- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Response to naysayers of ARMY Document leaked
Posted on 8/18/14 at 5:37 pm to kilo
Posted on 8/18/14 at 5:37 pm to kilo
quote:
Is it an active FM. Answer that question.
First of all, we have transitioned from the field manual. We now use a different naming convention for our doctrine. Try looking up ADP, ADRP, ATP and ATTP.
In regards to your question, are you referring to the document that is the focus of the article? ATP 3-39.33?
Do you know how to research? Then put that into Google and Army Publishing Directorate (apd.army.mil) as well and see what you get.
And enjoy the laughs.
0
Posted on 8/18/14 at 5:47 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:
Wolfhound45
I'll admit that I didn't read the entire article but wouldn't the military, aside from theCoast Guard and National Guard, being used against citizens be violation of Posse Comitatus?
Serious question. And I'm directing the question at you because you know your shite and I respect the hell out of you and your opinion.
Posted on 8/18/14 at 5:49 pm to MSCoastTigerGirl
Apparently not, if a 'state of emergency' is declared.
Posted on 8/18/14 at 6:27 pm to MSCoastTigerGirl
quote:
MSCoastTigerGirl
Don't mind taking this up (now that kilo has stopped laughing);
As in all of our doctrinal publications, if you have question about the authority cited for the doctrine you go to the references section. It will list military and then other supporting references. For ATP 3-39.33 it cites the following (References, page 125);
Other Publications
32 CFR, Part 215. Employment of Military Resources in the Event of Civil Disturbances. Constitution of the United States.
DODD 3025.18. Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DCSA). 29 December 2010.
DODD 5200.27. Acquisition of Information Concerning Persons and Organizations not Affiliated with the Department of Defense. 7 January 1980.
DODI 3025.21. Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement. 27 February 2013.
Executive Order 12333. United States Intelligence Activities. 4 December 1981.
Fed-Std 376B. Preferred Metric Units for General Use for the Federal Government. 27 January 1993.
House Joint Resolution 1292. 6 June 1968.
NGR 500-1. National Guard Domestic Operations. 13 June 2008.
10 USC, Subtitle A, Part I, Chapter 15, Section 331. Federal Aid for State Governments.
10 USC, Subtitle A, Part I, Chapter 15, Section 332. Use of Militia and Armed Forces to Enforce Federal Authority.
10 USC, Subtitle A, Part I, Chapter 15, Section 333. Interference With State and Federal Law.
10 USC, Subtitle A, Part I, Chapter 15, Section 334. Proclamation to Disperse.
18 USC, Part I, Chapter 67, Section 1385. Use of Army and Air Force as a Posse Comitatus.
The references that are most germane to your question are DODD 3025.18, DODI 3025.21 and 18 USC, Part I, Chapter 67, Section 1385. In a broad umbrella, our functions would mostly fall under Defense Support to Civil Authorities (DSCA) and Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement (DSCLE).
Bottom line, there are certain situations where the U.S. military does have the authority to assume law enforcement responsibilities. But they are very narrowly defined.
DODD - Department of Defense Directive
DODI - Department of Defense Instruction
USC - US Code
ETA: This is one I have not researched before;
32 CFR, Part 215. Employment of Military Resources in the Event of Civil Disturbances. Constitution of the United States.
This post was edited on 8/18/14 at 6:41 pm
Posted on 8/18/14 at 6:30 pm to Wolfhound45
Thanks for taking the time to link all of that and answer my question. You always answer my questions. I appreciate that.
Posted on 8/18/14 at 6:32 pm to MSCoastTigerGirl
quote:
MSCoastTigerGirl
You are quite welcome young lady.
Posted on 8/18/14 at 6:34 pm to Wolfhound45
And you warned me a long time ago to stay away from Geauxxx. I didn't listen.
I may have to get you to set him straight soon.
Posted on 8/18/14 at 6:35 pm to Wolfhound45
My point was the nonsense hair-on-fire treatment of the OP and the attendant link relating to that ATP. I'm probably the only person on this board actively serving in a DSCA related TF so I'm always amused by those that seem to think DoD is just going to up and drop the hammer on US civilians.
