Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 8/7/2005 11:07:53 PM EDT
War Plans Drafted To Counter Terror Attacks in U.S.
Domestic Effort Is Big Shift for Military
By Bradley Graham
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, August 8, 2005
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/07/AR2005080700843_pf.html
COLORADO SPRINGS -- The U.S. military has devised its first-ever war plans for guarding against and responding to terrorist attacks in the United States, envisioning 15 potential crisis scenarios and anticipating several simultaneous strikes around the country, according to officers who drafted the plans.

The classified plans, developed here at Northern Command headquarters, outline a variety of possible roles for quick-reaction forces estimated at as many as 3,000 ground troops per attack, a number that could easily grow depending on the extent of the damage and the abilities of civilian response teams.

The possible scenarios range from "low end," relatively modest crowd-control missions to "high-end," full-scale disaster management after catastrophic attacks such as the release of a deadly biological agent or the explosion of a radiological device, several officers said.

Some of the worst-case scenarios involve three attacks at the same time, in keeping with a Pentagon directive earlier this year ordering Northcom, as the command is called, to plan for multiple simultaneous attacks.

The war plans represent a historic shift for the Pentagon, which has been reluctant to become involved in domestic operations and is legally constrained from engaging in law enforcement. Indeed, defense officials continue to stress that they intend for the troops to play largely a supporting role in homeland emergencies, bolstering police, firefighters and other civilian response groups.

But the new plans provide for what several senior officers acknowledged is the likelihood that the military will have to take charge in some situations, especially when dealing with mass-casualty attacks that could quickly overwhelm civilian resources.

"In my estimation, [in the event of] a biological, a chemical or nuclear attack in any of the 50 states, the Department of Defense is best positioned -- of the various eight federal agencies that would be involved -- to take the lead," said Adm. Timothy J. Keating, the head of Northcom, which coordinates military involvement in homeland security operations.

The plans present the Pentagon with a clearer idea of the kinds and numbers of troops and the training that may be required to build a more credible homeland defense force. They come at a time when senior Pentagon officials are engaged in an internal, year-long review of force levels and weapons systems, attempting to balance the heightened requirements of homeland defense against the heavy demands of overseas deployments in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Keating expressed confidence that existing military assets are sufficient to meet homeland security needs. Maj. Gen. Richard J. Rowe, Northcom's chief operations officer, agreed, but he added that "stress points" in some military capabilities probably would result if troops were called on to deal with multiple homeland attacks.

Debate and Analysis

Several people on the staff here and at the Pentagon said in interviews that the debate and analysis within the U.S. government regarding the extent of the homeland threat and the resources necessary to guard against it remain far from resolved.

The command's plans consist of two main documents. One, designated CONPLAN 2002 and consisting of more than 1,000 pages, is said to be a sort of umbrella document that draws together previously issued orders for homeland missions and covers air, sea and land operations. It addresses not only post-attack responses but also prevention and deterrence actions aimed at intercepting threats before they reach the United States.

The other, identified as CONPLAN 0500, deals specifically with managing the consequences of attacks represented by the 15 scenarios.

CONPLAN 2002 has passed a review by the Pentagon's Joint Staff and is due to go soon to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and top aides for further study and approval, the officers said. CONPLAN 0500 is still undergoing final drafting here. (CONPLAN stands for "concept plan" and tends to be an abbreviated version of an OPLAN, or "operations plan," which specifies forces and timelines for movement into a combat zone.)

The plans, like much else about Northcom, mark a new venture by a U.S. military establishment still trying to find its comfort level with the idea of a greater homeland defense role after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Military officers and civilian Pentagon policymakers say they recognize, on one hand, that the armed forces have much to offer not only in numbers of troops but also in experience managing crises and responding to emergencies. On the other hand, they worry that too much involvement in homeland missions would diminish the military's ability to deal with threats abroad.

The Pentagon's new homeland defense strategy, issued in June, emphasized in boldface type that "domestic security is primarily a civilian law enforcement function." Still, it noted the possibility that ground troops might be sent into action on U.S. soil to counter security threats and deal with major emergencies.

"For the Pentagon to acknowledge that it would have to respond to catastrophic attack and needs a plan was a big step," said James Carafano, who follows homeland security issues for the Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington think tank.

William M. Arkin, a defense specialist who has reported on Northcom's war planning, said the evolution of the Pentagon's thinking reflects the recognition of an obvious gap in civilian resources.

