Obama’s “civilian national security force”

Part of the “change” that Obama wants to bring is a new “civilian national security force”; apparently, our national defense should not be left up to Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Coast Guardsmen, and Marines anymore:

  • FrenchyTheSailor

    He’s talking about his plan to increase “national service” opportunities for citizens. Also to increase the size of the Peace Corps.

    I think this is a very good idea. It falls right in line with what the Navy is doing in creating a Maritime Civil Affairs command. DoD is focusing on denying terrorists the ability to recruit in third world nations by sending in civil affairs teams to improve the country’s infrastruture and creating jobs and securing national borders.

    DoD also plans on working hand in hand with NGO relief agencies as well as organizations like the Peace Corp.

    While many people will decrie the expense of these programs, the truth is that by stablilizing these unstable regions of the world before they decend in to Kaos, we will save enormous sums by not sending in the military as peace keepers. Increased stability and economic growth could very well offset any investments we make in these regions.

    According to his website, other forms of “national service” would be used to improve America’s infrastructure and give inner city youths at risk a chance to learn skills taught by retired seniors.

    Apart from the initial cost outlay, I can’t see this as anything other than win-win. Not only do tap into our increasingly aged population and their wealth of knowledge and experience, but every disadvataged youth that is pulled off the streets and given skills for success is one potential American who ends up in our penal system (which we would have to pay taxes to support).

    Besides if any of you have read Starship Troopers, you’d know I’m a huge fan of national service.

  • No Frnechy, he is not talking about community service, he is talking about a seperate, CIVILINA military

    “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that is just as that’s just a s powerful; just as strong, just as well funded”

    You are basing your comment on the assumption it is some community service thing. It’s not. The Obama camp won’t seem to explain this comment he made.

  • Steven Nicoloro

    I think that having a civilian national security force is a waste of money. If we wants to improve the security in the United States he should give these additional funds to the existing police departments. All he is doing is establishing additional government. We should have less government and not more expenditures.

    Stop this madness. Elect John McCain president.

  • FrenchyTheSailor

    SW,

    I looked all over and I couldn’t find anything except this one video clip from one speech where he calls for a “civilian national security force”.

    Have you seen anything that lays out this plan to create such a radical new agency?

  • SW, in the context of the speach as a whole, Frenchy is more correct:

    So we are going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We’ll call on Americans to join an Energy Corps to conduct renewable energy and environmental cleanup projects in their neighborhoods all across the country. We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, to be there for our military families. And we’re going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered, and double the size of Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy.

    We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.

    A decent analysis of this can be found at The Volokh Conspiracy, IMHO. While i don’t agree with all of it, it does present what look to be some accurate arguments.

  • Darrell — Chesapeake

    That’s the point Frenchy. No one seems to know what the hell he was talking about. Why would he say something like that without any further explaination? The libs seem to think it will be a program like the old CCC. Trouble is, the CCC was a program to put the vast number of unemployed to work building stuff. If the government’s employment numbers are to be believed, no one would join this new program because we are already at full employment. If it turns out to be a new Gestapo, then we will find that there already is a civilian national security force. It’s been in existance since 1776.

  • I looked all over and I couldn’t find anything except this one video clip from one speech where he calls for a “civilian national security force”.

    Have you seen anything that lays out this plan to create such a radical new agency?”

    Exactly, you can find NOTHING from Obama that says it is anything other than what he said. Radical new agency? maybe not. He would be too busy bankrupting Clean Coal companies (Putting tens of thousands out of work) and deciding which tax break number is the his new truth… $250k, $200k, $120k? Who knows.

    Plus we all know his bosses, Reid and Pelosi hate any sort of military so maybe it is nothing.

  • Squeaky Whell? Is that anything like a whelk? 🙂

  • MB

    The Volokh analysis is useful if anyone is actually interested in the policy (versus cheap politics) of it. Obama seems to be mostly guilty of being too free with the “national security” schtick (something only he does, of course . . .).

    Anyway, if anyone is concerned about an internal snitch force, you missed your chance to vote your objections against Bush’s initial version of “Freedom Corps” (which was something of an attempt to rebrand and pseudo-militarize AmeriCorps).

    In any event, the National Service programs (AmeriCorps, Learn & Serve, VISTA, Senior Corps, etc.) have been a largely effective set of programs over the years. Enabling legislation came from Bush I, Clinton implemented (with a whole lotta input from Chuck Grassley, believe me), and Bush II generally maintained (we’ll just ignore that ridiculous Freedom Corps crap). They could be better, of course, but I think there’s a pretty well demonstrated return on investment with them. The program’s biggest critics (like, say, Republican Chuck Grassley) have turned into its biggest supporters.

  • Obama hates guns so much he wants to strip our military by 25% AND he wants to trample the Second Amendment.

    I guess the Civilian National Security Force can defend us using sticks and stones.

    Yippeee….

  • MB

    Yeah, I totally heard that Obama’s going to take all of your guns away, give them to the illegals, and then they’ll make all the white people slaves.

    I read it on the internet, so it must be true.

  • FrenchyTheSailor

    For all their insanity, I don’t think the Dems will want to build a civilian army to force god fearing Americans to denounce the church and impose abortions on unwilling young mothers, while storming the estates of the ubber wealthy in order to redistribute their money to unwashed masses.

  • Mark

    Jim – this is a bad post.

  • P-Town Hubert

    The CCC wasn’t “just as powerful” as the military. Why do Obama’s Kool-Aid drinkers constantly ignore his words and actions? Aren’t you ashamed of yourselves, giving America to an inexperienced and untested person of dubious associations?

  • MB is correct in his assertion about cheap politics. Except to create a phony issue there is not much point in taking Obama’s remarks out of context. That said, Obama is talking about spending as much as we spend on the military on civilian national security force. Even though we spend relatively less than we use to on the military, Obama still talking about spending hundreds of billions. Why do we need to do that? What is wrong with what nonprofits are doing? Why does the government need to soak up every cent it can and replace successful nonprofit programs with government waste?

  • FrenchyTheSailor

    Tom,

    In answer to you question: Minnesota.

    There are thousands of bridges in disrepair across the country. There are tens of thousands of Americans who have the skills and desire to volunteer their services in medical clinics, schools and a host of other venues.

    Look at NY after 911. Americans wanted to do their part, but apart from donating money they weren’t given the chance to do anything significant to help America in the war on terror.

    The problems facing this country will require some sacrifice on the part of “Joe Sixpack” and I think they’ll step up. They just need someone to give them direction.

  • FrenchyTheSailor – Look around. Do we have a shortage of cars? Do we even have a shortage of concrete and asphalt? Is there sufficient money? The answer to all those question is YES!

    When we just hand our money to politicians, they waste it. Socialism does not empower the People; it empowers their leaders. Whether he realizes it or not (and I am afraid he does), what Obama’s big government programs will do is make him more powerful.

    If you want bridges and road, pay tolls. If the government does not put them in the right place and maintain them, then the politicians don’t get the dough.

    We do not need government programs to give away money. If people want to volunteer their services to the needy, nobody is stopping them. There are plenty of private organization happy to accept donations and volunteer labor.

  • FrenchyTheSailor

    Tom,

    You’re right about one thing, look around.

    Our infrastructure is crumbling. But no one wants to pay for it. Thats what taxes are for. We can no longer “charge it”. If America wants to be a first world nation, we’re going to have to pay for it, as we go, and stop foisting those bills on the next generation.

    People keep saying the Dems are going to increase government, well the GOP has done exactly that. The largest increases in big government seem to keep happening under the Republicans (can anyone say Homeland Security, Star Wars).

    Besides, I think America is pretty sick and tired of being lied to (Iraq War). So excuse me if I don’t believe anything that comes out of the mouth of a Republican.

    I really think this is the best thing that could have happened to the GOP, maybe the real Republicans will take back their party from their Corporate masters and the religious zelots and get back to their roots.

  • Interesting, Frenchy.

    You don’t believe a word I say?

    Our infrastructure is crumbling? Where? Ok…one bridge accident.

    There was also a devastating one in the Tacoma Narrows in the 1950s.

    Disaster happens. Roads are, predominantly, a state issue…not a federal one. Are we really fearful of an invasion that requires us to move things across country (the purpose of the Eisenhower interstate system)?

    Nope.

    Interstate roads are for commerce. And states that want to have commerce are going to build good roads.

    Roads are not “crumbling”. Hysterics here are not required.

    As for the post, you guys are hilarious when you go after the messenger.

    Dudes, I didn’t say the words.

    if you’re so offended, take it up with your candidate.

    Have any of your true believers really looked hard at Obama, or are you all so under his spell that you’re blindly walking to the polls to pull the lever.

    If it’s a vote “against the Republicans” … I got news for ya, McCain is no conservative. It’s why the guy STILL doesn’t have full party support.

    McCain’s speech at the GOP Convention almost had folks there doing the “Homer Simpson.”

    The fact of the matter is that Democrats win this election no matter which candidate is elected.

    I’m just hoping it isn’t they guy who’s first answer for everything is to “increase funding” and “increase taxes on the top 5%.”

  • Robert E Lehman

    The problem is that big government proponents, both Democrat and Republican, are centralizing resources and reducing the leveraging power that local communities have with their own resources. And for whatever reason, we all keep going right along with. Obama is the capstone to to the deconstruction of American capitalism and freedom. Hopefully, we truly freedom loving American haven’t lost that fighting spirit. We are going to need it to take back our country if Obama succeeds tomorrow.

  • Red Defender?

    FrenchyTheSailor – I think you changed the subject. Instead, defending Obama’s proposal, you attacked Republicans. For good measure, you tossed in the Iraq War, which ironically, we have just about won.

    Whoever we elect, we need to reduce spending. Pay as you go needs to be redefined. Instead of reaching into each other’s pockets to pay for things, we each need to pay our own freight. Robbing Hood economics, otherwise known as socialism, does not work.

  • MB

    Dudes, I didn’t say the words.

    No, you didn’t say them. But you did present them in a completely distorted context, for cheap (and ineffective) political points. And . . . .

    You know, nevermind. Socialism starts tomorrow. Ooga booga.

  • FrenchyTheSailor

    JR, I appoligize for suggesting that “all” Republicans are untruthfull. I was refering to the GOP currently in power.

    I know you can’t be happy with what the current GOP has done to done to your party and as far as I’m concerned, that goes for the Dems as well.

    Our current political structure is as jacked up as our Dams, Bridges, public transport, education, health (and the list goes on). Please take a look at the 2005 Infrastructure Report Card from the American Society of Civil Engineers for all the gory details.
    http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2005/index2005.cfm

    The way I see it, this election has less to do with the issues and is more about punishing all those scum bags in Washington.

  • Al Rion

    The 4 second statement is pretty vague and incomplete without the full statement. Still, it sounds he’s actually taking Homeland Security seriously. Perhaps he’s referring to our currently far under funded and under staffed local, state and national law enforcement agencies.

    As for having his own “private army” …the president of the United States already has one and has had for a VERY long time. It is called The United States Maine Corp. Unlike the Army, Navy and Air Force, the Marines act at the discretion of the president.

    As for an “uproar” if Bush would have made that same announcement…all I can say is: He did. It’s called: Homeland Security (and the Patriot Act). The problem is Bush failed to organize it, put inept people in charge of it, under funded it, and ordered it to spy of American citizens.

  • Mark

    The Economist had a great article a few months back about how many decades behind Europe and Asia our infrastructure is and – more importantly how it is going to cripple our ability to compete in the future.

    If you care about the economic developent of our nation you’ll stop pretending that everything is ok – and you’ll get ready to get dirty and do something about making this nation better and more able to compete on the world stage. Heck, if folks were taking your we don’t need to do anything mantra we’d still be using canals across our country…

  • frank ross

    we are watching this black prick close if he tries he dies

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.