Military at the border??

[Chucko]

I would have done this 25 years ago. If the Border Patrol can't stop the flow, the military should be able to. I just hope they won't continue the catch and release policy. Catch them and across the border they go. That should be all the due process they get.

But, maybe this is just a bargaining chip by Trump to get a wall going.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/03/trump-says-military-will-secure-southern-border-until-wall-can-be-built.html

President Trump on Tuesday said that the U.S. will secure the southern border with the military until a wall can be built, calling the move a “big step.”

Trump made the remarks during a meeting with Baltic leaders, where he said he had discussed the matter with Defense Secretary Jim Mattis.
“Until we can have a wall and proper security, we’re going to be guarding our border with the military,” he said. “That's a big step, we really haven’t done that before, or certainly not very much before.”

At a news conference later, he confirmed the plan, saying the border is unprotected by "our horrible, horrible and very unsafe laws."

"We don't have laws, we have catch-and-release," he said. "You catch and then you immediately release and people come back years later for a court case, except they virtually never come back."

Trump did not offer specifics, but the move appears to be at least partly motivated by a caravan of over 1,000 Central American migrants heading toward the U.S. border. Buzzfeed, which first reported on the caravan, said that Mexican officials had not yet attempted to stop the flow.

[Ret10Echo]

I have sat through the day-long legal brief on JTF-6 missions on the border.

Bad idea... Posse Comitatus Act violations will result in service members being charged criminally.



18 U.S. Code § 1385 - Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus

Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
(Added Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, § 18(a), 70A Stat. 626; amended Pub. L. 86–70, § 17(d), June 25, 1959, 73 Stat. 144; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

[bblhead672]

Couldn't the military be used under the Insurrection Act ?

The Insurrection Act of 1807 is a United States federal law (10 U.S.C. §§ 251–255) that governs the ability of the President of the United States to deploy military troops within the United States to put down lawlessness, insurrection, and rebellion.

[Ret10Echo]

Why would we want to establish a precedence for active military operations domestically?

Bad idea

Knife cuts both ways.



I'm not a lawyer


These guys are (https://www.law.berkeley.edu/library/resources/disasters/Crockett.pdf)

[7624U]

NG Regulations 500-5
www.ngbpdc.ngb.army.mil/pubs/500/ngr500_5_angi10_208.pdf

5-4. Border Security Operations (BSO)
a. Thirty-nine of the fifty-four states and territories with National Guard forces possess a land and/or sea
territorial border. As such, National Guard border security-related activities occur on a regular, although typically
temporary basis.
b. Key to National Guard border security operations is the support provided to LEAs in the detection of
transnational threats desiring entry to the homeland by land, maritime, or air conveyance along the northern,
southern or maritime borders. Additional support activities include, but are not limited to: training, technical
support, services, intelligence analysis, surveillance, the installation of communications towers, permanent and
temporary vehicle barriers, and pedestrian fences.
NGR 500-5/ANGI 10-802 August 18, 2010
14
c. The NGB Border Security Operations (BSO) Branch serves as the NGB’s channel of communications
between federal, state and local authorities participating in border security law enforcement operations; monitors
domestic border-related activities; works with interagency partners on related matters; and develops future initiatives
that support the National Guard and its role in border security/homeland security, and homeland defense operations.

10-3. Title 32
a. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution authorizes the National Guard to operate under state control but in the
service of the Federal Government. This provision for state forces to operate in the service of the Federal
Government is unique to the National Guard and is codified under the authority of Title 32 U.S. Code. When
conducting domestic law enforcement support and mission assurance operations under the authorities of Title 32,
National Guard members are under the command and control of the state and thus in a state status, but are paid with
federal funds. Under Title 32, the Governor maintains command and control of National Guard forces even though
those forces are being employed “in the service of the United States” for a primarily federal purpose. Chapter 9 and
Section 502(f) of Title 32 provide specific guidance related to “homeland defense activities” and “other duty”
missions, enabling Governors access to federal funding for domestic missions including law enforcement support
and mission assurance operations.

Just have to get Homeland security to ask for assistance and tell the states we will fund more then just the use of your troops.
nothing new https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/25/us/national-guard-in-texas-could-get-arrest-power.html

[Chucko]

Why would we want to establish a precedence for active military operations domestically?

Bad idea

Knife cuts both ways.



