Civilian Homeland Security Force

[Sleepwalker]

I understand what you meant, now that you clarified your thoughts.  The original problem I had was your sentance "Actually the integration of U.S. military and civil/domestic capability is good".  I don't have any problem with learning lessons from each other, or working with each other, just not have any direct "integration".  As an historian, I know that this is always the first step would-be despots take.   

[CAPLAW]

I remember that they tried this back in Germany. 

[RiverAux]

This "issue"  popped up yesterday in several other discussion groups I am a part of and I suspect as part of an organized campaign, probably designed to try to scare people about a certain candidate.  I wouldn't take it seriously

[Auxpilot]

My gut is that his proposal is at best silly and at worst dangerous. I'm not sure if it shows a lack of understanding regarding the enemy that faces us, or a lack of support for our military.

I fear the latter is the driving force here.

Having been active Air Force when the money started to dry up under previous inept leadership, I can tell you that mistakes made in the next four years will haunt us for decades. They don't go away in 2012.

Barney Frank wants to cut the military budget by 25% - who is he working for, Osama

[Smithsonia]

Sleepwalker;
I am an Historian too. Civil Liberties are important to guard. By providing domestic services at a higher level is better than turning it over to the military in a pinch. Fire Brigades of volunteers became paid Fire Departments because the volunteers couldn't keep up. Militias of Minutemen became the Army and Marines because farmers and shop keepers couldn't fill the bill.

We must rise to the occasion and call to duty. Our missions must expand to remain relevant. BUT, that is another topic, entirely. On this subject -- training to the highest levels, remaining volunteer, serving our country, being experts in our fields and at our duties -- will preserve domestic tranquility and enhance our liberties -- not sacrifice those liberties. If George Washington were alive today he'd lead the National Guard or the CAP because for him we are as close as it gets to what he once knew and understood. BUT, just because we are volunteers doesn't mean we can't be professional with our missions.

[Sleepwalker]

  Then I think we are in agreement. 

[Flying Pig]

I don't think anyone is saying volunteers cant be professional, however, you are never going to have the same level in a part time volunteer as someone who is paid to do that job as a career/profession.  Unless of course, that volunteer acts in the same or similar capacity as a volunteer that they do in their paid life.  Believe me, I do Homeland Security, SAR and Law Enforcement as a CAP volunteer and as a paid career.  So if we are going to spend cash. I say beef up the paid ranks first.

[Smithsonia]

Flying Pig;
Volunteers are not as good as a paid professional. Really? I am so high priced as to not be affordable for anyone   national clients OR for the work I give for free to the CAP. I know that you allowed for this caveat in your blog. BUT, some stuff I give to CAP, is more than what is being generated inside all of the military.

My field is Media Relations, Public Affairs, Newsroom Consulting. I just came back from many days selling my services on a Navy project for a very good price. If asked, I'd donate the same information to CAP. So I suppose for some things you may be right BUT for many others I think you are quite mistaken. Similar for several pilots that have 20,000 hours in AF and Airlines and anoher 5000 hrs SAR for CAP. Don't short sell what we have and therefore what we can do.

IF you'd like it better: Pay us for one weekend a month and 2 weeks in the summer and make us even more professional. Of course, there are many issues under this idea and I don't want to drift the thread.

[Ned]

With respect to Smithsonia, it is also unconstitutional.  You cannot have the Military (of any sort!) policing America!

Ahh, no.  Using the military to enforce laws is a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, not the Constitution.

And if Congress wants to enact a law that would allow the military (or anyone else) to enforce laws, they could do so with a simple majority vote and the President's signature.

And a civilian law enforcement force is not prohibited by the PCA or any other federal law.  Heck. that's kind of what the FBI is doing every day, isn't it?

