The Topic Got Locked Before I Knew It Was Open!

[JohnKachenmeister]

So if I'm understanding all of this correctly, does that mean an enemy soldier is legally authorized by the GC to shoot a 12 year old cadet when he's in uniform doing something that somewhat helps support some conflict the USAF is fighting. 

Yes.

Under the GC, ANY combatant is a legitimate target.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Then again, after reading the GC's Ive come to the conclusion that anyone having both a CGAux card AND a CAP (AFAux) card, can upon capture be shot as a spy: two IDs ~ probable spy.

As for the Activities thing: If the US is in a war at home (World in Conflict anyone) I think that CAP is definitely going to be doing more. (One big reason to take SOS folks)
We would take over for the 71-L or the SrA at the base Inn.
--- Dropping bombs, no, but we probably will have Stingers on our 182's.  IM SERIOUS

More than likely, those of us fit for service would be first in line at your local draft board.  OR, we would be required to fill in on bases and posts in FRG functions, assist the Red Cross, setup those old cold war radio nets etc. 

Lets hope it never happens, but the way the world is going these days, that prediction has a better chance today than say 10 years ago.

First off, there is no American draft board, nor is there currently any provision under American law that would provide for the emergency establishment of a draft board in a time of war. And no, since the draft was abolished selective services doesnt count. The only thing that would bring on a draft is an act of Congress and we know how long that would take.

Secondly, CAP commanders, as has been recognized time and time again, have no authority under American or International Law, CAPs "constitution" and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, have any lawful authority to issue an order that must be obeyed nor would it hold up in any court in the land if one of us refused an order given by a USAF officer. We salute them as a courtesy, we obey them as a courtesy. Sure we can get 2B'd for disobeying an order, but in the scheme of international and military law...big F'in deal.

CAP is a private non-profit corporation, even when operating as a so-called "force multiplier" to the USAF. Its a non-profit kids. A 501.

We are not authorized under any conditions to bear arms. ANY CONDITION.

Those who think CAP pilots would be up there touching off stingers...well...the flaw in that needs no analysis.

I think this whole thing needs a good going over by a lawyer versed in military and international law. Even when in uniform, we do not wear USAF uniforms, we were USAF TYPE UNIFORMS.

What the USCGAUX does or doesnt do has no bearing on CAP because the organizations are so different that its like comparing apples to pumpkins. Any CAP member (remember the grade is a bling and has no meaning) who decided to "bear arms" whether it be an M-16, a radio, a plane or a sidewinder  would be in violation of so many international laws it would make their heads spin. Come time that there is a true act of war against the US (and terrorism is not an act of war) the USAF would be scrambling in so many directions carrying out so many procedures that they wouldnt even remember CAP existed and if they did, a CAP pilot under the current organizational structure is sure as heck not going to be carrying out military functions in a time of declared war. This isnt WWII folks. Its fun to think about and all, but its not gonna happen. Its not that I dont think it should or that it might be a good idea, its that the current law and structure of CAP itself do not allow for it. 

CAP cant even do something so simple as field a legally functioning medical asset. Come on guys.

The question is not whether CAP is likely to engage in combat, nor is the question addressing whether or not CAP, given its rather dysfunctional management profile, would be successful in combat.  I recognize that the US Congress has assigned CAP to carry out "Non-combat missions and programs for the Air Force".

The question is, however, does the GC recognize auxiliary military forces, however organized and assigned, as "Combatants?"  The answer is "Yes," unless individual members of that organization fall into the exceptions, such as medical troops or chaplains.

I don't see CAP, even in the MOST extreme situations, actually launching ordnance from their planes.  I DO see CAP involved in moving priority cargo and key personnel, however.  If we have stingers on our planes, they will probably be in the box.

[capchiro]

At the present time, congress is considering re-instating the draft and it could be done within a very short time period.

[mikeylikey]

At the present time, congress is considering re-instating the draft and it could be done within a very short time period.

Really?  I watch C-Span and have yet to hear of this.  The closest I read was an an Army Times Poll "should there be a draft?" 

Linky to draft related info please?

BTW......As an Officer, I would prefer there not be a National Draft.  When you force Americans to do something they DO NOT WANT TO DO, they usually end up doing half-assed jobs, being pissy about having to do it, and eventually hate the person making them do it. 

