DHS secretary Janet Napolitano wants to increase the deployment of National Guard forces to our southern borders, while SecDef Gates is concerned about expanded commitments without concomitant resource commitments:
The fight is largely over money. For the past two years, Pentagon budget officials have tried to slash funding for state drug-fighting operations, citing the financial strain of waging wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And military officials say governors could pay for their own guard units.
But governors contend that securing the border is a federal responsibility and that Washington should cover the cost.
Paul McHale, Gates’s assistant secretary for homeland defense until early this year, said the broader worry is strategic. “The real concern is, if it works once, and it works a second time . . . at some point a temporary mission becomes permanent,” he said. “Do it four or five times over a decade, and the political and military repercussions are likely negative.”
Our ground forces have spent so much time overseas in the last decade that Gates is right to worry about their op tempo. Still, defending the borders from national threats – and illegal border crossings come with all kinds of vulnerabilities – is a core role of the armed forces.
The president seems, for now, content to let the secretaries hash this out between themselves, no doubt considering it a kind of creative tension. Eventually he’ll have to decide though, and if the Guardsmen do get sent south, hopefully they’ll receive the resources necessary for the task.
We too often try to do this sort of thing on the cheap.
It’s what Libs do: dream up some unsuoortable idea…because it makes someone else feel good, then pass the unfunded requirement along, then tell the parties in the executing part of the plan to just shut up and make it work.
But…hold the phone! Wasn’t it evil, uncaring conservatives who wanted to close the borders, and suggested that use of troops along the border, in a National Defense role was acceptable and did not violate the Posse Comitatus law? And weren’t same people, who wanted that, shouted down?
Yeah, I thought so. But when a Dem goes to war, it’s just the perfect thing…
Then again, maybe she’s just writing it of as part of the war on drugs…and using NG to do a LE function. No legal issues there, nope…move along….nothing to see here.
Given the sentiment of the BO administration about border control, I’m shocked there’s any fight at all over this.
But, I couldn’t agree more that this falls squarely in the domain of the Feds, and it’s a shame to think the border states should be footing the bill. I hope it is not short-changed on support.
Start by cancelling the War on Drugs (remember that one folks, speaking of things you do once or twice that metastasize into permanent resource-sucking missions?), and use that money to secure our borders. It is a Federal resonsibility, one that Bush shirked to his shame, and though I’m amazed that this administration is considering it, it’s about damned time. A nation that cannot secure its own sovereign territory is not a nation. And maybe if we set the example, European nations might follow.
Dittos Zane. I have always maintained that a nation is defined by borders. No borders, no nation. Indeed as you state, it is precisely a federal responsibility to secure those borders and protect its citizens against all threats. Hey Washington, get the wax outta ya’ ears, listen up!
hey,…
Now there might be a good job for all us aging veterans. Warm weather, guns, outdoor activities, being useful. What’s not to like?
Warm beer. But…if I can drink a warm “new” coke at 2AM at sea, it still would be an improvement. When do we go?
Xformed,
I tell ya, it couldn’t be soon enough.
DHS could take 100% of their worthless TSA drones down to the Mexican border and station them every ten feet and solve two problems: increase airline security and prevent the flow of dangerous illegals across the Mexican border. Being the DHS though I’m sure they’ll prefer to mobilize the Rhode Island National Guard and station them at Sakonnet to keep the scum from Martha’s Vineyard from landing in America. They might back them up with the FBI Hostage Rescue Team. Killing innocent Americans seems to be what they excel at.
I spent the last couple of years fighting mission creep from people who knew better but were happy to keep trying to shovel their load onto somebody else’s back. They figured we had a lot of guys with guns and they were most likely just lying around doing nothing between deploying every 14 months.
DHS could take 100% of their worthless TSA drones down to the Mexican border and station them every ten feet and solve two problems: increase airline security and prevent the flow of dangerous illegals across the Mexican border.
You think that many folks with prosthetic limbs are smugglers and hijackers?
