| QUOTE (SupeRdUPErBlakE @ May 3 2003, 05:01 PM) | Who really cares about all this war stuff....its getting old.....can we get back to just flaming bagel? Thats the real war here....We are currently in the Bagel Saga. Who shall be the victor!?  |
Just because *you* have no interest in world politics does not mean the rest of us live in such a bagel-centric world. We are only allowed one thread when it comes to Iraq and the Middle East; if you don't like it, just stay out.
| QUOTE | really? i didnt know that.
im just curious, i dont know enough of the us army structure.
whats the purpose of the national guard? why cant the regular army not fullfill this purpose?
is it a part of the regular army? and if not, why not?
thanks for your explanation in advance |
The National Guard is one of the more interesting constitutional gray areas in our country's history. It is a long and very interesting story, but since I must take my gf out to lunch now, I will give you the short short version for now. If you are interested in more clarifications, just ask.
The purpose of the National Guard is almost legalistic in its conception. Essentially, at stressful times in American history, governors, legislators, and presidents have struggled with the problem of how to deal with domestic unrest when it requires force, since the conventional military branches are simply not designed to take on American citizens if it becomes necessary. I'm not talking about questions of logistics, but ones of training and psychology. Essentially, the NG's members trade any moral issues that they may have with dealing with such tough questions for a far reduced chance of being sent into a foreign country at the vanguard of an invasion, or anything of the sort.
Mind you, they are still called in as reserves occasionally, since an active duty National Guard unit is superior to a reserve Army unit, as a general rule.
In addition to that function, most of the time the National Guard serves as an auxiliary law enforcement mechanism, in states of emergency. In floods, for example, their manpower is used to help set up countermeasures as quickly as possible. In 9/11, they were crucial in restoring a semblance of order, as in the Rodney King riots, etc.
It does function, I believe, under the same dept of Defense as everyone else. But it has its own independent chain of command.
In my humble opinion, they are a necessary part of the federal and state government's coercion mechanisms. Their jobs lack the glamour of serving abroad in war, but that does not make them any less important.
Were we at the point they were created nearly a century ago, I would have a lot of issues with the US government explicitly wiping its ass with our constitution by designing a military force explicitly for domestic repression. But like with a number of other long established precedents, it is far more profitable to seek to make the best of them than to undo them. They try to legitimize by claiming it is just a logical evolution of state militias, but just because it absorbed state militias into it when it was created does not make it any less legitimate. There is no reason such a military force should be handled at the federal level rather than the state level. It is just one more tragic step in the centralization of power in Washington rather than at the local level.
Despite their claim to be a part of the constitution, that is clearly a violation of the obvious intention of the law, which was to reserve as much power as was reasonable and practical to the states, not the federal government.
Keep in mind these are, of course, my opinions. America's bloodiest war was fought in part over questions like these, so my view is hardly definitive. Just correct, that's all 
This is not a critique of the people that serve in it. They are just as likely to be highly motivated, patriotic citizens looking to serve their country. But I think their willingness to do so is founded on ignorance of America's history and what the country was supposed to be...
Damn, that wasn't brief at all. You bastard! and there's still so much more... |
Author
Topic: WAR ON IRAQ <- All Posts, POLLS, Question, and (Read 1491 times)