Since Northcom's inception in October 2002, its headquarters staff has grown to about 640 members, making it larger than the Southern Command, which oversees operations in Latin America, but smaller than the regional commands for Europe, the Middle East and the Pacific. A brief tour late last month of Northcom's operations center at Peterson Air Force Base found officers monitoring not only aircraft and ship traffic around the United States but also the Discovery space shuttle mission, the National Scout Jamboree in Virginia, several border surveillance operations and a few forest firefighting efforts.

'Dual-Use' Approach

Pentagon authorities have rejected the idea of creating large standing units dedicated to homeland missions. Instead, they favor a "dual-use" approach, drawing on a common pool of troops trained both for homeland and overseas assignments.

Particular reliance is being placed on the National Guard, which is expanding a network of 22-member civil support teams to all states and forming about a dozen 120-member regional response units. Congress last year also gave the Guard expanded authority under Title 32 of the U.S. Code to perform such homeland missions as securing power plants and other critical facilities.

But the Northcom commander can quickly call on active-duty forces as well. On top of previous powers to send fighter jets into the air, Keating earlier this year gained the authority to dispatch Navy and Coast Guard ships to deal with suspected threats off U.S. coasts. He also has immediate access to four active-duty Army battalions based around the country, officers here said.

Nonetheless, when it comes to ground forces possibly taking a lead role in homeland operations, senior Northcom officers remain reluctant to discuss specifics. Keating said such situations, if they arise, probably would be temporary, with lead responsibility passing back to civilian authorities.

Military exercises code-named Vital Archer, which involve troops in lead roles, are shrouded in secrecy. By contrast, other homeland exercises featuring troops in supporting roles are widely publicized.

Legal Questions

Civil liberties groups have warned that the military's expanded involvement in homeland defense could bump up against the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which restricts the use of troops in domestic law enforcement. But Pentagon authorities have told Congress they see no need to change the law.

According to military lawyers here, the dispatch of ground troops would most likely be justified on the basis of the president's authority under Article 2 of the Constitution to serve as commander in chief and protect the nation. The Posse Comitatus Act exempts actions authorized by the Constitution.

"That would be the place we would start from" in making the legal case, said Col. John Gereski, a senior Northcom lawyer.

But Gereski also said he knew of no court test of this legal argument, and Keating left the door open to seeking an amendment of the Posse Comitatus Act.

One potentially tricky area, the admiral said, involves National Guard officers who are put in command of task forces that include active-duty as well as Guard units -- an approach first used last year at the Group of Eight summit in Georgia. Guard troops, acting under state control, are exempt from Posse Comitatus prohibitions.

"It could be a challenge for the commander who's a Guardsman, if we end up in a fairly complex, dynamic scenario," Keating said. He cited a potential situation in which Guard units might begin rounding up people while regular forces could not.

The command's sensitivity to legal issues, Gereski said, is reflected in the unusually large number of lawyers on staff here -- 14 compared with 10 or fewer at other commands. One lawyer serves full time at the command's Combined Intelligence and Fusion Center, which joins military analysts with law enforcement and counterintelligence specialists from such civilian agencies as the FBI, the CIA and the Secret Service.

A senior supervisor at the facility said the staff there does no intelligence collection, only analysis.

He also said the military operates under long-standing rules intended to protect civilian liberties. The rules, for instance, block military access to intelligence information on political dissent or purely criminal activity.

Even so, the center's lawyer is called on periodically to rule on the appropriateness of some kinds of information-sharing. Asked how frequently such cases arise, the supervisor recalled two in the previous 10 days, but he declined to provide specifics.
Link Posted: 8/7/2005 11:11:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/7/2005 11:11:27 PM EDT by badroc]
So IT begins...the start of marshal law...enemy of the state...
Link Posted: 8/7/2005 11:17:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/7/2005 11:19:04 PM EDT by 22bad]
Hmmm........I know, lock down the border, deport the illegals and the "radical" muslims
naaaaaa, that would never work, I am sure they have a much better plan than that
Link Posted: 8/7/2005 11:18:43 PM EDT

...civilian response teams


I think they meant to say "those guys with guns that the founding fathers were talking about in that 2nd amendment thingy."
Link Posted: 8/8/2005 12:09:38 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/8/2005 12:14:54 AM EDT by RABIDFOX50]


Ummm, War Powers Act......