The TSA does a good job securing airports from the halt, the lame, and the Catholic clergy, but I haven’t noticed them pulling anyone who could walk across a corridor without assistance aside for scrutiny. Imagine how it will be for them to identify a fit male walking across the deserts without a redcap in tow as a threat.
Yeah I know. I am partially made of steel these days and get a laughingly thorough inspection from the TSA every single time I travel through an airport…..except 20% of the time when for some damned reason I “don’t” set off the metal detectors. It does make one wonder now doesn’t it?
Another “catch and release” task for the troops…RATS!
AW1Tim … I love it that you’re volunteering to help us secure the border. We border-staters are up to our ears in illegal aliens right now. A month or two ago, The Houston Chronicle made a slip in its liberal leaning agenda and admitted that Houston had more than 30,000 illegal alien felons wandering around making mischief and selling drugs and killing police officers. Better wear a bullet-proof vest when you come down.
And come to dinner, you hear? Downs and I would love to share an evening with you. Bring your gun if you want to. We like guns.
Marianne
The problem isn’t even money. If we have ROE problems with COIN activity on foreign soil, just what might the trigger restrictions be here at home?
This is just another impotent gesture, I’m afraid, doomed before it begins.
Funny how J-NO (as we called her here in AZ) has changed her position on the border. While she was GUV, she didn’t want to use the NG and insisted it was a Federal responsibility. I guess she still thinks it’s a Fed responsibility, just not hers.
AW1Tim … I seem to be “awaiting moderation” again. But I like your idea very much. Maybe when Lex gets back to the weekend staff at the spam filterers, [they're extra stuffy, you know] he can release my post and you can answer our dinner invitation.
Anyway, great idea …
Marianne
I’ll tell you about the border and how “secure” it is: I know a guy who’s obviously from south of the border. He’s been here a while and goes home to visit yearly….heads south, visits, comes north via some route that is different from mine, which I know since he tells me when he’ll be home by saying ‘it’ll be next Wednesday if all goes well, or it’ll be 5 days after that due to extra travel.’ Same guy just came to me to ask for money to help pay for his mother in law’s “travel agent” who is bringing her “up” next week. This is so common here in SoCal that it’s almost comical except for what it demonstrates about our Federal Government’s absolute ineptness at securing the border. Yes, the SAME FEDS who are working overtime to manage the rest of your life through health care and energy plans, etc, are unable to do the simple task of watching our border. No question about why Los Angeles is in trouble or the rest of the State, either, for that matter.
(PS – just got back from TJ, which is Tijuana for you geographically challenged folks who are not So. Calif. locals) and I’ll report that the Mexican government has no problems in putting a lot of well armed troops on their streets….I’ll also report that I stayed in a very nice hotel, ate at a real nice Argentinian restaurant, did some successful bargain shopping. Good time to be there as their business is down by over 50%.)
As long as the ROE and mission are something like “don’t ask, don’t tell” and the troops just have to sit around waiting for ICE to haul the guilty away, it is a worthless mission.
If, as is unlikely, the mission is defined as “secure the border with all force necessary,” then military force may be useful.
The ROE need to be something along the lines of “Any person observed crossing the border into the U.S. anywhere other than a legal point is a free fire target up to 5KM from the border.”
No arrests, asking for ID, or catch and release games. No lawfare or court dates. Humane treatment and essential medical care for any survivors, and then prompt return to their country of origin with a bill for said lodging, medical expenses and transportation. Deduct it from foreign aid payments if their home country is too cheap to pay.
Harsh? You bet. Effective? Yes, and a darn effective deterrent too.
Legal immigrants? Love them, and welcome them with open arms. Others, not so much.
If a country cannot define and defend its borders, it has ceased to exist as a country.
I’ll be happy if they let them carry weapons this time.
The skipper of the McCain has all the weapons he needs and then some, but I’ll bet he isn’t happy. You can bet the ROE for any Guard presence on the border will be some form of “if engaged, fall back and contact civilian authority”. No sense having weapons if the ROE say don’t engage.