Posse Comitatus restricts the use of active duty military personnel to enforce the law; normally interpreted to mean involvement in searches and seizures and arrests. It does not restrict the loan of equipment or providing logistic support or training. Further, Posse Comitatus does not apply to the National Guard--the state's militia.
Most of the equipment and armored vehicles came from the Texas National Guard. No federal military personnel operated any of the equipment and most was run by civil law enforcement agents who had been trained by the military.
The active Army equipment and training came primarily from Fort Hood. In accordance with normal procedures, the requirements went up from the civil agencies on the scene at Waco to Washington and then down through standard channels to the closest military base owning the equipment--Fort Hood, Texas. III Corps HQ, the headquarters responsible for Hood and all units on it, received the tasking. Based on equipment availability and training and deployment schedules and such mundane considerations as who had to support the last tasking, the III Corps staff would then designate one of its subordinate elements to meet the tasking. This procedure is followed every day for literally dozens of taskings. Clark commanded the 1st Cavalry Division--one of several subordinate commands to III Corps. If III Corps designated the 1st Cav to handle one or more parts of these taskings, Clark's staff, not him, would normally receive and take care of the action. And there is no reason to believe anything other than that took place.
Clark's Assistant Division Commander(ADC) was Brigadier General Pete Schoomaker (newly appointed Chief of Staff of the Army by Rumsfield). Schoomaker was special ops who was back out in the field army getting "re-blued" as we say. He had recently commanded Delta Force. Because of his experience, somebody in Washington asked for him by name to comment on the Waco plan. Again, this had nothing to do with Clark--he was not in command at Hood & did not have the kind of experience that would cause anyone to seek out his input. It is Schoomakeer who is said to have made the comment "We can't grade your paper" to Reno. BTW, with Schoomaker at the meeting was another recent newsmaker--then Colonel Boykin. Obviously, Schoomaker would have said something to his boss after he returned from his Reno briefing in D.C., but that is as close as Clark got to Waco.
The active duty military had very little involvement at Waco, did nothing unlawful, and Clark was not involved. Other than that, you guys are all over it.
Most of these arguments would have applied at Sand Creek, 130 years ago. That doesn't make the babies killed there any less dead, or the armies complicity any more excusable.
First, let's address the term militia.
The term militia, does not IMHO, mean the national guard. The term militia is the organization of the town's folk. Armed and ready to do what the local law enforcement is not able, or willing to do. We must be clear on this. The national gaurd, was brought in years ago, as a defense/protection...that is, a bunch of guys with M-16's, camo's, and tanks on the State's nickle(tax payer funded, government overseen).
It is also of my opinion that if an organization is state/federal funded, armed with aviation and armor, we are splitting hairs when we call the army and national guard two different entities. They are both armed as they are, and both on a federal government payroll. If I am mistaken, and the national guard is not receiving their checks from the same bank the actual army's checks are drawn from, then the individual states are paying national guard personnel with grant money from the same bank...if you get my drift. They are the military and it is my view, posse commitatus was written forbidding the military from police action. The actual law uses the term Army, but we all know the intended use of the term.