1. #4101
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    I noticed that I pointed out equipment and what it means to their effectiveness.

    There is also the question of the legality of using NG troops as law enforcement in DC under the current command structure (they are under the control of the military when mobilized for any reason).
    This isn't just about using them as "law enforcement. They weren't even allowed to do much of anything.

    They have been deployed numerous times in the past, to all sorts of locations. they have been called to quell riots, act as security, and disaster relief. But, as has been pointed out, they were more restricted than in the picture.

  2. #4102
    The Unstoppable Force Kellhound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    This isn't just about using them as "law enforcement. They weren't even allowed to do much of anything.

    They have been deployed numerous times in the past, to all sorts of locations. they have been called to quell riots, act as security, and disaster relief. But, as has been pointed out, they were more restricted than in the picture.
    The grey zone is the use of the NG in DC " for the purpose of executing the laws", as they are under the control of the federal government.
    Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    “Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons.”
    "His knowledge on that topic is only power point deep..." "Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely."
    "Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?"

  3. #4103
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    The grey zone is the use of the NG in DC " for the purpose of executing the laws", as they are under the control of the federal government.
    yes, they are under the control of the federal government. DC has their own National Guard. They were hamstrung.

  4. #4104
    The Unstoppable Force Kellhound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    yes, they are under the control of the federal government. DC has their own National Guard. They were hamstrung.
    Posse Comitatus does not allow the us of NG troops under federal control to be used for the purpose of executing the law unless the Insurrection Act is evoked (and it has been 28 years since it last was).
    Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    “Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons.”
    "His knowledge on that topic is only power point deep..." "Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely."
    "Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?"

  5. #4105
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    Posse Comitatus does not allow the us of NG troops under federal control to be used for the purpose of executing the law unless the Insurrection Act is evoked (and it has been 28 years since it last was).
    And as has been pointed out, they are objectively more restricted than they were... at the same location... just a few months ago.

    I have made no claims as to what you are talking about.

  6. #4106
    Legendary! Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    6,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    And as has been pointed out, they are objectively more restricted than they were... at the same location... just a few months ago.

    I have made no claims as to what you are talking about.
    Not sure where you got the idea they were more or less restricted then they were during last year. The actual actions of the NG in both cases were very simular. The major differences are 1) You didn't see the use of force memo last time, and 2) Last time they had a LOT of support by other federal agencies, where they had almost none this time.

    The first is not a big deal, the second absolutely is. As I mentioned in my earlier post on the topic, I am EXTREMELY concerned by the actions of numerous federal agencies during the Washington protests last year. Many of these agencies cannot even be identified, such as who was operating surveillance aircraft over the crowd, or who was providing the "Goon Squads" we saw in both DC and Portland. Other agencies we can identify, such as the National Park service, were operating WAY outside the scope of their authority, and tear gassing crowds. But I can't find any evidence that the National Guard itself was particularly misused in those cases (If you remember the iconic picture of them on the Washington Monument, they had no guns, no riot shields, and weren't advancing on protestors).

    As far as the memo itself, you seem to completely misunderstand what it is. It is a very standard use of force format, I dealt with similar documents hundreds of times. When it says "You can't do this thing without asking permission" that is exactly what it means. It doesn't mean you can't do it, it just means you have to ask the person assigned to approve such things. In Afghanistan we had mountains of these memos, restricting all sorts of things. "Don't use Aerial munitions within X distance of a structure", "Don't obstruct civilian traffic along roads", "Don't enter agricultural areas", but none of those were hard rules, each of them had a person you had to ask before you did something like that. They don't want Soldiers doing donuts in some poor farmers fields, but if one of my Platoons needed to go after a mortar emplacement or something, I was the one authorized to approve that. For something more serious, like Aerial Munitions near a residential structure, if we absolutely needed to do it, I had to ask my boss first (Or provide a really good reason after the fact!)

    That is all this memo is. "Don't do shit that is going to rile up the media unless you ask me first". Of course, Soldiers are ALWAYS allowed to do what they need to defend themselves, and since we saw the NG doing several of the things on that list, clearly they did ask for, and receive, permission to do it. They weren't actually used as traffic control, we saw them in a shield wall moving rioters away from the capital.
    "We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine." DJT- Jan 22, 2020
    "And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done." DJT- Feb 26, 2020
    “It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.” DJT- Feb 27, 2020

  7. #4107
    The Unstoppable Force Kellhound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    And as has been pointed out, they are objectively more restricted than they were... at the same location... just a few months ago.

