But why not bring back the National guard then?they don't even get paid like regulars.
And it does violate Posse Comitatus.
It smells to high heaven of something,what are they expecting?
First off, we don't have enough troops period.
IF the bring back reserves and guard members, they are SERIOUSLY SHORT HANDED in the sand box.
When the wars are over enough we can bring home the troops, you REALLY Don't want them dropped in your lap without 'Decompression' time!
Retrain is that 'Decompression' time.
Adjust them to working with FELLOW AMERICANS, not bring them home and slap then in another stressful situation where they *MIGHT* treat Americans as combatants.
(personally, our guys are better shots than I am, so I don't want them seeing me as an 'Adversary'!)
The idea is,
Right now, the continental US is WAY UNDERMANNED!
We are 'Stop Gapping' or 'Stop Loss-ing' people that don't want to be in the military anymore, and can't recruit enough to bring the military up to the troop strength levels we need in wartime.
The idea is to try and recruit enough so we will have full strength military, even though most of our soldiers are over seas in combat or support roles.
It's easy to send them home if we don't need them,
But if we wind up fighting a further extended war in Afghanistan, then we are going to need PLENTY more people to rotate in combat roles, and to keep our own shores safe...
The easiest way to put it is,
Do you want to have troops here, WHILE we fight them over there,
OR,
Do you want to be under staffed here while they fight over there?
----------------
As for Posse Comitatus, there would be NO violation if the troops are used in support rolls.
Cleaning up after disaster or attack, feeding/sheltering refugees, helping to find and correct 'Soft Targets' in the civilian population, ect.
Posse Comitatus only covers LAW ENFORCEMENT/JUDICIAL proceedings.
If the troops simply enforce curfew or looting laws, those are covered under it's charter when martial law is declared and the military is activated to help out.
As long as they don't try and enforce local, state or federal laws, or sidestep the judicial system there isn't a problem.
Besides, if martial law is declared, you are under military rules anyway, so arguing the point is splitting hairs.
The military MAY NOT act as law enforcement.
The military MAY NOT take any part in the resolution of any civilian legal dispute.
The military could have ended the 'WACO' siege in a matter of minutes,
But they were restricted by law and Posse Comitatus.
In the event of a hurricane, like Katrina, the state was a federal disaster zone,
BUT,
The governor had to declare martial law to bring in the National Guard supported by the regular Army.
And even though the Troops exchanged gunfire with some of the more stupid drug dealers, they had every right to do so, both under the rules of Martial Law, and as an INNATE RIGHT TO SELF PRESERVATION. Someone shoots at you, you have a SOVEREIGN RIGHT to shoot back to save your life or the lives of civilians/citizens that are threatened.