I'm not a lawyer


These guys are (https://www.law.berkeley.edu/library/resources/disasters/Crockett.pdf)

We can help other countries defend their borders, why can't the NG defend ours against threats especially if the border Patrol is getting overwhelmed by outsiders.

We listened to lawyers during the last administration and I am sick of them.

[Ret10Echo]

We can help other countries defend their borders, why can't the NG defend ours against threats especially if the border Patrol is getting overwhelmed by outsiders.

We listened to lawyers during the last administration and I am sick of them.

National Guard changes the discussion. Active Military I disagree with. YOMV. That's not a legal perspective, that's a "been there" perspective.

[doctom54]

Put our guys a kilometer inside Mexico and the Posse Comitatus act doesn't apply.

BUT

How about this. We round up all the Mexican Generals. Tell them we are putting say $100 million dollars in a Swiss Bank account. At the end of year it is all theirs EXCEPT we take out $10,000 for everyone who makes it across the border.
They can do the math and will figure out real quick it is in their best interest to not let anyone illegal across.

[Sdiver]

Hell, why not put veterans down there?
Just keep 'em supplied with Bacon, Bourbon and cigars, and I'm sure you'd see the invasion ... errr ... influx of illegals go way down.

Hell, if they're not going to use 'em at schools to protect kids, why not put 'em at the border to protect all of us?

[mojaveman]

I seem to remember the USMC doing some type of border surveillance operations twenty years ago and they ended up killing an innocent young sheepherder. The incident caused an uproar in the media.

Probably not a good idea for active duty military.

[EricV]

Wilmington Delaware was occupied by the Delaware National Guard for something like 9 months after MLK got shot. Governor Terry was a Southern Democrat BTW. He had Delaware State Troopers involved in the patrols for Use of Force issues. Not only did the rioting stop, but crime was down big time for 9 months.

Call up the Texas NG and get Texas Rangers involved for Use of Force issues. Liberals will howl like they did in Delaware but who cares??

[Mustang Man]

How about private contractors?

We already used them as a loop hole over seas as they are not military, might as well put them on the border and have our troops do the real overseas work.

[ddoering]

Couldn't the military be used under the Insurrection Act ?

In Sacramento? Yes.

[Team Sergeant]

Why would we want to establish a precedence for active military operations domestically?


Who said it was going to be AD?

You know the drug cartels are pissed as are then "American" border town police and politicians who take the cartel bribes.

[Joker]

Who said they are there to arrest someone?

[Texas_Shooter]

They put National Guard on the border during the Bush Administration http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/14/AR2006051400773.html. Look how well that worked out. Plus I'm pretty sure all they were able to do was point and call the border patrol to come and pick them up. More Border Patrol Agents is what we need. Federal Deputized agents that can make arrests.

[tom kelly]

Who said they are there to arrest someone?

THE C I A's Special Activities Division, could sheep dip the Drone Pilots based in Las Vegas and demonstrate the Hell Fire Missile's accuracy as a deterrent....SERIOUSLY what can be done to stop this bullshit of illegal immigration supported by the Mexican Gov. who are now transporting the Central American invaders through Mexico to the U S Border....

[PSM]

Who said they are there to arrest someone?

Exactly. Those willing to actually cross the border get passed off to the BP agents standing behind them. This is a foreign invasion. What does the oath say?

The wordings of the current oath of enlistment and oath for commissioned officers are as follows:

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

Does the Posse Comitatus Act supersede the oaths taken in all circumstances? Is an illegal alien crossing our border covered? They are not. If we don't protect our borders, we will eventually be protecting our homes.

[WarriorDiplomat]

We can help other countries defend their borders, why can't the NG defend ours against threats especially if the border Patrol is getting overwhelmed by outsiders.

We listened to lawyers during the last administration and I am sick of them.

I agree with you but aren't we using the military to enforce law if we do this? enforcing law is a law enforcement job but capturing unknowns at the border and holding them for the border patrol sounds good let them do the paperwork and NG do the patrolling and capture/denial operations. I am all down with placing the military in positions to fight off cartel harassment like Nogales and other places I feel the military may be better suited for those fights than the ICE/DEA/Border Patrol after all most of these Cartel muscle/trigger men are military trained or ex-military like the Zetas...come to think of it the border patrol and DEA love it when they can recruit ex-military the transition is easy and they reap the benefits of military trained tactical types. I think the only trick here to educate the citizenry on the difference and that placing military to guard its borders is not only constitutional but its intended purpose of the well armed militia as the forefathers saw it it is in our Oath.