    I have made no claims as to what you are talking about.
    And the restrictions are not effectively significant given the equipment authorized in both cases.

    Again, I would have preferred to see them armed with fixed bayonets both times because it is very effective at moving people.
    Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    “Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons.”
    "His knowledge on that topic is only power point deep..." "Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely."
    "Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?"

  8. #4108
    Quote Originally Posted by Thekri View Post
    Not sure where you got the idea they were more or less restricted then they were during last year. The actual actions of the NG in both cases were very simular. The major differences are 1) You didn't see the use of force memo last time, and 2) Last time they had a LOT of support by other federal agencies, where they had almost none this time.

    The first is not a big deal, the second absolutely is. As I mentioned in my earlier post on the topic, I am EXTREMELY concerned by the actions of numerous federal agencies during the Washington protests last year. Many of these agencies cannot even be identified, such as who was operating surveillance aircraft over the crowd, or who was providing the "Goon Squads" we saw in both DC and Portland. Other agencies we can identify, such as the National Park service, were operating WAY outside the scope of their authority, and tear gassing crowds. But I can't find any evidence that the National Guard itself was particularly misused in those cases (If you remember the iconic picture of them on the Washington Monument, they had no guns, no riot shields, and weren't advancing on protestors).

    As far as the memo itself, you seem to completely misunderstand what it is. It is a very standard use of force format, I dealt with similar documents hundreds of times. When it says "You can't do this thing without asking permission" that is exactly what it means. It doesn't mean you can't do it, it just means you have to ask the person assigned to approve such things. In Afghanistan we had mountains of these memos, restricting all sorts of things. "Don't use Aerial munitions within X distance of a structure", "Don't obstruct civilian traffic along roads", "Don't enter agricultural areas", but none of those were hard rules, each of them had a person you had to ask before you did something like that. They don't want Soldiers doing donuts in some poor farmers fields, but if one of my Platoons needed to go after a mortar emplacement or something, I was the one authorized to approve that. For something more serious, like Aerial Munitions near a residential structure, if we absolutely needed to do it, I had to ask my boss first (Or provide a really good reason after the fact!)

    That is all this memo is. "Don't do shit that is going to rile up the media unless you ask me first". Of course, Soldiers are ALWAYS allowed to do what they need to defend themselves, and since we saw the NG doing several of the things on that list, clearly they did ask for, and receive, permission to do it. They weren't actually used as traffic control, we saw them in a shield wall moving rioters away from the capital.
    The order literally states they are not allowed to wear body armor. As you can see from the photos from before, they are allowed to wear them.

    I've seen plenty of UOF and SOFA agreements.

    Most of it is fine, but some of it is not. This isn't about misuse, it's about equipping them. I get an order telling hem they are not to act as a law-enforcement entity. I get saying they are not allowed firearms. I take specific exception with not allowing them body armor and helmets.

    Tis isn't an issue with the actions of the National Guard troops, but with their limitations beforehand. And let's not pretend that the National Guard deployment was anything but a major catastrophe. Governors and the DC mayor were BEGGING to have the, and they were being stonewalled. Larry Hogan, a republican was on the phone desperately trying to offer assistance.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    And the restrictions are not effectively significant given the equipment authorized in both cases.

    Again, I would have preferred to see them armed with fixed bayonets both times because it is very effective at moving people.
    Body armor and helmets are important when dealing with a riot.
    Last edited by Machismo; 2021-02-02 at 08:54 PM.

  9. #4109
    Legendary! Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    6,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    The order literally states they are not allowed to wear body armor. As you can see from the photos from before, they are allowed to wear them.

    I've seen plenty of UOF and SOFA agreements.

    Most of it is fine, but some of it is not. This isn't about misuse, it's about equipping them. I get an order telling hem they are not to act as a law-enforcement entity. I get saying they are not allowed firearms. I take specific exception with not allowing them body armor and helmets.

