Bush Depleting National Guard Strengths - National Security At Risk

WASHINGTON Feb 27, 2006 (AP)­ President Bush thanked the nation's governors Monday for their support of National Guard troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, even as state leaders are warning Bush's budget plans will cut Guard strength and leave states less able to respond to homegrown emergencies. The governors, attending the winter meeting of the National Governors Association, hoped for answers during a private meeting with Bush and a private lunch later with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.

Did they get any answers? The National Guard was never meant to be first responders to combat areas. The way it is supposed to work is ACTIVE DUTY first, RESERVE units second, and NATIONAL GUARD units only when and as needed. The exception to the rule is when a unit has special skills and abilities, like the Chemical Response Unit from New York which deal with chemical exposure decontamination.

"I can't thank you enough for not only supporting the troops in harm's way, but providing great comfort to the families as well," Bush told the governors before going into a private meeting to answer a few of their questions.

But can we support the troops by providing them the armor that would save their lives and prevent catastrophic injuries... by over 80%!!!

Governors are united in their stance that the administration shouldn't reduce spending for the Guard. Their meeting with Rumsfeld was sought to address those concerns. "We're going to fight that tooth and nail," said Republican Gov. Bob Taft of Ohio. "The National Guard is not just important from the standpoint of disaster response in the state of Ohio, and homeland security, but is crucial for overall military preparedness. It would be a real mistake to cut back."

The National Guard is part of each state's disaster response plan. Having these troops federalized and serving overseas is undermining homeland security and weakening our ability to respond to natural disasters, man-made disasters or terrorist attacks.

Bush's 2007 budget submission would support a state-controlled National Guard of about 333,000 citizen soldiers the current total rather than the 350,000 authorized by Congress. It also proposes to pay for 188,000 Army Reserve troops rather than the 205,000 authorized by Congress.

Maybe it's time for independent militias to be formed again. We have a federal law that allows for community-based militia. Besides, militias are all the rage this year, especially in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine.

Republican Gov. Dirk Kempthorne of Idaho said the administration has since signaled it would not push for that reduction in strength, but he questioned whether the cuts within the Pentagon's spending proposals wouldn't end up forcing reductions anyway. Those plans would cut $789 million next year, totaling $5.3 billion over five years, Kempthorne said.

We have to pay for the tax breaks for the excessively rich somehow... So let us cut our military forces and once again eliminate personnel in favor of technological toys.

All 50 governors signed onto a letter to Bush earlier this month that opposed any cuts to the Guard. "We're getting ready for tsunamis. We're getting ready for earthquakes. We're getting ready for forest fires," said Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire of Washington state. "Cut all that back and I think you're left with a really troublesome situation."

Amen, brother Gregoire. Amen! This strategy betrays the fact that the Bush administration cannot manage the national security issues that we face... and will not listen to the folks that are trying to lead the nation in the right direction.

By the way, do not pay any attention to those background clicks on your phone... It's just your friendly naighborhood NSA agents performing a useless tap of your phone.