Budget: US National Defense & Security .... continued

I closed the preceding post with the following two paragraphs:

I believe we could save a great deal of military dollars and lives, if the Department of Defense, were just that a National Defense Force, and not an offensive weapon of politicians. There are a number of intergovernmental assets that could be combined to provide border, airport, port and coastal security, and at less cost than we are putting forward today. We also need to review our own internal status of forces, and review the implications of the Posse Commitus Act. The March 2009 event here in Samson, Alabama, is evidence of that, when you have rural sheriff department and police departments that are understaffed, and a situation occurs, and they ask for assistance from the nearby military base in a mutual aid agreement.

Think about it, when you have National Guard, Air National Guard, Homeland Security, FEMA, Customs and Border Patrol, DEA, etc., all with various unshared assets that if administered properly could meet not only the day to day national security and defense needs of the country, but also humanitarian aid during natural disasters. A better budgeting can be done.

From the Department of Defense's own website, I quote:

The mission of the Department of Defense is to provide the military forces needed to deter war and to protect the security of our country. The department's headquarters is at the Pentagon.

and ...

Today, the Department, headed by Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta, is not only in charge of the military, but it also employs a civilian force of thousands. With over 1.4 million men and women on active duty, and 718,000 civilian personnel, we are the nation's largest employer (emphasis mine). Another 1.1 million serve in the National Guard and Reserve forces. More than 2 million military retirees and their family members receive benefits. 

Now the Department of Homeland Security states it's mission as:

The Core Missions
There are five homeland security missions:

• Prevent terrorism and enhancing security;
• Secure and manage our borders;
• Enforce and administer our immigration laws;
• Safeguard and secure cyberspace;
• Ensure resilience to disasters;

Is it just me, or do others see a number of overlapping missions and/or roles just between the Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security?

Elsewhere I have commented that this Administration as well as preceding administrations have use the Armed Forces of the Untied States, like their own version of the "Foreign Legion" (no offense to the French or their Foreign Legion forces intended). Anyone who has gone through basic military training in any of the United States' service branches, recalls that the middle-portion of "basic" (after they take away your individuality) is to indoctrinate you into the "purpose" the military exists. Before continuing let's look at that Oath of Enlistment required by federal statute in 10 U.S.C. § 502:

10 USC § 502 - Enlistment oath: who may administer(a) Enlistment Oath.— Each person enlisting in an armed force shall take the following oath:
“I, XXXXXXXXXX, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”
(b) Who May Administer.— The oath may be taken before the President, the Vice-President, the Secretary of Defense, any commissioned officer, or any other person designated under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense. 

What is the first clause of that solemn oath?   "I, XXXXXXXXXX, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;". The Constitution of the United States of America, that is the ultimate allegiance sworn to by every enlisted member of the United States Armed Forces.

The Second clause of that oath reads, "and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice." Sadly, in my opinion the closing caveat phrase seems to be often ignored, "according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

One source usmilitary.com has the following to say (in part) about "Obeying Orders."

Military discipline and effectiveness is built on the foundation of obedience to orders. Recruits are taught to obey, immediately and without question, orders from their superiors, right from day-one of boot camp.
Military members who fail to obey the lawful orders of their superiors risk serious consequences. Article 90 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) makes it a crime for a military member to WILLFULLY disobey a superior commissioned officer. Article 91 makes it a crime to WILLFULLY disobey a superior Noncommissioned or Warrant Officer. Article 92 makes it a crime to disobey any lawful order (the disobedience does not have to be "willful" under this article).
In fact, under Article 90, during times of war, a military member who willfully disobeys a superior commissioned officer can be sentenced to death.
Seems like pretty good motivation to obey any order you're given, right? Nope. These articles require the obedience of LAWFUL orders. An order which is unlawful not only does not need to be obeyed, but obeying such an order can result in criminal prosecution of the one who obeys it. Military courts have long held that military members are accountable for their actions even while following orders -- if the order was illegal.

continuing ....

So, to obey, or not to obey? It depends on the order. Military members disobey orders at their own risk. They also obey orders at their own risk. An order to commit a crime is unlawful. An order to perform a military duty, no matter how dangerous is lawful, as long as it doesn't involve commission of a crime. 

Getting back on topic - Budget: US National Defense & Security 

When you look at all the agencies, departments, bureaus, administrations, etc., operated by the Federal Government that provide a service or mission of border, port, airport, airspace security or sovereignty, shouldn't they all be under one organization? Since World War II and the creation of the present Department of Defense, the common practice of Administrations and Congress, when one organization gets too large, their solution is to break it up into separate groups and agencies or departments. Now if according to the Department of Defense's own website, that if DOD is the nation's largest employer, you don't have to be a rocket-scientist to deduce that actually the entire federal government is truly the nation's largest employer.

