U.S. nears putting Guard troops on border

WASHINGTON — The Defense and Homeland Security departments are finalizing plans to station National Guard troops along the border with Mexico, most likely as backup support to local law enforcement personnel in border states.

The four border-state governors who requested National Guard assistance — including Texas' Rick Perry — have provided their input, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told a breakfast meeting with reporters Tuesday.

The final decision on whether to implement the emerging plan is in the hands of White House officials, she said.

Napolitano said the White House decision-making process “is not by any stretch final” but that “most of the planning process has been done.”

The homeland security secretary's comments came as the contours of a possible National Guard deployment were becoming clearer.

The Obama administration's newly appointed border czar, Alan Bersin, said in an interview that any National Guard troops deployed to the Southwestern border would be used “in support of law enforcement,” including helping to staff checkpoints targeting vehicles suspected of ferrying firearms or cash drug proceeds from the United States into Mexico.

“Every time you have (National Guard) support at the border, you're plussing up law enforcement,” he said.

He said Guard troops only would help “in the support capacity, not doing the searches.”

“The process of consultation, information-gathering and formulation of recommendations is ongoing as we speak,” Bersin said. “The states have made clear their requests for additional National Guard deployments. I am certain that will be taken into account by the White House as it has been by Secretary Napolitano.”

Perry had joined with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the governors of Arizona and New Mexico to request that Obama send National Guard troops to the Mexican border.

Perry asked Obama on Jan. 23 to send 1,000 federally funded National Guard troops to the Rio Grande and sent the administration a detailed deployment plan in April.

“Texas knows exactly what is needed to protect Texans,” Perry spokeswoman Katherine Cessinger said.

“We have not received official word from Washington on the governor's deployment plan — or any plan, for that matter,” she said.

Napolitano, a former Arizona governor, said she has tried to bring “a real focus on bringing state and local governments in at the get-go” of planning —not just after final decisions have been made.

The governors, all of whom face significant budget squeezes, are hoping Obama will decide to deploy the National Guard troops, thus making the added security a federal expense rather than a state cost.

This situation has gone way past the point of being stupid. It's rating up there somewhere around treason, sedition, and many other terms which describe things that are heavily damaging to the security of a nation.

I have a story that rather relates to this particular problem and how to solve it. You'll relate to it I'm sure.

Back in the mid 1980s when we bombed Libya, the USAF ran out of cops, so they "volunteered" a bunch of us comm types with high security clearances to convert us into "Law Enforcement Specialists" and then do things like watch "Priority A" resources parked in hardened hangers on flight lines. We all thought that after spending as much time as we did handling highly classified information that simply watching hangers would be easy! At least you didn't have to worry about inadvertently carrying something out of the AOR! It's not like you can take payload off of hard points and stick it in your pack!

So they told us what we would be watching and we were well familiar with the (then current) regs and laws there where I was stationed in England with regards to the U.K.'s Official Secrets Act, as well as our own established guidelines for how to handle unauthorized access, or even attempted access to restricted areas.

We spent the first couple of nights with "real" cops just to get a better idea of how we were expected to operate. At the beginning of every shift at guard mount, we received a briefing and the first night that we were going to cover our AORs without "real" cops, the Senior NCO told us that the local "peace protestors" were likely to cut the fence and try to vandalize hangers, or aircraft IF they could gain access. He told us to handle things as our trainers had shown us. The problem was that we hadn't heard much about these peace protesters until this. Somebody told the SMSgt this and he said that the peace protesters did this at least a couple of times a month. One of us explained that those were RESTRICTED areas having REAL "Priority A" resources parked INSIDE and that deadly force was authorized and that if they tried what he said they would that we would simply shoot them.

The SMSgt just about had a cow on the spot, and got in the guy's face who said this. I knew him and he was a Comm Center Operator from my base. The SMSgt tried to belittle the guy into "understanding" his viewpoint, but the Airman simply explained that it was a huge liability to even TELL us to handle these intruders in the way which he was suggesting and that he had a mind to go talk to the JAG after the shift.

The SMSgt swore out loud and stomped into the building. We just stood in ranks, wondering what was going to happen next. Then a 1st Lt came out and simply finished the briefing not mentioning anything about the peace protesters.

I watched those dark, concrete hangers for the better part of six months and never, EVER got even a glimpse of a peace protester. About three months into it, we found out that the "Management" in the Cop Shop had concerns about pushing us because we weren't "really" cops, but rather communicators and so they really didn't know what to do. As it turns out, they BELIEVED us...which was a good thing, because we would have shot the intruders...after following protocol of course. :-) We found out, that they sent the British Liaison Officer to the peace protester's camp the very evening we had our "discussion" with the SMSgt at guard mount and TOLD them that there was a new crew on the flight line, which unlike the old crew would SHOOT THEM if they tried an incursion!

Needless to say... they stopped coming.

My bet is that they will not be armed. They will be used as arms, legs, backs, eyes and not brains.

They will also be used for a show of force in terms of head counts and bring really cool vehicles and maybe radios and other equipment.

They can run errands and help LEO guard people and stuff. As long as they are supervised by an LEO, they can hide in the dirt and brush to be eyes and ears.

They will be helpful, and some talented and specialized Troops will be very helpful, but they will not likely be assigned out like most might imagine.

Publicly, you will hear of great deeds and see impressive sights, but some poor LEO Sergeant that already had too much to do, and dreamed of full functioning assistance, will suffer from daily migraines on top of his daily migraines.

All in all, it’s a good step, but in my view.... our regular military should have already been there and the Guard assigned to work closely with them.

Our ‘leaders’ should either take this seriously or not. With this half*** approach, I believe it’s for show and not being taken seriously.

I guess I should be content that Obama didn’t tell Mexico they had a year to be nice, like he told Iran.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.