By Paul Wallis
EDITOR AT LARGE
DIGITAL JOURNAL
October 8, 2025
The US Capitol building is visible as armed members of the National Guard stand outside Union Station on August 27, 2025 in Washington, DC - Copyright POOL/AFP Nathan Howard
The startling news that the Trump administration is looking at the Insurrection Act of 1807 to permit deployment of US troops on US soil hasn’t gone down well. The possible use of this law is seen as a means to circumvent courts and state governors protesting the presence of National Guard troops in their cities.
The previous deployments of troops to Washington, LA and other cities have been largely cosmetic. There was and still is no need for troops in any of these cases. Sending 800 troops to Portland, for example, borders on farcical. Portland is a city of over 600,000 people. How are 800 troops going to control a city of this size? As usual, there is no sign of any level of violence that couldn’t be controlled by local authorities.
The Insurrection Act was previously used by President Eisenhower to protect black students during integration. The troops deployed were the 101st Airborne, a famous US Army combat unit, in the face of very real and serious violence. 101st Airborne aren’t famous for their ambiguity. The violence stopped pretty much instantly.
That’s definitely not the case now. There are no indications of any such levels of violence in US cities. The deployment of troops to Portland remains blocked. Hence, presumably, a need for the invocation of the Insurrection Act. No kidding, Goofy?
Critics say this is an excuse to “militarize” US cities. If so, the means used are also beyond ridiculous. You can’t possibly control these gigantic cities with virtual tourist groups of troops. Maybe they’ll buy souvenirs, but that’s about as much impact as they can have.
Trump has been talking about “the enemy within” in speeches to the US military command. Trump’s long lineage of lack of military experience is showing.
Meanwhile, these troops aren’t fighting dangerous gangs or serious threats to the public. MS 13 and the other fun lovers are doing fine, thanks for asking. they’re intruding on Joe Renter and everyday people for no reason at all.
A few military points:
There is no physical event justifying the use of troops. Absolutely none.
Current deployments have achieved precisely nothing. Even the White House isn’t claiming any significant achievements. Bit late now, if it does.
This is a colossal waste of military resources and emergency resources which could be better used elsewhere. When Kentucky got blown down this year, what was done?
It’s extremely expensive, costing millions per day for no benefit whatsoever to the cities, the US taxpayer, and definitely not the US military. The cost factor isn’t getting much attention from the administration.
It adds to the burden of US military commitments. What if you sprinkled the National Guard all over the US? What would be the effect on logistics alone? What level of operational coherence would you expect? “We have guys in a park somewhere in the continental United States” isn’t exactly top-of-the-line deployment practice. On the other hand, if the squirrels stage a revolution, they’ll be ready, right?
The US military has much better things to do with its time than put down non-existent threats. US states and governors aren’t at all happy. The courts are getting choked with lawsuits against these deployments.
It’s looking more like a game show than policy. If you’ve ever seen someone who doesn’t know how to play chess playing chess, you’ll see the similarities. They’ll move anything anywhere, always to the wrong places. In this case, there is no game and no other side.
The Insurrection Act won’t change any of that. It appeals to the authoritarianism addicts, but nobody else. It makes America look utterly ridiculous.
__________________________________________________________________
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this Op-Ed are those of the author. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the Digital Journal or its members.
October 8, 2025
The US Capitol building is visible as armed members of the National Guard stand outside Union Station on August 27, 2025 in Washington, DC - Copyright POOL/AFP Nathan Howard
The startling news that the Trump administration is looking at the Insurrection Act of 1807 to permit deployment of US troops on US soil hasn’t gone down well. The possible use of this law is seen as a means to circumvent courts and state governors protesting the presence of National Guard troops in their cities.
The previous deployments of troops to Washington, LA and other cities have been largely cosmetic. There was and still is no need for troops in any of these cases. Sending 800 troops to Portland, for example, borders on farcical. Portland is a city of over 600,000 people. How are 800 troops going to control a city of this size? As usual, there is no sign of any level of violence that couldn’t be controlled by local authorities.
The Insurrection Act was previously used by President Eisenhower to protect black students during integration. The troops deployed were the 101st Airborne, a famous US Army combat unit, in the face of very real and serious violence. 101st Airborne aren’t famous for their ambiguity. The violence stopped pretty much instantly.
That’s definitely not the case now. There are no indications of any such levels of violence in US cities. The deployment of troops to Portland remains blocked. Hence, presumably, a need for the invocation of the Insurrection Act. No kidding, Goofy?
Critics say this is an excuse to “militarize” US cities. If so, the means used are also beyond ridiculous. You can’t possibly control these gigantic cities with virtual tourist groups of troops. Maybe they’ll buy souvenirs, but that’s about as much impact as they can have.
Trump has been talking about “the enemy within” in speeches to the US military command. Trump’s long lineage of lack of military experience is showing.
Meanwhile, these troops aren’t fighting dangerous gangs or serious threats to the public. MS 13 and the other fun lovers are doing fine, thanks for asking. they’re intruding on Joe Renter and everyday people for no reason at all.
A few military points:
There is no physical event justifying the use of troops. Absolutely none.
Current deployments have achieved precisely nothing. Even the White House isn’t claiming any significant achievements. Bit late now, if it does.
This is a colossal waste of military resources and emergency resources which could be better used elsewhere. When Kentucky got blown down this year, what was done?
It’s extremely expensive, costing millions per day for no benefit whatsoever to the cities, the US taxpayer, and definitely not the US military. The cost factor isn’t getting much attention from the administration.
It adds to the burden of US military commitments. What if you sprinkled the National Guard all over the US? What would be the effect on logistics alone? What level of operational coherence would you expect? “We have guys in a park somewhere in the continental United States” isn’t exactly top-of-the-line deployment practice. On the other hand, if the squirrels stage a revolution, they’ll be ready, right?
The US military has much better things to do with its time than put down non-existent threats. US states and governors aren’t at all happy. The courts are getting choked with lawsuits against these deployments.
It’s looking more like a game show than policy. If you’ve ever seen someone who doesn’t know how to play chess playing chess, you’ll see the similarities. They’ll move anything anywhere, always to the wrong places. In this case, there is no game and no other side.
The Insurrection Act won’t change any of that. It appeals to the authoritarianism addicts, but nobody else. It makes America look utterly ridiculous.
__________________________________________________________________
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this Op-Ed are those of the author. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the Digital Journal or its members.
No comments:
Post a Comment