retreat rather than fire back even when they are being fired upon.
2007-02-16 07:00:07 · 11 answers · asked by elaeblue 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Actually I heard this on CNN news and they stated that national guard troops were deployed on the border and that as of right now they are not being given any orders even to protect themselves against being fired upon., If we are going to put them there then let them do thier job and dont himder them with stupid things like not being allowed to protect themselves when fired upon.
2007-02-17 06:29:19 · update #1
I didn't know this - and apparently the national Guardsmen on the border are not aware of this either.
The Soldiers on the border have orders that only authorize them to use deadly force in order to protect human life - and then if alternative courses of action are not practical.
Remember that these people are trained as Soldiers - not police. Thus their mission is to observe and report. They are not there to get into gunbattles.
2007-02-16 07:27:57 · answer #1 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You have ZERO idea of what you're talking about. Yet another lame attempt in a never-ending series of lame attempts to blame President Bush for something he didn't do. God, I hate election years....
The troops posted on the border are National Guard troops, and the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits them from taking any active part in enforcing civilian law. They can only act as observers, reporting what they see to the civilian federal authorities so they can take actions. Therefore, when deployed in this means along the border, they CANNOT be armed with live ammunition.
So you tell me, genius - under those circumstances, if you came under fire from armed illegals, would YOU stand there and get shot, or would you run for cover and NOT get shot?
2007-02-16 08:18:38 · answer #2 · answered by Team Chief 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Actually, we have not deployed any troops along the border. We have border patrol, INS, DEA, and customs agents working around the border. Might have a few other agencies, but not a military troop deployment.
The people who are out there are pretty much not trained or equiped to fight battles. Therefore, retreat is the best idea for them.
I think that we do need stronger protection along the borders though.
2007-02-16 07:04:40 · answer #3 · answered by A.Mercer 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What is WITH you people? First you gripe if a soldier DOES kill someone now you're whining about our troops being ordered NOT to use deadly force. They (our reserve troops) are there to OBSERVE AND REPORT, DO NOT ENGAGE...we had active duty troops that did the same job in Viet Nam and I'm sure they're doing that in Iraq/Afghanistan, too. Try paying attention to the news instead of only seeing what you want to see.
2007-02-16 14:49:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's because the day a National Guardsman accidentally fires on an American citizen, the whole thing will blow up in their face. You will see mayhem and chaos in the streets.
2007-02-16 07:09:44 · answer #5 · answered by Kilroy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO. LMFAO! That's ludicrous. I think that the more important question is why are they even being sent down there.
2007-02-16 07:07:20 · answer #6 · answered by profile image 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
where you been that's old news
Bush's stand on border protection is a joke and a bad joke at that
Build the WALL
Deport them all when found
Jail employers of the Illegal Alien Invader Rejects
Tell your reps every week
2007-02-16 07:05:23 · answer #7 · answered by ? 3 · 1⤊ 4⤋
I believe it. Bush can't go against his own corporate interests. He needs to go
2007-02-16 07:04:53 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
no, I did not know that. Who did you hear this from, the Minutemen?
2007-02-16 07:10:51 · answer #9 · answered by Jack Chedeville 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
geez maybe his 700 mile billon dollor fence will work LOL
2007-02-16 07:38:49 · answer #10 · answered by bone g 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