Bill Richardson and Chris Dodd: National Guard Needed Here to Fight Disasters, Not in Iraq

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 04:25:24 PM EST
Tags: Bill Richardson, national guard, wildfires (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Update: Sen Chris Dodd has issued a similar statment.

*****

Governor Bill Richardson makes the connecton between the California wildfires and the War in Iraq: Because our national guard is there, it isn't here responding to disasters.

George Bush, his Republican friends and the Democrats who continue to allow this war to continue have not only broken our military, they've broken our National Guard.

The news this morning had images of Americans fleeing to a huge sports arena for shelter during a natural disaster that struck a familiar chord. When Katrina struck and the floods hit two years ago, a good portion of the Louisiana National Guard was in Iraq. How many people died in the days it took to get proper personnel on the ground in New Orleans? Today, as the fires rage, California has National Guard men, women, and critical equipment thousands of miles away in Iraq. They need to come home. We need them here.

More....

Some, I'm sure, will accuse Richardson of politicizing a tragedy for electoral purposes.

This has gone on long enough. When a national disaster hits, our states depend on the National Guard. Right now, President Bush is robbing Peter to pay Paul to continue his disastrous adventure in Iraq, and when tragedy hits us here at home, Americans are stuck with the bill. This cannot continue.

Will other Dems join him? Maybe not today, but after the immediate crisis, I think it will become a popular analogy.

Update: Sen. Dodd's statement:

"As you know, Governor Schwarzenegger has had to ask other states for help because so many of California's National Guard, who provide critical support to the citizens while you are fighting the fires, were deployed to Iraq. In a Dodd Administration, never again will our houses be on fire because our troops are taking fire in Iraq. Never again will our first responders be left without the support they need because our President failed to do what it took to keep our communities safe. That is why in 2008, nothing will be more important than leadership that can get results that make us stronger and more secure. That's the first responsibility of an American President."

< Brownie's Back to Give Expertise on Wildfires | World Series, Game 1 >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Bill Richardson and Chris Dodd: National Guard Needed Here to Fight Disasters, Not in Iraq | 62 comments (62 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Sigh (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by jarober on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 05:07:22 PM EST

Having more guardsmen on hand would not help a lot - not with the Santa Ana winds blowing the way they are.

Now, perhaps if the environmental groups didn't sue to stop every initiative to get rid of deadwood (i.e., fuel) in the forests out west, things might be better.

I won't hold my breath waiting for TL to take note of that.

LookIng For Work? (none / 0) (#2)
by squeaky on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 05:17:35 PM EST

Sounds like you and Heckova Job Brownie are in the same league. I hear BUsh is still hiring incompetents.

Orange County Fire Chief Chip Prather told reporters that firefighters' lives were threatened because too few crews were on the ground. He said a quick deployment of aircraft could have corralled a massive blaze near Irvine.
"It is an absolute fact: Had we had more air resources, we would have been able to control this fire," he said.

Nice selective quote (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 05:53:52 PM EST

here's what followed it:

The state's top firefighter said Prather misstated the availability of firefighters and equipment. Eight of the state's nine water-dumping helicopters were in Southern California by Sunday, when the first fires began, along with 13 air tankers, said Ruben Grijalva, director of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.
Grijalva said the fires, spread by wind that at times topped 100 mph, would have overwhelmed most efforts to fight them.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger dismissed the criticism when questioned by an ABC News reporter, and praised the rapid deployment of fire crews and equipment across a region from north of Los Angeles to the Mexican border.
"Anyone that is complaining about the planes just wants to complain because there's a bunch of nonsense," he said. "The fact is that we could have all the planes in the world here - we have 90 aircraft here and six that we got especially from the federal government - and they can't fly because of the wind situation."

: OK (none / 0) (#7)
by squeaky on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 06:11:45 PM EST

Critics said inadequate resources and other problems challenged firefighters already struggling with high winds and dry conditions.
Assemblyman Todd Spitzer, R-Orange, lambasted his fellow lawmakers for not implementing recommendations made by a blue-ribbon commission in 2004.
The commission, formed by Schwarzenegger following the deadly 2003 wildfires, recommended devoting more personnel and equipment to fighting fires.
Although the Legislature implemented some of the commission's recommendations, it didn't follow all of them.
Spitzer, who represents Corona and parts of Orange County, visited an Orange County fire Tuesday, joining that county's Fire Authority Chief Chip Prather in lashing out at the state.
Prather said there are not enough resources to go around because of the number of fires.
All in all sounds like this one is everone's worst nightmare.

a million refugees (none / 0) (#4)
by Jen M on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 05:41:07 PM EST

don't need any kind of assistance?

