Why is the National Guard sounding the alarm? They know they have KP duty and it'll be a world easier if the average individual is prepared to wash his own dishes come y2k. Also, Guardsmen are working stiffs like you and me with no Clintonesque "political viability" to maintain. The US military has some genuises at the level of General Officer, but not too many of the genuises work at the Pentagon. After all, it's the bureaucrats at the Department of Defense who are largely responsible for getting us into this mess by their foolish insistence on the two digit dates. Political honesty? On Dec. 31, 1999, find George Bush . . . I bet you'll be able to "read his hips" as he's bugging out! The absence of trust and honor among our political leaders is costing this country right now. Pick your own president, but I'd feel a lot better if this situation were being reported on by a Harry Truman or Jimmy Carter or one of the Roosevelts. Clinton-Koskinen says there's no problem with large-scale outages? It would take a unique form of idiot to find that reassuring. FEMA says its encouraging preparedness. Wonderful. I know that, you know that, but the average person on the street has no idea. We're routinely getting plastered with worthless franked mail from our US Representative but I haven't received a single written warning of the y2k hazard. FEMA may be cute and cover its tail by making a paper trail of its "warnings", but FEMA is scared to go shout it from the mountaintop. The President could solve this preparedness problem with one memo directed to FEMA. This is where lack of courageous leadership can really do lasting harm to the country.

-- Puddintame (dit@dot.com), January 15, 1999

Answers

Puddintame, I love the name...I think I get the reference too.

Re: National Guard. If Y2K is not as "seamless" as the Mayor of a nearby City recently stated it would be, the National Guard will be on the front lines of the resulting mess. In veiw of this fact, I bet they would rather "protect and serve" a public than is somewhat prepared than one that is relatively helpless. I believe what the Guard has to say far more than what the Mayor says. He did not qualify his statements at all! Seamless implies 0% problems. I would like to know how many of you believe that Y2K will be "seamless".

-- Sue (conibear@gateway.net), January 15, 1999.

There's an old Arab proverb that goes something like, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Taking my cue from the events at Ruby Ridge, I feel safe in labeling the Federal Marshals as the enemy. Not only did they acquit themselves as cowards, they had and continue to have the arrogance to retain the Medals of Honor that the federal government awarded them for their conduct there.

On the thread about Facts & Opinions about martial law you will find the text of several Executive Orders that were written and actually implemented. This is real American History. This is not a "what if", this is a "this is what happened". These EOs happened because the federal government was afraid that the state National Guard would oppose with force of arms, the Federal Marshals who were implementing federal court decisions. The NG was activated and then ordered to remain in their armories for the duration!

The National Guard has an unblemished record throughout the history of America. They have always "been there" when we needed them and they have always performed with honor and distinction and competance.

Despite the fact that Guard officers take an obediance oath to the President which officers of the Regular establishment do not, their commissions and warrants charge them with obediance to "appropriate" orders, just as those of the Regulars do and the regard that Guardsmen hold for their own oaths has been taken seriously enough by the federal government that when they feared the Guard's interference in a process that the state governor might have seen differently than the president did, the Guard was activated (federalized) and ordered to "stay out of it" in the firm belief that the Guard would honor their oaths.

Now you might wonder why the federal government would not simply order the Guard to do whatever it wanted, and it would be a legitimate question.

In Mississippi and Alabama, the federal government was enforcing civil rights orders which were clearly not oppressive or "bad" (except maybe to the KKK) and the Guard was protected from having to possibly disobey a governor. But, had they been ordered to sit in their armories while the federal cops went around shooting women with children in their arms, I suspect that the outcome would have been different.

If Y2K results in disaster-like conditions and/or civil disorder, look for the National Guard to be there to help. You'll find that they are us. You'll find them to be some of the best friends any people ever had.

-- Hardliner (searcher@internet.com), January 15, 1999.

Hardliner,

Agreed.

-- Sue (conibear@gateway.net), January 16, 1999.