The deterrence of lightly armed Feds fighting military trained Cartel strongmen is not much of one but place the combat patrols on the border with Infantry and you have an over-matched group of thugs getting their ass handed to them with military tactics and battle drills now that is a deterrent. Kind of like the difference between Tacoma PD targeting gangs and drug dealers but Rangers doing to fighting....the Crips have not been a force on hilltop ever since and the ranger still lives in the same house....the cops have never publicly admitted to any dead gangbangers from the incident but I have a hard time 2/75 studs didn't kill at least 1 or 2.

[PSM]

Mark Levin, a Constitutional scholar/lawyer addressed the Posse Comitatus Act tonite here: https://tunein.com/podcasts/Conservative-Talk/The-Mark-Levin-Show-p30095/?topicid=120705921

[sinjefe]

Given that the discussion on the part of the WH seems to be revolving around National Security v. Immigration, I'm curious as to what our resident attorneys think of this:

http://www.endusmilitarism.org/PDF/military_detention_of_US_citizens_and_18_USC_4001a .pdf

The argument seems to be that, since the President is C-in-C, he has the authority to "detain" (wherever) enemy combatants (referring to the authorization of the use of military force).

So, as I understand it (laymans terms), an example might be members of the US Military observes group of people crossing the international border and detains them (meanwhile contacts USBP) IOT sort out if any of them are AQ, NK, ISIS, whatever. USBP shows up and, once DOD sorts out none are enemy combatants, CBP takes over.

Thoughts?

PS- It looks like (to me) it is authorized in T10 USC, Subtitle A, Part I, Ch. 15 (Military support to civilian law enforcement agencies), Front Matter (Department of Defense Authority To Provide Assistance To Secure the Southern Land Border of the United States)
link: http://uscode.house.gov/browse/prelim@title10/subtitleA/part1/chapter15&edition=prelim

[Ret10Echo]

Who said it was going to be AD?

You know the drug cartels are pissed as are then "American" border town police and politicians who take the cartel bribes.

No "said"... I do believe that most people who read the headline are assuming AD since they do not appreciate the nuance of AD as opposed to NG and Title 10 - Title 32.

[Box]

JTF-6 activities always progressed under the veil of counter-drug ops; using active duty military to conduct active LE duties against US citizens was always a Posse Comitatus nightmare and like Ret10Echo said, the result was countless hours of ridiculously over engineered legal briefings about ROE and Posse Comitatus.

I think using active duty troops opens a 'Yuge' can of worms but it seems like Posse Comitatus concerns would be a little different in the case of immigration control. It would certainly be argued by the administration that troops are being used to actively defend against foreign invaders. It could also be argued by the opposition that such a deployment of resources would be done purely to enforce domestic immigration policy.

As others have already stated, Posse Comitatus doesn't apply the National Guard or Coast Guard. The USMC is also under different restrictions than the US Army.
Attaching a Marine corps unit to the Coast Guard and deploying USANG troops seems like a pretty convenient way around posse comitatus -

Seems like a slippery slope considering the US Border Patrol has a hard time enforcing the law as it is and they are quite literally THE.US.BORDER.PATROL.
...activists judges and corrupt state legislators will expend every effort to undermine any effort to secure the nations borders

Inertesting times to be an American citizen.

[TOMAHAWK9521]

Kind of like the difference between Tacoma PD targeting gangs and drug dealers but Rangers doing to fighting....the Crips have not been a force on hilltop ever since and the ranger still lives in the same house....the cops have never publicly admitted to any dead gangbangers from the incident but I have a hard time 2/75 studs didn't kill at least 1 or 2.

Ah, yes. The Hilltop exchange. Remembering that incident brings a smile to my face. No, I, like most of the guys, didn't get to take part in it. But it sure was fun seeing and hearing all the positive feedback from the public and then watch how the CoC had no choice but to go easy on the guys involved or else face a PR nightmare.

[Badger52]

In Sacramento? Yes.:D

[Golf1echo]

Civil disturbance means acts of violence and disorder prejudicial to the public law and order. It includes acts such as riots, acts of violence, insurrections, unlawful obstructions or assemblages, or other disorders prejudicial to public law and order. It also includes all domestic conditions requiring or likely to require the use of federal armed forces.