Are you going to take note of them?


Right.... (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by jarober on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 05:40:09 PM EST

There are guard units from around the country being deployed to California to help. What you - and Richardson - and TL - are missing is the question of skills. You can't grab an arbitrary guard member and toss them into fire fighting. I have no idea how many of them have the appropriate skills, but for a set of fires this big, you would see units being pulled from across the country - with a war or without one.

There have been other fires during times when the guard was not being rotated to Iraq (or Afghanistan, etc) - and for things this big, units from around the country have always gotten pulled. The fact that you guys think that arbitrary guard members could - and should - be tossed into the fray shows a fundamental lack of awareness.

Richardson asks (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 05:52:47 PM EST

How many people died in the days it took to get proper personnel on the ground in New Orleans?

And the first answer is:

Dozens of National Guard and Coast Guard helicopters flew rescue operations that first day--some just 2 hours after Katrina hit the coast. Hoistless Army helicopters improvised rescues, carefully hovering on rooftops to pick up survivors. On the ground, "guardsmen had to chop their way through, moving trees and recreating roadways," says Jack Harrison of the National Guard. By the end of the week, 50,000 National Guard troops in the Gulf Coast region had saved 17,000 people; 4000 Coast Guard personnel saved more than 33,000.
These units had help from local, state and national responders, including five helicopters from the Navy ship Bataan and choppers from the Air Force and police. The Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries dispatched 250 agents in boats. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), state police and sheriffs' departments launched rescue flotillas. By Wednesday morning, volunteers and national teams joined the effort, including eight units from California's Swift Water Rescue. By Sept. 8, the waterborne operation had rescued 20,000.

The second answer is:

Katrina hit the coast on August 29th. On August 30th, the "Pentagon announced it will send five ships, though four are several days away". The other was the USS Bataan, which was following behind the storm. On the morning of August 31, the (hospital ship)USS Bataan was flying missions into Louisiana, as "four MH-53 Sea Stallion and two HH-60 Seahawk helicopters from USS Bataan were flying medical-evacuation and search-and-rescue missions in Louisiana, and Bataan's hospital was preparing for possible use for medical support".

The third answer:

The federal government pretty much met its standard time lines, but the volume of support provided during the 72-96 hour was unprecedented. The federal response here was faster than Hugo, faster than Andrew, faster than Iniki, faster than Francine and Jeanne."
For instance, it took five days for National Guard troops to arrive in strength on the scene in Homestead, Fla. after Hurricane Andrew hit in 1992. But after Katrina, there was a significant National Guard presence in the afflicted region in three.
Journalists who are long on opinions and short on knowledge have no idea what is involved in moving hundreds of tons of relief supplies into an area the size of England in which power lines are down, telecommunications are out, no gasoline is available, bridges are damaged, roads and airports are covered with debris, and apparently have little interest in finding out.
Journalists complain that it took a whole week to do this. A former Air Force logistics officer had some words of advice for us in the Fourth Estate on his blog, Moltenthought:
"We do not yet have teleporter or replicator technology like you saw on 'Star Trek' in college between hookah hits and waiting to pick up your worthless communications degree while the grown-ups actually engaged in the recovery effort were studying engineering.

Everyone (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by Che's Lounge on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 06:13:45 PM EST

has a point here. Tankers and choppers were unable to fly on Sunday and Monday due to the winds, so that question is moot. However there are approx 20,00 national guard troops in CA. We got 1200. They are desperately needed for the relief and recovery efforts and further containment activities. We cannot get enough help. Also, if guard troops are sent here from other states, what happens if there are problems in those states? This is also a huge impact on those troops, who are otherwise trying to earn a living, while the troops that SHOULD be available are deployed in Iraq. That is symptomatic of the quagmire.
I spent the day at Qualcomm stadium yesterday in the medical clinic. Please do not compare this to the Superdome. Despite the difference in management, the conditions were different. Access was easier here and there were many of us residents who were still able to assist others. It may be tough to breathe, but at least we can get around for the most part. And it's far from over just because the winds have died down. Now the smoke is just settling down on us instead of blowing out to sea.

