OT: Seriously????

[kato13]

The plan is we take over during the Stanley Cup playoffs.

We just need to wait until two Canadian teams are playing.

[Webstral]

The plan is we take over during the Stanley Cup playoffs.

We just need to wait until two Canadian teams are playing.

My cousin is starting Basic this summer. He'll be a sergeant major before the invasion gets underway.

[Webstral]

Who'd know Canadians are too polite to say anything loud or rude like "stop that.'

The last thing a number of US soldiers would hear is "Sorry, eh!" over a bullhorn before the sniper's round struck home.

[Cdnwolf]

The plan is we take over during the Stanley Cup playoffs.

We just need to wait until two Canadian teams are playing.

Even better.... when Toronto Maple Leaf's are in the Stanley Cup final...

because Canadians would be too much shock... and hell would have froze over...

You guys would have a long long long wait.


BTW GO HABS GO!!

[NanbanJim]

Texas, Florida, and New York all have State Guard forces. Given that they exist, it is then appropriate for them to monitor military activities in their AOR. What exactly is your problem

[Webstral]

The State Guard movement appears to be gaining traction nationwide. This link goes to the State Guard Association, which links to State Guard sites:

https://www.sgaus.org/

I think we can credit the Global War on Terror and its associated mobilization of National Guard units for the states' realization that the National Guard is a federal reserve under control of the states only when the feds don't need the National Guard. Now that the immediate need for the National Guard overseas appears to be diminishing, I expect enthusiasm for the State Guards will recede somewhat. It's too bad. We have a need for them.

Anyway, the states are well within their rights to monitor federal military activities in the given states. The militia was mentioned in the Constitution specifically as a strategic counterbalance against a the professional force. Laughable as that idea may be at the present, the fact remains that the states each were intended to have their own military force from the founding of the nation.

Naturally, this doesn't guarantee wise use. Were I the Governor of Texas, I would have had the State Police or the Texas Rangers monitor Jade Helm. Mobilizing the Texas State Guard, or a portion thereof, smacks more of political statement to a portion of the governor's electorate than prudent measure.

[RN7]

Is there any mention of state guard forces in T2K

The State Guard forces are fairly sizeable...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_defense_force

Surely they would have been used after the National Guard was federalised and most of it was sent overseas, and very useful in emergency relief and law and order duties after the nuclear attacks and the Mexican invasions of the South-West.

[Webstral]

The State Guard has been discussed, though not lately. There's a lot of wiggle room for interpreting what kind of number's we're talking about here, along with efficacy. In short, it seems unlikely that very many states would catch on to the fact that the National Guard is going to be deployed until 1996. Once the first National Guard formations start being called up for training and don't come home in 2 weeks, a few forward-thinking politicians might develop the right idea. There not being very many forward-thinking politicians, I doubt very many states would give the matter careful thought until October 1996, when the first REFORGER units started going to Germany. This does not give much time to build State Guards before the nukes start flying.

An argument could be made that Operations Desert Shield & Storm in the v1 chronology might raise awareness of the National Guard problem. The need to backfill USAEUR formations being deployed to the Persian Gulf with National Guard units earmarked for Germany (or alternatively the need to backfill in CONUS those III Corps units deployed to Europe to take the place of VII Corps) might cause more politicians to wonder what would happen in the event of a general mobilization than might otherwise be the case. In this event, State Guards might be significantly further along than if the states get started in 1996. A year is not very long for a reserve formation to find its footing, but 5-6 years is a fair amount of time.

[Ancestor]

Okay, so we are in Ancestor's wheelhouse.

First, I am familiar with the State Guards in TX and NY. They seem to be pretty squared away, kind of like a Civil Air Patrol on steroids. Many retired plus a minority who want to "serve" but are not able/do not want to raise their hands (not a disparaging comment - they just want to do their duty as Americans without leaving home, which I fully support). For the latter, I remember a guy who was a comedian in New York who joined the NG state guard after 9/11 writing an article about in National Review.

Second, as of 2008 Louisiana had a "state militia". When our state sent an augmentation team down there for Hurricane Gustav OPS my warrant's new BFF was the LA State Militia Historian. (My warrant, let's call him "Indiana Jones", was Vietnam era and this was his last hurrah-my first crack when he introduced the historian to me was "I'm glad Indy found someone who is interested in his recollection of the Battle of New Orleans"). At any rate, Indy, being the awesome guy that he is, traded his "US ARMY" velcro patch for the "LOUISIANA" patch the militiaman was wearing on his ACUs (yes, they wore ACUs). The real problem was the next morning, when Indy showed up to help me get ready to brief the two star but was still wearing his "LOUISIANA" patch. I let hilarity ensure among the staff before I corrected him. He and I have traded enough shots/beers/insults that it was all in good fun.

