Increasing military's role raises questionsBush disaster-relief plan complicated by law against using active-duty troops for law enforcement, possible overextension of Guard.
By Tom Bowman and Siobhan Gorman / Baltimore Sun
Excerpts:
Bush, in a nationally televised speech from New Orleans last week, called for "a broader role for the armed forces, the institution of our government most capable of massive logistical operations on a moment's notice," in responding to disasters.
Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies said concerns over Posse Comitatus are misplaced because the president could have declared a national emergency. That would have freed troops to take part in law enforcement and other types of domestic duties.National Guard troops, who are commanded by a state's governor unless called to federal duty by the president, can perform law-enforcement functions under a state's laws.
(snip)
Aside from a debate over Posse Comitatus, Sylves said, adding the active military to disaster response raises a host of difficult questions, including whether the active military should have shoot-to-kill orders domestically to keep order in a disaster; whether the National Guard or the active military is in charge if both are responding; what authority governors have in such a situation.
Within the military, there will be tension between the roles of the active duty officers and the National Guard, Sylves said.
(snip)
Blum is resistant to such an idea, saying his troops should be prepared for everything from combat to disaster relief.
"I don't think our military is large enough to devote a sizable portion for specialized units," he said.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/services/site/premium/access-registered.intercept
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
