Military Reviews Placing Special Ops on U.S. Soil

Working backwards here -- that and not being a typist makes me late. Thanks for the thoughtful response. I agree we're pretty close. I think NorthCom should have a SOC but I also think it oughta be low key and even possibly called something else. It should definitely be involved if the operational units get committed.

Yeah, they're in the process of moving most, not all, of the CA away from SOCOM, PsyOps as I understand it is gonna be about a 50:50 split. Agree that Congress can change the Posse Comitatus but my objection to the use of Federal troops in the direct Action mode barring a really unusual situation is purely based on the PR and the Politics -- my suspicion is the the Chiefs of Staff / CNO / CMC will feel the same way (CinCSoc probably won't care).

Re the comment on the public; Sir, you are a Master of Understatement!!! Well said.

My JTF 6 comment was based on a conversation with a friend who's pretty reliable and who was in discussions with the JTF J3 on another matter a few months ago. Perception was there had been jurisdiction, operational and disciplinary problems and some disenchantment had occurred. Same for the Tejas Guard comment. Re the Marine and the shooting, I'm told there were other problems and I wasn't referring totally to the shooting but also to the logistic and personnel problems that occurred

Having dealt with the Guard and Reserve on a full time basis in my last job before retirement, I'm far more aware of Title 10 and 32 problems and limitations (and Guard and Reserve capabilities <- that is not derogatory) than I want to be; however, in this case, which Title rules and the Posse Comitatus Act are not the problem in use of the Guard in Title 32 status under NorthCom direction -- I think the politics will be.

Still, we're in pretty much agreement; just quibbling over details. Thanks again.

Ken

Hi Troufion, what was described sheds some light on it. One why were they shooting? Generally it can only be in defense of yourself or an innocent person. Two exactly what their status was is the question, i.e. martial law or some kind of declaration of emergency. Which obviously did not exist and in that case he was vulnerable to prosecution and or civil penalties. Even if it had gone forward he still probably would have come out OK. But it was his uncertain legal status to enforce the law i.e. make an arrest as opposed to shoot in self defense. Yes I know it sounds crazy but shooting someone is an arrest (when acting under the color of law), it is a seizure under the constitution and only LE can do that. Unless the special situations exist for Federal troops like martial law, etc.


Hi Ken, did you meet my buddy George standing in the doorway to the University of Alabama saying segregation now and forever before he ran away:) I was actually on a protection deatil for his son once. I was Alabama ICE (Isolate The Criminal Element) as part of the ATF project safe neighborhoods. My comment about the FBI HRT is just to point out that SWAT ain't their thing. Investigations is and they are the best at it and having a SWAT team detracts from that. Where do you live in Florida? I grew up down there.
We will have to disagree about SOF there are certain missions that they would definately do better then LE that need to be done.

Bill, when I started in LE most SWAT teams were operated like you desribed. Only the largest cities could afford full time dedicated teams how it starting becoming what it is today I am not sure. Fat cops don't run fast but if they ever get a hold of you:eek:

I would, however suggest that civilian LE whose job the Gangs are can do everything as well as the guys in the SO community can if they're properly and sensibly selected and trained. It ain't that hard.

Been my observation that saying you can't do the job and someone else is needed to do it reflects badly and that most people are protective of their turf and will bend over backwards to avoid saying that and getting 'help' they don't want, particularly if that 'help' comes from the Feds.

Aside from the fact of really adverse PR and the political (not legal) implications, I have no prob with Military SOF doing SOF stuff (even in CONUS); LE isn't Military SOF stuff.

Gangs are an LE job. Given interstate proliferation, some Federal involvement is going to occur, if you don't like the FBI doing it, then pick an Agency. I used the HRT in the comment simply because it existed (and will probably continue to do so, distraction or not). I hear the Park Police have a good crew (no snark and no fooling)

On the FBI, both my Sons would disagree with you on the caliber of the Investigative ability of the FBI. Both of 'em have bad stories. One of 'em has a hilarious tale about a bank that got hit by a serial bank robber everyone had been looking for for months when not one but two SAs were in a bank he hit. Bad Guy got away, embarassing in several ways the SAs in the process. Few weeks later he got caught by a local cop. Then, of course, there was Ol' Eric Rudoplh...;)

No Federal Troops in 'Bama, the AL ArNG just got Federalized IIRC. I had to deal with Faubus and rather irate and unfriendly Arkansans in AR and Barnett in MS (actually not, we set between the runways at Columbus AFB for ten days doing little and went back to Bragg). George was a trip though...

I'm up in the L.A. corner, Redneck Riviera. I fit right in. :)

Ken, it has been my experience when LE doesn't ask for backup or assistance when it is needed gets a lot of people hurt. I would agree that the mentality by the brass is yes we will protect our turf and no we do not need any help but that doesn't make it right.

I have friends that would agree with your son's judgment about the FBI's investigative ability. My parents live just outside Daytona Beach when the first female serial killer (supposedly anyway) Irene Warnus was working. When the second murder happened the local Cops thought it was a pissed off hooker the FBI said no it dosen't fit the profile and we see how that ended up. But on the whole they do pretty good.

Late to this great discussion. A few things to add....

Troufion's made a comment early in this thread about military forces being "restricted from internal operations" and also correctly indicated that there are other permissive authorities. Posse Commitatus, which has been drug out in this thread already but whose application has not really been discussed, prevents only the use of the military (by combo of law and policy as discsussed) directly in the enforcement of laws in the U.S. And of course things like the Insurrection Act and Stafford Act have more to say. But in short, the U.S. military is in no way prevented from the conduct of military operations within the U.S. By Posse Commitatus or other. PC is far less restrictive than is often touted. Martial law is something dramatically different and for most situations a red herring.