I do believe in National Service though.  I would not mind a law stating something like "before you are considered a Citizen, you must serve our country for 2 years after graduating High School.  Whether that service is military, or civilian, you MUST SERVE".

[RiverAux]

Congress isn't considering it.  One or two congressmen have been half-heartedly pushing for it as a political ploy.  Came up for a vote a year or two ago and not even the bill sponsors voted for it. 

[Tim Medeiros]

I do believe in National Service though.  I would not mind a law stating something like "before you are considered a Citizen, you must serve our country for 2 years after graduating High School.  Whether that service is military, or civilian, you MUST SERVE".

Sounds alot like that Starship Troopers movie a few years back, minus the civilian part, but personally, I like the idea.

This thread has alot of interesting information, I'm certainly glad there are people more knowledgeable on the subject than me willing to educate us about it.

[mikeylikey]

I do believe in National Service though.  I would not mind a law stating something like "before you are considered a Citizen, you must serve our country for 2 years after graduating High School.  Whether that service is military, or civilian, you MUST SERVE".

Sounds alot like that Starship Troopers movie a few years back, minus the civilian part, but personally, I like the idea.

This thread has alot of interesting information, I'm certainly glad there are people more knowledgeable on the subject than me willing to educate us about it.

That was a good movie.  Anyway, we are all here to educate each other!  Or at least that is what they keep telling us.

[NIN]

An interesting read on the transition from a post-Vietnam conscripted Army to the so-called "VOLAR" (Volunteer Army) in the 1970s is a book called "The Battles of Peace" by Michael Lee Lanning.  Its worth the read for some of the hard leadership lessons it presents.

Read most of it and you'll understand why professional soldiers do not welcome a conscripted Army.

[Short Field]

[I do believe in National Service though.  I would not mind a law stating something like "before you are considered a Citizen, you must serve our country for 2 years after graduating High School.  Whether that service is military, or civilian, you MUST SERVE".

Read Robert A. Heinlien's book "Starship Trooper" for more on this requirement.  The movie barely touched on this subject.

Conscripts make poor troops - especially today in our high-tech military.

[star1151]

I do believe in National Service though.  I would not mind a law stating something like "before you are considered a Citizen, you must serve our country for 2 years after graduating High School.  Whether that service is military, or civilian, you MUST SERVE".

Kind of limits the officer pool, does it not?  NROTC denied me for a medical reason, but if that reason didn't exist, I'd hate to be forced to enlist instead of doing ROTC or OCS after college.  Like you said, when people are forced to do something they don't want to do, they generally do a poor job.  I think that extends past the draft (which I'm not subject) and into mandatory national service.

[Gunner C]

Getting back to the GC/LOLWF questions, I read somewhere that the reason that CAP was originally put in uniform was to give the members GC status in case they were picked up by German U-Boats.  It would have been a VERY long voyage back, but they would have been treated as PWs instead of spies, etc.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Getting back to the GC/LOLWF questions, I read somewhere that the reason that CAP was originally put in uniform was to give the members GC status in case they were picked up by German U-Boats.  It would have been a VERY long voyage back, but they would have been treated as PWs instead of spies, etc.

That's true, Gunner.  In mid-1942, when Arnold had reached the decision to arm CAP planes, but had not yet devised the exact method, he asked Gill Robb Wilson if CAP members would carry bombs in civilian clothing and without any military affiliation.  Wilson assured Arnold that CAP members would, even though everyone knew that the Germans did not have a reputation for kindness toward partisans.

Arnold thought the idea through, and decided to make CAP an "Auxiliary" of the Army Air Corps, and put them in a modified Air Corps uniform.

And the rest, is history.

[RiverAux]

I thought we had settled this.  CAP members were wearing uniforms about a year before the organization was transferred to the Army.  They were wearing the Army uniform well before actually being in the Army. 

[lordmonar]

First off, there is no American draft board, nor is there currently any provision under American law that would provide for the emergency establishment of a draft board in a time of war. And no, since the draft was abolished selective services doesnt count. The only thing that would bring on a draft is an act of Congress and we know how long that would take.

The theoretical supposition here is that someone big and bad was attacking us on American Soil...like maybe Mexico or Canada allied against us...how else could CAP be involved.

So...the selective service does count and Congress could pass that bill quickly....only took 2 days for us to come in during WWII.