Ned Lee
Former CAP Legal Officer

[Smithsonia]

I think folks are getting a little hung up on what the military does. They shoot people and blow up stuff. BUT, they also have communication nets, command and control protocols, progressive training and educational programs. They do lot's of things that we can learn from. GPS, Sat-Imaging, Hand held radios, etc. are all military adapted equipment. So is SAR by plane. ARPA and DARPA through the Dept of Justice and then FEMA have many programs that we should coat tail and many ideas which we can use. Besides I doubt they'll ever allow me to drive an F-16 on age factors alone. Those of you that see the military one way are missing an opportunity. The opportunity to learn, adapt, modify, and train.

[blackrain]

Greetings to all on this election night. Fortunately I'm finally back in the states now and enjoying what this great nation has to offer.

Good discussion and I think it does touch on issues we've all discussed before. I agree with flying pig that paid professional should be funded first as a core force with volunteers plusing up as needed. More well trained paid professionals can only help improve the skill level of the volunteers.

In fairness the National Guard is a military organization that can do Federal military mission under command of the President and a state law enforcment/civil defense role under the command of that particular states governor so it's not unprecedented to have an essentially military organization doing a domestic mission.

Can't wait to see how this all plays out at any rate

[LittleIronPilot]

I think folks are getting a little hung up on what the military does. They shoot people and blow up stuff. BUT, they also have communication nets, command and control protocols, progressive training and educational programs. They do lot's of things that we can learn from. GPS, Sat-Imaging, Hand held radios, etc. are all military adapted equipment. So is SAR by plane. ARPA and DARPA through the Dept of Justice and then FEMA have many programs that we should coat tail and many ideas which we can use. Besides I doubt they'll ever allow me to drive an F-16 on age factors alone. Those of you that see the military one way are missing an opportunity. The opportunity to learn, adapt, modify, and train.

Understood....so long as it is also understood that the military's NUMBER ONE MISSION should ALWAYS be to "break things and kill people".

[Smithsonia]

I'm not speaking of changing the military one little bit. I'm for going through their entire program and picking the best  information and procedures for CAP. When GPS rolled out, the military couldn't quite understand why and how civilian folks would use it. So, they provided an open door policy for civilian side information and technical review inside ARPA/DARPA. They provided information from what had been military information through USGS, FAA, and many other civilian sources. This information was first built through the Global Strategic Survey. This information was originally developed so the military knew the Lat/lons of everybody in the world. They needed this information just in case they would call in a Air Strike on your BBQ. This office was made to facilitate the transfer of information for a more peaceful purpose.

It didn't change the military's commitment to blowing up things. It did change civilians abilities to navigate the world. The technical guys that declassify these things are interesting. Meaning, until they figure out and deploy an anti or safety-device they won't clear the original device for civilian use. SO, in this case they deployed the detunable GPS-SAT. This kind of reclassification isn't a priority. Emphasis on this activity comes and goes. It goes as we gear up for war, and information closes down. It comes during hard economic times and on-coming peace/withdrawal when the military is fighting fewer enemies and more congressional bean counters. As an act of defensive goodwill they show all the material and information that they can declassify and pass it to civilian use. They do this to get tax dollars and justify their budgets. Which is likely now or soon. GPS was rolled out during Gulf War 1 and took off in the following economic downturn.

As part of some very near future National economic stimulation package the military will open up again. They prefer to work with people they trust. CAP is trustworthy. We should have people ready to cherry pick the best ideas for our missions without compromising the military's missions. AND, we should be ready to teach what we know to anyone that needs to know (given OpSec) without compromising our mission.

[wuzafuzz]

Unfotunately, civilian "volunteers" don't protect anyone, no matter what their title.   If they are going to invest money into programs for Homeland Security, I would like to see it go to beef up the ranks of the gunslingers and intelligence ranks.  Lets face it, when it hits the fan, its not civilian volunteers who take care of it.  I know there are many who are committed, but I dont want to see military level spending put up to train people who might be "busy" when the call comes.  Regardless of what many people may think, there is a completely different level of commitment with people who's paid profession is "protecting".  Its paid men and women with guns and badges, or both, who get it done in the end.