Since I do not own a foil hat I will side with the black helos....
In the event of a MAJOR incident, I would welcome any and all assist from any American be it in a civi uniform or military thank you very much.
God in heaven forbid anything like that to happen...but.....if it does its going to be huge. I just got done with a seminar on the organizational aspects of FEMA and how Homeland Security is working with EVERY agency from our lowly Sheriff's office all the way up to the Pentagon to make sure every asset is utilized. It's called the "National Incident Management System".
Link Posted: 8/8/2005 12:11:56 AM EDT
Just get Dick Marcinko to fix some stuff up. He'll know what to do, Maybe if we beg him nicely and convice him that we like him and don't want to bend him over like the navy did, he'll stop writing books for a second and fuck up some terrorists
Link Posted: 8/8/2005 12:19:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dusty_C:
Just get Dick Marcinko to fix some stuff up. He'll know what to do, Maybe if we beg him nicely and convice him that we like him and don't want to bend him over like the navy did, he'll stop writing books for a second and fuck up some terrorists



I met him at a book signing in Newburgh New York back in 92. We only spoke for four minutes or so but I liked what he had to say. He signed Rouge Warrior for me even though he was pushing a newer book. Great guy.
Link Posted: 8/8/2005 12:29:05 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RABIDFOX50:

Ummm, War Powers Act......

Since I do not own a foil hat I will side with the black helos....
In the event of a MAJOR incident, I would welcome any and all assist from any American be it in a civi uniform or military thank you very much.
God in heaven forbid anything like that to happen...but.....if it does its going to be huge. I just got done with a seminar on the organizational aspects of FEMA and how Homeland Security is working with EVERY agency from our lowly Sheriff's office all the way up to the Pentagon to make sure every asset is utilized. It's called the "National Incident Management System".



Would our chances of being attacked be lower if we did not have an open border that a MILLION
unknowns a year(minimum)were crossing with a number of KNOWN terrorists included with them

It is almost like they WANT us to be attacked........maybe someone else knows why they do
not close down the border even though the situation is so bad the illegals now attack Cops?
Link Posted: 8/8/2005 12:31:49 AM EDT
So if there are a known percentage of terrorists crossing, ntm plain ole' criminals. Can we take that percentage and shoot at groups of illegals trying to cross with that percentage of each group our bag limit? Good deterrent. I'm very anti illegal if you can't tell. I think anyone trying to cross illegally should be shot on sight.
Link Posted: 8/8/2005 12:32:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By RABIDFOX50:

Originally Posted By Dusty_C:
Just get Dick Marcinko to fix some stuff up. He'll know what to do, Maybe if we beg him nicely and convice him that we like him and don't want to bend him over like the navy did, he'll stop writing books for a second and fuck up some terrorists



I met him at a book signing in Newburgh New York back in 92. We only spoke for four minutes or so but I liked what he had to say. He signed Rouge Warrior for me even though he was pushing a newer book. Great guy.



I'd love to meet him. We need more leaders like him.
Link Posted: 8/8/2005 12:40:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/8/2005 12:41:08 AM EDT by 22bad]

Originally Posted By Dusty_C:
So if there are a known percentage of terrorists crossing...........



It is not a known "amount" of terrorists it is KNOWN TERRORISTS...........
Link Posted: 8/8/2005 1:49:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dusty_C:

Originally Posted By RABIDFOX50:

Originally Posted By Dusty_C:
Just get Dick Marcinko to fix some stuff up. He'll know what to do, Maybe if we beg him nicely and convice him that we like him and don't want to bend him over like the navy did, he'll stop writing books for a second and fuck up some terrorists



I met him at a book signing in Newburgh New York back in 92. We only spoke for four minutes or so but I liked what he had to say. He signed Rouge Warrior for me even though he was pushing a newer book. Great guy.



I'd love to meet him. We need more leaders like him.



I met him also at a book signing on the Army Post where I was doing AIT. He signed 4 of my books, even though I was well after the posted hours. I was quite impressed with him. I still have the pictures my buddy took of us.

-K
Link Posted: 8/8/2005 1:51:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By badroc:
So IT begins...the start of marshal law...enemy of the state...




"It could be a challenge for the commander who's a Guardsman, if we end up in a fairly complex, dynamic scenario," Keating said. He cited a potential situation in which Guard units might begin rounding up people while regular forces could not.

This part worries me. Alot.

-K
Top Top