Actually, it sort of isn't.
Disclaimer up front-- I've never served in any sort of armed forces, and I only know a few people who have, so I may get something wrong in here. If so, it's entirely my fault.
But, as I understand it, after perusing several Wikipedia articles and the official National Guard website, the Guard serves two purposes-- firstly, and most simply, they act as a reserve force for the US Armed Forces, and can be called upon by the federal government to serve in a variety of ways on behalf of the U.S.
Secondly, and (to me at least more confusingly), they are based on state militias. You don't enroll in the National Guard of the United States-- you enroll in the (for example) Massachusetts National Guard. Which is what confuses me most, I guess-- it's the state National guard. Oxymoronically named government agencies always leave me scratching my head. So you serve the state, providing a variety of security functions at the state level-- again for example, the Massachusetts National Guard provided security for the Democratic National Convention in Boston in 2004. You help out in emergencies at the behest of (I believe) the Governor. But you are always also available should the President need a hand (for a war, or national emergency, or whatever).
For a country that historically (and still sporadically) struggles with state rights issues, that must occasionally put a soldier in a hell of an awkward position. I seem to recall hearing something at one point where a state law conflicted with a federal law, and the US Marshals and the National Guard were actually sort of working against each other. Something civil rights related? I forget. If you know, please chime in.
It's Constitutional:
ReplyDelete"6th Amendment, Section. 2. The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;..."
And of course the (infamous) Second Amendment.
Well, sure. But I don't really feel like that explains why the "Militia of the several States" are called the National Guard. Why not just call them the State Guards?
ReplyDeleteI believe that a national standing army is relatively recent (I'm having trouble digging up the history). I know that the Continental Army was disbanded after the Revolution; no national army until the War of 1812.
ReplyDeleteSo, the main function of the state militias since the revolution has been to guard the United States against external enemies; not the States against each other.
from http://www.ng.mil/About/default.aspx:
"Throughout the 19th century the size of the Regular Army was small, and the militia provided the bulk of the troops during the Mexican War, the early months of the Civil War, and the Spanish-American War. In 1903, important national defense legislation increased the role of the National Guard (as the militia was now called) as a Reserve force for the U.S. Army."
So until the 20th century the state militia were effectively the army of the United States.
Hmm. I suppose that makes sense.
ReplyDelete