That's not true at all. Read the full list. They cannot actually interact with protesters, cannot seek assistance from any of the other government personnel who were there, and couldn't actually do any law enforcement whatsoever.
They were ordered to be traffic control.
They were completely hamstrung, and you know it. So, feel free to keep being ridiculous in the name of fascists, I expect nothing less from you.
https://www.cleveland19.com/2021/02/...apitol-window/
And add another in the bucket of, "These people are too stupid to be a serious threat."
We already had the guy who wore his company badge, with his name, picture, and company name on it.
We also have a guy who wore his work jacket to the riot, which has the name and phone number of his employer.
Seriously, these chucklefucks should have spent less time yelling about wanting to find and fight antifa and more time paying attention to how antifa operates. I can't remember the last time one of those idiots did something this deeply stupid.
Some of the things are standard, but not others. The dude is an officer, and knows his stuff. But, not being able to interact with law enforcement, including asking for assistance, that's not normal. The other issue was the refusal to allow body armor and helmets.
I absolutely get not arming them with firearms, that is very common. But, the way it's worded means that they cannot do much of anything. By the wording, they cannot even detain a violent protestor, and hold them for arrest by actual law enforcement.
And let's not forget, the Guard wasn't even used. They wanted to be, and DC, Maryland, and Virginia were trying to use them... but were denied, even under those limited orders.
"Law and Order", lots of places have had that, Russia, North Korea, Saddam's Iraq.
Laws can be made to enforce order of cruelty and brutality.
Equality and Justice, that is how you have peace and a society that benefits all.
Just a reminder... Trump had unmarked vans snatching people off the street, during BLM protests.
Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi
Not having offensive weapons and full riot gear is a massive constraint on effectiveness no matter how you look at it, and my comment was strictly based on equipment not orders. But I don't expect you to notice such things.
- - - Updated - - -
Don't get me wrong, I believe all rioters should be dealt with via extreme force.
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.
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.