So a corollary of that permissiveness becomes the legal wrangling, executive decisions, political landmines, etc. of what is law enforcement and what is military operations in today's context of the GWOT. :eek:

Not to die in that rat hole, I'm glad it has been brought out here already that NORTHCOM's AOR includes areas outside of the 50 states, possessions and territories to which PC applies. BTW, PACOM and I think even SOUTHCOM own areas to which it DOES apply. PC does not map perfectly 1:1 to NORTHCOM.

Finally, there is a legitimate componency argument to be made in the context of Defense Support of Civil Authorities. SOCOM forces are lending their special capabiltiies in support of civil authorities (whether it be HRT, LA SWAT, USSS or other for NSSEs, etc.), so NORTHCOM damn well better have a liaison cell that knows the secret handshake. Then they can at least get along with SOCOM and step on each others's toes like all the other geographic CINCs (can we say that now that Gates is in?), rather than being completely out to lunch. There's a lot of debatable issues with regard to the COCOM of SOF, but not having a SOF connection at the NORTHCOM HQ is akin to a head in the sand and abdication from engagement in those issues.

In the net, there certainly is a reason to be worried about this and the details of its execution. But to call this an inherently and epicly bad thing is I think premature. Let us screw it up first, before we lambast it.

Slapout, you are right about my buddy Max's paper. It is available from SSI on the web. He has expanded it into a book which is currently under consdieration for publication. From what I hear, it is likely to be a go.

Ken, yeah, we are really close. Amazing what a good discussion will bring our!:wry:

Ironhorse, PACOM does have some US territory - Hawaii comes to mind as does Guam - where PC applies. SOUTHCOM is a bit different. Until the second last revision of the UCP, it had no territory on which PC applied. Then it picked up Caribbean waters. Then NORTHCOM was created and it lost most of those. However, JIATF-South is located in Key West and is subordinate to SOUTHCOM. But its CO is a USCG Rear Admiral and it has Customs and other LE folk in addition to USCG so it would be hard for it to violate PC either as a reg or law.:cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John T. Fishel

Ironhorse, PACOM does have some US territory - Hawaii comes to mind as does Guam - where PC applies. SOUTHCOM is a bit different. Until the second last revision of the UCP, it had no territory on which PC applied. Then it picked up Caribbean waters. Then NORTHCOM was created and it lost most of those. However, JIATF-South is located in Key West and is subordinate to SOUTHCOM. But its CO is a USCG Rear Admiral and it has Customs and other LE folk in addition to USCG so it would be hard for it to violate PC either as a reg or law.:cool:

---

That turmoil is exactly what I was unable to recall the current net of, as of my last post.

Checking just now, SOUTHCOM does NOT list anything domestic-y in its AOR or "area of focus" as they call it on their web page. However, the About NORTHCOM page pins the rose squarely on SOUTHCOM for Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands, where PC et al apply. So there's a clear black and white line that is crossed for land masses, even if we don't dive into the gray and sloppiness of the whole territorial waters, Coast Guard, JIATF, etc.

Quote:

---

USNORTHCOM’s AOR includes air, land and sea approaches and encompasses the continental United States, Alaska, Canada, Mexico and the surrounding water out to approximately 500 nautical miles. It also includes the Gulf of Mexico and the Straits of Florida. The defense of Hawaii and our territories and possessions in the Pacific is the responsibility of U.S. Pacific Command. The defense of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands is the responsibility of U.S. Southern Command. The commander of USNORTHCOM is responsible for theater security cooperation with Canada and Mexico.

---

Ironhorse, it seems that the 2 commands can't get it right:eek:, how are we mere mortals supposed to sort it out?

John T Fishel, I copy that with the appropriate levity that I read was intended :)

For those more literal out there, I know the UCP is a lot more specific than the webmasters' interpretations of it for public consumption. But to say that even the full UCP is completely clear (in a functional go-to-work way) would be to do injustice to the horrible ambiguites of our world and the complexities inherent in any attempt to impose a convenient organizing taxonomy on it.

P.S. speaking to an FDNY official not long after 9/11. For those that don't know it, FDNY and NYPD get on in many ways like Christians and lions. Rough paraphrase of his observations:

We'd finally agreed that the FD had lead for explosions and fires, and the PD had the lead for acts of terrorism. That seemed like a great plan, and we were ready to live with that. Until we had an act of terrorism that caused an explosion and a fire, when it didn't do much for us and we were back at it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ironhorse

Late to this great discussion. A few things to add...

Let us screw it up first, before we lambast it.

---

And we probably will :)

Then we'll fix it, we're pretty good at that methodology

Good post, BTW

< I don't think that the emphasis has been weak on UW/FID on SOF's part but I do believe that a lot of Big Army commanders are uncomfortable with the idea of a bunch of "long haired cowboys" running around the country side with their own private militias (some of them actually believe this). >

One of my instructors was a long haired civil operator who had done just this - maybe he was pulling our legs, but he had a pretty amusing story about the early OEF days and hiring out Pashtun body guards for local dignitaries, when they started essentially tithing him, and being culturally sensitive and aware, he was forced to accept said tithings. The story was a cautionary tale, because apparently he wound up getting into a lot of trouble over this, but fought it in a court martial and was exonerated.