US military plans to help counties in pandemic

[Guest guest]

Pentagon to Detail Troops to Bolster Domestic Security

By Spencer S. Hsu and Ann Tyson Washington Post Staff Writers

Monday, December 1, 2008; A01

The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the

United States by 2011 trained to help state and local officials

respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe,

according to Pentagon officials.

The long-planned shift in the Defense Department's role in homeland

security was recently backed with funding and troop commitments after

years of prodding by Congress and outside experts, defense analysts said.

There are critics of the change, in the military and among civil

liberties groups and libertarians who express concern that the new

homeland emphasis threatens to strain the military and possibly

undermine the Posse Comitatus Act, a 130-year-old federal law

restricting the military's role in domestic law enforcement.

But the Bush administration and some in Congress have pushed for a

heightened homeland military role since the middle of this decade,

saying the greatest domestic threat is terrorists exploiting the

proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000

troops to domestic response -- a nearly sevenfold increase in five

years -- " would have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable, "

McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said in

remarks last month at the Center for Strategic and International

Studies. But the realization that civilian authorities may be

overwhelmed in a catastrophe prompted " a fundamental change in

military culture, " he said.

The Pentagon's plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces to be ready

for emergency response by September 2011. The first 4,700-person unit,

built around an active-duty combat brigade based at Fort , Ga.,

was available as of Oct. 1, said Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., commander

of the U.S. Northern Command.

If funding continues, two additional teams will join nearly 80 smaller

National Guard and reserve units made up of about 6,000 troops in

supporting local and state officials nationwide. All would be trained

to respond to a domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear,

or high-yield explosive attack, or CBRNE event, as the military calls it.

Military preparations for a domestic weapon-of-mass-destruction attack

have been underway since at least 1996, when the Marine Corps

activated a 350-member chemical and biological incident response force

and later based it in Indian Head, Md., a Washington suburb. Such

efforts accelerated after the Sept. 11 attacks, and at the time Iraq

was invaded in 2003, a Pentagon joint task force drew on 3,000 civil

support personnel across the United States.

In 2005, a new Pentagon homeland defense strategy emphasized

" preparing for multiple, simultaneous mass casualty incidents. "

National security threats were not limited to adversaries who seek to

grind down U.S. combat forces abroad, McHale said, but also include

those who " want to inflict such brutality on our society that we give

up the fight, " such as by detonating a nuclear bomb in a U.S. city.

In late 2007, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England signed a

directive approving more than $556 million over five years to set up

the three response teams, known as CBRNE Consequence Management

Response Forces. Planners assume an incident could lead to thousands

of casualties, more than 1 million evacuees and contamination of as

many as 3,000 square miles, about the scope of damage Hurricane

Katrina caused in 2005.

Last month, McHale said, authorities agreed to begin a $1.8 million

pilot project funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency

through which civilian authorities in five states could tap military

planners to develop disaster response plans. Hawaii, Massachusetts,

South Carolina, Washington and West Virginia will each focus on a

particular threat -- pandemic flu, a terrorist attack, hurricane,

earthquake and catastrophic chemical release, respectively -- speeding

up federal and state emergency planning begun in 2003.

Last Monday, Defense Secretary M. Gates ordered defense

officials to review whether the military, Guard and reserves can

respond adequately to domestic disasters.

Gates gave commanders 25 days to propose changes and cost estimates.

He cited the work of a congressionally chartered commission, which

concluded in January that the Guard and reserve forces are not ready

and that they lack equipment and training.

Bert B. Tussing, director of homeland defense and security issues at

the U.S. Army War College's Center for Strategic Leadership, said the

new Pentagon approach " breaks the mold " by assigning an active-duty

combat brigade to the Northern Command for the first time. Until now,

the military required the command to rely on troops requested from

other sources.

" This is a genuine recognition that this [job] isn't something that

you want to have a pickup team responsible for, " said Tussing, who has

assessed the military's homeland security strategies.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the libertarian Cato Institute

are troubled by what they consider an expansion of executive authority.

Domestic emergency deployment may be " just the first example of a

series of expansions in presidential and military authority, " or even

an increase in domestic surveillance, said Christensen of the

ACLU's National Security Project. And Cato Vice President Gene Healy

warned of " a creeping militarization " of homeland security.

" There's a notion that whenever there's an important problem, that the

thing to do is to call in the boys in green, " Healy said, " and that's

at odds with our long-standing tradition of being wary of the use of

standing armies to keep the peace. "

McHale stressed that the response units will be subject to the act,

that only 8 percent of their personnel will be responsible for

security and that their duties will be to protect the force, not other

law enforcement. For decades, the military has assigned larger units

to respond to civil disturbances, such as during the Los Angeles riot

in 1992.

U.S. forces are already under heavy strain, however. The first

reaction force is built around the Army's 3rd Infantry Division's 1st

Brigade Combat Team, which returned in April after 15 months in Iraq.

The team includes operations, aviation and medical task forces that

are to be ready to deploy at home or overseas within 48 hours, with

units specializing in chemical decontamination, bomb disposal,

emergency care and logistics.

The one-year domestic mission, however, does not replace the brigade's

next scheduled combat deployment in 2010. The brigade may get

additional time in the United States to rest and regroup, compared

with other combat units, but it may also face more training and

operational requirements depending on its homeland security assignments.

Renuart said the Pentagon is accounting for the strain of fighting two

wars, and the need for troops to spend time with their families. " We

want to make sure the parameters are right for Iraq and Afghanistan, "

he said. The 1st Brigade's soldiers " will have some very aggressive

training, but will also be home for much of that. "

Although some Pentagon leaders initially expected to build the next

two response units around combat teams, they are likely to be drawn

mainly from reserves and the National Guard, such as the 218th

Maneuver Enhancement Brigade from South Carolina, which returned in

May after more than a year in Afghanistan.

Now that Pentagon strategy gives new priority to homeland security and

calls for heavier reliance on the Guard and reserves, McHale said,

Washington has to figure out how to pay for it.

" It's one thing to decide upon a course of action, and it's something

else to make it happen, " he said. " It's time to put our money where

our mouth is. "

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/30/AR2008113002217.\

html

[Guest guest]

I do have to say that the military presence in our nation's airports does not make me feel particularly safe. In fact, it makes me feel as though I should be afraid.

Do one thing every day that scares you.

Eleanor Roosevelt

From: <rumjal@...>Subject: [Flu] US military plans to help counties in pandemicFlu Date: Wednesday, December 3, 2008, 9:47 PM

Pentagon to Detail Troops to Bolster Domestic SecurityBy Spencer S. Hsu and Ann Tyson Washington Post Staff WritersMonday, December 1, 2008; A01The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside theUnited States by 2011 trained to help state and local officialsrespond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe,according to Pentagon officials.The long-planned shift in the Defense Department's role in homelandsecurity was recently backed with funding and troop commitments afteryears of prodding by Congress and outside experts, defense analysts said.There are critics of the change, in the military and among civilliberties groups and libertarians who express concern that the newhomeland emphasis threatens to strain the military and possiblyundermine the Posse Comitatus Act, a 130-year-old federal lawrestricting the military's role in domestic law

enforcement.But the Bush administration and some in Congress have pushed for aheightened homeland military role since the middle of this decade,saying the greatest domestic threat is terrorists exploiting theproliferation of weapons of mass destruction.Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000troops to domestic response -- a nearly sevenfold increase in fiveyears -- "would have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable, " McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said inremarks last month at the Center for Strategic and InternationalStudies. But the realization that civilian authorities may beoverwhelmed in a catastrophe prompted "a fundamental change inmilitary culture," he said.The Pentagon's plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces to be readyfor emergency response by September 2011. The first 4,700-person unit,built around an

active-duty combat brigade based at Fort , Ga.,was available as of Oct. 1, said Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., commanderof the U.S. Northern Command.If funding continues, two additional teams will join nearly 80 smallerNational Guard and reserve units made up of about 6,000 troops insupporting local and state officials nationwide. All would be trainedto respond to a domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear,or high-yield explosive attack, or CBRNE event, as the military calls it.Military preparations for a domestic weapon-of-mass- destruction attackhave been underway since at least 1996, when the Marine Corpsactivated a 350-member chemical and biological incident response forceand later based it in Indian Head, Md., a Washington suburb. Suchefforts accelerated after the Sept. 11 attacks, and at the time Iraqwas invaded in 2003, a Pentagon joint task force drew on 3,000

