But let's get back to that idea of National Guard Troops for Border Patrol. Bill O'Reilly asked Michael Chertoff about this exact same thing in December of 2005 (expect to hear O'Reilly crowing about it today):
“Why don’t you put the National Guard on the border to back up the border patrol and stop the bleeding, and then start to increase the Border Patrol, the high-tech and all of that?” O’Reilly asked.From today's press conference TPM Muckraker provides this account with Fatherland Security's Michael Chertoff:
“Well, the National Guard is really, first of all, not trained for that mission,” Chertoff told O’Reilly. “I mean, the fact of the matter is the border is a special place. There are special challenges that are faced there.”
“I think it would be a horribly over-expensive and very difficult way to manage this problem,” Chertoff said. “Unless you would be prepared to leave those people in the National Guard day and night for month after month after month, you would eventually have to come to grips with the challenge in a more comprehensive way.”
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, if I've understood everything I've heard, you don't yet know what missions the 6,000 National Guardsmen will do, you don't know who is going to pay for them, you don't know what the rules of engagement will be for them, you don't know what size units there will be or how long -- whether they'll be two-week or six-month deployments, and you don't really know exactly which equipment they're going to have. So my question is, how long have you been working on this?SECRETARY CHERTOFF: I guess that's what they call a loaded question. And I guess you haven't understood what we've said, so I'm going to try to make it really clear. . . I]t is true that, sitting here right now, I do not have in my head every single mission set. . .
ASSISTANT SECRETARY McHALE: . . . We don't know how many helicopters we're going to put up, but we know to a near certainty that we'll have helicopters. . . We don't know where we will place censors [sic] to detect illegal movement, but it's almost a certainty that we will have censors [sic]. . . We don't know how many barriers or roads we're going to build, but clearly, we will be putting new barriers in place, and clearly, we will be building new roads . . . So your question, sir, is a fair one.
QUESTION: What I'm really trying to understand, is this a well-thought-out plan, or is it something that's just been --
ASSISTANT SECRETARY McHALE: Yes, sir, it is.
SECRETARY CHERTOFF: in quite exquisite detail. . .
GENERAL BLUM: This is clearly a well-thought-out plan[.]
So, let's see...5 months ago this was a horrible idea. Today, it's a well thought out plan, except that we don't know how much equipment, nor where it will all be placed. This sounds like another policy pulled - no doubt with hasmat suits - from Karl Rove's asshole. Questions: Why are we wasting resources on this? Assuming that this is a problem, is this the best use of resources? Why stretch the National Guard in this manner? Haven't we tried this before and the troops were recalled because they shot a Mexican teen in the back? (OK, that one's rhetorical because the answer is "yes") Where is Osama bin Laden and why haven't we captured him yet? Can we trust an administration that flubbed bin Laden's capture, flubbed the Weapons of Mass Destruction, screwed up royally on the post Iraq planning, could not and can not properly address the aftermath of Katrina nearly 9 months later, and could not deliver a proper system to benefit seniors in this country (not to mention No Child Left A Dime) to deliver on this promise?
No comments:
Post a Comment