It’s not quite clear what Obama meant by this. If he meant that the military had taken over too many functions that normally should be handled by the State Department, then that echoes what Defense Secretary Robert Gates said this week. It seems to reference the costs associated with reopening consulates and doubling the Peace Corps, but that wouldn’t come close to matching what we spend at the Pentagon. The phrasing of it — a “civilian national security force” — sounds much more like a quasi-military organization operating within the US under the control of the federal government.
The media needs to ask Obama about it — but they’d have to report it first:
HT: Pat Hickey, With Both Hands
:) says:
can you say "legion of forgotten men"
what, does this guy think he is senator "BUZZ" from a Sinclair Lewis novel?
In the book they started by arming the "legion" a civilian force.
add in that his own "president seal" and campaign motto of "I/We are the one/s you/we have been waiting for"
SB says:
The national service scams are here:
http://www.bethechangeinc.org/service...
http://nationalserviceact.org/
The guy who found the scams is here:
http://blogofbile.com/2008/07/31/serv...
Obama's RPCVs are here:
Potho says:
Gates was referring to Peace Corps with guns, which is the Green Berets. The missions are basically the same and both came into their own under Kennedy. Peace Corps has become a national security issue because some Congressmen think they really fight terror, etc. PC has become more dangerous and is in countries where it should not be; military coups and dictators. The excuse here is doubling th esize of PC, which Clinton wanted, Bush wnated and now Obama wants. The budget doubles over five years and they won't be able to double the numbers without being in very dangerous countries. So, it's PC fighting terror when they are really just Americans living overseas. This is the core of the job and the pay reflects this, not the median income of the countries.
Gates is confused because the Afghanistan war, which was planned and executed by the Intelligence Committee, is 'PC with guns.' Green Berets and counter insurgency. Allot of the the people involved were special forces and X PCs who were strongly tied to the Kennedys.
The funding is already there for PC and it will probably be why they are put into another group like VISTA or Homeland Security or whatever because they doubled the budget and not the PCVs.
The diplomats are the Department of Peace, free school for federal employees. What is needed here is not more diplomats free schooling, but more participants. More Americans should be able to participate if there is limit on federal foreign service; like five years. Anyone with a college degree can become a diplomat and the training is enough for anyone. A free school isn't needed.
The military is doing allot of what are called traditional peace roles, especially in Africom, where some have been killed. They do allot of work with AIDs. It is the military because it is dangerous. PC can't do this work and there have been problems in countries that would have traditionally had evacuations. The need to double the number of PCVs keeps them in dangerous countries and some, arguably, have been murdered as a result or 'accidentally' shot.
Obama is using national security to say we want budget money. They've already done this and it's not working. A new national security force isn't needed. We have the DoD and the green berets, that is what they are for; they do plenty of 'peace' work.