Veteran Speaks Out Against Military Deployment for Domestic Policing

Veteran Speaks Out Against Military Deployment for Domestic Policing

For over 35 years, I dedicated my life to serving our nation in both the regular Army and the National Guard. My journey included roles as a part-time citizen soldier and a full-time Title 10 officer after being mobilized in September 2001. Throughout my career, I had the privilege to lead both active-duty and National Guard units, alongside soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines.

My experiences took me to significant sites around the world, including Red Square in Moscow, Tiananmen Square in China, and the edge of the DMZ in North Korea. These locations helped me understand how some countries employ military forces domestically to implement policies and maintain control over their citizens.

Recently, we witnessed troubling actions from our government that echo such practices. Two weeks ago, the President deployed the National Guard to America’s second-largest city, disregarding the state governor’s objections. Shortly thereafter, he ordered active-duty Marines into the same city. Furthermore, on June 14, military personnel celebrated the 250th Birthday of the U.S. Army with tanks and marching in Washington, D.C.

These developments raise significant concerns. In my prior role as the No. 2 officer within the National Guard Bureau, I recognized the dangerous trend of shifting the military’s focus from national defense to law enforcement. This transformation moves us from protection to intimidation, which can lead to severe legal, operational, and ethical ramifications.

The Dangers of Military Policing

First and foremost, deploying the military to police our citizens blurs the essential separation between the military and civilian populations. The military’s primary role is to defend against external threats, not manage domestic affairs. The Posse Comitatus Act was enacted precisely to limit military involvement in domestic law enforcement, ensuring a barrier between military operations and civilian policing. This separation is essential to maintaining our identity as freedom-loving Americans.

The U.S. military commands the highest training standards for combat but is not prepared to handle immigration enforcement or civilian arrests. This latest deployment intensifies the legal and ethical risks for service members while jeopardizing the rights of citizens in Los Angeles, potentially leading to disastrous outcomes.

Impact on Military Readiness

Secondly, the President’s decision to deploy military forces against protests detracts from the overall readiness of our armed services, diverting critical resources away from essential defense priorities. National Guard units consist of community members who volunteer to protect their neighborhoods by responding to disasters such as hurricanes, floods, and forest fires.

Threatening to send National Guard units across the nation merely to address constitutionally protected protests compromises their primary mission, which is to respond to community needs.

Compromised Military Priorities

Moreover, the deployment included not just the National Guard, but also active-duty Marines. This utilization of military resources to suppress protests undermines the military’s core mission of national defense. While threats exist abroad, our military is presently engaged in 160 countries worldwide, making it critical to allocate financial and personnel resources effectively.

The Pentagon has already estimated that this deployment will incur costs of approximately $134 million, a figure expected to rise as unforeseen issues arise. For example, reports indicate that service members may even be forced to sleep on the floor, a troubling indication of logistical mismanagement.

A Broader Concern

These recent presidential actions are not only legally ambiguous—they are emblematic of a broader problem. They appear to have been implemented primarily to intimidate and silence dissent while undermining the authority of state governors. Such misuse of military power damages the trust between military personnel and the communities they are meant to serve.

It is essential to underscore the principle that accountability for violence is necessary. However, this must be balanced with the protection of the right to peaceful protest and free speech. Recent incidents, such as a U.S. senator being physically restrained while opposing the President’s actions, starkly illustrate the urgency of preserving these rights.

Protecting Constitutional Rights

Regardless of individual political views, it is crucial that our leaders refrain from deploying military forces to quash political opposition within the country. Such actions erode the mutual trust essential between military members and citizens.

Let us be perfectly clear: the right to free speech and due process is fundamental. Countless individuals have served in the military to defend these rights, including my own family. My grandfather served in the Navy during World War II, my father in the Army during Vietnam, and my son in the Air Force, conducting search and rescue operations in Afghanistan.

It is painfully apparent that the President’s recent actions contradict the principles for which countless veterans have fought. His attempts to use the military as a tool for intimidation against American citizens are fundamentally wrong and must cease immediately.