The NG has been involved with a Civil Disturbance protocol for a long time, I'd say at the very least illegal border activity fits these descriptions.

Perhaps we just need to define a disputed zone, Immigration has increased our population and it could be argued we need to manifest some destiny once again. Zachary Taylor would have approved :D

https://www.history.com/topics/mexican-american-war

[JJ_BPK]

Black Jack Pursing didn't seem to get hung up on crossing the border when he chased Poncho?

https://www.defensemedianetwork.com/stories/hunting-the-insurgent-leader/

I do not see this as a big deal.

[Ret10Echo]

What's coming out in the media...


Enjoy this quote Richard Barlow, then a top Border Patrol official in San Diego, said their success as lookouts varied because they were unarmed and needed protection in more dangerous areas.

“They aren’t allowed to have contact (with people arrested), so they’re basically eyes,” Barlow said.

Full story HERE (https://federalnewsradio.com/defense-main/2018/04/guards-last-border-deployments-offer-clues-to-the-future/)

[bblhead672]

Ran across this in my interweb journeys today.

US Army on the Mexican Border, A Historical Perspective (http://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/combat-studies-institute/csi-books/Matthews_op22.pdf)

Since the mid-19th century, the United States has frequently employed
the US Army on its southern border to perform various roles in support of
the Nation—from outright war, to patrolling the border, to chasing bandits
while securing persons and property on both sides of the border, and most
recently to supporting civil law enforcement and antidrug efforts. Events
since 9/11, such as the recent deployment of National Guard Soldiers to
the Mexican border, are only the latest manifestation of this long tradition.
This 22nd Occasional Paper in the Combat Studies Institute (CSI) Long
War Series, The US Army on the Mexican Border: A Historical Perspective,
by CSI historian Matt M. Matthews, reviews the lengthy history of the
US Army on the Mexican border and highlights recurring themes that are
relevant to today’s ongoing border security mission.

[Team Sergeant]

What's coming out in the media...


Enjoy this quote

Full story HERE (https://federalnewsradio.com/defense-main/2018/04/guards-last-border-deployments-offer-clues-to-the-future/)

Funny, how I remembered the Border Patrol/US Forest Service/ DEA all calling Special Forces in the 90’s requesting our presence on the border, in the forest, and leading the way to drug cartel factories and all for the very same reason, they were too scared to do it themselves, it was too dangerous.

I also remember the lads we sent to the US border reporting low flying aircraft coming from Mexico into the United States and when reported to the feds, nothing.

Just watched a “new” documentary on netflix concerning the hunt for pabalo escobar, the documentary stated the DEA “did it all” and not a single mention of US Army Special Operations involvement………….

I’m thinking the left-wing would like all the sheeple to think the “feds” are the absolute best at what they do.

Until it gets dangerous…….. then they call in Special Operations. Don’t believe me? Two words, “Waco Texas”. This time the FBI/ATF brought in Special Operations because it was “too dangerous”.

Wonder how long it will take before some national guardsmen and border patrol agents are once again caught taking bribes. Seems to happen every time the guard is sent to the border.

The stories we and JTF-6 could tell............:munchin

[Ret10Echo]

The stories we and JTF-6 could tell............:munchin

;)

[PSM]

The Ft. Huachuca Aerostat was removed just after Biden was sworn in. The BP refused to answer press questions at first, then later said it was for maintenance. Does anyone know if the Deming and Yuma 'stats are still operational? It's been really windy the last couple of weeks, so they are probably grounded but ours is just gone.

[Ret10Echo]

Seems like the program is being discontinued

Link (https://www.securityinfowatch.com/video-surveillance/news/21209929/cbp-to-discontinue-use-of-surveillance-blimps-on-border)

I would want to corroborate the story with a source a bit more reliable.

[PSM]

Seems like the program is being discontinued



Ours is the TARS system. It is a bit of an eyesore and visible out our front window, but it also serves an important purpose. I hope they have a replacement. The timing is interesting, though. No more wall, no more Aerostat.

BTW, SAR also uses it to give directions to lost hikers or find injured and stranded folks.

I won't be sorry to see it go like the wind turbine they removed a couple of years ago.