    Tis isn't an issue with the actions of the National Guard troops, but with their limitations beforehand.
    Again, it does not prohibit wearing body armor and helmets, it merely requires authorization before you do so. At the time that memo was written (January 5th) there was no a clear reason to deploy body armor or helmets in Washington DC. The Military REALLY doesn't like the optics of doing so (The fact that some police agencies dress like they are on patrol in Baghdad is a separate issue...).

    When there WAS a reason to deploy those things, they did so. Look at pictures of the National Guard useage at the capital. You will see helmets, riot shields, and body armor all in use.

    Body armor and helmets are important when dealing with a riot
    Of course it is. And when there was a riot (On January 6) the national guard used Body Armor and Helmets. They used tear gas, armored vehicles, and carried rifles as well. However, on January 5th there was not a riot, so the National Guard wasn't there, and wasn't using those things.

    You keep claiming they were limited, but they clearly weren't. They showed up with all the things they needed, and they did it in about 5 hours. Which is extremely fast for a Tuesday. The National Guard isn't like the regular army, they don't show up and sit around bases all day, they have full time civilian jobs. They had to be called up, equipped, and deployed. I don't know how many they had on standby, but I doubt it was the full number deployed that day.

    If you look at the Troops that were posted around the Capital between Jan 6 and Jan 20th, you see the armor, rifles, and helmets all available. (However I don't see any ammunition, the rifles are just for show/poking people).
    "We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine." DJT- Jan 22, 2020
    "And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done." DJT- Feb 26, 2020
    “It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.” DJT- Feb 27, 2020

  10. #4110
    Quote Originally Posted by Thekri View Post
    Again, it does not prohibit wearing body armor and helmets, it merely requires authorization before you do so. At the time that memo was written (January 5th) there was no a clear reason to deploy body armor or helmets in Washington DC. The Military REALLY doesn't like the optics of doing so (The fact that some police agencies dress like they are on patrol in Baghdad is a separate issue...).

    When there WAS a reason to deploy those things, they did so. Look at pictures of the National Guard useage at the capital. You will see helmets, riot shields, and body armor all in use.


    Of course it is. And when there was a riot (On January 6) the national guard used Body Armor and Helmets. They used tear gas, armored vehicles, and carried rifles as well. However, on January 5th there was not a riot, so the National Guard wasn't there, and wasn't using those things.

    You keep claiming they were limited, but they clearly weren't. They showed up with all the things they needed, and they did it in about 5 hours. Which is extremely fast for a Tuesday. The National Guard isn't like the regular army, they don't show up and sit around bases all day, they have full time civilian jobs. They had to be called up, equipped, and deployed. I don't know how many they had on standby, but I doubt it was the full number deployed that day.

    If you look at the Troops that were posted around the Capital between Jan 6 and Jan 20th, you see the armor, rifles, and helmets all available. (However I don't see any ammunition, the rifles are just for show/poking people).
    When there was a riot on Jan 6th, the National Guard wasn't even there.

    They didn't show up for several hours, despite the governors and mayors literally begging to be able to do it. W already know this, Larry Hogan went on television to state it.

    It does prohibit them from being warn, until they are given permission to do so.
    Last edited by Machismo; 2021-02-02 at 09:06 PM.

  11. #4111
    Legendary! Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    6,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    When there was a riot on Jan 6th, the National Guard wasn't even there.
    Which is a much bigger issue then anything to do with the national guard. There are a lot of people responsible for securing the Capital, but there were no resources in place to security. Using the National Guard is absolutely the last resort. It wasn't that large a crowd, it could/should have been handled by Police. It wasn't, because the Police seemed to be complicit AF.

    They didn't show up for several hours, despite the governors and mayors literally begging to be able to do it.
    Were exactly do you think the DC National Guard is physically located? Hint: It isn't at the Capital Building. They use normal trucks and stuff to move, it isn't particularly fast. Then they have to get all their people together, brief them what is going on, issue them their stuff, get them on the trucks, drive to the capital...

    I promise you, it takes forever to get a military unit to go anywhere. Hours is pretty fast, because again, THEY ARE NOT POLICE. They aren't supposed to show up on a minutes notice to quell insurrections, because we aren't supposed to need that capability.