: Something Positive (5.00 / 0) (#44)
by john horse on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 06:11:52 PM EST

Che,
First of all, its good to see you posting at TL again.
One of the positive things I have observed about disasters, having worked in emergency management, is the help that is received from other areas. I'm sure that firemen, Red Cross personnel, police, sheriffs, utility workers, etc. from all across the country are now in San Diego. When a disaster strikes they don't hesitate to come over and help.
Another great thing is the attitude of these workers. I've been in emergency operations centers. You find unbelievable cooperation and coordination with everyone concentrating on the task at hand. Very little ego. Very little tolerance for BS. They are what is right about our country.
Hang in there Che.
By the way, the National Guard was often used in Florida for major fires.

: Che (1.00 / 1) (#10)
by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 07:52:55 PM EST

I heard this PM that 17000 are available.

Jarober (5.00 / 1) (#9)
by Che's Lounge on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 06:18:43 PM EST

You send us the Guard, we'll find stuff for them to do. You don't know what you're talking about.

The original topic, Jarober (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by Che's Lounge on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 08:56:33 PM EST

was the california guard, but go ahead and change the goalposts as you see fit.

"Today, as the fires rage, California has National Guard men, women, and critical equipment thousands of miles away in Iraq. They need to come home. We need them here."

And as your comment infers, when people are suffering you treat the issue as a game.

TTFN

: Why do you care where the resource comes (none / 0) (#16)
by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 10:37:55 PM EST

from??
Do you demand made in CA for your medical supplies??

Oops (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by jarober on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 10:20:39 PM EST

We now find out, from ABC-TV, why the California guard is smaller than its authorized strength: seems the Democratic legislature of the state has made California the only state in the nation that does not offer an education benefit to guard members.

Assemblyman DeVore thinks it has been difficult to get tuition benefits approved in this Democratic-led state Legislature in recent years because it could be viewed as support for the Iraq War
Lt. Col. Jon Siepmann, CA National Guard: "This is a problem we've seen really over the past twenty years but most noticeably in the past ten years, even before the war started."

So if Richardson wants to know why there are fewer CA guard around, he might want to go ask the Democrats running the legislature in California.

Facts are such inconvenient things...

Wingnuts (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by bernarda on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 09:25:11 AM EST

jarober could be a standup comic. I doubt if he is reporter from Iraq.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/05/11/MNGRIPPB2D1.DTL

"As state forestry officials predict an unusually harsh fire season this summer, the California National Guard says equipment shortages could hinder the guard's response to a large-scale disaster.

A dearth of equipment such as trucks and radios -- caused in part by the war in Iraq -- has state military officials worried they would be slow in providing help in the event of a major fire, earthquake or terrorist attack."

Wingnuts are also cheapskates when it comes to anything but war, at least for spending as they would never put themselves on the frontline.

"But his appeal had no effect. Four months after the Cedar fire, a ballot proposal to boost hotel-motel taxes to pay for better fire protection failed to win voter approval. The City Council, mindful of the anti-tax mood of residents, has opted not to try again.

San Diego was recently denied full accreditation by the Commission on Fire Accreditation International, now called the Center for Public Safety Excellence, because many of its stations fail to meet the five-minute standard for arriving at major fires or calls for paramedic service."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-prepare23oct23,0,6144290.story?page=2&coll=la-home-cente r

Republican coward is a pleonasm.


: Good One!!! (none / 0) (#22)
by squeaky on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 11:53:00 AM EST

Republican coward is a pleonasm.
Perfect.

: You can't hide from the facts. Tehe (none / 0) (#26)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 12:44:57 PM EST

Lt. Col. Jon Siepmann: "We think that providing an educational benefit will go a long way towards recruiting and retaining quality soldiers here in California."
California is the only state in the nation that does not provide any college tuition help for its guardsmen. The Guard believes it can swell its numbers by 10,000 with a tuition benefit.
It's the number one thing recruits ask for. Assemblyman Chuck DeVore just retired from the Guard after 24 years of service. Though California has the largest guard force in the country, he's worried about our disaster prone state.

I love it (none / 0) (#15)
by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 10:36:54 PM EST

I gotta say this - Che (1.00 / 0) (#17)
by jimakaPPJ on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 10:45:41 PM EST

When the Guard wasn't needed to protect you, you weren't interested in such trivial information as your Democratic Left wingers not being willing to support the Guard.

