more about the president's homeland army

[mellowtigger]

The Army Times posted an article last week about the ACLU questioning this month's assignment of an army brigade to US soil.  The soldiers are assigned to the United States Northern Command (NorthCom), an entity created during the watch of "W" in the post-9/11 security frenzy. I can't immediately find how many individual soldiers are part of this brigade, but supposedly the definition of an American brigade can mean anywhere from 1500 to 4000 people.

The article mentions 1) that the ACLU is asking for “any and all records” about the assignment and 2) that the ACLU says the controversial move “raises important questions about the longstanding separation between civilian and military government within the United States — a separation that dates to the nation’s founding”.

A similar article over at Salon.com (decidedly more liberal than the Army Times) quotes "long-time FBI agent and current ACLU national security policy counsel Mike German" as saying:

This is a radical departure from separation of civilian law enforcement and military authority, and could, quite possibly, represent a violation of law. Our Founding Fathers understood the threat that a standing army could pose to American liberty. While future generations recognized the need for a strong military to defend against increasingly capable foreign threats, they also passed statutory protections to ensure that the Army could not be turned against the American people. The erosion of these protections should concern every American.

It does concern me. A lot. I doubt that it has to do with "W" trying to remain president at any cost (because his deity told him to) than with having a convenient way to establish martial law when the economy finally collapses (which he (or someone in the administration) threatened to do if lawmakers didn't pass the $700billion bailout bill).

Comments

[pangolin.livejournal.com]

I seem to call there was rather a ruckus when some commander (maybe Caesar) brought or threatened to bring troops into Rome. Don'tcha love how history repeats itself.

[mellowtigger]

Coincidentally, I already had the quote saved to my hard drive back in 2007. :)

"Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar."

It is not, however, an actual quote from Julius Caesar. This text appeared nowhere until 2001.
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/caesar.asp

[mellowtigger]

Wait, wait... I did some more digging.

Apparently it was customary for any Roman general to disarm his troops before they were allowed inside Rome.

"It was a cardinal rule for all military leaders, whether Consuls, Dictators or Proconsuls, to disband their armies outside the walls of Rome. They were absolutely forbidden by all tradition and custom to bring their armies into Rome under arms. This tradition went right back to the expulsion of the last of the kings of Rome, and honoured the freedom of the political institutions of the Republic."
- http://pages.interlog.com/~gilgames/civwar.htm

That webpage ties the breaking of the code to Sulla, though, not Julius Caesar. I saw it on the internet, so it must be true. :)