What does this mean to T2K My state has a robust WWII era statutory foundation on the books for a state militia. It's about 1/2 actual "let's keep the peace on the home front" and 1/2 "if this whole Axis and Allies thing goes to hell then we need to be ready for Missouri to invade again, just like the stories grandaddy tells."

From a legal standpoint its a decent militia code. However, during the "oh shit, were in this for the long haul" phase of OIF (2004-2006), there was a big grass roots move to reinstate the State Guard due to our propensity to suffer natural events. From where I sat, it seemed very sincere, albeit simple-minded. Nonetheless, it was dispatched with extreme prejudice by state leadership. While practical reasons were cited (and they were indeed legion), I suspect that the real motivation was political.

So, in a T2K world, I suspect that you would have the gamut. States with a well developed and traditional State Guard (SG) may be a robust force for supporting civilian authorities. Conversely, such a force could be politically exploited by a Governor for nefarious political purposes, a mafia or praetorian guard. In a state without an active SG a Governor (or Legislature) could invoke long forgotten police powers under militia statutes dating to WW2 or even the 1918-19 flu pandemic IOT either lawfully restore order or deputize the local bosses friends as law enforcement/tax collectors/henchmen.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the idea of state guards in a Twilight 2000 campaign is a GM's dream.

[RN7]

As a matter of interest Ancestor was your state guard outfit armed and with what were they armed with Did you use the same rifles etc as the Army and National Guard or just hand me downs

[.45cultist]

The last thing a number of US soldiers would hear is "Sorry, eh!" over a bullhorn before the sniper's round struck home.

There was a web comic where a sniper shoots an invading U.S. soldier, then "Sorry!" is heard from the woodline.

[Ancestor]

As a matter of interest Ancestor was your state guard outfit armed and with what were they armed with Did you use the same rifles etc as the Army and National Guard or just hand me downs

I apologize, I didn't clarify the fact that my experience with state militias was as a traditional Guardsman working in Title 32 status with them during a response, not as a member. I know for a fact that the Louisiana State Militia is not armed, at least not the ones that I met during post-Gustav OPS. As I recall, the NY State Guard is also unarmed. I cannot speak for Texas' State Guard as I was dealing with more of a familiarization type meeting than an operational event and the members that I met were not armed (at least not obviously!)

I can say that in my state (KS) provisions exist in the militia code that officers must supply their own weapons. My old boss (MDay) actually used it to write off the purchase of his civilian M9 as a "business expense". Even though the Army issued him his own M9 for NG purposes both the IRS and KS Dept of Revenue never contested the issue. Without researching the issue for each state, I suspect that most militia codes have similar provisions. Many were written in the 19th century with similar provisions and, when updated immediately prior to or at the outbreak of either WWI or WWII, these were incorporated either by reference or via a specific new statute with the same language. As the Dick Act, which created the modern NG after the Spanish-American war and requires some level of standardization with active Army with respect to training, doctrine, and equipment, applies only to the National Guard and not State Guards, I suspect that in the Twilight world one would see a hodge-podge of both hand me down issued weapons (or, as the Small Arms Guide states, low rent weapons such as the M16 EZ) and personally owned weapons.

Hope that helps and sorry for the confusion!

[RN7]

Thanks for all that Ancestor and I am surprised that state guard forces are unarmed. I would have thought that they would have access to state armouries, even hand me down weapons like the M14. I live (part of the year) in the Kansas City area in Johnson Countr, what part of Kansas are you from

[Ancestor]

Thanks for all that Ancestor and I am surprised that state guard forces are unarmed. I would have thought that they would have access to state armouries, even hand me down weapons like the M14. I live (part of the year) in the Kansas City area in Johnson Countr, what part of Kansas are you from

Goodland (if you are ISIS)...JoCo if you are not...

[swaghauler]

Thanks for all that Ancestor and I am surprised that state guard forces are unarmed. I would have thought that they would have access to state armouries, even hand me down weapons like the M14. I live (part of the year) in the Kansas City area in Johnson Countr, what part of Kansas are you from

There is still legal debate between the Federal Government and the States about the legality of militias. The Federal Government says that the only authorized militias are National Guard units and that all militias should be regulated by the US government as outlined by the Constitution. Their assertion is the clause that states the Government shall not use the Army to police its citizens in the main body of the document prohibits such organizations. The States claim "State's Right's," and say that such militias are authorized for the STATES under the Second Amendment (as a hedge against Federal aggression). I'm guessing that the Supreme Court will eventually have to make a ruling on this. It is only an issue with a handful of states (mostly southern border states) who have used these militias to assist local law enforcement (mainly along the Mexican border). It does set up an interesting political issue for the Milgov/Civgov debate. The power of a local militia could sway control of a region. Could "friction" between militia and US military or LE units create a problem (this is already happening occasionally in Southern Texas) that "devolves" into open warfare