Guard Border Mission Draws to a close

I do not disagree with your assessment of current force applications, however, the name is National Guard. Or on another front, Coast Guard. But does the Guard have Law Enforcement authority like the Coast Guard?

Op-for said "While the Guard is supposed to supplement civil authorities in times of crisis, it is not intended to BE the authority"

Excuse me.

But the United States military has historically patrolled the country's borders against foreign encroachment since its antiquity. The switch to limited "domestic law enforcement" is a recent phenomenon peculiar to such countries as the United States.

And certain Latin American countries to the south don't share your dishonest assumptions that their borders shouldn't be manned by the military.

Nice try. But your tripe is little more than an attempt to "shape perceptions" rather than "tell it like it is".

"especially for something like border patrol, clearly a domestic security mission"

False.

A bald-faced lie.

Border patrol is - by its very definition - an INTERNATIONAL security mission; one that deals with a foreign counterpart, a counterpart that comes from a foreign territory that is outside the control of your own domestic law enforcement's jurisdiction.

Do Not Pass Go.

Do Not Collect $200

Op-for said: "With all of the priorities that Guard has now, to include training for war overseas, preparing for disaster response missions, and patrolling the border is a mission that could be handed off to civilian law enforcement authorities in light of these other requirements."

Jesus. You are either clueless or dishonest. (probably both).

The Guardsmen are being used as show-pieces in order to politically paint them as FAILURES!

They're like the US Navy and Coast Guard who have to operate under current crippling ROE's under SOUTHCOM, only worse. They don't even get to pursue or arrest (and technically the Navy can't arrest either).

The Latins and the US government are scared stiff of the US military securing the border because it is the one organization that can secure it. Much of it is political. If the Latins try to use provacteur tactics against the military, the US government will either have to side with foreign governments and attack the US military or side with the US Military and blame the provacteurs.

Their answer: point to the Military on the border that they've sabotaged by limiting their time on duty to a matter of weeks and in some cases DAYS!

"We sent them there and it didn't solve the problem" Code: they failed.

You can't even get processed correctly on station, let alone learn the job at hand and become efficient at it - and these jackass governors KNOW IT. They've denied any units with helo and wheeled transport, denied any military equipment electronic/communication/surveillance requests and gear, logistics to support that gear, denied authority to operate (not to mention they're the wrong types of units), put up artificial administrative barriers to prevent them from working seamlessly with the border patrol, not to mention develop long-term contacts.

Think it's funny?

Think again.

In case you're as clueless as I think you are, this is the same thing that will happen in Iraq. The new administration will sabotage, deny supplies and deny authority to CENTCOM, crippling the mission. We won't even be allowed to TALK to the Iraqi security forces without minders and interference from the State Department. When things start going to shit, the politicians will use that AGAINST the Military:

"You Failed (just like we planned) and it's evidence that your mission is hopeless."

Is it becoming clear to you now, or was it clear to you from the get-go.

Op-for: You may not condone this kind of treachery in OIF and OEF, but the fact that you condone it when it suits your purpose is disgusting.

Wouldn't surprise me, Mr. Jiminez, but that might have been somewhat harsh.

I've heard something to the effect that the National Guard are being used as political stage props, though. Yes, anybody who has ever done a real job understands that you can't settle into it in a matter of weeks or days.

That said, I don't think op-for is lying (as you put it) although I do think that some of his assumptions aren't necessarily true.

I've quoted you and linked to you here: http://consul-at-arms.blogspot.com/2008/05/re-guard-border-mission-draws-to-close.html