Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size
Login

Military Photos



Online
There are 142 users online

You can register for a user account here.
Library of Congress

Military Quotes

The art of war is of vital importance to the State. It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected.

-- Sun Tzu

Current poll results


Should homeland defense be a permanent mission for the Guard and Reserve?

Yes78 %78 %78 % 78.37 % (384)
No14 %14 %14 % 14.90 % (73)
I do not know4 %4 %4 % 4.69 % (23)
I have no opinion0 %0 %0 % 0.20 % (1)
Other, please list in comments1 %1 %1 % 1.84 % (9)

Total votes: 490
One vote is allowed per day

[ Voting booth | Other polls ]

Comments

Display Order
Re: Should homeland defense be a permanent mission for the G
by SEATJERKER
on Jul 15, 2002
As the state's militia, the Guard should be available for the governor's call when needed for state duty, such as disaster relief etc. If there was a short-term requirement, obviously they could be called up by the CinC, but I see homeland defense as a long-term issue. And
homeland defense is a national matter, best dealt with at the federal level. This indeed is one of the legitimate functions of the federal government. The jursidictional disputes that could arise with the Guard involved would only further weaken our defenses.

Re: Should homeland defense be a permanent mission for the G
by Anonymous
on Jul 15, 2002

My son is in the Guard and I know there are many soldiers who would love to be on active duty without leaving home. These soldiers could be federalized and used to supplement homeland defense. They might even free up regular active duty soldiers and airmen for other assignments. My experience in the reserve leads me to believe that the same is true in that instance. With the reserves, we could also use sailors and marines. I think it's a great idea which I readily support.


Re: Should homeland defense be a permanent mission for the G
by Anonymous
on Jul 17, 2002

the gaurd and reserve are part time . a full time service should be born. with the possibility of short term help from the reserve and gaurd.


Re: Should homeland defense be a permanent mission for the G
by Anonymous
on Jul 17, 2002

Not only must we have Homeland Defense as a permanent mission of the Guard and Reserves AND the Coast Guard, but the "Defense Department" should go back to being titled the "War Department" if our services are going to continue being expected to risk their lives all over the world! I'd like to see the FBI, FAA and ATF part of Homeland Defense permanently too.


Re: Should homeland defense be a permanent mission for the G
by Anonymous
on Jul 18, 2002
The Guard and Reserve should remain in thier pre 9/11 status. There is a protocol for the Guard and Reserve, and it should be used as planned. We as a nation that has fought for our freedom, and self preservation enough to know that you don't change horses in the middle of the stream. The system that has governed our Guard and Reserve units have worked well in the past, let's leave it that way. This is the first real war on american soil since the 1860's, so it will take a little geting used to, however if everyone just does his/hers job. Then all will be well if we practice what we have preached over the last 200 + years

Respectfully,
Larry M. Easton Sr.

Re: Should homeland defense be a permanent mission for the G
by Anonymous
on Jul 24, 2002

With respect, there have been a number of real shooting wars on american soil prior to and following the 1860s. One can name the Indian Wars out west and military actions which involved tribal peoples all across the nation. Long before our War of Rebellion we experienced the Whiskey Rebellion which much changed our democracy. Several times in the 20th century we suffered when military action was called forth to challenge labor disputes, and even freedom of assembly and speech protesting foreign undeclared war. The Civil Rights movement experienced numerous armed conflicts between citizens and military forces. The attack upon Pearl Harbor was seen by government as a direct attack upon the sovereignty of the United States itself, as have been other armed skirmishes on protectorates of the american government in other decades. During WW II it is often forgotten that about 400 of our ships were sunk in sight of american shores by Nazi U-boats. So, indeed these and other examples would suggest a serious need to prudently rethink, reconfigure and reform our domestic defense plan and forces which has long been neglected.


Only logged in users are allowed to comment. register/log in
Military History
Forum Posts

Military Polls

Should women be included in the next draft?

[ Results | Polls ]

Votes: 150

This Day in History
1544: Francis, the king of France, and Charles V of Austria signed a peace treaty in Crespy, France, ending a 20-year war.

1777: American forces under Gen. Horatio Gates meet British troops led by Gen. John Burgoyne at Saratoga Springs, NY.

1862: Union troops under General William Rosecrans defeat a Confederate force commanded by General Sterling Price at Iuka in northern Mississippi.

1863: Union General William Rosecrans and Confederate General Braxton Bragg begin a major battle at Chickamauga, Georgia. The following day, the Confederates routed the Yankees and sent them in retreat to Chattanooga, Tennessee.

1864: Union General Philip Sheridan routs a Confederate force under General Jubal Early in Virginias Shenandoah Valley. This battle was part of Sheridans pacification of the valley.

1912: Marines participated in the Battle of Masaya during the Nicaraguan Campaign.

1918: American troops of the Allied North Russia Expeditionary Force battle Soviet forces near the town of Seltso.

1944: The three month battle at Huertgen Forest on the Belgian-German border began.

1948: Moscow announces it will withdrawal soldiers from Korea by the end of the year.

1950: The 1,496-man Filipino 10th Infantry Battalion Combat Team, with attached tanks and artillery, arrived in Korea.