Thread: Deploy the Military AFTER the Terrorist Attack

From the Washington Post...

War Plans Drafted To Counter Terror Attacks in U.S.
Domestic Effort Is Big Shift for Military

By Bradley Graham
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, August 8, 2005; Page A01

COLORADO SPRINGS -- The U.S. military has devised its first-ever war plans for guarding against and responding to terrorist attacks in the United States, envisioning 15 potential crisis scenarios and anticipating several simultaneous strikes around the country, according to officers who drafted the plans.

The classified plans, developed here at Northern Command headquarters, outline a variety of possible roles for quick-reaction forces estimated at as many as 3,000 ground troops per attack, a number that could easily grow depending on the extent of the damage and the abilities of civilian response teams.

e-Qaeda The Rise of a Radical Webmaster
Briton Used Internet As His Bully Pulpit
Babar Ahmad, a 31-year-old computer whiz and mechanical engineer, was hailed as a big catch by U.S. law enforcement officials when he was arrested here one year ago on charges that he ran a network of Web sites that served as a propaganda and fundraising front for Islamic extremists.

The possible scenarios range from "low end," relatively modest crowd-control missions to "high-end," full-scale disaster management after catastrophic attacks such as the release of a deadly biological agent or the explosion of a radiological device, several officers said.

Some of the worst-case scenarios involve three attacks at the same time, in keeping with a Pentagon directive earlier this year ordering Northcom, as the command is called, to plan for multiple simultaneous attacks.

The war plans represent a historic shift for the Pentagon, which has been reluctant to become involved in domestic operations and is legally constrained from engaging in law enforcement. Indeed, defense officials continue to stress that they intend for the troops to play largely a supporting role in homeland emergencies, bolstering police, firefighters and other civilian response groups.

But the new plans provide for what several senior officers acknowledged is the likelihood that the military will have to take charge in some situations, especially when dealing with mass-casualty attacks that could quickly overwhelm civilian resources.

"In my estimation, [in the event of] a biological, a chemical or nuclear attack in any of the 50 states, the Department of Defense is best positioned -- of the various eight federal agencies that would be involved -- to take the lead," said Adm. Timothy J. Keating, the head of Northcom, which coordinates military involvement in homeland security operations.

The plans present the Pentagon with a clearer idea of the kinds and numbers of troops and the training that may be required to build a more credible homeland defense force. They come at a time when senior Pentagon officials are engaged in an internal, year-long review of force levels and weapons systems, attempting to balance the heightened requirements of homeland defense against the heavy demands of overseas deployments in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Keating expressed confidence that existing military assets are sufficient to meet homeland security needs. Maj. Gen. Richard J. Rowe, Northcom's chief operations officer, agreed, but he added that "stress points" in some military capabilities probably would result if troops were called on to deal with multiple homeland attacks.

Debate and Analysis

Several people on the staff here and at the Pentagon said in interviews that the debate and analysis within the U.S. government regarding the extent of the homeland threat and the resources necessary to guard against it remain far from resolved.

The command's plans consist of two main documents. One, designated CONPLAN 2002 and consisting of more than 1,000 pages, is said to be a sort of umbrella document that draws together previously issued orders for homeland missions and covers air, sea and land operations. It addresses not only post-attack responses but also prevention and deterrence actions aimed at intercepting threats before they reach the United States.

The other, identified as CONPLAN 0500, deals specifically with managing the consequences of attacks represented by the 15 scenarios.

This certainly makes me feel better. After the terrorists sneak a suitcase nuke across our undefended borders and expode it in Manhattan, the army will come in and control the crowds of panicked citizens and administer first aid. It makes one wonder if "military intelligence" is an oxymoron after all.

Think about this. We are planning to be the farmer who only closes the barn door after the horse has run away. This is our government's PLANNING!!!

COLORADO SPRINGS -- The U.S. military has devised its first-ever war plans for guarding against and responding to terrorist attacks in the United States, envisioning 15 potential crisis scenarios and anticipating several simultaneous strikes around the country, according to officers who drafted the plans.

Is this a joke? Are these people serious? We have been sitting here since Pearl Harbor, 61 years, WITHOUT a war plan for guarding against and responding to terrorist attacks in the United States?

There is no difference of any kind between a "terrorist" attack and an "attack" of any kind.

Am I to believe and are you expected to believe that AMERICANS sit here everyday like "ducks on a pond" spending billions and billions of dollars every few months on national defense and WE DON'T HAVE ANY?

To prevent "enemy attacks" you keep enemies OUT!!

To prevent "enemy attacks" you keep foreign nationals OUT!!

To prevent "enemy attacks" you keep illegal aliens OUT!!

To devise a war plan to "guard the nation", you SEAL THE BORDERS and DEPORT ALL ENEMIES AND POTENTIAL ENEMIES AND THAT INCLUDES ALL ILLEGAL ALIENS!!

I'm more afraid now than I was. I thought the 4 hits of 9/11 were a "fluke"; one of those bizarre scenarios where we were unprotected for a day and the terrorists found out what day; so now it seems it didn't matter "what" day; because "any day" will do; because no President or US Congress or US Supreme Court or Governor since WWII thought it was important to defend our nation or our people at home.

Is THIS believable? No, THIS is not believable.

SO WHAT ARE THEY UP TO NOW?



If I were the US Military I would have been ashamed to offer this "report" to the Washington Post's Bradley Graham. Is Bradley related to Kathyrn Graham, the owner of the Washington Post, who used to attend so they say, the Bilderberger Meetings, planning the scheme that would one day rule the world with a little business tribunal, who assured the Bilderbergers complete secrecry and "discretion" as they carved their scheme to take over the world?

THIS story is a "plant"!! For what purpose, I wonder?

Judy, I think maybe you give these people too much credit.

I think it more likely stupidity than conspiracy (or perhaps political correctness run amok in the military).

You're probably right ScareCrow. I guess we'll find out soon enough.

IN the meantime, do we REALLY want to underwrite this level of stupidity?

Not I.

I know what you mean. I want to throw up everytime I think of the waste of lives in Iraq, when our own borders are wide open. We are re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic with this kind of nonsense.

As the old song goes, "When will they ever learn?"

Yeah, the army will probably deploy 2 large columns of tanks at the border.
In between those columns will stream the entire Mexican army(except those troops zealously guarding THEIR southern border)

,followed by a column of 2 million of Mexico's most poor and disease striken citizens.



-n

The only thing that really stuck out to me, in what I have heard on the News. Is this so called Crowd suppression. Makes me wonder. What is this about?

I think this is your basic standard Homeland Security pacifier for the masses to make them think the government is doing something. The military will be useless against terrorists. All they can do is come in after the fact and clean up.

We can guard Korea's borders, we can guard Iraq's borders, we can guard Western Europe's borders, we can protect Japan, and Taiwan, and on and on, so why can't we defend our own borders militarily? Give me one good reason, just one.