Secondly, CAP commanders, as has been recognized time and time again, have no authority under American or International Law, CAPs "constitution" and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, have any lawful authority to issue an order that must be obeyed nor would it hold up in any court in the land if one of us refused an order given by a USAF officer. We salute them as a courtesy, we obey them as a courtesy. Sure we can get 2B'd for disobeying an order, but in the scheme of international and military law...big F'in deal.

As far as the law of armed conflict goes and international law....the fact that we internally have a command structure...even if it has no "legal" power, constitutes a command structure in for the LOAC.

CAP is a private non-profit corporation, even when operating as a so-called "force multiplier" to the USAF. Its a non-profit kids. A 501.

We are not authorized under any conditions to bear arms. ANY CONDITION.

By definition or aircraft counts as a "weapons system" and counts as bearing arms.  Our communications network counts as a command and control asset.  All of these make us legal targets.

Those who think CAP pilots would be up there touching off stingers...well...the flaw in that needs no analysis.

I don't know....it did not take the old boys in '42 to talk the government out of some bombs when they needed them.....it would not be too far fetched to see some armed applications of CAP aerial platforms.....not against the Russians....but since this is all hypothetical let's enjoy ourselves.

I think this whole thing needs a good going over by a lawyer versed in military and international law. Even when in uniform, we do not wear USAF uniforms, we were USAF TYPE UNIFORMS.

Uniforms can be as simple as a handkerchief tied around the sleeve.  The enemy does have a copy of AFI 36-2903......oh don't shoot that one....he's not wearing the right color name tapes!

What the USCGAUX does or doesnt do has no bearing on CAP because the organizations are so different that its like comparing apples to pumpkins. Any CAP member (remember the grade is a bling and has no meaning) who decided to "bear arms" whether it be an M-16, a radio, a plane or a sidewinder  would be in violation of so many international laws it would make their heads spin.

No.....he would be defending his country...and even civilians can do that!  The GC specifically protects "volunteer" organizations and affords them the same protection as the regular forces of a combatant country.  For example Hitler Youth units in WWII were armed and sent to the front.  They were legal combatants and afforded POW status.  In this hypothetical we could arm Boy Scouts and they would be legal combatants.

Come time that there is a true act of war against the US (and terrorism is not an act of war) the USAF would be scrambling in so many directions carrying out so many procedures that they wouldnt even remember CAP existed and if they did, a CAP pilot under the current organizational structure is sure as heck not going to be carrying out military functions in a time of declared war. This isnt WWII folks. Its fun to think about and all, but its not gonna happen. Its not that I dont think it should or that it might be a good idea, its that the current law and structure of CAP itself do not allow for it.

Well you are right that this situation would probably never happen...so it is totally hypothtical....but you are wrong about the legal issues.  If Mexico was going to attack us.  They could certainly bomb your CAP hanger and the house that has your CAP HF radio and it would be totally legal as far as the GC is concerned.  It makes no difference if "our" rules don't allow us to use those assets in a conflict....the fact that they "could" be used with a simple executive order by POTUS or an Act of Congress makes them legal targets. 

CAP cant even do something so simple as field a legally functioning medical asset. Come on guys.

Now you are mixing liability law with international law.  We could field them....we just don't want to pay the insurance premiums to cover it.  Has nothing to do with any law forbidding or preventing us from doing it.  It is the CAP lawyers who suggested against it and CAP leaders agreeing.

[wingnut]

Amidst all the add-ins, pork spending, and excitement of the budget process, it has now come out that a tiny clause was slipped into the Pentagon's fiscal year 2007 budget legislation. The one sentence section (number 552 of a total 3510 sections) states that "Paragraph (10) of section 802(a) of title 10, United States Code (article 2(a) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice), is amended by striking `war' and inserting `declared war or a contingency operation'." The measure passed without much notice or any debate. And then, as they might sing on School House Rock, that bill became a law (P.L.109-364).

The addition of five little words to a massive US legal code that fills entire shelves at law libraries wouldn't normally matter for much. But with this change, contractors' 'get out of jail free' card may have been torn to shreds. Previously, contractors would only fall under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, better known as the court martial system, if Congress declared war. This is something that has not happened in over 65 years and out of sorts with the most likely operations in the 21st century.