There are lots of reserve and volunteer deputies, police officers, firefighters, and EMS folks who bring plenty to the table.  They are marginalized in some jurisdictions but carry the day in others.  By all means beef up the paid ranks when possible, but don't discount the value of properly trained and committed volunteers.  Most importantly, use the right resource for the job at hand.

[Cecil DP]

Barney Frank wants to cut the military budget by 25% - who is he working for, Osama

Well he is the most openly gay congressman we have. In fact several years ago one of his roomates ran a "callboy" operation out of the congressman's apartment.

[DNall]

That whole concept is innate distrust and fear of the military.

Recruiting is going to drop off bad now. And budgets are going to get slashed. Not 25%, but bad. We're strained now. When cut back, we'll be drastically restrained in what we're capable of overseas. That means the country has to take a big step back in the GWOT, and undertake a more isolationist approach.

War is diplomacy by other means. You can't disengage militarily, including from being the world's policeman, without in turn disengaging economically or losing diplomatic leverage. All this will ultimately lead to a lot bigger and more costly fight down the road. That's really unfortunate that not everyone understands this.

Anyway, cuts to the military budget will be magnified in the CAP budget. There's less slack to swing our way. You can expect less training resources & downsizing the paid staff.

I do not expect any civilian national security force to get off the ground. That whole phrase sounds VERY frightening. I can't imagine the ACLU or all the congressmen that fought so hard against the Patriot Act would be able to support such an idea in any form. To whatever extent it does happen, CAP will not benefit. In fact, I would keep CAP as far away from such a political hot potato as possible. i would not want to get caught in any backlash or crossfire when it starts to come apart.

[RRLE]

First, I voted for the other guy. Second, as RiverAux wrote this topic popped up all over the internet the day before the election. Third, if you all take a deep breath and really read the position paper then you might find out that CAP could benefit.

Try reading: HELPING ALL AMERICANS SERVE THEIR COUNTRY: BARACK OBAMA AND JOE BIDEN'S PLAN FOR UNIVERSAL VOLUNTARY CITIZEN SERVICE. There should be plenty in there to warm the hearts of CAP recruiters.

[A.Member]

Try reading: HELPING ALL AMERICANS SERVE THEIR COUNTRY: BARACK OBAMA AND JOE BIDEN'S PLAN FOR UNIVERSAL VOLUNTARY CITIZEN SERVICE. There should be plenty in there to warm the hearts of CAP recruiters.

That does not address his his proposed civilian security force as stated in his speech.  But I do love this contradiction of Barney Frank's recent statement:

Before the 2000 election, George Bush and Dick Cheney famously told our military "Help is on the way."

Today, the active Army is short 3,000 captains and majors, and 58 percent of recent West Point graduates are choosing to leave the force – double the historic average. We do not have a single combat brigade at home in reserve, ready for an unexpected crisis. Our National Guard and Reserves have only half the equipment levels they need, hampering their ability to respond to crises, foreign and domestic. Barack Obama and Joe Biden will strengthen the military and enable more men and women to serve their country in the armed forces.

Expand to Meet Military Needs on the Ground: A major stress on our troops comes from insufficient ground forces. Barack Obama and Joe Biden support plans to increase the size of the Army by 65,000 troops and the Marines by 27,000 troops. Increasing our end strength will help units retrain and re-equip properly between deployments and decrease the strain on military families.

Solve Recruitment and Retention Problems: A nation of 300 million strong should not be struggling to find enough qualified citizens to serve. Recruiting and retention problems have been swept under the rug by lowering standards and using the "Stop Loss" program to keep our servicemen and women in the force after their enlistment has expired. Even worse, the burdens of fixing these problems have been placed on the shoulders of young recruiting sergeants, instead of leadership in Washington. America needs a leader who can inspire today's youth to serve our nation the same way President Kennedy once did—reaching out to youth, as well as the parents, teachers, coaches, and community and religious leaders who influence them. Barack Obama and Joe Biden will make it a presidential imperative to restore the ethic of public service to the agenda of today's youth, whether it be serving their local communities in such roles as teachers or first responders, or serving in the military and reserve forces or diplomatic corps that keep our nation free and safe.