Now that you do you, you are crying tears as big as horse turds.

Now. Tell me how much you support the troops.

Come on. Let's hear it.

Repeat after me.

Sooner or later.

You get what you pay for in this life.

Or, as in this case, you don't get what you didn't pay for.

No free rides.


No free karmic rides (5.00 / 1) (#30)
by jondee on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 01:03:56 PM EST

either.

What goes around comes around, pokerputz.

Sooner or later, you get what you've got coming.

And the money, or lack thereof, is the least of
it.

No free rides.

You dont support sh*t. Well maybe, your own ignorance which you wont let die a natural death.


: Jonee shows (1.00 / 0) (#35)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 01:26:24 PM EST

his/her nasty side....
And your point is what??
CA's Governornator has said they have more than enough resources, with more on the way.
All of your whining is just a way to try and attack the war, and Bush.
It doesn't work. Americans are understanding that first people must have their local officials do the right things first. Be prepared, etc. And then, when a disaster hits, they can hold the fort until the help gets there.
I quote from my earlier comment:

Journalists complain that it took a whole week to do this. A former Air Force logistics officer had some words of advice for us in the Fourth Estate on his blog, Moltenthought:
"We do not yet have teleporter or replicator technology like you saw on 'Star Trek' in college between hookah hits and waiting to pick up your worthless communications degree while the grown-ups actually engaged in the recovery effort were studying engineering.

So putz yourself, dude. As for karama, you can have mine. I believe in reaity, not spooks.

Once again (5.00 / 1) (#23)
by Che's Lounge on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 11:57:39 AM EST

As a now occaisional visitor to this site, I realize the reason I ditched in the first place. So let me also go OT for one last comment. Jim, you may feel free to provide some self pleasuring response, but you can be quite sure I will never read it.

"Now that you do you, you are crying tears as big as horse turds."

"Now. Tell me how much you support the troops."

To comment about a given topic at this site is to invite repeated personal attacks and snide remarks from the embedded, self absorbed, RW hack that infests this site. If any progressive humanist provides a debatable point to a thread, the still-predicatble result is a personal attack. Since the comments are full of pornographic, fascist attacks by PPJ and his LGF refugees, I guess I'll just read the articles. Again, Jim, feel free to rant on about me ad lib. It's obviously your site now.

Hardly (5.00 / 0) (#24)
by squeaky on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 12:15:38 PM EST

It's obviously your site now.

Don't be so thinned skin Che, ppj et al are more like a tiny bug in a plate of delicious food. Scrape it off and enjoy the rest of your meal.


It's been that way for awhile (5.00 / 1) (#31)
by jondee on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 01:09:48 PM EST

It's the perfect home for a gone-to-seed, E.D afflicted chickenhawk with a grudge agaisnt a world he dosnt understand.


: Refute the point. (1.00 / 0) (#33)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 01:13:47 PM EST

You can't. It was the CA state assembly who didn't act properly. Now everyone wants to blame Bush, the Repubs, the war....

Che - If you can't stand the (1.00 / 0) (#32)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 01:11:32 PM EST

heat, you shouldn't be in the kitchen.

Your whole comment was about the lack of support.

They are desperately needed for the relief and recovery efforts and further containment activities. We cannot get enough help

And then we find that the CNG says the problem was that CA politicians wouldn't spend the money.

Hey. They are your politicians. You let them slide and not support the troops. It is your problem.

Deal with it.


Funny (1.00 / 1) (#11)
by jarober on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 08:41:11 PM EST

Umm, Che - Maryland is sending some guard units. Thanks for playing.

A Game? (1.00 / 0) (#13)
by jarober on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 10:08:12 PM EST

It's not a game. It's also not a stupid political game, which is what you want to make it. With Santa Ana winds at up to 100 MPH before today, things simply weren't going to be controllable, period.

Now that the winds are dying down, firefighters are starting to get on top of things. This wasn't a manpower problem; it was a simple matter of not being able to deal with things before the winds dropped some.

As JimkaPPP pointed out about Katrina, the left got Katrina wrong, and it's busily getting this wrong. You people are more deranged about Bush than the right ever was about Clinton - and that's saying something.

Gutless Wingnut Wimps (5.00 / 0) (#42)
by bernarda on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 04:30:49 PM EST

Speaking of which, I see that jarober pops up again here after being too cowardly to respond to my earlier posts.


