- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
0
Posted on 10/29/18 at 11:22 am to bamarep
quote:
Patrolling our streets is one thing, repelling invaders is something else all together.
That action is exactly why we have a military. Fighting on foreign soil is one thing, but defending the homeland should be their primary job.
Posted on 10/29/18 at 11:25 am to The Maj
Why should PC apply when the people the troops would be deployed against are NOT US citizens? It should not matter where, but who.
Posted on 10/29/18 at 11:25 am to bamarep
No amendment to the PC act is needed for a national.military to defend.a border from foreign.invasion. That is the most fundamental role of a national military. The PC act is designed to.protect American citizens from a.Commander in.Chief using it in a law enforcement role domestically.
We better do more to defend our own border than we did.for South Korea and Kuwait.
We better do more to defend our own border than we did.for South Korea and Kuwait.
Posted on 10/29/18 at 11:28 am to tigerpawl
According to the following the troops can be armed if the decision is made that their lives could be in danger. That will be the rub right there.
When the walkers get close the military needs to drop a few thousands flyers warning them of this.
quote:
Arming DoD personnel with firearms shall be limited and controlled. Qualified personnel shall be armed when
required for assigned duties and there is reasonable expectation that DoD installations, property, or personnel lives
or DoD assets will be jeopardized if personnel are not armed. Evaluation of the necessity to arm DoD personnel
shall be made with the consideration of the possible consequences of accidental or indiscriminate use of those
arms. However, the overriding factors in determining whether or not to arm are the mission and threat. Arming
DoD personnel (i.e., administrative, assessment, or inspection, not regularly engaged in or directly supervising
security or law enforcement activities) shall be limited to missions or threats and the immediate need to protect
DoD assets or persons' lives.
In reference to the DOD Directive, the military departments also have promulgated policies and regulations
regarding carrying firearms for personal protection while on duty. (see Table 1.) Across the Services, the carrying
of government-issued firearms for personal protection is generally prohibited unless authorized by high-level
officials, and in most cases requires an evaluation of threat conditions.
When the walkers get close the military needs to drop a few thousands flyers warning them of this.
Posted on 10/29/18 at 11:31 am to tigerpawl
Posted on 10/29/18 at 11:33 am to lsufan1971
Before one of the lefty tards chimes in, we're ALREADY under a presidential declared National Emergency so the military can be used as he sees fit.
Posted on 10/29/18 at 11:37 am to bamarep
quote:
National Emergency so the military can be used as he sees fit.
While true, he (his advisors) are probably attempting to avoid some lefty judge attempting to step in on any of this...
The aviation assets will surveil and jump BP agents or even NG to where they are needed.
The engineers will build and operate temporary detention centers, along with medical and other logistics personnel...
You will have some ground transportation assets that will transport to the detention centers...
The MP's will have a force protection role and could possibly man the gates of the detention centers... More than likely they will be the only AD with live ammo...
Posted on 10/29/18 at 11:38 am to AggieHank86
Saw a line of Humvees at Buccees.
Posted on 10/29/18 at 11:39 am to tigerpawl
Posted on 10/29/18 at 11:40 am to AggieHank86
quote:
support troops, not combat troops.
5000 support troops should be able to support quite the combat regiment when it get's deployed.
Posted on 10/29/18 at 11:41 am to TaderSalad
But, but muh optics!
Posted on 10/29/18 at 3:11 pm to NIH
Couple of interesting points from Jennifer Griffin's twitter:
1. 800 troops already there, another 200 arrive tomorrow, 1,700 will be in place by Saturday. Troops are authorized to be there through December 15th.
2. DoD will be paying for the deployment not DHS.
3. Troops arriving today will be setting up 3 unified command centers, temporary shelters for up to 2400 Border Patrol, also authorizes MREs and riot gear for up to 500 Border Patrol agents.
4. RoE have not been determined yet. The CBP wants DoD personnel to be in "direct contact with migrants and protesters". DoD order says this may cause issues with Posse Comitatus
1. 800 troops already there, another 200 arrive tomorrow, 1,700 will be in place by Saturday. Troops are authorized to be there through December 15th.
2. DoD will be paying for the deployment not DHS.
3. Troops arriving today will be setting up 3 unified command centers, temporary shelters for up to 2400 Border Patrol, also authorizes MREs and riot gear for up to 500 Border Patrol agents.
4. RoE have not been determined yet. The CBP wants DoD personnel to be in "direct contact with migrants and protesters". DoD order says this may cause issues with Posse Comitatus
This post was edited on 10/29/18 at 3:12 pm
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News