While it will be no easy undertaking, and it will cost many senior level government employees their positions, I will make it one of my priorities as President to consolidate agencies, departments, and organizations within the federal government that perform the same or similar mission into one cohesive, compact, but mission effective and efficient organization. I guess in many ways you might call a new version of the Base Realignment and Closure Commission on steroids, because I intend to take it federal government wide, and not only within the departments of Defense and Homeland Security.

We do live in a world that is different from 1947 when our present defense infrastructure was established. The United States of America just like nearly every nation on this planet is facing tough financial times and hardships. We can no longer continue spending as if on a lobster and champagne budget, when all we really can afford based on income and revenue is a burger and shake.

We must also revisit the United States Code, that amalgamation of laws enacted by Congress and signed into Law by the President, and review, revise, and re-write, as necessary. One in particular that comes to mind is in combination with the revision to DOD/DHS is The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 and amended in 1956.

From the United States Northern Command website:

The Posse Comitatus Act
Section 1385 of Title 18, United States Code (USC), states:
“Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”
The PCA does not apply to the U.S. Coast Guard in peacetime or to the National Guard in Title 32 or State Active Duty status. The substantive prohibitions of the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) were extended to all the services with the enactment of Title 10 USC, Section 375. As required by Title 10 USC, Section 375 the secretary of defense issued Department of Defense Directive 5525.5, which precludes members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps from direct participation in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.
The PCA generally prohibits U.S. military personnel from direct participation in law enforcement activities. Some of those law enforcement activities would include interdicting vehicles, vessels, and aircraft; conducting surveillance, searches, pursuit and seizures; or making arrests on behalf of civilian law enforcement authorities. Prohibiting direct military involvement in law enforcement is in keeping with long-standing U.S. law and policy limiting the military’s role in domestic affairs.
The United States Congress has enacted a number of exceptions to the PCA that allow the military, in certain situations, to assist civilian law enforcement agencies in enforcing the laws of the U.S. The most common example is counterdrug assistance (Title 10 USC, Sections 371-381). Other examples include:
•The Insurrection Act (Title 10 USC, Sections 331-335). This act allows the president to use U.S. military personnel at the request of a state legislature or governor to suppress insurrections. It also allows the president to use federal troops to enforce federal laws when rebellion against the authority of the U.S. makes it impracticable to enforce the laws of the U.S.
•Assistance in the case of crimes involving nuclear materials (Title 18 USC, Section 831). This statute permits DoD personnel to assist the Justice Department in enforcing prohibitions regarding nuclear materials, when the attorney general and the secretary of defense jointly determine that an “emergency situation” exists that poses a serious threat to U.S. interests and is beyond the capability of civilian law enforcement agencies.
•Emergency situations involving chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction (Title 10 USC, Section 382). When the attorney general and the secretary of defense jointly determine that an “emergency situation” exists that poses a serious threat to U.S. interests and is beyond the capability of civilian law enforcement agencies. DoD personnel may assist the Justice Department in enforcing prohibitions regarding biological or chemical weapons of mass destruction.
Military support to civilian law enforcement is carried out in strict compliance with the Constitution and U.S. laws and under the direction of the president and secretary of defense.

Why do I believe such a revision is necessary?

On March 10, 2009, active duty U.S. Army Military Police troops from Fort Rucker were deployed to Samson, Alabama in response to a murder spree. Samson officials confirmed that the soldiers assisted in traffic control and securing the crime scene. The governor of Alabama did not request military assistance nor did President Obama authorize their deployment. Subsequent investigation found that the Posse Comitatus Act was violated and several military members received "administrative actions."

• Army reviews shows troop use in Samson killing spree violated federal law

•  Revolutionizing Northern Command

This happened here, near where I live, and I heard the events unfold on my radio scanner that afternoon as I was preparing to go to our regular American Legion meeting. I will not forget what I heard that tragic day. Whether in accordance with PCA or not, one must recognize and understand the situation and conditions here in this part of Alabama.  The City of Samson has five members in its police department, including the Chief of Police. City-data.com reflects that in 2007 the Police Department's monthly payroll for those five members was $20,639.00.  Also City-data.com reflects for 2002 the Geneva County Sheriff's law enforcement budget was $947,000.00 annually, for which there are thirteen full-time employees.

As I would assume to be the case in many small-town and rural counties in America, most law enforcement organizations have mutual-aid agreements, just as the many volunteer fire departments have mutual aid agreements. Yes, I recognize there is "protocol" for everything, but that does not make it right. At that time I was also the District Commander for the American Legion's 35th District of Alabama, and my wife and I attended five of the six funerals of our neighbors and fellow citizens. This link will take you to a BBC-America article about that day, the top picture is that of Sheriff Deputy Josh Meyers, who lost his wife, Andrea Dawn Myers, 31, and daughter Corrine Gracy Myers, 18 months, that day.

