Guard Border Mission Won't Detract From Other Roles, Officials Say

WASHINGTON, May 24, 2006 – The National Guard's support for the border security mission won't detract from its warfighting and disaster support roles, but will actually sharpen its ability to carry them out, senior defense officials told Congress today.

"National Guard combat readiness will not -- will not -- be degraded," Army Lt. Gen. H Steven Blum, chief of the National Guard Bureau, told the House Armed Services Committee today, putting added emphasis on his second "will not."

President Bush proposed using up to 6,000 National Guard members on a rotational basis for up to a year to support the U.S. Border Patrol as it recruits and trains more members. If needed, the Guard would contribute up to 3,000 troops for another year.

"This limited, temporary deployment will not adversely affect operational readiness or DoD's ability to conduct the global war on terrorism, nor hinder the National Guard's ability or capacity to aid their states in the event of a natural disaster or other emergency," Paul McHale, assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense, said in his prepared remarks. The maximum 6,000 National Guard members to support the mission represent just 2 percent of the Guard force, Blum noted. That number, even when added to the 71,000 National Guard members currently deployed in support of the war on terror, "still leaves a pretty robust inventory of over 350,000 citizen soldiers" to respond to hurricanes and other natural disasters, he said.

McHale told committee members the border-security mission will track closely with the counternarcotics mission the National Guard has been conducting along the southwest border for more than two decades. "The difference is the size of the force, and the commitment of resources will be far greater than anything we have done in the past," he said.

As they support the Department of Homeland Security, the Guardsmen will sharpen the military skills they apply to both their warfighting and disaster response missions, Hale told the committee. "The man and women of the Department of Defense will work diligently and professionally to support DHS, improving our land-border security while providing excellent training to our soldiers and airmen," he said.

Hale called the Guard mission "an important but temporary bridge to improve civilian security capabilities."

Blum compared the mission to the post-Sept. 11, 2001, airport security role the National Guard assumed as the Transportation Security Agency recruited and trained more workers. Just as the Guard turned that mission over to TSA when it was ready, it will turn the border security support role over to the Border Patrol as soon as possible, he said.

"We expect to work ourselves out of a job" as quickly as the Border Patrol is ready to assume the entire mission, Blum added.

Blum called the mission another example of the National Guard stepping up to the plate to serve the country when it's needed. "Once again, your Guard has been called for the security of our nation," he said. "And once again, we will answer that call. This is a mission ... the National Guard can do and can do well."

Army Maj. Gen. Richard Rowe Jr., U.S. Northern Command's chief of operations, assured committee members that as the Defense Department supports civil authorities in responding to natural disasters and security borders, it won't lose sight of its "primary mission of homeland defense."

David Aguilar, chief of the U.S. Border Patrol, told committee members the capabilities the National Guard will bring to the effort "are absolutely critical as we move forward."

Aguilar cited the Border Patrol's "very proud history" of cooperation with the military and specifically, the National Guard. "We look forward to building on that proud history," he said.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1637224/posts

The first problem that I see is that the National Guard has got to be pretty weary of the President finding new and exciting things for them to do. If these guys (and gals) wanted to be in the regular Army or Air Force, they would have joined the regular Army or Air Force. I have yet to hear a National Guard soldier or airman complain about performing a mission for their country, but consider the load that has been put on these folks during the past few years: Iraq, Afghanistan, Louisiana for Hurricane Katrina, the various other disasters that their governors send them to handle, and now the Mexican border. Also consider that law enforcement may be the industry most heavily represented among National Guard troops. Every time their commanders tell them to pack up their troubles in the old kit bag and smile, smile, smile, a police department, sheriff's office, highway patrol or state prison gets its staff reduced. Cops are the first line of defense for homeland security. This initiative, at best, just moves the playing pieces around on the board.

One can only assume that the NG will be used for KP duty. What other role can they preform? It's a pity that our national leaders are wasting the time of those who volunteered in service to their country.

There is a national crisis on our southern boarder. A crisis that can use a military application to defend our sovereignty. To send military personnel to do administrative tasks is a waste, a demoralizer and right out of a Clintonian play book.

AS I understand it the plan is to deploy the Guard only during their usual 2 week summer drill period.

That makes it a total joke. By the time they travel there, go through orientation, training etc maybe they will have time for 2 days doing something productive.

Just another case of the politicians proposing a fix that doesn't but hopefully will lull the ingnorant voters into thinking the government is addressing the problem.

Deployment of the Guard isn't going to help, given the role they're to be given. Since they won't be used to actually put the arm on people, about all they'll be good for is either doing the rear-echelon stuff or sitting at the border spotting people for the BP to apprehend. The BP already knows where there are lots of people sneaking in, they just don't have the personnel to make the arrests, or detention space to hang on to them. The Guard can report all the movement it wants, but the BP isn't going to be able to respond to most of the things the Guard sees. The President could send 100,000 troops to the border, and if they couldn't detain anyone, it might as well be zero. As T.J. Bonner said, "They're just going to tell us how many we missed."

There has been no complaint in this household....hubby spent 15mos in Iraq, 30 days in NO and is to be deployed again to Iraq in 07.....btw son just volunteered to go to Iraq......but, I can only speak for this household.

I agree we should have more border patrol agents and a fence. Americans should respond to the foreigners and do a counter-protest June 3rd.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1638751/posts

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.