    It does prohibit them from being warn, until they are given permission to do so.
    ... which is exactly what I said, with sentence structure moved around. Since that permission was given, and the body armor was worn, it is a non-issue. Plenty of legitimate issues here, this memo isn't really one of them. I don't like it at the DoD level, as I said the first time, but there isn't a case to be made that it actually hurt anything.
    "We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine." DJT- Jan 22, 2020
    "And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done." DJT- Feb 26, 2020
    “It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.” DJT- Feb 27, 2020

  12. #4112
    The Undying cubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    31,249
    Quote Originally Posted by Thekri View Post
    Were exactly do you think the DC National Guard is physically located? Hint: It isn't at the Capital Building. They use normal trucks and stuff to move, it isn't particularly fast. Then they have to get all their people together, brief them what is going on, issue them their stuff, get them on the trucks, drive to the capital...

    I promise you, it takes forever to get a military unit to go anywhere. Hours is pretty fast, because again, THEY ARE NOT POLICE. They aren't supposed to show up on a minutes notice to quell insurrections, because we aren't supposed to need that capability.
    But there is direct evidence that the National Guard was delayed significantly outside of their normal response times. Trump and his political cronies stalled potential response times with direct orders that stymied communication and orders.

  13. #4113
    Legendary! Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    6,114
    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    But there is direct evidence that the National Guard was delayed significantly outside of their normal response times. Trump and his political cronies stalled potential response times with direct orders that stymied communication and orders.
    Sure, don't doubt it. Everyone in that administration was a complete POS.

    The only point I was making is that it is silly to claim they weren't allowed to wear armor, when we saw them wearing armor when they showed up. Obviously everything about the Trump administrations response was horrible, but that was just standard for them.
    "We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine." DJT- Jan 22, 2020
    "And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done." DJT- Feb 26, 2020
    “It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.” DJT- Feb 27, 2020

  14. #4114
    Quote Originally Posted by Thekri View Post
    Which is a much bigger issue then anything to do with the national guard. There are a lot of people responsible for securing the Capital, but there were no resources in place to security. Using the National Guard is absolutely the last resort. It wasn't that large a crowd, it could/should have been handled by Police. It wasn't, because the Police seemed to be complicit AF.

    Were exactly do you think the DC National Guard is physically located? Hint: It isn't at the Capital Building. They use normal trucks and stuff to move, it isn't particularly fast. Then they have to get all their people together, brief them what is going on, issue them their stuff, get them on the trucks, drive to the capital...

    I promise you, it takes forever to get a military unit to go anywhere. Hours is pretty fast, because again, THEY ARE NOT POLICE. They aren't supposed to show up on a minutes notice to quell insurrections, because we aren't supposed to need that capability.

    ... which is exactly what I said, with sentence structure moved around. Since that permission was given, and the body armor was worn, it is a non-issue. Plenty of legitimate issues here, this memo isn't really one of them. I don't like it at the DoD level, as I said the first time, but there isn't a case to be made that it actually hurt anything.
    Oh, I agree, the NG should be very low on the list. Capitol Police fucked up, bigly.

    https://www.factcheck.org/2021/01/ti...nt-to-capitol/

    As for the DC armory, it's less than miles from the Capitol Building, give or take. They also could have staged at Andrews, or Anacostia, both of which are within 15-20 min.

    This shows the failure leading up to it all, not just on the day of. As for the day of, getting the approval, then the ensuing shenanigans, is to blame.

    As for the wording, that means a great deal. They were prevented from wearing it, unless approved. And as we've seen, approval was something that was in short supply. Anyone who doesn't see this as an utter failure of the complete chain of command, to include the fucking president, is delusional.

  15. #4115
    Quote Originally Posted by Thekri View Post
    Sure, don't doubt it. Everyone in that administration was a complete POS.

    The only point I was making is that it is silly to claim they weren't allowed to wear armor, when we saw them wearing armor when they showed up. Obviously everything about the Trump administrations response was horrible, but that was just standard for them.
    They were allowed to with authorization, and it took forever to even send them in. Add in that you also had the VANG in there and they were under no such orders and this is a weird nitpicky thing to argue about. We have evidence of orders restricting the use of basic body armor in a situation that was known to be volatile. It’s inexcusable.

