There May Be Trouble Ahead…

The US Department of Defense plans to deploy 20,000 troops nationwide by 2011 to help state and local officials respond to terror or nuclear attacks and emergencies, The Washington Post said Monday.

Citing Pentagon officials, the newspaper said the plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces.

The first 4,700-strong unit, built around an active-duty combat brigade, is based at Fort Stewart, Georgia, and is already available for deployment, according to General Victor Renuart, commander of the US Northern Command, it said.

Two additional groups will later join nearly 80 smaller National Guard and reserve units made up of about 6,000 troops to support local and state authorities nationwide, The Post said.

They will all would be trained to respond to domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive attacks.

The newspaper said that civil liberties groups and libertarians had expressed concern that the plan could undermine the Posse Comitatus Act, a 130-year-old law restricting the military’s role in domestic law enforcement.

Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000 troops to domestic response — a nearly sevenfold increase in five years — “would have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable,” Paul McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said in remarks last month noted by the Post. But the recognition that civilian authorities may be overwhelmed in a catastrophe [Hurricane Katrina might be used as an example] prompted “a fundamental change in military culture.”

Perfect shock doctrine sales pitch, you send the military and National Guard into an imperial war of conquest then allow a natural disaster and starved infrastructure to overwhelm the Gulf coast & New Orleans and bingo you get a nice reason to militarise society (even more, 1st BCT already deployed) and ensure the Pentagon keeps sucking up the cash…just as recession bites and the rich siphon off more than ever (banks got the bailout but you? Well they are probably about to close $2 trillion in credit lines, so um live within your means and work harder -hoping that means you get more income, not always a given eh?- Lost your job? Have you considered suicide prole scum?). This is a tell, they expect civil unrest as the corporatists of both parties remain unrepentant for the recession/depression they created. Deployment also gives the Pentagon more political power, what representative with troops deployed in their constituency will move against military spending and lose the troops vote (already any area with bases or industrial plants for war -not ‘defense’- is beholden to the almighty patrio war porn worship), so the Empire goes. This rightfully should be seen as another cost of the Iraq war, the army have crossed the Rubicon. 911/waronterror ™ the fig leaf for the lockdown. The real motor for this, unbound US imperialism, goes unmentioned largely even as its beneficiaries and salesmen are exposed.

6 Responses to “There May Be Trouble Ahead…”

  1. libhomo Says:

    Where are they going to find the troops? The Iraq War has forced the US military to lower its recruiting goals so it wouldn’t have to admit they are not getting enough enlistments.

  2. RickB Says:

    I think they are timing it so withdrawn Iraq battalions become the domestic force (I think they will maintain the mercs in iraq to look withdrawn while retaining a presence to protect supply of oil, also a few bases will be negotiated, castle keeps) and with the prospect of being deployed at home I think recruitment will be less problematic (especially in a recession, poverty draft redux).

  3. Jotman Says:

    Another note about timing. WaPo also reports on the release of a draft task force report today:

    “The odds that terrorists will soon strike a major city with weapons of mass destruction are now better than even, a bipartisan congressionally mandated task force concludes in a draft study. . . “

    Is it just a coincidence that the timing of the domestic militarization plan coincides with the release/leak or the scary task force draft report? And why is a draft report being released anyway?

    The report talks about non-proliferation:

    The landmark Non-Proliferation Treaty should be dramatically toughened, the report recommends, with the addition of real penalties for violators and a more robust International Atomic Energy Agency to carry out inspections and enforce the rules.

    I wonder if the final report will say anything about the underlying hypocrisy that makes NPT enforcement so difficult. How about the US agrees to follow the NPT by working to get rid of its own nukes?

  4. RickB Says:

    No coincidence, of course they are coordinated, that’s military planning & psy ops for you! And timed to keep Obama in line, they fear even a 1 dollar spending cut, they already proposed an expanded budget so even if he just keeps spending the same they will attack him as cutting it. Although I don’t think he will will that much of a threat to them, but the top brass take no chances.

    Yeah that NPT bit sounds like another vague hint at attacking Iran and a Bolton-ish reform of the IAEA because they hate the ElBaradei. And yes it is rich given the US have comprehensively broken the NPT. It all adds up to creating more reasons for military actions by further tipping global bodies into the empire’s pocket, and the domestic force is both cash cow and power consolidation by the Pentagon, who unless stopped will wreck the US republic all the while proclaiming ‘safe, strong America’ and other patriotic newspeak.

  5. Jotman Says:

    Another thing striking about the leaked draft report: As far as I can tell, it contained absolutely no new information.

  6. RickB Says:

    That’s terrible, they are so assured of scaring people they don’t even put any work into it anymore, and they certainly won’t respect us in the morning.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: