|
|
| Post Number: 1
|
MrTarzan 
Group: Members
Posts: 564
Joined: Feb. 2004
|
 |
Posted on: Mar. 02 2004,10:58 pm |
|
   |
How do you feel about Reservests being activated for occupation duty? How do you feel about National Guard being sent? Do you know anyone affected? If so, post them on the Honor Roll thread I am starting in Miscellaneous.
--------------
Be not simply good, be good for something-Henry David Thoreau
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 2
|
LisaMarie
Group: Members
Posts: 367
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Mar. 03 2004,8:10 am |
|
 |
It's a load of crap, they're supposed to be protecting the HOMELAND, not keeping the peace halfway around the world.
--------------
Bush & Son - Sending America to war since 1990
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 3
|
GEOKARJO
Google This!!!
Group: Members
Posts: 7799
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Mar. 03 2004,2:20 pm |
|
|
Let's put it this way, they enlisted and took an oath to protect and serve and to obey the commander and cheif, and defend the United States all enemies forweign and domestic. I was Drafted in 1972 to Serve My country. Be Proud and Be the Soldier you asked to be, and defend the Homeland from all enemies forweign and domestic. 
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 4
|
Jesus Juice
Group: Members
Posts: 107
Joined: Jan. 2004
|
|
Posted on: Mar. 03 2004,2:55 pm |
|
|
Maybe it's the Jesus Juice talking but...
Perhaps if President Clinton had done something to contain or disarm these terrorist cells and counties we wouldn't be in the situation we are in. Sometimes protecting our homeland requires missions outside of our homeland. GEOKARJO is right and I know it is not just the Jesus Juice talking when I say I support our troops.
Thanks for reading.
-JJ
--------------
http://www.mankatochat.com
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 5
|
MrTarzan
Group: Members
Posts: 564
Joined: Feb. 2004
|
|
Posted on: Mar. 03 2004,6:04 pm |
|
|
I guess I wanted a little more here. I agree that all soldiers that took the oath should step up to the plate without complaint when called. The Reserves are there to augment the regular forces without a doubt, and our history is full of times where they had to help even with occupation forces. The use of the Guard has been limited to when they were needed in combat overseas to augment forces, and it is not really their mission to be occupation forces is it? I don't know of many that have been called that are complaining, and I had many serving with me in the regular Army as recently as Desert Storm, and they were good soldiers. However, within six months of the end of actual combat the Guard was released. The Reserves are a different story and a lot of them were kept. The Guard, unlike the Reserves is also needed at home for disasters, and I guess I feel if we need to send tens of thousands of them over for nation building, perhaps we need to make the regular Army bigger again? What do you think? 
--------------
Be not simply good, be good for something-Henry David Thoreau
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 6
|
irisheyes
Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 3040
Joined: Oct. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Mar. 03 2004,8:29 pm |
|
|
I think those are all good points. I would disagree with Jesus Juice about Clinton's handleing of the situation. Better print this off cause it will be the first and last time I'll defend Clinton.
The rules were different before 9-11 regarding Executive orders. Durring his terms in office their were much stricter rules regarding covert operations and CIA handleing of informants. Also, their was a ban on assasinations, and with many of the higher up terrorists, they won't be taken alive, so their was no other way. That all changed in the weeks after 9-11, the ban on assasinations was lifted, the CIA started useing more and more duffel bags packed with millions in cash to pay off informants.
I don't think we should expand the military, I think instead we need to greatly increase the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Administration. I have no military experience though, so those of you that do can point out any flaws with this post.
Sorry for taking it off the topic Tarzan, just wanted to respond to those statements.
--------------
You know it's going to be a bad day when you cross thread the cap on the toothpaste.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 7
|
MrTarzan
Group: Members
Posts: 564
Joined: Feb. 2004
|
|
Posted on: Mar. 03 2004,8:56 pm |
|
|
No need to apologize irisheyes, I value your opinion. I agree that there were many more restrictions, and that it is easy to sideline quarterback. I do believe that there have been many mistakes made for decades in our handling of the middle east, and that it will get more difficult before it is better. Still, I think that in a time of conflict, and that is what we have just as surely as any time in our previous history, we need to make the Army bigger, because there is no substitue for the man on the ground with a rifle to hold and protect real estate, and I really don't think that the Guard should be used for that overseas on a ongoing rotating basis. I believe it will weaken us in the end by destroying the Guard. If we need that many, grow the Army like we did in WWII, then you can shrink it years from now when we don't need it by simply raising reenlistment standards, as they did in the early 90's, the 50's and othertimes when they needed to reduce forces. Then you place them in Reserve or let them join the Guard. Who is going to help during fire, flood, blizzard, civil unrest, tornado and other disasters if all the Guardsmen (50% funded by the state) are overseas doing the regular Army job? I just like to discuss this because I like to hear what everyone here has to say. There are some really smart people chiming in here, (and a few less bright as well  ). If I were simply to talk to old military and government chums, I would only learn how they think and not get to hear the people that have never served, so thank you for your input irisheyes.
--------------
Be not simply good, be good for something-Henry David Thoreau
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 8
|
Grinning_Dragon
rideo draconigena
Group: Members
Posts: 3095
Joined: Aug. 2003
|
|
Posted on: Mar. 03 2004,9:30 pm |
|
|
I do agree with the need to increase the numbers in active duty, and trying to keep the Nat'l Guard on the homefront.
But one thing that is being neglected is the fact that the President or Govenor of any given state, can call forth the militia in a time of crisis, as mandated by the United States Constitution, described by Title 10; Subtitle A; Part1; Chapter 13; Sec. 311 which lists the classifications:
Militia: composition and classes
(a)
The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b)
The classes of the militia are -
(1)
the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2)
the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia
As an American Citizen it is our duty to protect our homefront, and lend back up to our active duty brothers in arms...
--------------
*SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS / MOLON LABE / Se Defendendo
memoria of cado frater ,Semper fidelis
*The object of war is NOT to DIE for YOUR Country, but to make the OTHER BASTARD DIE for HIS...Patton
My Constitutional Rights trump your dead.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 9
|
MrTarzan
Group: Members
Posts: 564
Joined: Feb. 2004
|
|
Posted on: Mar. 03 2004,11:50 pm |
|
|
True, true, Grinning_Dragon. And it is right to call them when needed, but I am concerned we are becoming to dependent on them rather than the regulars, and that it will lead to a decline in the willing volunteers. The guard serves a unique purpose, and I hope they don't become a permanent rotating force. I am not concerned for myself as I am retired, but the force in general.
--------------
Be not simply good, be good for something-Henry David Thoreau
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 10
|
moldyoldsoldier
Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: Mar. 2004
|
|
Posted on: Mar. 04 2004,9:17 pm |
|
|
I think that the nation is in seriously weak shape when the Army needs to rely so heavy on the Guard. It will drop Guard enrollment, and it shows that the standing force is too small. Increase the size even for three years, and you will have plenty that wish to go reserve and guard, meanwhile, serving the needs of the nation at present.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
