United States Defense Thread

spoz

The Bunker Group
Plus there is the posse comitatus act which significantly restricts how the US military can be used internally. I seem to remember there was even some rumblings about using them in disaster relief type operations because of that, so suppressing civil strife would certainly be an issue. I know that Lincoln did something like that at the start of the civil war under the Insurrection Act, but even then (from memory) it was considered to be of doubtful legality and that was before Hayes signed 18 USC 1385. It doesn't directly apply to the Navy and Marines, but from memory there is some sort of equivalent for them.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
The link mentions that there is no requirement for a governor’s approval in the Insurrection Act and the President has the authority as CIC to utilize active duty troops. To date, when this act has been applied, it has been at the request of governors.
 

Blackshoe

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Plus there is the posse comitatus act which significantly restricts how the US military can be used internally. I seem to remember there was even some rumblings about using them in disaster relief type operations because of that, so suppressing civil strife would certainly be an issue. I know that Lincoln did something like that at the start of the civil war under the Insurrection Act, but even then (from memory) it was considered to be of doubtful legality and that was before Hayes signed 18 USC 1385. It doesn't directly apply to the Navy and Marines, but from memory there is some sort of equivalent for them.
My completely armchair guess on this is that a smart President could do it (declare a state of emergency, call out the troops, put them in places) and then dare the courts to do something about it. I am sure it's as legal as say, shutting down our states for Coronavirus or the VPOTUS shutting down all commercial air travel in the nation (something Cheney did during 9/11), which is to say, "maybe not, but what are you going to do about it?"

Good,bad, or indifferent, Trump is not smart enough at manipulating levers of government power to pull that off.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Trump has apparently discovered the importance of Polar regions but this may create problems, especially in the Southern Hemisphere. As US icebreaker capability is near as bad as Canada’s, nothing will be happening soon.

 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #85
Trump has apparently discovered the importance of Polar regions but this may create problems, especially in the Southern Hemisphere. As US icebreaker capability is near as bad as Canada’s, nothing will be happening soon.

Hell yeah. McMurdo is NZ claimed territory. He definitely doesn't understand the Antarctic Treaty and it will create problems for Australia too, especially because the PRC have research stations in their claimed territory. Both the PRC and Russia would very quick to militarise the region if they could. The PRC especially wants to extract the mineral resources from continent and the surrounding seas, which are expressly forbidden by the Treaty.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Hell yeah. McMurdo is NZ claimed territory. He definitely doesn't understand the Antarctic Treaty and it will create problems for Australia too, especially because the PRC have research stations in their claimed territory. Both the PRC and Russia would very quick to militarise the region if they could. The PRC especially wants to extract the mineral resources from continent and the surrounding seas, which are expressly forbidden by the Treaty.
Yep, another Donald $hitshow in the making. Maybe November will rectify this.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Hell yeah. McMurdo is NZ claimed territory. He definitely doesn't understand the Antarctic Treaty and it will create problems for Australia too, especially because the PRC have research stations in their claimed territory. Both the PRC and Russia would very quick to militarise the region if they could. The PRC especially wants to extract the mineral resources from continent and the surrounding seas, which are expressly forbidden by the Treaty.
The mining ban does come up for review in iirc 2048. Though a few years back all the treaty signatories re-affirmed their commitment to it.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #88
Yep, another Donald $hitshow in the making. Maybe November will rectify this.
Maybe, maybe not. We'll have to wait and see.
The mining ban does come up for review in iirc 2048. Though a few years back all the treaty signatories re-affirmed their commitment to it.
Yes, but a lot can change between now and then. A lot has changed in the world since that reaffirmation.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #89
The White House is determined to further politicise the Pentagon by appointing more Trump loyalists to positions within the Pentagon.

White House intensifies effort to install Pentagon personnel seen as loyal to Trump

Another problem is the increased militarization of police forces in the US. To be fair this is just a US problem, but it is there where it is most prominent at the moment in a democracy that isn't a police state.

Police departments equip, train and sometimes dress like soldiers - at what cost?
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
Another problem is the increased militarization of police forces in the US. To be fair this is just a US problem, but it is there where it is most prominent at the moment in a democracy that isn't a police state.

Police departments equip, train and sometimes dress like soldiers - at what cost?
Took a quick read through of the article and came away with questions along with a few thoughts.

One of the first thoughts/questions is whether or not the paper and whoever did the "research" is familiar with the saying, "correlation does not imply causation." This particularly came to mind when listing the places which received surplus weapons, vehicles and gear from the DOD and also listing some of the places which received the most and had the most officer involved shootings when adjusted for population.

I do know that police and EMS first responders have adopted a number of systems that were developed for and used by the military. This is particularly true in certain areas of emergency medicine (tourniquets are back, hemostatic gauze/clotting agents, etc.) which has made significant progress over the last 20 years in responding to trauma including amputations and massive hemorrhages.

It has become fairly standard for police officers to equipment themselves (if not already issued by their dept.) with an IFAK that it kitted out to enable them to rapidly access it and it's contents, so that they can self-treat in an emergency like having been shot or stabbed. This also ties into another area which I have seen labeled as "the militarization of the police," which is the fairly widespread adoption, again by police and EMS, of LBE vests, bags/packs, or plate carriers, which typically use MOLLE or similar webbing platforms.

An area people tend to overlook, is just how much gear that law enforcement either wants to, or has to carry, in order to safely and effectively carry out their duties in the current era. I suspect many people are still thinking the level of police gear required by Barney Fife would work today, when the reality is far different. For uniformed officers on 'routine patrol' all the gear an officer might need, with a few exceptions, tends to be carried on their person, since every call and response can be different and an officer will not necessarily know beforehand what the actual situation is, or what would be required. This in turn means that an officer needs to be able to both carry the gear ergonomically, but also in a fashion so that the appropriate gear is easily accessible when needed. As an interesting side note, a friend of mine did a study when he was going for his Masters in Emergency Management, which indicated that the weight growth of police duty belts when kitted out was such that officers were developing chronic back problems due to all that weight being concentrated around the waist.

Me being me, I am less concerned about the surplus gear, and tend to me more concerned about the attitudes held by some officers as well as officials, generally those further from the centre in terms of views.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
I can’t help but notice that many US officers have waistlines that likely cause chronic back problems. I think it is fair to say many non- US police forces don’t need to carry as much self-treat kit as they don’t face anywhere near the level of gun threats their US colleagues face.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #92
I can’t help but notice that many US officers have waistlines that likely cause chronic back problems. I think it is fair to say many non- US police forces don’t need to carry as much self-treat kit as they don’t face anywhere near the level of gun threats their US colleagues face.
Yep, our cops generally do their patrolling unarmed, although they do have pistols and a rifle locked in a safe in the patrol car in case they need them in an emergency. We had a young cop shot and killed a week back. First one shot and killed on duty in 11 years. That's for the whole country. Some whacko on meth let rip with a long arm when pulled over on a routine traffic stop. 1 cop dead and another seriously wounded.
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
I can’t help but notice that many US officers have waistlines that likely cause chronic back problems. I think it is fair to say many non- US police forces don’t need to carry as much self-treat kit as they don’t face anywhere near the level of gun threats their US colleagues face.
Probably not as many as you think. Quite a few of those who look a bit "thick" around the middle are actually wearing protective vests. Also, while some are indeed overweight, such weight tends to get distributed around the body more than the 18+ extra lbs from having a pistol, spare magazines, taser, pepper spray, radio, IFAK, sets of hand cuffs/restraints, PR-24 or baton.

Here is a site which shows some of the standard gear US police tend to carry on their duty belts. Things not included which I routinely see are medical/exam gloves, and an IFAK.

By switching that 18+ lbs from directly around the waist to also being supported by the shoulders/torso, it completely changes how the weight is distributed and reduces the strain the back suffers in a 12-hour shift.

Police deployed on special assignments, like riot control or SWAT, tend to have even more gear on when engaged in such roles.
 
Probably not as many as you think. Quite a few of those who look a bit "thick" around the middle are actually wearing protective vests. Also, while some are indeed overweight, such weight tends to get distributed around the body more than the 18+ extra lbs from having a pistol, spare magazines, taser, pepper spray, radio, IFAK, sets of hand cuffs/restraints, PR-24 or baton.

Here is a site which shows some of the standard gear US police tend to carry on their duty belts. Things not included which I routinely see are medical/exam gloves, and an IFAK.

By switching that 18+ lbs from directly around the waist to also being supported by the shoulders/torso, it completely changes how the weight is distributed and reduces the strain the back suffers in a 12-hour shift.

Police deployed on special assignments, like riot control or SWAT, tend to have even more gear on when engaged in such roles.
But having that weight up higher certainly effects centre of gravity. That is an issue in hand to hand and even just walking in icy stuff. I never consider it much till I ended up in an ameteur reproduction of the benny Hill show chasing after a big guy on a muddy field who wasnt wearing biddy armour and weapon while we were. Slipping all over the show. And he was as graceful as a gazelle.
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
But having that weight up higher certainly effects centre of gravity. That is an issue in hand to hand and even just walking in icy stuff. I never consider it much till I ended up in an ameteur reproduction of the benny Hill show chasing after a big guy on a muddy field who wasnt wearing biddy armour and weapon while we were. Slipping all over the show. And he was as graceful as a gazelle.
The weight itself is not necessarily 'higher up' as you put it, but where it is being supported from. Basically the difference between having a ~9 kg bum pack/fanny pack vs. a 9kg backpack. With something like a plate carrier or LBE vest that same amount of weight can get distributed across or around the torso even more efficiently.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Yep, our cops generally do their patrolling unarmed, although they do have pistols and a rifle locked in a safe in the patrol car in case they need them in an emergency. We had a young cop shot and killed a week back. First one shot and killed on duty in 11 years. That's for the whole country. Some whacko on meth let rip with a long arm when pulled over on a routine traffic stop. 1 cop dead and another seriously wounded.
The Scottish police shot & killed someone three days ago. It was reported that he was the first for 50 years. It was actually 51 years, less two weeks: July 1969. The last time a police officer was shot & killed in the line of duty in Scotland was December of the same year, when a bank robber (an ex-policeman) shot & killed two policemen before other officer (unarmed) tackled him. The death penalty had been abolished two weeks earlier.
 
Top