  16. #4116
    Legendary! Thekri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A highly disgruntled constituent of Lindsey Graham.
    Posts
    6,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    They were allowed to with authorization, and it took forever to even send them in. Add in that you also had the VANG in there and they were under no such orders and this is a weird nitpicky thing to argue about. We have evidence of orders restricting the use of basic body armor in a situation that was known to be volatile. It’s inexcusable.
    Sure, fine. This is exactly why I don't post much on here anymore, people are more interested in being angry then they are about understanding anything. Anger without context is not a helpful situation. Restricting body armor in CONUS is normal, always. Insurrections are not normal, and it is very easy to sit looking back on the situation and be upset because you know what happened next.

    The reason this is important is because the neutrality of the military is a large part of what let us survive the last 4 years. Deploying troops and guns the second some group of Americans start talking shit is a REALLY bad idea. The Guard should never have been called in. Those helmets and armor should never have been needed. The Capital Police should have handled it, with support from other federal and local law enforcement as needed.

    This isn't me defending any part of Trump's administration, this is about something much larger and more important. The sight of military forces in and around that capital building is already a sign of complete and total failure to govern.
    "We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine." DJT- Jan 22, 2020
    "And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done." DJT- Feb 26, 2020
    “It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.” DJT- Feb 27, 2020

  17. #4117
    The Unstoppable Force Kellhound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    The order literally states they are not allowed to wear body armor. As you can see from the photos from before, they are allowed to wear them.

    I've seen plenty of UOF and SOFA agreements.

    Most of it is fine, but some of it is not. This isn't about misuse, it's about equipping them. I get an order telling hem they are not to act as a law-enforcement entity. I get saying they are not allowed firearms. I take specific exception with not allowing them body armor and helmets.

    Tis isn't an issue with the actions of the National Guard troops, but with their limitations beforehand. And let's not pretend that the National Guard deployment was anything but a major catastrophe. Governors and the DC mayor were BEGGING to have the, and they were being stonewalled. Larry Hogan, a republican was on the phone desperately trying to offer assistance.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Body armor and helmets are important when dealing with a riot.
    Not nearly as important as shields (and face shields) and offensive weapons. Look at pictures of the Guard on the 6th. They have small chest body armor, large face shields, large shields, and lower leg hard armor. That is how you equip troops for riot duty, not normal helmets and combat body armor.
    Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    “Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons.”
    "His knowledge on that topic is only power point deep..." "Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely."
    "Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?"

  18. #4118
    Quote Originally Posted by Thekri View Post
    Sure, fine. This is exactly why I don't post much on here anymore, people are more interested in being angry then they are about understanding anything. Anger without context is not a helpful situation. Restricting body armor in CONUS is normal, always. Insurrections are not normal, and it is very easy to sit looking back on the situation and be upset because you know what happened next.

    The reason this is important is because the neutrality of the military is a large part of what let us survive the last 4 years. Deploying troops and guns the second some group of Americans start talking shit is a REALLY bad idea. The Guard should never have been called in. Those helmets and armor should never have been needed. The Capital Police should have handled it, with support from other federal and local law enforcement as needed.

    This isn't me defending any part of Trump's administration, this is about something much larger and more important. The sight of military forces in and around that capital building is already a sign of complete and total failure to govern.
    Weird. I never saw the military presence in DC, which is plentiful, as anything but a sign the military is run from the Pentagon. And the difference in their basic response to the protests over the summer vs the insurrection is the issue.

  19. #4119
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    Not nearly as important as shields (and face shields) and offensive weapons. Look at pictures of the Guard on the 6th. They have small chest body armor, large face shields, large shields, and lower leg hard armor. That is how you equip troops for riot duty, not normal helmets and combat body armor.
    They have helmets.

    They have body armor.

    These are things that others wanted to prevent them from having.

  20. #4120
    The Unstoppable Force Kellhound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    They have helmets.

    They have body armor.

    These are things that others wanted to prevent them from having.
    In many ways the full combat body armor is a detriment when not facing high velocity projectiles. Its heavy and bulky.

    And they did have helmets, body armor, shields etc. on the 6th.
    Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
    “Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons.”
    "His knowledge on that topic is only power point deep..." "Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely."
    "Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •