Discussion - Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

[hawkeye]

Time to wake up the general population.

 

[H1N1]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Troops moving into US cities would sound the alarm. Do you think they could declare martial law to keep everyone from mingling.

 

[Lurker]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Troops moving into US cities would sound the alarm. Do you think they could declare martial law to keep everyone from mingling.

Not sure about mingling, but how about service disruptions? What if all stores (i.e. food, etc.) and other services were shut down due to sickness/deaths. In light of 1918, what if there are many dead? It would likely be a policing/recovery function. People desperate for help, food, burial, and medical workers will no doubt be unruly.

 

[Labrador - Sadie]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Troops moving into US cities would sound the alarm. Do you think they could declare martial law to keep everyone from mingling.

I agree with Lurker. The only reason to declare martial law would be to maintain order and keep the peace in time of turmoil. I also believe this may be declared only where needed, not just declared nationally. Unless the turmoil was national, which I'm afraid would be a doomsday scenario.

 

[tropical]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

As depicted in #3/5, it is an additional help (mil have huge stocks obviously).

More to eyed is the obviously real level of incombent near future pandemic seriousness, if the mil will be needed.

Looking at the slopy logistic at the various countries health sector preparedness by dev/staff, it could be a valuable suport.

 

[JimO]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

The Congressional Research Service provided a report for Congress on the role of the DOD during a flu pandemic.

Source: "The Role of the Department of Defense During a Flu Pandemic" June 4, 2009. Lawrence Kapp, Don Jansen. Congressional Research Service (R40619)

...supporting law enforcement; supporting quarantine enforcement;...

This is the part that alarms me. We have national guard troops or State militia in every state in addition to State and Local law enforcement. We do not need (and I do not want) armed federal military troops conducting law enforcement or quarantine enforcement activities. The federal military could easily take on administrative tasks normally performed by national guard and law enforcement and allow them to enforce the law. It's a dangerous precident. :twocents:

 

[Nika]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

The following has to be said. You might not like it but, hey, FluTrackers prides itself on calm, rational, and productive discourse with airing of opinion from all sides.

I totally do not get why people get their panties in a bunge over the possibility that the US military could help out. I know that this might sound nuts to "you" but there it is.

I would prefer the gun nuts we know to the gun nuts we dont know to be roaming the streets (as if, anyways). Military has a chain of command, random militia, not so much and not so accountable.

This is all so very out there. If things truly become that profoundly dysfunctional, baby, it might be better to have the military on the ground.

I would be utterly freaking if it were the Chinese military or the Russian.

Ours? Not so much.

 

[ming]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

"controlling movement into and out of areas, or across borders"

Better get the family gathered safely at home and keep them there..

 

[JimO]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

I have many relatives in the Florida National Guard, many of whom are serving in Iraq as federal military. I can assure you that the state national guards and state militia are more than adequately trained, with proper command and control, to handle any civil unrest short of a civil war (which I am not suggesting at all). So, the federal military is not required under most reasonable scenarios. National Guard troops have conducted crowd control, riot control, security during natural disasters, enforced martial law, etc. for decades without the help of armed federal troops. And many national guard troops have as much or more combat experience as those who have only served in the U.S. Military.

I don't have my "panties in a bunge" and I don't consider my concerns as "so very out there". It is simply that to me there is a huge difference between having State military troops, who answer to the Governor and are sworn to uphold the State Constitution, and having the U.S. Military troops, who ultimately answer to the President and are sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution. The federal government has been found in court to be violating the legitimate rights of individual states in the past and in a crisis, if there is a conflict between a state and the federal government over things like a decision to forceably quarantine American citizens or use force in crowd control, I'd rather that decision be made by the Governor or local law enforcement and not the commander of Northcom. It's not that I don't trust our soldiers, it's the command structure that I take issue with.

That's my personal opinion and in no way represents FT or its members. You have every right to disagree with my opinion, and we do pride ourselves in calm, rational, and productive discussion. However, I don't believe it's necessary to use the phrases quoted above, which suggest that I am being irrational and not discussing issues in a calm and productive manner.

 

[Nika]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

I have many relatives in the Florida National Guard, many of whom are serving in Iraq as federal military. I can assure you that the state national guards and state militia are more than adequately trained, with proper command and control, to handle any civil unrest short of a civil war (which I am not suggesting at all). So, the federal military is not required under most reasonable scenarios. National Guard troops have conducted crowd control, riot control, security during natural disasters, enforced martial law, etc. for decades without the help of armed federal troops. And many national guard troops have as much or more combat experience as those who have only served in the U.S. Military.

I don't have my "panties in a bunge" and I don't consider my concerns as "so very out there". It is simply that to me there is a huge difference between having State military troops, who answer to the Governor and are sworn to uphold the State Constitution, and having the U.S. Military troops, who ultimately answer to the President and are sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution. The federal government has been found in court to be violating the legitimate rights of individual states in the past and in a crisis, if there is a conflict between a state and the federal government over things like a decision to forceably quarantine American citizens or use force in crowd control, I'd rather that decision be made by the Governor or local law enforcement and not the commander of Northcom. It's not that I don't trust our soldiers, it's the command structure that I take issue with.

That's my personal opinion and in no way represents FT or its members. You have every right to disagree with my opinion, and we do pride ourselves in calm, rational, and productive discussion. However, I don't believe it's necessary to use the phrases quoted above, which suggest that I am being irrational and not discussing issues in a calm and productive manner.

Sounds like you are well grounded in the military in terms of family and friends. Do you fear that they would do the wrong thing?

The really out there statement, if you will look at the syntax, was not about your ideas, it was about the scenario that would lead to this eventuality.

 

[tropical]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

#12:...

It will be a new experience ...

Maybe the overal functioning could be disrupted because of national alone decisions, which could be even contrary, so with a half hundred of various diferent local decisions, in an very severe event, the whole could be paralized without an central command, or an uniform control of the various decentralized resources, now regulary flowing everywhere through the whole ...

"the spice must flow" - or the machines stops

 

[JimO]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Sounds like you are well grounded in the military in terms of family and friends. Do you fear that they would do the wrong thing?

Objectively, no. I believe that soldiers are more trustworthy than the average person. However, soldiers are trained to follow orders and would only refuse to do so under extraordinary circumstances if the individual felt the order was immoral or unethical, which is very rare. Soldiers are on a "need to know" status, meaning that they might be ordered to do something and have no idea why or what the consequences will be. Only the commanders know this in most cases.

So, I am left deciding which command structure I trust more under the circumstances. I trust the state-level command structure more with law enforcement duties and I trust the U.S. Military more with warfare.

In the case of U.S. citizens, law enforcement must consider the individual rights of the person. Military personnel are not trained to deal with the problem of potentially violating the rights of a citizen. They are trained to deal with enemy combatants, which is a huge difference in the tactics you would use, for example, in riot control, forced quarantine, or conducting arrests. Obviously, law enforcement personnel are focused on this consideration and national guard troops have training in this area because they are far more accustomed to dealing with internal civil issues in their state and not enemy combatants. Many do serve in the military when the need arises, as has happened in recent years, but that is not their primary function as members of the national guard.

So, my personal opinion is that I did not like it when the Bush Administration created Northcom in the rush to create security from terrorists and I did not like it when the Obama Administration assigned a combat battalion to Northcom earlier this year. And I don't want to see further erosion of the separation of civil law enforcement and warfare, whether it's a flu pandemic, hurricane, or earthquake.

 

[St Michael]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

So, my personal opinion is that I did not like it when the Bush Administration created Northcom in the rush to create security from terrorists and I did not like it when the Obama Administration assigned a combat battalion to Northcom earlier this year. And I don't want to see further erosion of the separation of civil law enforcement and warfare, whether it's a flu pandemic, hurricane, or earthquake.

Excellent summary.

 

[Nika]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Objectively, no. I believe that soldiers are more trustworthy than the average person. However, soldiers are trained to follow orders and would only refuse to do so under extraordinary circumstances if the individual felt the order was immoral or unethical, which is very rare. Soldiers are on a "need to know" status, meaning that they might be ordered to do something and have no idea why or what the consequences will be. Only the commanders know this in most cases.

So, I am left deciding which command structure I trust more under the circumstances. I trust the state-level command structure more with law enforcement duties and I trust the U.S. Military more with warfare.

In the case of U.S. citizens, law enforcement must consider the individual rights of the person. Military personnel are not trained to deal with the problem of potentially violating the rights of a citizen. They are trained to deal with enemy combatants, which is a huge difference in the tactics you would use, for example, in riot control, forced quarantine, or conducting arrests. Obviously, law enforcement personnel are focused on this consideration and national guard troops have training in this area because they are far more accustomed to dealing with internal civil issues in their state and not enemy combatants. Many do serve in the military when the need arises, as has happened in recent years, but that is not their primary function as members of the national guard.

So, my personal opinion is that I did not like it when the Bush Administration created Northcom in the rush to create security from terrorists and I did not like it when the Obama Administration assigned a combat battalion to Northcom earlier this year. And I don't want to see further erosion of the separation of civil law enforcement and warfare, whether it's a flu pandemic, hurricane, or earthquake.

Got it.

I live in a village in MA (1700 people). We have no full time police department. One have one 1/5 time police person, maybe 10 hours a week. She does her job, up to 10 hours. Rest of the time, its the Staties who cover us. Its the same in many small communities here.

If there are issues of unrest, we are completely on our own. Staties will likely be focused on larger populations in close range.

State funding of all of these law enforcement activities is on the wane (as is the case with MANY state funded aspects of our lives).

This is not a picture of strength or resilience. Its a common story now, and it paints a picture of communities that really have no state help to speak of (and the state is not in a position to make it any better either)

 

[Lizw]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Objectively, no. I believe that soldiers are more trustworthy than the average person. However, soldiers are trained to follow orders and would only refuse to do so under extraordinary circumstances if the individual felt the order was immoral or unethical, which is very rare. Soldiers are on a "need to know" status, meaning that they might be ordered to do something and have no idea why or what the consequences will be. Only the commanders know this in most cases.