The left got Katrina wrong (none / 0) (#25)
by Dadler on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 12:26:07 PM EST

Yes, they actually believed that the federal government would give a sh*t about its own people. Who was responsible for those levies, the ones that burst? Who neglected them after being told time and time again they wouldn't hold in a major event? The feds.

Dude, uber-conservative Duncan Hunter has already called out the government about having all the military resources here in San Diego grounded so long. Wake the f*ck up. You think your comments about the wind are insightful. Who DIDN'T know the wind was playing a huge factor? No one. Make a real point or take your flat ball and go home.

Deranged about Bush? As if he has no factual track record of dismal failuire and financial ruin for the nation. 2.4 TRILLION for Iraq. A national guard broken and stretched beyond limits. Stand up and be a man and face REALITY. Or are you going to try to defend this president and his administration? Are you going to defend Iraq as necessary and good and worthwhile and a great use of much needed resources? Are you really going to go to that factually irrational extreme?

2.4 TRILLION.

And yes, the top one percent still gets its tax cuts. And SCHIP was just too expensive and " socialist", even though it channeled kids into PRIVATE insurance plans. McCarthy b.s. propaganda wins again. Be proud.

Bunch of pathological liars.

To quote David Mamet, "who the f*ck told you you could work with men?"

Pretending Iraq doesn't exist, or that the billions and billions, soon to be TRILLIONS of dollars spent there, doesn't have a serious impact on our own ability here at home to meet needs and deal with emergencies, well, keep your dishonest head in the sand. Because you are being wildly dishonest. Clinton was hated by the right because of his dick, no more, no less. That is deranged. A president sending a nation to mass murder and financial doom is, jeez you're so right, it's certainly comparable to the clenis is Monica's yapper.

Again, Clinton was the single most disappointing president of my lifetime. Not even a close contest. He underacheived to a sickening degree. But Bush is by far the worst president in my lifetime. Not even a close contest again. "Mission Accomplished", major combat operations are over. Come on, Jar, you aren't such a reactionary winger that his Neville Chamberlin moment isn't clear to you.

Unbelievable.

Quit whining and get the facts. (1.00 / 0) (#28)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 12:57:44 PM EST

Yes, they actually believed that the federal government would give a sh*t about its own people.

Nonsense.

Did you miss:

The federal government pretty much met its standard time lines, but the volume of support provided during the 72-96 hour was unprecedented. The federal response here was faster than Hugo, faster than Andrew, faster than Iniki, faster than Francine and Jeanne."
For instance, it took five days for National Guard troops to arrive in strength on the scene in Homestead, Fla. after Hurricane Andrew hit in 1992. But after Katrina, there was a significant National Guard presence in the afflicted region in three.

Dadler, your assertion is just flat wrong. And you know it. That's unworthy of you.

Are you going to defend Iraq as necessary and good and worthwhile and a great use of much needed resources? Are you really going to go to that factually irrational extreme?

Yes. It was and it is.

And I ask you. Why didn't your state assembly provide the education benefits needed to recruit as shown on ABC news?? (See Jarober's 9:20AM link).

Why do you think that the rest of the world should be supporting CA's lack of ability to provide for itself a NG large enough??

You know, Santa Anna winds are expected every year. They aren't unique.

Grow up and quit whining. If you live in a canyon in an area with a history of fires, or in a city that is 6' below sea level, protect yourself first. Don't expect someone else to do so.


thank you (5.00 / 1) (#38)
by Jen M on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 02:40:17 PM EST

Yes, for provident a wonderful example of how much the federal government cares about people.

Great way to illustrate their attitude!

Way to go! You are dead on!


: Jen M (1.00 / 0) (#50)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 07:40:55 PM EST

And what would be your realistic expectation?
Please remember that "beam me up Scotty" was a TV series.
NG and US Naval people were on scene within hours, risking their lives to save people who did some very dumb things and who had some very poor advice/direction from the politicians they elected.
Who told the people of NO that they should expect Aunt Jane in NB to pay taxes so they could live where they want??
Aunt Jane has her own problems. Some of which is a climate that would send the die hard NO resident run screaming away from Lincoln.
You pay your money and you takes your chances.
Sympathy is between Sh*t and syphilis in the dictionary.

Every man for himself.. (5.00 / 0) (#41)
by jondee on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 03:40:52 PM EST

Unless you own a large security concern or an overseas catering outfit.

