interested in a flame war.
Some actual information: The National Guard is composed of two parts, the Air National Guard and the Army National Guard. Most states and territories have units of both. The National Guard is what the US Constitution refers to in Article I, Section 8, Clause 15 and 16 as the militia. The name National Guard came about by subsequent legislation. Day to day the National Guard is governed by the provisions of Title 32 of the United States Code and its chain of command is through a state officer known (in most cases) as The Adjutant General to the Governor. This is a difference between the Guard and the active duty forces and the Reserve forces (Army Reserve, Air Force Reserve, Navy and Marine Corp Reserves). Active duty and Reserves are governed under Title 10 of the US Code and the chain of command runs through the Secretary of Defense to the President. The Posse Comitatus act applies to Title 10 forces and generally prevents the use of title 10 forces in domestic law enforcement. There are exceptions and there are provisions for suspension as has been detailed elsewhere.

Most states have entered into an agreement called EMAC that allows states to support one another in times of emergency (most NG troops supported the Katrina effort under EMAC, once some of the bugs got worked out). I noted one poster suggested states call out their Guard units themselves. Here's the deal with the Guard - day-to-day, we're cheap - small full time force, large numbers who are only paid for drill once a month and a couple of weeks a year normally. The last few years haven't been normal, and the Guard is expensive when in full time Federal service in large numbers (such as airports after Sept 11). Most states can't afford to have the Guard on extended duty on their own nickel (even wildfire support, flood relief, etc usually is reimbursed to the states after disaster declarations open the taps on Federal money).

The elegant thing about having the Guard on the borders is that when the rotation of a unit is complete, and its members go back to their civilian lives they are completely free to talk of their experiences in a way that active duty forces may not be. Also citizen soldiers and citizen airmen are politically tuned to their communities and nation, and understand we should not be there to harass law abiding citizens or to be pawns in the internal politics of Federal agencies.

The best thing the FReeper community could do at this point is to support vocally, through Congressional delegations and this forum, passage of legislation now coming up in the House to give the National Guard a seat at the JCS table, and preserve the independence of the Guard.

[ohioWfan]

Forgive the double post.

Is FR acting up, or is it just my computer?

(But it didn't hurt to ask the question twice..............not that I'll get an answer......)

[VictoryGal]

FR seems awfully slow today (in response time, not content :-)

[Junior_G]

It's FR. I'm having the same problem.