Re: veterans benefits for National Guard

Date: 2007-01-07 09:17 pm (UTC)
One of the problems here is that the National Guard are NOT supposed to be serving outside of the US, nor are they supposed to be under the Commander in Chief, though Bush and company insists this is legit. The National Guard units are, effectively, the original Homeland Security forces. They are legally under the command and control of the Governor of their state, NOT the US military/Commander in Chief, unlike active duty forces and the Reserves. They are supposed to be mobilized to handle issues in their own state; a Governor may "loan" troops on request to the Governor of another state in case of invasion, natural disaster, or civil unrest. If active duty troops aren't enough for an international situation, it's supposed to be the Reserves who get mobilized for active duty; the Guard are supposed to stay home, protecting the US. Now they are being Federalized (which happened to a much lesser extent also during VietNam) so if they meet the same criteria, they get the same benefits. But they should not be serving abroad, and no one in Congress seems willing to say it, or address the Federal power-grab. (Governor Lynch here in NH has spoken out, as have a few other Governors, but most are strangely silent.)
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

December 2015

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789 101112
13141516171819
202122 23242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 8th, 2025 08:19 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios