>The Obamessiah’s ‘Civilian Expeditionary Workforce’?

>
Spartacus asks:

Could this DoD directive be the administrative foundation for The Dear Leader’s ‘civilian national security force’?

Read it all.

7 responses to “>The Obamessiah’s ‘Civilian Expeditionary Workforce’?

  1. >Yes. From page 6: (d) DoD civilian employees who become ill, contract diseases, or who are injured orwounded while deployed in support of U.S. military forces engaged in hostilities (see Glossary,“contingency operation”) are eligible for medical evacuation and health care treatment andservices in military treatment facilities (MTFs) at no cost to the civilian employee and at thesame level and scope provided to military personnel. The same system used to track active dutypatients through the Military Health System shall be used to track DoD civilian employeesinjured in theater while forward deployed. Civilians will not be charged personal leave whileundergoing therapy and/or rehabilitation due to a combat, combat support, duty related ornon-duty related injury incurred during deployment after they return from deployment.From page 9:Global War on Terror (GWOT). The type of operational activity that the President or theSecretary of Defense approve to prevent or respond to life-threatening acts that are a violation ofthe criminal laws of the United States or of any State and appear to be intended to intimidate orcoerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion;or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping.

  2. >Oh yeah. thats exactly what that is. Where else you use the words ‘expeditionary’, ‘combat’, and ‘civilian volunteer’ in one sentence if you aren’t planning on those civilians to be shot at. There was even something about the ‘relocation’ of ‘groups’ in there. They know damned well that there are going to be issues if the full force military has to be called in to control the populace but to use civilians there is less of a chance of that happening. You just have to recruit the ‘right ones’Every day I get closer to just dropping off the scope and holing up till the lead starts to fly.

  3. >Well, there are DoD civilian employees now in Iraq and Afghanistan. They were also used in Kosovo.While it is creepy and the (GWOT) part is troubling, there is also this.from the definitions;stability operations: An overarching term encompassing various military missions, tasks, and activities conducted outside the United States in coordination with other…So I’ll have to give it a 40/60 (Y/N) chance, since there are not many community organizers working for the DoD at present. (I hope).A big negative for participants, the Geneva Conventions do not apply to them. That is why every thing was done by military personnel in the past. On the other hand Islamists are not known for giving anyone Geneva Convention rights…

  4. >The link doesn’t work for me. What is the title of the directive?

  5. >It is DoD Directive 1404.10, dated 23 Jnuary 2009 and titled “DoD Civilian Expeditionary Workforce”.Hope that helps. You may also want to download Foxit Reader as a free and low-space way to read .pdf files:http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/rd_intro.php

  6. >Nope. This is just a modification of the terms of the mobility agreement that DoD civilians have to sign as a condition of employment. Civilian deployments were a rarity in the modern era – up until OIF & OEF. There are even involuntary deployments of civilians now, which is a big deal. Now it's pretty common. Things like medical care while deployed were never well codified. It's not shocking that it's taken almost 8 years for DoD to get things down on paper. "Expeditionary" means "going somewhere nasty overseas where people will try to kill you".There are many reasons to be concerned about the use of the military against US citizens, but this isn't one of them.

  7. >Here comes der “Brownshirts”.Bob III