![]() ![]() When National Guard troops were deployed to New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, many of them played a heavy law enforcement role. In addition to the Guard’s role in fighting foreign wars, its domestic deployments - even in response to natural disasters - have been cause for concern. The fact that National Guard trainings are part-time does not change the fact that, once sent to war, Guard members become real troops. In December of 2011, the National Guard boasted that it had deployed “more than 250, 000 Guard members” in support of the Iraq War. war on Iraq, with Guard members comprising 41% of U.S. The United States heavily relied on the Guard to fight the U.S. And the Guard has mobilized to participate in brutal wars. As writer Rebecca Gordon noted in an article for Tom Dispatch, in its 2019 “ posture statement,” the National Guard Bureau says its mission is “fighting America’s wars,”“securing the homeland,” and “building enduring partnerships.” The National Guard’s military purposes are clear: It is the reserve force for the Army and Air Force, subject to the dual authority of state and federal leaders. But this is not how the Guard describes itself. military, focused on responding to domestic emergencies like floods and storms. The National Guard, which emerged from state militias that were used to wage brutal onslaughts and massacres of Native American tribes, is often depicted as a more peaceful domestic counterpart to the U.S. Yes, these National Guard forces are under the control of governors and not federalized under the command of our blood-thirsty president (save for Washington, D.C.), but the latter scenario can’t be the basis by which we measure the bad. But from a protester’s perspective, there’s not a significant difference between this escalation and the status quo: armed, occupying soldiers with humvees roaming major American cities, under the banner of the state National Guard. The escalation from deploying the National Guard to deploying active-duty troops may offend a uniquely American sense of a firewall, of “turning troops” on “one’s own people” or pop notions of posse comitatus. ![]() Any politician who objects to Trump’s threat to wage a literal war against Black-led uprisings should also oppose activation of the National Guard. Yet the National Guard is part of the military, and it has long been used to fight brutal wars abroad, as well as domestic wars against protesters and striking workers. ![]() Jay Inslee objected to Trump’s threat to send in the military by noting that the 300 National Guard members he’d already activated had it covered. Pritzker said on June 1, shortly after Trump issued his military threat, “I reject the notion that the federal government can send troops into the state of Illinois.” Yet Pritzker announced that same day that he was activating 250 Illinois National Guard members to “support various jurisdictions throughout the state in their work to protect communities,” in addition to the 375 National Guard members activated in Chicago. The idea that sending the National Guard to assist police in violently quelling protests does not count as deploying the military - and diverges sharply from Trump’s threat to unleash active-duty forces - has been repeated by Democratic politicians across the country. Pritzker to send 375 National Guard soldiers to Chicago to help the police, a decision she claimed wasn’t easy, “but is surely the right decision for this moment.” At a May 31 press conference days before speaking out against Trump’s threat of a military crackdown, Lightfoot announced that she’d asked Gov. The point is that the National Guard is neither innocent, nor separate from the tremendous war apparatus that has led to the United States accounting for 38% of all global military spending.īut by the time Lightfoot spoke these words, military forces had already been deployed to Chicago, and military humvees were spotted in its streets, all at the mayor’s request. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |