Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Army calls for arming National Guard troops along Canadian, Mexican borders
Associated Press ^ | 3-26-02 | WILSON RING

Posted on 03/26/2002 1:56:09 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer

Edited on 04/13/2004 2:40:00 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) --  The Army is recommending arming some of the National Guard troops working along the Canadian and Mexican borders.

The recommendation came Friday from the Force Command, which oversees domestic troops. In a memo, it said some border troops, including all those at border crossings in New York and New England, carry 9mm pistols.


(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Canada; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; Mexico; News/Current Events; Philosophy; US: Arizona; US: California; US: Idaho; US: Maine; US: Michigan; US: Minnesota; US: Montana; US: New Hampshire; US: New Mexico; US: New York; US: North Dakota; US: Texas; US: Vermont; US: Washington
KEYWORDS: army; border; canada; govwatch; immigrantlist; latinamericalist; mexico; nationalguard; veitnam

1 posted on 03/26/2002 1:56:10 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
"...(not)...needed in California, Arizona and New Mexico..."

We've had a coupla gunfights here in Arizona, admittedly on their side of the border.
I'm here to tell ya, if my a$$ were on the line, I'd be armed.


2 posted on 03/26/2002 2:05:19 PM PST by HiJinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Arm the poor people for crying out loud. One good rush of terrorists, and the soldier is toast.
If the politicians were the ones sitting out there, they'd be sitting in bullet proof tanks!!!!
3 posted on 03/26/2002 2:12:33 PM PST by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
PS...remember right after 9/11 they wanted bullet proof shields in front of them in the chambers? Cowards telling soldiers to be brave. Unbelievable !!
4 posted on 03/26/2002 2:14:21 PM PST by concerned about politics
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
To send an American out, unarmed, in an American uniform, is a disgrace and a crime. Why not just paint a bulls eye on his behind and get it over with. May the people responsible for this travesty burn in some screwy Hell. But please Jesus, not until after I get a crack at them.
5 posted on 03/26/2002 2:16:29 PM PST by Francohio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
No armed soldiers are needed in California, Arizona and New Mexico. In Texas three ports of entry should have a total of six armed soldiers.

If the writer of this memo believes those are the facts he is dillusional and needs serious help. Here is the pertainent part of a post from late last year strongly suggesting only a fool would go unarmed on our southern boarder:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE [San Diego, CA]-Shortly after noon on October 24, 2000, two U.S. Border Patrol agents patrolling the international border between the United States and Mexico were shot at by ten men dressed in military-style uniforms with tactical vests and carrying high-powered military rifles with bayonets.

The incident occurred in Copper Canyon, about eight miles east of the Otay Mesa Port of Entry.

Almost immediately after the agents disembarked from a clearly marked Border Patrol helicopter, the soldiers fired approximately eight shots at them from Mexico. The agents took cover in thick brush and identified themselves in Spanish as Border Patrol agents, but were nonetheless pursued by some of the soldiers, who entered the United States by crossing a well-maintained barbed-wire fence.

The other Mexican soldiers set up two sniper positions, one in Mexico and the other in the United States. The soldiers searched the area, pointing their weapons in the direction of the Border Patrol agents and ordering them in Spanish to come out of the brush. The agents did not comply, but instead identified themselves again and told the soldiers to return to Mexico.

Once other Border Patrol agents neared the scene, the soldiers retreated to Mexico and drove off in a minivan.

This is the second confirmed incident this year in which Border Patrol agents have been shot at by the Mexican military. The other occurred on March 14 in Santa Teresa, New Mexico. As in the previous incident, disaster in this case was averted only through the exemplary professionalism, courage and restraint of the involved Border Patrol agents.

Local 1613 of the National Border Patrol Council, which represents over 2,100 Border Patrol employees in the San Diego area, is seeking immediate action by the governments of both nations to ensure that incursions and acts of aggression by the Mexican military cease and desist before a tragedy occurs.

For further information, contact L. Keith Weeks, Local 1613 Vice-President, at (909) 600-2566. The freerepublic link is http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a39fab4e86461.htm

6 posted on 03/26/2002 2:17:12 PM PST by joeyman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Meanwhile back at the crazy INS --
7 posted on 03/26/2002 2:34:59 PM PST by flamefront
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

And from above Which combined with the previous would disarm both the troops and the INS. What a kettle of fish that would be.
8 posted on 03/26/2002 2:46:02 PM PST by flamefront
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
What good is a Soldier without his rifle?
9 posted on 03/26/2002 3:01:36 PM PST by watcher1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Let me get this straight, guards need M-16's to watch old ladies strip searched at domestic air terminals but, are unarmed at the borders? This isn't scarecrow security it is Potemkin national security policy!
10 posted on 03/26/2002 3:02:12 PM PST by Righty1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: watcher1
It doesn't do any good to give them an M16A2 rifles but forget to issue them ammunition.
11 posted on 03/26/2002 3:21:53 PM PST by Recon by Fire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
That has to be great for our military's morale.
12 posted on 03/26/2002 3:25:23 PM PST by 4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
What a dummy I am. I learned something today,though.... Never would've guessed the Troops at the borders don't carry weapons. Where've I been all these years!?
13 posted on 03/26/2002 3:48:49 PM PST by silver fox two
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flamefront
fully automatic sidearms.

Huh?

14 posted on 03/26/2002 3:58:36 PM PST by watcher1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: silver fox two
I guess that you may have believed that the gov took the constitution seriously? I think that part of this is the army keeping the guard in their place. This has elements of the SA vs the wehrmacht.
15 posted on 03/26/2002 4:37:23 PM PST by Righty1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: Oldeconomybuyer
What good is an unarmed soldier?