He wants to say Californans "hate America", ala Beck; he just hasnt worked up the nerve yet.


Dont expect someone else (none / 0) (#40)
by jondee on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 03:30:39 PM EST

to do it; unless it involves a a trillion dollar neocon circle jerk designed to "protect Americans from terror" (why cant they just protect themselves?), and an oppurtunity for contractors to thoroughly pillage the treasury.

Otherwise, dont expect others to do things for you.

You believe in reality pokerputz, you just dont know what it is.


Would 600 billion help? (none / 0) (#18)
by john horse on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 05:58:32 AM EST

That is the amount that has already been spent in Iraq. Every dollar wasted in Iraq is one less available for what is needed here.

Nope (1.00 / 0) (#19)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 06:51:06 AM EST

It wouldn't the CA Demos still wouldn't have spent it on the NG.


: Wow (none / 0) (#20)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 06:53:13 AM EST

what a difference punctuation makes...
wow it wouldn't. The CA Demos still wouldn't have spent it on the NG.

The extraordinary (none / 0) (#27)
by tnthorpe on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 12:51:41 PM EST

continual redeployments of the NG are just the chickenhawks' chickenshi* draft. The expenditure of wealth abroad is just part of their Norquist plan for better government: break it, blame it, bury it.
Fact is, the NG is needed here, and the chickenhawks running the Occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan need to fix the armed forces they've broken instead of breaking the back of the NG. Add wrecking the military to the Bush Administration's long list of failures, a legacy of incompetence and corruption that future generations will be paying for in all sorts of ways. The Bush Administration has turned out to be nothing much but a giant tax on the future, but what else can you call conservative politics these days?


heh (1.00 / 0) (#29)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 01:03:33 PM EST

You can blame who you want, but the facts are as shown by ABC News. Your elected leaders blew it.

Just as the Mayor of NO blew it.

As I told Dadler.

Grow up and quit whining. If you live in a canyon in an area with a history of fires, or in a city that is 6 foot below sea level, protect yourself first.

It aint my job to pick up your toys and clean up the mess made by your elected leaders.


I'm surprised (5.00 / 0) (#34)
by tnthorpe on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 01:18:27 PM EST

after a post like this that you don't tie your shoes together in the morning.

I prefer to think that the unelected leader, BUSH, blew it in NO by putting incompetence in place and lauding the performance of his hand-picked cronies.

Why don't you grow up and post something that isn't recycled right wing garbage? Your post is just a pathetic example from a typical Bush enabler, immune to facts, self-righteous, and prone to repetition.

Have you no shame? At all?

Pathetic.


Ha (1.00 / 0) (#51)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 07:45:46 PM EST

The people he put in place were approved by Congress. That includes DEMOCRATS. Many Democrats.

: You (5.00 / 1) (#54)
by tnthorpe on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 08:11:54 PM EST

have a keen grasp of the obvious, but how is it that you are so obviously wrong so often?
tehehehe
Film at 11. Gov't corruption crosses party boundaries. Go tell Drudge right quick there! You're on to something!!
As for the Dems, bunch of patsies, incompetents, and repubs in bad drag if you ask me. But please don't.
BTW, that Bush and his administration monumentally failed with Katrina and Rita and continue to do so to this day isn't an exoneration for those who abetted such abysmal performance.
But surely that's obvious?!?!?!!?
tehehehehe

It aint my job (none / 0) (#62)
by jondee on Sat Oct 27, 2007 at 12:51:21 PM EST

But, somehow it's your "job" to defend "us" from "terror" to the tune of a trillion dollars, plus whatever can be skimmed and stolen.


Cheap politics (none / 0) (#36)
by Slado on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 02:10:40 PM EST

That's all anyone with any common sense could call this.

What exactly would the extra troops be doing? Passing out water?

If their weren't enough fire fighters then maybe they're would be an argument. From the way the MSM is praising Arnold I think even the dems and their lefty allies will be hard pressed to make this natural disaster an indictment of the war with revisionist history like they did Katrina.

Why evertime people are in trouble to Dems immediately think of the ways they can use this to hurt Bush? Oh yeah because their democrats.

since when is (5.00 / 1) (#37)
by tnthorpe on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 02:37:43 PM EST

national preparedness at home "cheap politics"? If you don't know what more manpower could do on firelines in difficult terrain, then maybe you too have a career in Bush's FEMA!

The illegal war is indictable on its own terms, as anyone with common sense can tell.

Licking Bush's boots may be a bizarre turn-on for some on this site, but for me not at all. He is a disaster that exacerbates the normal challenges and mishaps the nation encounters. Bush's misuse of the NG is just one such example in an administration rife with the most egregious corruption, incompetence, and mendacity.

Of course, you're welcome to hold Bush's hand while the thinking part of the country points out his many failures. Note that this includes people all across the political spectrum, so your last line rings pretty hollow.


Perhaps you don't understand (1.00 / 0) (#52)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 07:48:02 PM EST

It is called the California National Guard.

It is not called the Federal National Guard.

See the difference???

tehe


Go (5.00 / 1) (#53)
by tnthorpe on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 08:03:31 PM EST

spill your koolaid elsewhere.


Facts bother you?? (1.00 / 0) (#55)
by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 26, 2007 at 07:59:53 AM EST

Heh


facts? you gotta be kidding me (5.00 / 1) (#56)
by tnthorpe on Fri Oct 26, 2007 at 12:45:19 PM EST

12406. National Guard in Federal service: call

Whenever--
(1) the United States, or any of the Commonwealths or possessions, is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation;
(2) there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States; or
(3) the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States;
the President may call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard of any State in such numbers as he considers necessary to repel the invasion, suppress the rebellion, or execute those laws. Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States or, in the case of the District of Columbia, through the commanding general of the National Guard of the District of Columbia.

In an article posted on its website Sunday, Newsweek magazine notes that legal wrangling was also going on within the Bush administration as the situation in New Orleans deteriorated:
President Bush could have "federalized" the National Guard in an instant. That's what his father, President George H.W. Bush, did after the Los Angeles riots in 1992.... But after Katrina, a strange paralysis set in. For days, Bush's top advisers argued over legal niceties about who was in charge, according to three White House officials who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the negotiations. Beginning early in the week, Justice Department lawyers presented arguments for federalizing the Guard, but Defense Department lawyers fretted about untrained 19-year-olds trying to enforce local laws, according to a senior law-enforcement official who requested anonymity citing the delicate nature of the discussions.
-----
Feel free to apologize for getting it wrong again.


Nice try at changing the subject (1.00 / 0) (#57)
by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 26, 2007 at 02:10:43 PM EST

but it doesn't work.

The issue is that prior to federalization the CA NG belongs to the state of CA. It is that state that impeded the expansion/retention of CA NG, thus being a major contributor to the problem.

I would also hazard a guess that, at this very moment, the CA NG has not been placed under the control of the Federal Government. As the LNG was never given to the Feds during Katrina.

Behind the scenes, a power struggle emerged, as federal officials tried to wrest authority from Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D). Shortly before midnight Friday, the Bush administration sent her a proposed legal memorandum asking her to request a federal takeover of the evacuation of New Orleans, a source within the state's emergency operations center said Saturday.
The administration sought unified control over all local police and state National Guard units reporting to the governor. Louisiana officials rejected the request after talks throughout the night, concerned that such a move would be comparable to a federal declaration of martial law

Did (5.00 / 0) (#58)
by tnthorpe on Fri Oct 26, 2007 at 02:56:32 PM EST

California invade Iraq and send huge numbers of NG there on multiple redeployments? I must have missed that.

For the king of moving goalposts you can do better than that.

It is the fact that the Federal Gov't is misusing the NG that makes disasters here more difficult to manage. Other governors have objected.
"By ROBERT TANNER
The Associated Press
Sunday, February 25, 2007; 7:04 PM
WASHINGTON -- Governors concerned about the demands the war in Iraq is placing on their National Guard forces met with a top Guard official Sunday and said they were closely monitoring deployment of their troops, worn-out equipment and how ready they would be for domestic emergencies."

That misuse of the NG is all down to the illegal war pursued by the Bush Administration and his Dem and Repub enablers, of whom you are clearly one. And pointing out that Bush fails doesn't mean there's plenty more to go around, whether it's NO or CA or IRAQ.

Without the NG to shore up the ruins of the army that Bush's mismanagement has destroyed, there's a draft. Simple, because reality has a well known liberal bias.


News Flash! (1.00 / 0) (#59)
by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 27, 2007 at 07:37:16 AM EST

Meteor hurdling towards earth! End of world expected!

