- Joined
- Feb 2, 2008
- Messages
- 3,059
Are you responding to what the Article and Northcom Commander said or your own prejudices about the DoD? Let's go back and see what the article says:
The reality is that the Dod is the largest standing possessor of logistics, engineering and manpower assets in the world so unless you are arguing that the country, history and the need be damned- disaster relief will only be performed by Homeland Security because it's their turf, there must be an established framework for providing and controlling forces to civil disaster relief efforts. I don't believe that I have ever heard anyone argue that an adhoc headquarters with an adhoc commander performs faster and with more efficiency than an established organization.
Adm Allen was the Federal coordinator after FEMA fell down on the job, but one hardly thinks that he would argue that the utilization of DoD assets was more efficient with no controlling headquarters leaving Federal and state military forces initially reporting to separate commands. Similarly- I've yet to read an argument from anyone there that Katrina would have been resolved faster and with less loss of life and property if only the AD military had not provided forces to the effort.
Your argument is totally at odds with the proposal- it seems about everything except what they have proposed. You've raised the spector of Posse Comitatus- which is not the issue here. You've argued that Active Duty assets should not be used in disaster response although historically and in virtually every major disaster they have been utilized. You've argued that the National Guard wasn't prepared, trained or empowered to swiftly take command of a military response effort which includes AD forces- which is of course the shortfall that the Northcom Commander is attempting to rectify by training NG officers to assume command of Active Duty forces supporting a disaster relief effort. Subsequently, you've argued that AD officers are not primarily concerned with dealing with the civilian infrastructure- which is exactly what the NorthCom commander is saying. I can't see that your argument would find many allies in Homeland Security, The USCG, or the various State TAGs. As far as it being a bid for more money? How do you figure that? This doesn't add forces, force structure or even billets- it trains existing NG Officers and predesignates them for contingency assignments. In the words of Shakespeare: this is "much ado about nothing".
The reality is that the Dod is the largest standing possessor of logistics, engineering and manpower assets in the world so unless you are arguing that the country, history and the need be damned- disaster relief will only be performed by Homeland Security because it's their turf, there must be an established framework for providing and controlling forces to civil disaster relief efforts. I don't believe that I have ever heard anyone argue that an adhoc headquarters with an adhoc commander performs faster and with more efficiency than an established organization.
Adm Allen was the Federal coordinator after FEMA fell down on the job, but one hardly thinks that he would argue that the utilization of DoD assets was more efficient with no controlling headquarters leaving Federal and state military forces initially reporting to separate commands. Similarly- I've yet to read an argument from anyone there that Katrina would have been resolved faster and with less loss of life and property if only the AD military had not provided forces to the effort.
Your argument is totally at odds with the proposal- it seems about everything except what they have proposed. You've raised the spector of Posse Comitatus- which is not the issue here. You've argued that Active Duty assets should not be used in disaster response although historically and in virtually every major disaster they have been utilized. You've argued that the National Guard wasn't prepared, trained or empowered to swiftly take command of a military response effort which includes AD forces- which is of course the shortfall that the Northcom Commander is attempting to rectify by training NG officers to assume command of Active Duty forces supporting a disaster relief effort. Subsequently, you've argued that AD officers are not primarily concerned with dealing with the civilian infrastructure- which is exactly what the NorthCom commander is saying. I can't see that your argument would find many allies in Homeland Security, The USCG, or the various State TAGs. As far as it being a bid for more money? How do you figure that? This doesn't add forces, force structure or even billets- it trains existing NG Officers and predesignates them for contingency assignments. In the words of Shakespeare: this is "much ado about nothing".
