Should we send federal troops to Ferguson?

[LuckyTheDog]

Back in 1957, Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas National Guard and then sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock. It was a very different situation and a different time. But I can't help thinking that a similar kind of federal intervention is needed in Ferguson, Mo.

But, of course, if Obama tried it, people would absolutely lose their minds.

Thoughts?

[upaloopa]

1. No it is the presents of police and NG troops

that turned a peaceful evening into trouble last night

[LuckyTheDog]

3. Right. So, federalize the NG and tell it to stand down.

Get the state and local forces out of there. Then, send in the federal troops to protect people and property.

That's my idea. But, would it work?

[upaloopa]

9. Troops are not trained to do that kind of job

Imagine giving you an automatic rifle and telling you to protect the people and town. The troops have as much training as you have. Remember Kent State?

[LuckyTheDog]

15. Kent State was National Guard

And, back in 1957, because the National Guard was part of the problem in Little Rock, Eisenhower federalized it to get it out of there,

Ike then sent in the 101st Airborne on what was basically a peace-keeping mission. It worked.

[upaloopa]

21. I know they were NG. The point I was making is that

untrained troops are a hazard not a help

[NYC_SKP]

2. No, we should strongly request retraction of state police, support community-based coordinators.

I can't believe that I have to explain what that is or the reasons that it's the right thing to do.

PTAs, PTOs, Community and Faith based orgs, Local NGOs, these are what we need to lead.

Easy peasy.

[cwydro]

4. I hear what you are saying.

But to me, it is obvious that there are people in there just trying to stir the pot. White, black...who cares>

The violence only hurts the community, and it has to stop. It solves nothing.

I'm afraid for what could happen if somehow this is not dealt with in some way.

[RobertEarl]

6. Right

And it is the cops who are committing the most violence.

The cops are out of control and causing problems. Who can contain them but a superior force?

[cwydro]

11. Well, you have a point.

The cops started the whole mess, I agree.

But the looting and violence have to stop.

[RobertEarl]

18. That's why they have swat

All the cops need is their swat teams. This presence of the cops blocking streets and firing tear gas is just inciting riots. The cops are out of control causing more damage that any other group. Someone needs to control the cops.

[NYC_SKP]

8. I liked that amnesty international was brough in.

I can't, in contrast, believe that stepping up the authority level from county to state to federal (when they all show up armed to the teeth) is a move in a productive direction.

The better strategy would be to return a sense of control to the people in the community, through civic and faith based and other local orgs.

If these don't exist, then it's an object lesson for why they should.

Power abhors a vacuum.

Communities that aren't organized are fertile grounds for abuse.

[kath]

10. yes, good that AI came. BUT they were "asked" (read "made") to leave last night.

Lovely, eh?

[951-Riverside]

22. These community "peace keepers" were shoving people around night and chasing them with bullhorns

They really got people amped up last night.

One "peace keeper" told a random woman to give him a hug then walked over grabbed and kissed her while she was trying to push away. Very creepy and borderline assault IMO.



If this is to be done right, these "community-based coordinators" better damn well be trained in respecting people's rights and personal space because some power tripping a-hole running around with a bull horn and shoving everyone around is going to create more problems than it solves.

[JI7]

5. to control the local cops ?

because that's the only reason i can see how they can be useful

[951-Riverside]

7. Yes and close air support please

#OMG Theres ISIS supporters in Ferguson!



Apparently this photo is circulating the right wing blogs of some idiot holding up a piece of cloth with "ISIS here" written on it.

if Obama tried it, people would absolutely lose their minds.

And rightfully so because the federal troops would be directed against the people not the oppressive police who are getting into fights against the citizens of Ferguson every night.

No one in the federal government is asking police in the area to put the tanks and assault rifles away.

[LuckyTheDog]

19. You MIGHT have a point...

... If I really had suggested that the the federal troops "be directed against the people not the oppressive police who are getting into fights against the citizens of Ferguson every night."

But that was not my suggestion. Just the opposite.

My suggestion was to use federal troops to REPLACE the police and National Guard. Send those guys home.

[951-Riverside]

24. I agree with you

...if this was done to insure peace.

What needs to happen right now is a complete pull back of the tanks and cops armed with rifles. They are obviously looking for a confrontation not keeping the peace or a resolution also remove Capt Johnson from command.