civilsupport personnel across the United States.In 2005, a new Pentagon homeland defense strategy emphasized"preparing for multiple, simultaneous mass casualty incidents."National security threats were not limited to adversaries who seek togrind down U.S. combat forces abroad, McHale said, but also includethose who "want to inflict such brutality on our society that we giveup the fight," such as by detonating a nuclear bomb in a U.S. city.In late 2007, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England signed adirective approving more than $556 million over five years to set upthe three response teams, known as CBRNE Consequence ManagementResponse Forces. Planners assume an incident could lead to thousandsof casualties, more than 1 million evacuees and contamination of asmany as 3,000 square miles, about the scope of damage HurricaneKatrina caused in 2005.Last month, McHale said, authorities

agreed to begin a $1.8 millionpilot project funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agencythrough which civilian authorities in five states could tap militaryplanners to develop disaster response plans. Hawaii, Massachusetts,South Carolina, Washington and West Virginia will each focus on aparticular threat -- pandemic flu, a terrorist attack, hurricane,earthquake and catastrophic chemical release, respectively -- speedingup federal and state emergency planning begun in 2003.Last Monday, Defense Secretary M. Gates ordered defenseofficials to review whether the military, Guard and reserves canrespond adequately to domestic disasters.Gates gave commanders 25 days to propose changes and cost estimates.He cited the work of a congressionally chartered commission, whichconcluded in January that the Guard and reserve forces are not readyand that they lack equipment and

training.Bert B. Tussing, director of homeland defense and security issues atthe U.S. Army War College's Center for Strategic Leadership, said thenew Pentagon approach "breaks the mold" by assigning an active-dutycombat brigade to the Northern Command for the first time. Until now,the military required the command to rely on troops requested fromother sources."This is a genuine recognition that this [job] isn't something thatyou want to have a pickup team responsible for," said Tussing, who hasassessed the military's homeland security strategies.The American Civil Liberties Union and the libertarian Cato Instituteare troubled by what they consider an expansion of executive authority.Domestic emergency deployment may be "just the first example of aseries of expansions in presidential and military authority," or evenan increase in domestic surveillance, said Christensen of

theACLU's National Security Project. And Cato Vice President Gene Healywarned of "a creeping militarization" of homeland security."There's a notion that whenever there's an important problem, that thething to do is to call in the boys in green," Healy said, "and that'sat odds with our long-standing tradition of being wary of the use ofstanding armies to keep the peace."McHale stressed that the response units will be subject to the act,that only 8 percent of their personnel will be responsible forsecurity and that their duties will be to protect the force, not otherlaw enforcement. For decades, the military has assigned larger unitsto respond to civil disturbances, such as during the Los Angeles riotin 1992.U.S. forces are already under heavy strain, however. The firstreaction force is built around the Army's 3rd Infantry Division's 1stBrigade Combat Team, which returned in April

after 15 months in Iraq.The team includes operations, aviation and medical task forces thatare to be ready to deploy at home or overseas within 48 hours, withunits specializing in chemical decontamination, bomb disposal,emergency care and logistics.The one-year domestic mission, however, does not replace the brigade'snext scheduled combat deployment in 2010. The brigade may getadditional time in the United States to rest and regroup, comparedwith other combat units, but it may also face more training andoperational requirements depending on its homeland security assignments.Renuart said the Pentagon is accounting for the strain of fighting twowars, and the need for troops to spend time with their families. "Wewant to make sure the parameters are right for Iraq and Afghanistan, "he said. The 1st Brigade's soldiers "will have some very aggressivetraining, but will also be home for much of

that."Although some Pentagon leaders initially expected to build the nexttwo response units around combat teams, they are likely to be drawnmainly from reserves and the National Guard, such as the 218thManeuver Enhancement Brigade from South Carolina, which returned inMay after more than a year in Afghanistan.Now that Pentagon strategy gives new priority to homeland security andcalls for heavier reliance on the Guard and reserves, McHale said,Washington has to figure out how to pay for it."It's one thing to decide upon a course of action, and it's somethingelse to make it happen," he said. "It's time to put our money whereour mouth is."http://www.washingt onpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/ article/2008/ 11/30/AR20081130

02217.html