Simply put under new rules a defense contractor civilian employee can now be charged under the UCMJ without a declared war.

CAP is issued Contracts by USAF to perform missions, in a "contengency operation" can CAP members be considered "volunteer contractors"?

any JAGs out there?

[wingnut]

Does the current CAP ID card meet DOD standards, while on an AFAM we are considered civilian employees

From DODD Policy Manual


B. Geneva Conventions Identification Card

Under both the Hague and Geneva Conventions, Department of Defense employees are entitled to be protected as prisoners of war if captured. These protections are accorded to civilians who accompany the armed forces provided they have received authorization from the armed forces. The DD Form 489 is the Geneva Conventions Identification Card. There is a US DoD/Uniformed Services Civilian, Geneva Conventions Identification Card, DD Form 2764, April 1998, which is also available to document the Geneva Convention Category and the Blood Type.

You ask; Whats my point? a contract janitor cleaning the bathrooms on base is "required" to have a "Standard" DOD ID  card,  go to the DOD  id card web page.

//https://www.cac.mil/CardInfoPrivelege.do

I think it makes more sense to have the correct ID cards in use now rather than a rush to give to us in a crisis.

[wingnut]

Authority to Deploy
DoDD 1404.10 provides for "...the involuntary assignment of civilian employees to Emergency Essential (E-E) positions as may be necessary to meet the exigencies of the circumstances and when unforeseen contingencies prevent prior identification of those positions as being E-E".

Basic definitions associated with this program:
Key Employee: Incumbent of a CONUS position that cannot be vacated during war or national emergency without seriously impairing the mission; such employees have unique or scarce managerial or technical skills required by the wartime mission.


Emergency-Essential (E-E) Employee: Incumbent of an overseas position or who would be sent overseas during a crisis situation; position ensures success of combat operations or supports essential combat systems after a mobilization, evacuation order, or other military crisis.

Cadre Employee: A nucleus of trained personnel capable of setting up new operations and training others.

Alternate Employee: A direct hire U.S. citizen employee who is paid from appropriated funds, assigned to a non-E-E position but performing the duties of another E-E civilian position during a crisis situation

*** ask for volunteers first, if none they can assign a civilian employee to a combat area or situation . . .

[wingnut]

Better Yet from the same policy DOD Policy Manual

Clothing and Equipment:

Standard issue of BDUs and associated clothing/ equipment; additional clothing/equipment required by theater commander.

Authorized insignia - olive drab insignia with letters "US" above left breast pocket.

Name tape above right breast pocket.

Unit patches as authorized by the MACOM or theater commander.

Issue same defensive personal protective gear as military.

Issue black baseball cap to be worn in lieu of BDU cap; may be worn at all times except when commander directs wear of Kevlar helmet.

Civilians authorized to wear this clothing/ equipment are expected to adhere to use and wear instructions contained in AR 670-1. No other dress/grooming standards exist for civilians other than for health/safety concerns.

Weapons:
Privately owned weapons/ammunition are not authorized under any circumstances.

Government Issued weapon and ammunition (sidearm only) for personal protection.

When approved by theater commander.

Acceptance (weapon Issue) is voluntary for all civilian personnel.

Must be trained in proper use and care prior to issue.


*** Interesting Yes?? the UCMJ does now cover civilian employees (See previous post) in a combat or "other special  "undeclared wars.

I think maybe an option would be to have a core group of CAP members who have skills and former military training, these members could volunteer to be placed on an "emergency availability list", that way the CAP members who opt out can do so.

[Major Carrales]

What one is failing to take into account is that, during a national emergency that actaully threatens the US mainland in a serious manner...many of the rules in place now and plans laid outside fo those defense conditions...may fall infavor of laws passes during the emergency that are "necessary and proper."

That could range from Martial Law to emergency legilsation the type of which we cannot anticipate.

In those uncertain times CAP could be absorbed into the USAF or even disbanned, there is no way to know until the enemy is at the gates.

[lordmonar]

What we are dealing with here is two things.

1.  What the international community considers CAP to be.

2.  What the U.S. Law and the we consider ourselves to be.

So....yes by U.S. law, USAF and CAP regulations we are no combatants....but under international law we are.

We could be legal targets and if captured we are afforded POW rights we were ever to have a war on U.S. Soil.