Replace those guys with perhaps national guard or federal troops (for now) to do community relations and peacekeeping.

They should help store owners clean up, protect store fronts, assist ambulances get to residents with medical issues, help people with starting cars, hang out at the community centers, speak to the kids, give them rides in Humvees, etc. Typical community relations stuff.

Peacekeeping troops would be used to break up fights, detain only if charges are to be filed and hand detainees over to civil authorities.

The point is to treat the community like human beings but whatever is done, the civilian police have to be removed. Their presence will always cause conflict.

On the other hand if they're inserted as back up for the police, it will end horribly.

[kentuck]

12. Yes, but not to confront the protesters.

Only to protect private property. The present law enforcement should be withdrawn from the operation.

[LuckyTheDog]

20. Bingo.

Yes, withdraw the local law enforcement entirely.

Troops would protect people and property. In other words, keep places from being broken into -- and make sure those who are protesting peacefully get to do that without interference.

[sabbat hunter]

13. federal troops

cannot be used under the Posse Comitatus Act. That act prevents federal troops from being used to enforce local laws (desegregation was a federal issue)


They also can be used in case of a terrorist act or natural disaster, neither of which are happening in Ferguson.

[LuckyTheDog]

17. But they would not be "enforcing local law."

In Little Rock in 1957, the the troops were enforcing federal laws and federal court orders.

The Justice Department could get the federal court involved in a similar way here.

A federal court order protecting the rights of assembly and free speech in Ferguson could be enforced using the same kind of power Eisenhower used to protect the Little Rock Nine.

[lumberjack_jeff]

14. Posse Comitatus: It's not just a good idea, it's the law. n/t

[LuckyTheDog]

16. Well, it was done in 1957

And it was not a violation of Posse Comitatus because the troops were enforcing federal laws and federal court orders.

The Justice Department could get the federal court involved in a similar way here. A federal court order protecting the rights of assembly and free speech in Ferguson could be enforced using the same kind of power Eisenhower used to protect the Little Rock Nine.

[former9thward]

23. In 1957 National guard troops were put under federal control.

The were not our regular military. What federal court orders would be they be enforcing exactly?

[LuckyTheDog]

25. You are wrong. In 1957, Eisenhower sent on the 101st Airborne. (nt)

[former9thward]

26. If, I am wrong on that I stand corrected.

But you did not answer the question. What federal court orders would they be enforcing? Actually upon investigation I was not corrected. Eisenhower federalized 10,000 members of the Arkansas National Guard as I suspected so you are wrong. There were some elements of the 101st sent in but few in number compared with the National Guard.

[LuckyTheDog]

28. Here is a pretty decent summary

The specific ruling was the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Rock_Nine

In the case of Ferguson, the Justice Dept. has not gone to a federal judge, so far as I can tell. But I think the feds could get a judge to issue an emergency decree ordering the protection of free-speech and assembly rights of Ferguson residents.

If the order was not adequately carried out by local authorities (and it probably would not), the next step would be to federalize the National Guard and order it to stand down. After that, federal troops could be called in to keep the peace.

[former9thward]

29. No, they could not get such an order.

No federal judge would make such an order when there is violence going on.

[Bluenorthwest]

32. Los Angeles 1992, 2,000 7th Infantry Division soldiers and 1,500 Marines from 1st Marine Divison

were deployed to LA. Not sure what legal authority was used, but deployed they were.

[hack89]

27. No - they are not trained in non-violent, peaceful crowd control.

They are combat troops.

[LuckyTheDog]

30. Except there are units trained for that

Members of the 101st were used as peacekeepers in Kosovo, for example.

[hack89]

31. They underwent extensive special training and received specialized equipment before they deployed

it is not a normal skill set that is routinely practiced. I doubt that there are any troops right now that have current crowd control training.

[Maeve]

33. While I see your point, I think it's more important to ramp down the force

Cool heads and a more civilian approach as opposed to more boots on the ground. More talk, more community-based work.
Oh, and get that cop in custody (protective custody, if you must) so people can see that their concerns are being addressed. If that had been done earlier on, we might have had a lot calmer situation.

[LuckyTheDog]

34. Good points (nt)

[Eleanors38]

35. To do what? nt