Tobiasly’s Blog

I think Bush is doing exactly the right thing with his new border security plan. Regardless of where one stands on the issue of what’s to be done with the millions of illegal immigrants already in the country, it’s difficult to argue against the need for tighter control of our borders. This is not an immigration issue; it’s a national security issue.

As usual, there has been quite a bit of knee-jerk reaction to this plan.

There are those who believe that this is not an appropriate use of the National Guard. Senator Chuck Hagel says, “That’s not the role of our military. That’s not the role of our National Guard. . . . That’s a short-term fix, and I’m not sure that’s a very wise fix.” What part of the term National Guard is unclear here?

Protecting our borders from foreign threats is exactly the type of role the National Guard was designed for. The heritage of the National Guard dates back to colonial days when groups of citizen-soldiers would form militias in order to protect their homes from outside attacks. This is another case of a regular-army veteran such as Senator Hagel who doesn’t truly understand the dual role of the National Guard (not to denigrate the admirable service of Sen. Hagel or the regular Army of course).

The anti-war crowd was also quick to claim that the National Guard is stretched too thin to assume this additional duty. Not true — the vast majority of these troops will be used during their regular two- or three-week annual training period, with only a small “continuity force” to ensure the smooth transition of forces in and out.

When I was an Infantry officer in the National Guard, I would have loved to have a “real-world” mission such as this instead of the usual Annual Training period where exercises were still centered around Vietnam-era “walk through the woods and find the bad guys” missions which are becoming increasingly less relevant in today’s military. A real-world mission such as this is a great way to provide officers, NCOs, and soldiers with the type of experience and practice they need in planning and executing a mission.

There are also those who would like us to believe that 6,000 trigger-happy cowboys are going to be released to the border to start shooting border crossers on sight. Again, an emotional claim not based on the truth. These troops will be used for “surveillance and reconnaissance, engineering support, transportation support, logistics support, vehicle dismantling, medical support,” construction of barriers, roads and other infrastructure, and language support.

In other words, they will be used to free up the Border Patrol from some of the behind-the-scenes and support roles in order to more effectively perform their job. And as the Border Patrol builds up its force by 2008, the National Guard presence will gradually decrease. Also, those troops will remain under the control of the governors from whose states they are pulled, although federal money will be used to support the program. In other words, there will be no “federalization” of most troops who participate in this program, as occurs (for example) when soldiers are mobilized for duty in Iraq or Afghanistan.

So in summary, I’m having a really hard time trying to find any negatives to this plan. Regardless of what eventually is done about the millions of illegals in our country, it is of critical importance that we tighten our southern border and that we do it now.