Skip to main content

View Diary: Chuck Hagel throws gauntlet down Part II. - Updated! (11 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Being vindictive would not be a good idea. (6+ / 0-)

    It might soothe the righteous outrage that a lot of people feel about this.  But cutting bases and force structure with an eye to punish a state is petty and would be like using a sledgehammer to smash a fly.  AND can only actually happen if congress would go along with it (not likely).

    Like it or not, day to day the folks in the National Guard do have to follow lawful directions and orders from their state Governor even the misguided and dumb ones.

    The solution I proposed is doable because it goes back to the states that have leaders that  are saying they will no longer follow the laws they had previously agreed to. If the Secretary of Defense and the Chief of Guard Bureau cannot trust the Military from a state to follow US Law, then that pretty much breaches ALL the previous agreements they made.

    Current agreements and memos of understanding or memos of agreement between the DOD and National Guard cover a lot of things that are not set in stone as law.  A lot of the backbone how the guard is able to operate in modern times is simply done by their agreement
    (each states) to follow the rules and regulations of the US armed forces.

    And the political leaders in nine states have decided to tear up those agreements and walk off.  

    If someone makes a important promise to you then breaks it, that invalidates all the other promises they made as well.

    You simply can no longer trust them.

    My solutions posted above address that issue.

    If a state decides to go their own way on one issue, how can the DOD trust them to follow Army regulations for training soldiers in their schools?  How can they be trusted to properly handle classified documents? How can they be trusted to perform even the most basic functions of an army to established Army standards?  

    What you allow, is what will continue.

    by Nebraskablue on Sat Nov 02, 2013 at 08:14:42 AM PDT

    •  Actually (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Kansas Born, pittie70, OleHippieChick

      Just as people believe states rights give them authority to ignore federal law when their state disagrees, the federal government has the right to decide its criteria for assigning force and function.  While Congress has oversight for base closures, it does not have oversight for assignment to those bases.  Many of the national guard use US bases for their own offices.  Reassigning some functions would not close the bases, but it could reduce the numbers.  It can be argued that a state's failure to adhere to federal law makes it harder for our troops to perform certain functions efficiently.  How those functions are identified and moved is entirely at the discretion of the DoD.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (124)
  • Community (62)
  • Bernie Sanders (44)
  • Elections (33)
  • Hillary Clinton (27)
  • 2016 (27)
  • Climate Change (26)
  • Culture (26)
  • Civil Rights (23)
  • Environment (22)
  • Science (21)
  • Spam (17)
  • Labor (17)
  • Law (17)
  • Media (17)
  • Republicans (17)
  • Barack Obama (16)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (15)
  • White House (14)
  • International (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site