Rebuild the Military for 21st-Century Tasks: As we rebuild our armed forces, we must meet the full spectrum needs of the new century, not simply recreate the military of the Cold War era. In particular, we must focus on strengthening the ground force units and skills that military officers have dubbed "High Demand/Low Density."

The U.S. military must:
• Build up our special operations forces, civil affairs, information operations, engineers, foreign area officers, and other units and capabilities that remain in chronic short supply.
• Invest in foreign language training, cultural awareness, and human intelligence and other needed counterinsurgency and stabilization skill sets.
• Create a specialized military advisors corps, which will enable us to better build up local allies' capacities to take on mutual threats.

Guarantee Our Ground Forces Have the Proper Training for New Challenges: Obama and Biden will ensure that Soldiers and Marines have sufficient training time before they are sent into battle. This is not the case at the moment, where American forces are being rushed to Iraq and Afghanistan, often with less individual and unit training than is required...

...Ensure the Guard and Reserves Can Meet their Homeland Security Missions: The poor readiness of America's Guard and Reserve forces threatens our ability to respond to natural disasters or terrorist attacks at home. We saw this, sadly, after both Hurricane Katrina and the tornadoes in Kansas. Because of the depletion of its resources in Iraq, the National Guard is less ready today than it was on 9/11. Nearly 90 percent of units have serious equipment shortages; many have less than 1/3 of the equipment they require. A particular focus of the Obama-Biden plan will be to reverse the trend of "cross-leveling," the cannibalizing of soldiers and machines from units back home for missions abroad.

Make the Reserve and National Guard Components Whole: Today, the selected Reserve makes up 37 percent of the total force, but only receives 3 percent of the equipment funding and 8 percent of total DOD budget. Barack Obama and Joe Biden will resource and equip the Reserve and Guard to meet their missions not only overseas, but also at home. Barack Obama's administration will consult regularly with governors of the 50 states on the needs of their Guard units.

Now, when you're making more recent statements about cutting 25% of the military spending (their words, not mine), how on God's green earth can you retain readiness levels let alone expand programs?!  So, which is it?  Doesn't look like they're on the same page.  Can't wait to hear that one explained. 

I agree 100% with DNall...CAP stays as far away from this steaming dung pile as possible - we don't want the stink to get attached to us.

[Flying Pig]

Unfotunately, civilian "volunteers" don't protect anyone, no matter what their title.   If they are going to invest money into programs for Homeland Security, I would like to see it go to beef up the ranks of the gunslingers and intelligence ranks.  Lets face it, when it hits the fan, its not civilian volunteers who take care of it.  I know there are many who are committed, but I dont want to see military level spending put up to train people who might be "busy" when the call comes.  Regardless of what many people may think, there is a completely different level of commitment with people who's paid profession is "protecting".  Its paid men and women with guns and badges, or both, who get it done in the end.

There are lots of reserve and volunteer deputies, police officers, firefighters, and EMS folks who bring plenty to the table.  They are marginalized in some jurisdictions but carry the day in others.  By all means beef up the paid ranks when possible, but don't discount the value of properly trained and committed volunteers.  Most importantly, use the right resource for the job at hand.

Your missing my point.  When we are talking about a volunteer Homeland Security Force, I am seeing something like CAP on a larger scale. Hence.....civilians with no authoriity.  I am not talking about Reserve Deputies and firefighters, who bring with them some type of law enforcement authority.  If his idea is to have a national reserve police, then I still say NO anyway.

[A.Member]

Your missing my point.  When we are talking about a volunteer Homeland Security Force, I am seeing something like CAP on a larger scale. Hence.....civilians with no authoriity.  I am not talking about Reserve Deputies and firefighters, who bring with them some type of law enforcement authority.  If his idea is to have a national reserve police, then I still say NO anyway.

Agreed. And if it's something else, explain what it would do that one of the umpteen hundred different federal, state, or local agencies and/or volunteer services don't already do.