The approximate path that Michael Kenneth McLendon took that day from Kinston, Alabama, through the City of Samson, through the City of Geneva, to his final suicide at his former place of employment on the City of Geneva's North side covered approximately 26 miles, which under normal driving without stops takes about 35 minutes. The soldiers from Fort Rucker performed only the duties mentioned above traffic control and security at the temporary morgue site, in order to allow Samson Police and Geneva County Sheriff Deputies to do their jobs investigating and securing evidence, as well as attending to victims.

Our present system is not perfect

We still have a great deal of situations and issues that need improvements. But this is an article about Budget. We just passed the eleventh anniversary of September 11, 2001 and we are still fighting a war, alleged to be about terrorists hiding in the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan, and now allegedly having spread to the Arabian Peninsula and parts of Africa. We have seen the cost in the lives of too many American Men and Women, both military and civilian, as in the most recent case of Ambassador Stevens. Just what is our mission there? Are we there now to exterminate the Taliban? or Al Qaeda? How many terrorists must we kill before the mission is over? How many innocent women and children must die as "collateral-damage" from American-drone strikes?

A Time for True Military Policy Change

The Cold War is over. Where is that illusionary Peace-Dividend that we were supposed to experience when it ended? I will share with you an old recurring dream/vision from the late 1980's.