MSM - Experts say that this all Bush's fault.


: I've (5.00 / 1) (#60)
by tnthorpe on Sat Oct 27, 2007 at 12:24:38 PM EST

never seen you move the goalposts to outer space before, but keep kicking, you'll bet a ball in orbit before long, I'm sure.

: News Flash! (none / 0) (#61)
by jondee on Sat Oct 27, 2007 at 12:44:02 PM EST

Mr. "Hawk on Defernse" is bullish on defending everything other than than the property and lives of thousands of his fellow Americans in California.
Faux News: Experts say the people that started the fires are the same people who set up Larry Craig (and probobly murdered Ron Brown).

The thought that NG manpower (none / 0) (#39)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 03:26:45 PM EST

would be used at all "on firelines in difficult terrain" is too ridiculous to even respond to.


They Were Used To Fight Fires In Florida (none / 0) (#43)
by john horse on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 05:51:13 PM EST

In Florida they've been used to fight fires. Maybe you know something about emergency management that I don't know since I left.


Just what I google (none / 0) (#45)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 06:19:52 PM EST

WASHINGTON, (05/14/2007) - National Guard troops are responding to wildfires in Florida, Georgia, Minnesota and California, using air assets to deliver water and providing logistics and communication support.

Florida National Guard fire mop-up team supports firefighters
(5/14/2007) - Thirty Florida National Guard Soldiers have been dispatched today to work behind firefighters battling fires bordering Camp Blanding and Bradford County, Joint Training Center, southwest of Jacksonville.

The Guard provided helicopters,bulldozers, water tankers and high mobility vehicles. Soldiers dropped water on the blazes, aided in refueling and carried equipment in addition to security details and drafting plans to help firefighters.
"If it didn't have to do with getting nose to nose with the fire, we probably did it," said Jon Myatt, public information director for the Florida Division of Military Affairs.

Support services, yes. NG manpower "on firelines in difficult terrain," no.

There is no shame in not wanting to go "nose to noe" with a wildfire. Frontline fire fighting is so dangerous and such specialized equipment and training is required that the NG, quite understandably, chooses not to do it.

Probably the fire agencies don't want the liability of being responsible for under-trained and under-equipped NGsmen either...


figure it out knucklehead (5.00 / 0) (#48)
by tnthorpe on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 06:33:49 PM EST

more firefighters = more people on the front line

Is that so ridiculous, or is it just that the math, like reality, has a well-known liberal bias?

As for really impenetrable terrain, those fires are usually left to burn themselves out and are approached through the air, where, guess what, the NG assists.

SAN DIEGO, Ca. (10/24/2007) - Army National Guard helicopters were attacking southern California's ferocious wildfires, and Guard Soldiers on the ground were manning traffic control points and were prepared to provide people who had lost their homes with some of the necessities of life here Wednesday, Oct. 24.

The newspaper headline "Help From Above" summed up how aircraft, including National Guard helicopters carrying big Bambi water buckets, were trying to bring under control the firestorm that has forced some 500,000 residents to flee the devastated, seven-county region since last weekend.

"This is true and pure homeland defense. This is my home. This is what I joined to do," said California Army Guard 1st Lt. Robi Yucas, who was coordinating the Guard's aviation assets here even as his wife and daughter and dog were preparing to evacuate their fire-threatened home in Oceanside.
----
Growing up in CA as I did, I know what I'm talking about, which you clearly do not. Maybe less sarcasm and more knowledge would improve your posts, sarc.


: I read your comment to mean that (none / 0) (#49)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 06:48:42 PM EST

NG manpower would be "on firelines in difficult terrain." Clearly that does not happen.
If you really meant "NG manpower would be used in support services so that more (non-NG) firefighters could be freed-up to be "on firelines in difficult terrain" then I apologize for misunderstanding what you wrote.

Role Of National Guard In Fires (none / 0) (#46)
by john horse on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 06:25:05 PM EST

Apparently there are people who are ignorant of the role of the National Guard regarding fires. The National Guard is absolutely essential during a major fire.

Here is some of what they do:

Aerial Water Drops including Bambi Buckets with UH-60s
Mop-up Crews
Wildland Safety
Fire Perimeter
Liaison Operations
DOF Fire Operations Reports
Support Platoons
Track/Wheel Maintenance, Medics and
Transportation

: Thank you for making my point. (none / 0) (#47)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 06:27:56 PM EST