When I was reading earlier in this thread, I couldn't help but think of our young soldiers shooting up a car full of women and children in Iraq, because the only option they had when a car didn't stop was to kill the people in it. One big reason it isn't appropriate to use our military for tactical operations within the US is that we aren't the enemy, any more than the Iraqi civilians who couldn't speak English and didn't recognize the order to stop. This is not a political comment about the war, btw. It's just an observation that soldiers trained to operate against an "enemy" don't often have the luxury of trying to figure out whether you're the enemy or not.

 

[Niko]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Objectively, no. I believe that soldiers are more trustworthy than the average person. However, soldiers are trained to follow orders and would only refuse to do so under extraordinary circumstances if the individual felt the order was immoral or unethical, which is very rare. Soldiers are on a "need to know" status, meaning that they might be ordered to do something and have no idea why or what the consequences will be. Only the commanders know this in most cases.

So, I am left deciding which command structure I trust more under the circumstances. I trust the state-level command structure more with law enforcement duties and I trust the U.S. Military more with warfare.

In the case of U.S. citizens, law enforcement must consider the individual rights of the person. Military personnel are not trained to deal with the problem of potentially violating the rights of a citizen. They are trained to deal with enemy combatants, which is a huge difference in the tactics you would use, for example, in riot control, forced quarantine, or conducting arrests. Obviously, law enforcement personnel are focused on this consideration and national guard troops have training in this area because they are far more accustomed to dealing with internal civil issues in their state and not enemy combatants. Many do serve in the military when the need arises, as has happened in recent years, but that is not their primary function as members of the national guard.

So, my personal opinion is that I did not like it when the Bush Administration created Northcom in the rush to create security from terrorists and I did not like it when the Obama Administration assigned a combat battalion to Northcom earlier this year. And I don't want to see further erosion of the separation of civil law enforcement and warfare, whether it's a flu pandemic, hurricane, or earthquake.

Ditto! :tiphat:

I would only add to this sentence...
"However, soldiers are trained to follow orders and would only refuse to do so under extraordinary circumstances if the individual felt the order was immoral or unethical," or a violation of the soldiers oath to uphold the Constitution of the US.

 

[Lizw]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Ditto! :tiphat:

I would only add to this sentence...
"However, soldiers are trained to follow orders and would only refuse to do so under extraordinary circumstances if the individual felt the order was immoral or unethical," or a violation of the soldiers oath to uphold the Constitution of the US.

Yes, but seriously, how many soldiers do you think are familiar enough with the constitution to argue with a superior officer who gives an order? Constitutional scholars can't agree on how to interpret parts of it. How can we expect ordinary soldiers, very many of whom have no more than a high school education (for what that's worth these days), to do better? I'd be more confident in their ability to refuse an order they thought was immoral or unethical, and I'm not real confident about that. Not because I have doubts about their morals or ethics, but because soldiers are trained nowadays to defend themselves first and ask questions later.

 

[prepdeb]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

I really have mixed feelings about the possibility of military presence all over the country if things get bad.

As someone who lives in an urban area, I think our local LEOs would need help if things got bad. Many feel we don't have enough officers to handle normal crime rates.

If people who are not prepared get desperate, even those who are normally law abiding will do what they can to provide for their loved ones.

There's always a segment of society that views disruption of any kind as an opportunity to get away with crime.

So while part of me detests the thought, another part of me welcomes it.
I know, be careful what you ask for.

 

[Science Teacher]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

If things get really bad in this pandemic, I would welcome the military help.
I expect many situations where the have- nots go after those who have.
Think of all the organized gangs in this country, especially in our cities. They may well be armed and dangerous and structured enough to cause damage.If our structure breaks down, civil unrest may become rampant.

I just don't feel we have enough civil law enforcement to cover all of the areas in this country that may need extra protection.

One thing that I am most concerned about is the closing of borders at the state to state and community level. I will need to monitor this situation closely since I have out of state grown kids and their families that have made plans to SIP with me if the situation gets really bad.

ST

 

[Corn]

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Re: US: Military planning for possible H1N1 outbreak

Speaking for the US and although I welcome logistical support the military has to offer....

There will be too many outbreaks, nation wide for the military response to be effective. (Just like we anticipate with hospitals and health care to be overwhelmed at some stage.) Too many fires in too many places to be effective.

Also, the military comprises one of the highest risk groups, young men and women. They will be hard pressed.

And.......don't forget we are already involved in two major international conflicts, spread out with bases or operations in over 130 countries world wide.

Remember the 1918 Pan can partly be credited for halting World War One? More young men died of the flu than the conflict itself (IIRC) here in the US?

Therefore I don't see the military as being very effective except for local use of borrowed equipment and supplying other logistics.

We'd better focus our military assets on maintaining our international commitments we've already started. Maybe even an oportunity with a well vaccinated force to mop things up in Afghanstan, Pakistan and operations elswhere with a foe hard hit by the virus. May sound cruel but war is hell and the virus may provide opportunities for our military objectives overseas.