The Speech "The Speech" is the second of the three dreams or visions. It takes place in a large hall or auditorium. I am not certain of its location completely, as to whether it was within the chambers of the U.S. House of Representatives or whether it was within the chambers of the United Nations General Assembly in New York City, or elsewhere. The uncertainty rests in there were many government officials and dignitaries from around the world in attendance and there were as nearly as many flags around the perimeter of the auditorium, as well as the United Nations logo on the wall behind the dais, as well as the American flag. I would conjecture that since I have been inside the UN General Assembly chambers as a high school senior, and have yet to visit the halls of Congress, that the likely location was at the United Nations building. I do not recall what the circumstance or occasion for my speech was other than before starting I was sitting in a small room just behind the dais, and very nervous about how what I was about to unload on the audience would be received. I recall remembering a part of a tape by David Reber when he was asked about publicly speaking before large groups of students. His reply was, "Lord you see these butterflies in my stomach, make them fly in formation one more time. Amen." Mr. Reber was a Viet Nam Veteran and had on many occasions before becoming an evangelical speaker said those same words. I recited those words as I heard President Ronald Regan introduce me to the audience. It was an eerie feeling walking out into the auditorium, as a mere mortal citizen, not a government official, and having the heads of state, government officials and other dignitaries from around the world standing and applauding my entrance. Reaching the platform President Regan greeted me with a handshake and then a hug. I then turned to the audience and waved a polite greeting. Faces I seemed to recognize were: Mikhail Gorbachev, Fancios Mitterand, Margaret Thatcher, Arial Sharon, Yassar Arafat, Momar Qadafi, Sam Nunn, Vice President George Bush, Strom Thurmond, Joseph Biden, Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, and others whom faces I recognized from television news. I began my speech quoting General Douglas MacArthur's speech from the deck of the U.S.S. Missouri, September 2, 1945, at the end of the United States war with Japan, closing World War II. "Men since the beginning of time have sought peace," but "military alliances, balances of power, leagues of nations, all in turn have failed, leaving the only path to be by the way of the crucible of war." Now "we have had our last chance. If we do not now devise some greater and more equitable system, Armageddon will be at our door. The problem basically is theological and involves a spiritual recrudescence and improvement of human character that will synchronize with our almost matchless advances in science, art, literature and all material and cultural developments of the past two thousand years. It must be for the spirit if we are to save the flesh." This was met with a standing ovation. I continued, "My fellow citizens of the world, I am not a government official, nor a highly acclaimed scholar, nor a philosopher, nor a theologian, just a brother in the human race. We are a very diverse human race, with belief, value and moral systems that are as countless as the grains of sand on the beach. We have a choice before us. We can allow that diversity to be a strength to us, or it can be a dividing wedge that further separates us. The answer lies within each of us as brothers and sisters in humanity. For it will be of the spirit if our diversity is to be our strength, but it will be of the flesh that will further divide us. Since I wish to see unity among all peoples, it is that in which I shall speak of today."
 "My brothers and sisters, within many of our countries we have recreational, university and professional team sporting events. And while the participants are members of a team, they each have varying roles and responsibilities. A soccer team is not made up of or consist of all goalkeepers, there are forwards, mid-fielders, and halfbacks or defensemen. And while any member of the team can likely play in the role of any position, the coach puts them in a role or position that will benefit the team as a whole." "To those of you here who are heads of state, or government officials, you are charged with dual roles. For you are like as coaches to your countrymen seeking to beneficial matters of your people. But on the global scale, you are also players upon a team, maybe even more than one team by treaties and alliances." "To my knowledge, do not all cultures have the precept of something such as 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,' or as the Christian Bible teaches 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' This is a spiritual condition of the human race. All civil law is but an expansion of these things. Our human race has sought to clarify this intent down to the smallest detail. Why? Because of our own flesh, greed, and lust, to be better than someone else." "Many of your are now or have been parents. I ask you to pause for a moment and consider the life of an infant between two and five years of age. They my brothers and sisters are the purest and innocents of the human race. For they know not the teachings or dogmas of our adult world. I ask you also to consider especially those regions where the crucible of war has been spilt upon the ground. Does the infant or toddler care of such things? We can and must learn from your children, they do not hate! Yes, they may get angry and even fight with one another over who plays with what toy; but when the fight or argument is over, are they not back playing together as friends in a short time?" "Some of you may be silently asking, 'But what of our ways, our teachings, or our instructions to go out into the world and spread our truths?' I say, Fathers, how do you teach your sons to farm the fields or work on the family automobile? Mothers, how do you teach your daughter to cook or take care of the household or sew? Do we not teach our children by setting an example for them to follow? We teach them in a loving manner. We do not merely use words, nor do we beat them into submission to teach them. They learn by our example and the experience of doing. It is the loving example by which we teach that becomes the attraction and driving force in their learning to be like their parents." "Consider your own lives for a moment. What was or is the greatest lesson or task that you have learned? Was it learned by following someone's example and then doing it yourself? Or did you learn it from having it beat into you? Or did you learn it without first experiencing it?" "My brothers and sisters, we stand here at the crossroads of the existence of the human race. The path we take this day will chart the course of human events that lay yet before us and all of humanity. It will not be an easy journey, I will guarantee you that much. What I will guarantee, however, is that if we can recognize the strength within our diversity; if we can do unto others as we would have them do unto us; if we can allow our own example of life to be the attraction or guide post … we can and will one day live in a world filled with peace and love. A world where a person is measured by their strength of character and integrity, and not by the color of their skin, their creed or any other such thing." "In the theme or thesis of loving our neighbor as ourselves or doing unto others as we would have them do unto us, I must question the practice of the last two thousand years or more of waging religious wars. As I eluded to just moments ago, it is the power of attraction that draws others to experience and share in what we have, NOT the power of oppression or the fear of terrorism. For what I ask do most teachings give us? Is it not better to die in love of our neighbor, our fellow human being and walking the path of truth; than it is die in attempting to persuade others through the use of force or terrorism? For while both maybe considered as martyrs, is it not better to die as a martyr living in love and defense of the truth; than to die as a martyr oppressing the freedoms of our fellow human beings to further our own beliefs?" "In closing, we are all gathered here today for a purpose. I do not believe that any of you present are here against your own will or were forced to be here. You came because you wanted to. You came because something within you was curious about what would be said here today. The presence of so many heads of state, government officials and other honored guests, suggests one thing. The current state of world affairs is not working. My brothers and sisters, the power to change the course of human events dwells within each and every person alive. That power is not something of magic. The power I speak of is the power of love. It is manifest though acceptance and tolerance of beliefs, values and the moral codes of others, and respects that we are all individuals free to choose what we shall hold as our own personal truth, regardless of what our neighbor holds as their personal truth. Lastly it is the understanding that through diversity the human race has strength. Walk in Peace, and Love. Thank you." Finished speaking, the auditorium erupted in a loud ovation. As is the custom of such gatherings of leaders, there was a reception in which I spoke to many of those leaders present, yet we spoke not through interpreters, but directly. During which, many invited me to their own countries to speak before their houses of government and assemblies of people. The vision ended as I was on an airline flight back to California, from as I said could only presume to be New York City. I was sitting there on the airplane, looking out of the window as Mother Earth and the fluffy white clouds passed beneath us. I sat there pondering the experience of the speech and reception. I had spoken my truth to the leaders of the world and they had accepted it, possibly in politeness, yet many had invited me to their countries to share my message with their people. Looking out the window, I smiled and said, "It is good." Then the vision ended.

As I state above, "The current state of world affairs is not working. My brothers and sisters, the power to change the course of human events dwells within each and every person alive. That power is not something of magic. The power I speak of is the power of love. It is manifest though acceptance and tolerance of beliefs, values and the moral codes of others, and respects that we are all individuals free to choose what we shall hold as our own personal truth, regardless of what our neighbor holds as their personal truth. Lastly it is the understanding that through diversity the human race has strength."  This is what we must not only build the defense of our great nation upon, but also build the economy of our nation.

God Bless the United States of America
William M. Silaghi