Posted on 8/18/14 at 6:44 pm to Clames
quote:
My point was the nonsense hair-on-fire treatment of the OP and the attendant link relating to that ATP. I'm probably the only person on this board actively serving in a DSCA related TF so I'm always amused by those that seem to think DoD is just going to up and drop the hammer on US civilians.
Don't disagree with a word you said. I will simply stating that the focus of the article (ATP 3-39.33) is (in fact) current Army docrtine.
And considering that many years ago I served as the Medical Planner for JTF-CS (as a much more junior field grade officer than I am now - you can figure it out), yes, I am somewhat familiar with the provisions of DSCA.
This post was edited on 8/18/14 at 6:44 pm
Posted on 8/18/14 at 6:47 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:
Don't mind taking this up (now that kilo has stopped laughing);
I have not stopped laughing.
Posted on 8/18/14 at 6:48 pm to kilo
I can't have two of my favorite posters arguing, kilo.
It makes me sad. You and Wolf are both awesome. I'm leaving the thread before I
It makes me sad. You and Wolf are both awesome. I'm leaving the thread before I
Posted on 8/18/14 at 6:50 pm to Clames
quote:
My point was the nonsense hair-on-fire treatment of the OP and the attendant link relating to that ATP. I'm probably the only person on this board actively serving in a DSCA related TF so I'm always amused by those that seem to think DoD is just going to up and drop the hammer on US civilians.
EXACTLY.
WE didnt even use ROE like that in a combat zone against unarmed civilians. We had some tense moments during the surge in 07 where we faced off with 100k protesters in Sadr City and our ROE was not even remotely that harsh.
Thats what Im laughing at "sir".
Its just a scare tactic.
This post was edited on 8/18/14 at 6:51 pm
Posted on 8/18/14 at 6:53 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:
JTF-CS
They need help...
Posted on 8/18/14 at 6:54 pm to Clames
quote:this craziness has been going on for 25 years. In 1990 it was Russian troops here in the US because US soldiers wouldn't shoot Americans (source, my goofy brother-in-law). That is the original source of the black helicopter. They were carrying around foreign troops getting ready to shoot us.
so I'm always amused by those that seem to think DoD is just going to up and drop the hammer on US civilians.
People just want to believe certain things.
Posted on 8/18/14 at 6:56 pm to MSCoastTigerGirl
quote:
I can't have two of my favorite posters arguing, kilo.
I like wolfhound. We are just having a discussion. No worries.
Posted on 8/18/14 at 6:59 pm to Tigah in the ATL
quote:
People just want to believe certain things.
I remember the facebook/twitter thing a couple years ago about the UN moving around armor,light skin and support vehicles around by train inside the country to staging areas. It was like the gif "its happening" for the conspiracy types.
Posted on 8/18/14 at 7:08 pm to Clames
quote:
They need help...
Long in my rear view mirror. Don't even know anyone there now.
Posted on 8/18/14 at 7:28 pm to MSCoastTigerGirl
quote:
And you warned me a long time ago to stay away from Geauxxx. I didn't listen.
I may have to get you to set him straight soon.
He is fine young man. The kind of guy you know has your back in a tough spot. Hope I get a chance to meet him IRL at his airborne school graduation in the near future.
Posted on 8/18/14 at 7:30 pm to Wolfhound45
He really does seem like a good guy. Even though he is a sexist pig. At least he is consistent.
If you meet him IRL you have to give him hell though. It's a must.
Posted on 8/18/14 at 7:33 pm to MSCoastTigerGirl
My ears were burning so I checked the poliboard and look who's talking about me.
Wolf, I'm in the guard now. Does that mean I'm gonna have to arrest and strip search coastie at the next round of protests?
Wolf, I'm in the guard now. Does that mean I'm gonna have to arrest and strip search coastie at the next round of protests?
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News