It looks like we've achieved our goal of being a kinder, stupider nation.

18 posted on 03/26/2002 5:45:01 PM PST by Barnacle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flamefront
"Under current rules, the troops are protected by the armed agents of U.S. Customs and the Immigration and Naturalization Service they are assisting."

Sound policy. Some might view putting armed soldiers on borders as an act of aggression. If the custom officers CAN be armed, why not hire more customs workers? I wonder, how much cheaper is it to staff border stations with National Guard vs. Customs Officers? Isn't the NG situation supposed to be temporary until more customs officers can be hired and trained?

19 posted on 03/26/2002 5:49:43 PM PST by badfreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Righty1
Let me get this straight, guards need M-16's to watch old ladies strip searched at domestic air terminals but, are unarmed at the borders? This isn't scarecrow security it is Potemkin national security policy!

Typical governmental incompentence, aka, the norm.

The federal government is the problem, it is not the solution.

---max

20 posted on 03/26/2002 6:13:02 PM PST by max61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Barnacle
It looks like we've achieved our goal of being a kinder, stupider nation.

Soldiers are for fighting wars, not policing the citizenry or guarding the borders.

---max

21 posted on 03/26/2002 6:14:25 PM PST by max61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: max61
Soldiers are for fighting wars, not policing the citizenry or guarding the borders.

I said nothing about policing citizenry. However, guarding our nation's boarders is congruent with protecting our national security. And that's exactly what our military is for.

22 posted on 03/26/2002 6:29:45 PM PST by Barnacle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

Comment #23 Removed by Moderator

To: ratcat
you hit that nail on the head.
land mines; they work day or night, sun and rain and you only have to pay for them when they fire.
24 posted on 03/26/2002 7:02:36 PM PST by IRtorqued
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: IRtorqued
A step in the right direction.
25 posted on 03/26/2002 7:36:58 PM PST by Ciexyz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: flamefront
"They blame some lawmakers in Washington who they say think M-16s and automatic pistols look mean."

WTF - I think weapons are supposed to "look mean" - duh. Lord, deliver us from these bureaucrats before it's too late.

26 posted on 03/26/2002 8:18:08 PM PST by Let's Roll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
No armed soldiers are needed in California, Arizona and New Mexico. In Texas three ports of entry should have a total of six armed soldiers.

Is this a joke?

27 posted on 03/26/2002 8:30:07 PM PST by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SAMWolf;Tailback;
Bump
28 posted on 03/26/2002 9:22:53 PM PST by Snow Bunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
and when you consider the recent news of the INS disarming their officers and de-milling their M-16 rifles so that it cannot fire automatic, just WHO is running the INS???
29 posted on 03/26/2002 9:23:12 PM PST by prophetic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Snow Bunny
Thanks for the ping. Bump
30 posted on 03/26/2002 9:32:23 PM PST by SAMWolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: joeyman
There is a lot about those situations that were not reported. First, the Agents in San Diego do not for whatever reason carry their assigned M-4s or shotguns out to the field. The carrying of M-4's is discouraged and is prohibited in built up areas. The beaurocrats managing San Diego Sector turn a blind eye constantly to Mexican aggression. Santa Teresa was the same way. The Mexicans were caught and the gutless little turd running the Border Patrol Sector let the Mexican military go south with all their gear. BORTAC is our national react team, which is tailor made for these situations. But I guess anything other than kidnapping little Cuban boys is a little out of their league.

Combat, conflict, aggression is fervantly discouraged in every conceivable manner. I have had two friends recieve commissioner awards because when faced with a deadly force situation they did not fire and kill the aggressor. Those that have shot people or fought with suspects and have saved their own lives or the lives of others have been investigated and ignored by INS management. Having the National Guard on the border is not going to change anything. Not as long as political correctness reigns supreme.

31 posted on 03/26/2002 9:59:26 PM PST by Ajnin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
bttt
32 posted on 03/26/2002 10:10:04 PM PST by Don Myers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prophetic
Who is running the INS? Liberal sacks of sh*t are running the INS. In order for an Agent in El Centro Sector to take an M-4, he has to fill out a report and then check it out. You can't use optics, laser sights or anything else that can be fitted to the weapon to make it easier to actually hit the target. And yes you are absolutely correct about the loss of full auto selection.
33 posted on 03/26/2002 10:12:35 PM PST by Ajnin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: IRtorqued
Sounds like a good step to me!
34 posted on 04/02/2002 4:02:27 AM PST by Joined2Justify
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
A late post but contemporary to the subject.

The enlisted personel posted as security on the deck of the USS Cole in Aden, reportedly had M-16's but no ammunition. I think that this practice is dereliction of duty on part of the OD in charge; that is to "appear armed", but in fact be unarmed. The Captain of the Cole should have been court martialed.

This is the type of policy that lost Viet Nam. This is a mistrust of the troops in harms way that they might get trigger happy and ruin an officers career. There is no honor for a commander in a policy such as this. If a superior does not trust the soldier, put a supervising NCO or Duty Officer with the armed detail.

As a "Buck" Sgt. I told a captain that I would rather go to the stockade than mount guard with arms and no ammunition. I got the ammo and so did my squad.

I would like to see the UCMJ address this situation that to seem armed and not be armed, is unlawful.

35 posted on 04/10/2002 1:17:07 PM PDT by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson