Trump risks turning U.S. military into deadly political force, veterans warn
The Trump administration’s deployment of national guard troops to Los Angeles to intervene in civilian protests in the face of opposition from the Californian governor is a major escalation that risks the politicisation of the US military, armed service veterans are warning.
Former top military figures have told the Guardian that the decision to put up to 2,000 troops under federal control and send them into the streets of LA is a violation of the military’s commitment to keep out of domestic politics in all but the most exceptional circumstances. The last time a US president federalised the national guard against the wishes of a state governor was in 1965, when Lyndon Johnson deployed them to protect civil rights marchers in Alabama.
“This is the politicisation of the armed forces,” said Maj Gen Paul Eaton. “It casts the military in a terrible light – it’s that man on horseback, who really doesn’t want to be there, out in front of American citizens.”
Eaton, who commanded the training of Iraqi troops during the invasion of Iraq, predicted that the LA deployment would lead to the eventual invocation of the Insurrection Act. The 1807 law empowers the president to deploy the full US military against insurrection or armed rebellion.
“We are headed towards the invocation of the Insurrection Act, which will provide a legal basis for inappropriate activity,” he said. [Continue reading…]
LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell said in response to the announcement that the department had received “no formal notification” about the Marines’ arrival in LA.
- “The possible arrival of federal military forces in Los Angeles — absent clear coordination — presents a significant logistical and operational challenge for those of us charged with the safeguarding this city,” the police chief said in a statement.
- He said LAPD and it partners are confident in their ability to manage the large-scale demonstrations, and urged for open and continuous lines of communications between all agencies to “prevent confusion” and “avoid escalation.”
Following the deployment of Marines to LA, Task & Purpose reports:
About 1,500 Marines from Camp Pendleton, California, were deployed to Los Angeles in 1992, and they were issued riot gear and given refresher training prior to their mission, retired Army Maj. Gen. James Delk, who oversaw the California National Guard’s response to the riots, wrote in a 1995 Army case study of the riots.
However, communications proved to be a challenge at times because Marines, soldiers, and police all use different terminologies, Delk wrote. In one incident, a squad of Marines accompanied police to a home in response to a domestic dispute. One of the police officers was hit when someone inside opened fire.
“His partner grabbed him and as he pulled him back he hollered to the Marines ‘Cover me!’” Delk wrote. “Now to a cop, that was very simple command. That means aim your rifle and use it if necessary. To a Marine, and there were some well-trained young patriots in that squad, it meant something entirely different. They instantly opened up. A mom, a dad, and three children occupied that house.”
Police later found more than 200 bullet holes in the home, but thankfully no one inside was hit, Delk wrote.
“The point is, those great young Marines did exactly what they’re trained to do, but not what the police thought they requested,” Delk wrote. “You need to understand the differences in language.” [Continue reading…]