UN White House authorizes lethal force for troops at Mexico border

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
https://nypost.com/2018/11/21/white...w&utm_medium=SocialFlow&utm_source=NYPTwitter

The White House gave troops stationed at the southern border the OK to use lethal force if necessary — a move that legal experts warn may violate the Posse Comitatus Act, which bars the military from being used for civilian law enforcement.

The “cabinet order” was signed by White House Chief of Staff John Kelly — not President Trump — and authorizes “Department of Defense military personnel” to “perform those military protective activities that the Secretary of Defense determines are reasonably necessary” to protect border agents, the Military Times reported.

That includes “a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention and cursory search.”

There are about 5,900 active-duty troops and 2,100 National Guard forces deployed to the Mexican border.

Trump had said earlier this month that the troops could “fight back” if the Central American asylum seekers heading to the US border hurled rocks their way.

“They want to throw rocks at our military, our military fights back. I told them to consider it a rifle. When they throw rocks like what they did to the Mexican military and police I say consider it a rifle,” the commander in chief said on Nov. 1.

He later walked back the comment that rocks are the same as rifles after widespread condemnation.

Some of the actions described in Kelly’s late Tuesday order, including crowd control and detention, could violate the 1898 Posse Comitatus Act.

The Congressional Research Service determined “case law indicates that ‘execution of the law’ in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act occurs (a) when the Armed Forces perform tasks assigned to an organ of civil government, or (b) when the Armed Forces perform tasks assigned to them solely for purposes of civilian government,” the website reported.

But the law also allows the president “to use military force to suppress insurrection or to enforce federal authority,” the service found.

Prior to the midterms, the president employed harsh anti-immigrant rhetoric to describe the “caravans” of migrants — many of them women and children — fleeing their homelands.

He repeatedly called the caravan an “invasion” of the US, claiming without evidence that “Middle Easterners,” terrorists and hordes of violent gang members had infiltrated the group in an effort to fire up his nationalist base.

He ordered the troop deployment, and ominously warned that the active duty troops would stop the asylum seekers, though their actual role turned out to be building camps and stringing barbed wire along the border.

Trump barely mentioned the caravans after the midterms, and the Pentagon announced that the border operation, briefly dubbed “Operation Patriot Freedom” before the brass scrapped that moniker, would be wound down and that the troops would be home by Christmas.

Some of the migrants have amassed at the border city of Tijuana, while others remain hundreds of miles away from the US.

Experts eyed the order warily.

Posse Comitatus is “always looming in the background. You never invoke it as such because it is such a background principle,” William Banks, author of “Soldiers on the Home Front: The Domestic Role of the American Military” and the former director of the Institute for National Security and Counterterrorism at Syracuse University, told the website.

Kelly said in the directive that the move was necessary because “credible evidence and intelligence” suggest that the migrants in Tijuana, “may prompt incidents of violence and disorder” that could threaten Border Patrol personnel.

But the White House could still find itself in legal hot water if the authorities in the memo are determined to be counter to the law, Banks said.

Personally im of a neutral opinion. But if the caravan is going to try to force its way across the border like it has been forcing its way through Mexico then they get what they deserve.
 
Hopefully the threat of force scares migrants who would otherwise have gotten aggressive and no shots are fired.
 
Correct decision. If you can't or won't defend your border then you don't really have a country.

They'll only need to shoot a few. The rest will scatter when they see they're serious.
 
i smell bullshit... COs interviewed by NPR claim that they are not carrying weapons and are just there to protect border patrol officials, so what would be the point of authorizing lethal force?
 
Last time I checked, it wasn't the job of "civilian law enforcement" to repel a foreign invasion.
What’s more, you’d think the notion of it being for civilian law would mean it’d have fuck all to do with a bunch of non-natives taking up space they have no need to occupy.
 
With this latest development, I wouldnt put it past the organizers to try and use the women and children as meatshields to make it as politically bad as possible.

I suspect the plan will be to have Americans in amongst them. Berkeley is probably full of tumbleweeds ATM.
 
i smell bullshit... COs interviewed by NPR claim that they are not carrying weapons and are just there to protect border patrol officials, so what would be the point of authorizing lethal force?

How are they going to protect anyone without access to weapons? Do they just nicely ask people to stop attacking border control officials? Spray them with a fire hose?

Even less lethal weapons are still weapons, so I call bullshit on any claim that they have no weapons at all.
 
This is a common sense decision? If you’re going to send our brave service men and women to defend our border, you can’t hamstring them.
 
This isn't the army watching the border between Illinois and Indiana, this is them watching the border between the US and Mexico.
 
I expect we'll soon hear about protests from antifa cucks and mayors from sanctuary cities stating that Blonard Bloomf is killing "non-American-American-citizens", or something autistic along those lines.

They are already in a paradox after knowng mexican people didn't want them and saying "Orange Man is right". Even cities like San Diego don't want them after watching the shit show.

San Francisco in other hand...
 
Man, he knows how to milk those SJWs good and right before thanksgiving. I can imagine how insufferable and depressed they’ll be at family dinners tomorrow :story:
 
Man, he knows how to tard cum those SJWs good and right before thanksgiving. I can imagine how insufferable and depressed they’ll be at family dinners tomorrow :story:

5D chess strikes again, I am imagining a collage of insufferable lefty dangerhair millennials commiserating on a park bench somewhere because they've all been unilaterally thrown out of their gatherings for not shutting up about how dinner was an allegory for feasting on the dead bodies of the less fortunate the same way Blonald Blumpf does.
 
How are they going to protect anyone without access to weapons? Do they just nicely ask people to stop attacking border control officials? Spray them with a fire hose?

Even less lethal weapons are still weapons, so I call bullshit on any claim that they have no weapons at all.
Based on my experience, they will have firearms, but not ammunition for those weapons. If things turn violent, ammunition will be dispersed. If it comes to shooting, they'll be given fire orders.
 
Good. The whole reason we have 20 million illegals and god knows how many of their children in this country right now is because illegally hopping the border is so easy and free of consequence for most of the people who do it. The vast majority of them wouldn't even bother trying if there were substantial resistance to be feared in doing it.
 
Back
Top Bottom