Introduction
For millennia, citizens of the United States have felt assured that they are safe from foreign invasion or internal attacks. However, incidents such as the Oklahoma City bombing, World Trade Center bombing, release of sarin in a Tokyo subway and the USS Cole bombing remind Americans that this sense of security may be an illusion. Notably, today, the US as a result of being a strategic world leader, faces a variety of “asymmetric threats” both within its borders and abroad. Accordingly, the US government has instituted a Homeland Security Program to respond to increased public concerns with regard to terrorism and the use of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs). A key component of this program was the establishment of the National Guard Civil Support Teams (CSTs) in 1998, whose mandate was to respond to Weapons of Mass Destruction events. This paper is a research on key aspects of the National Guard Civil Support Teams (CSTs), from its formation, training, activation and deployment to establish their preparedness.
Origin of the CST
During the 1990’s a changing military and political climate accompanied by various events such as the Oklahoma bombing, provoked significant concerns among the American public with regard to domestic terrorism (Moore, et al., 2010). Consequently, the US Congress, President Clinton and the Department of Defense began reviewing the existing strategies and plans for homeland defense. The review of the readiness and response abilities indicated critical deficiencies in the country’s defense against domestic and international terrorism. Accordingly, in the Presidential Decision Directive of 1995, President Clinton outlined key steps to increase the US defense and initiated a review of response c...
... middle of paper ...
... Doing That in a Title 32 Status-The National Guard Now Authorized to Perform Its 400-Year Old Domestic Mission in Title 32 Status. Army Law, 23.
Moore, M., Wermuth, M., Castenada, L., Chandra, A., Norricks, D., Resnick, A., . . . Burks, J. (2010). Bridging the gap: developing a tool to support local civilian and military disaster preparedness. Santa Monica, CA: RAND CORP .
National Guard Bureau. (2013, March). Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Civil Support Teams(CST) Fact Sheet. Retrieved from National Guard Bureau Public Affairs: http://www.nationalguard.mil/media/factsheets/2013/WMD-CST-March-2013.pdf
Prasad, S. K. (2009). Terrorism and Bioterrorism, Volume 5. Grand Rapids, MI: Discovery Publishing House.
Shireley, L. (2009). National Guard Civil Support Teams: A 24/7 Response to Weapons of Mass Destruction. University of St. Thomas Law Journal, 6(3), Article 9.
During Desert Shield and Desert Storm, European Command (EUCOM) air defense units from 32d Air Defense Command deployed with the mission to provide security for the back door of Iraq from locations in Israel and Turkey. (Global Security) The threat the US and coalition forces faced was Sadaam Hussein’s chemical weapons arsenal. Intelligence suggested that Iraqi Forces filled both chemical and biological payloads to the Scud missiles. (Rostker) The concern was if a warhead would explode, it would release airborne agents on the US and coalition forces. US Commanders had additional concerns. Could Patriot engage the warheads successfully? Patriot capabilities were not for the purpose of the mi...
The Special Forces have always been an elite unit that the American people, all military members, and the rest of the world could view as the best of the best. Building this reputation is just like in any other unit, there are support elements specifically designed to be able to assist the Special Forces to accomplish any mission, impeccably by land, sea, or air. Special Forces Groups contain two chemical detachments; the Chemical Decontamination Detachment and the Chemical Reconnaissance Detachment. The mission of the Special Operations Force Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (SOF CBRN) forces is to provide Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) reconnaissance and surveillance support for Special Operating Forces (SOF) in support of strategic, operational, and tactical objectives in all environments (Army, 2007).
Host: On September the 11th 2001, the notorious terror organisation known as Al-Qaeda struck at the very heart of the United States. The death count was approximately 3,000; a nation was left in panic. To this day, counterterrorism experts and historians alike regard the event surrounding 9/11 as a turning point in US foreign relations. Outraged and fearful of radical terrorism from the middle-east, President Bush declared that in 2001 that it was a matter of freedoms; that “our very freedom has come under attack”. In his eyes, America was simply targeted because of its democratic and western values (CNN News, 2001). In the 14 years following this pivotal declaration, an aggressive, pre-emptive approach to terrorism replaced the traditional
When a giant explosion ripped through Alfred P. Murrah federal building April 19,1995, killing 168 and wounding hundreds, the United States of America jumped to a conclusion we would all learn to regret. The initial response to the devastation was all focused of middle-eastern terrorists. “The West is under attack,”(Posner 89), reported the USA Today. Every news and television station had the latest expert on the middle east telling the nation that we were victims of jihad, holy war. It only took a few quick days to realize that we were wrong and the problem, the terrorist, was strictly domestic. But it was too late. The damage had been done. Because America jumped to conclusions then, America was later blind to see the impending attack of 9/11. The responsibility, however, is not to be placed on the America people. The public couldn’t stand to hear any talk of terrorism, so in turn the White House irresponsibly took a similar attitude. They concentrated on high public opinion and issues that were relevant to Americans everyday. The government didn’t want to deal with another public blunder like the one in Oklahoma City. A former FBI analyst recalls, “when I went to headquarters (Washington, D.C.) later that year no one was interested in hearing anything about Arab money connections unless it had something to do with funding domestic groups. We stumbled so badly on pinpointing the Middle East right off the bat on the Murrah bombing. No one wanted to get caught like that again,”(Posner 90). The result saw changes in the counter terrorism efforts; under funding, under manning, poor cooperation between agencies, half-hearted and incompetent agency official appointees and the list goes on. All of these decisions, made at the hands of the faint-hearted, opened the doors wide open, and practically begged for a terrorist attack. So who’s fault is it? The public’s for being
September 11, 2001 was one of the most devastating and horrific events in the United States history. Americans feeling of a secure nation had been broken. Over 3,000 people and more than 400 police officers and firefighters were killed during the attacks on The World Trade Center and the Pentagon; in New York City and Washington, D.C. Today the term terrorism is known as the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives (Birzer, Roberson). This term was clearly not defined for the United States for we had partial knowledge and experience with terrorist attacks; until the day September 11, 2001. At that time, President George W. Bush, stated over a televised address from the Oval Office, “Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shatter steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve.” President Bush stood by this statement for the United States was about to retaliate and change the face of the criminal justice system for terrorism.
Being the oldest daughter of a Senior ATF Agent, I have been exposed to domestic terrorism all of my life. My father has investigated thousands of bombings, fires, and explosions for more than twenty years now. Many of these incidents were examples of the terrorism that I speak about. His experiences have taught me countless lessons and informed me of many current events. The information that I have obtained from him is far more valuable than anything that the media could ever possibly convey. Though he is always strictly guarded with the confidences of his profession, he has always provided me with a firsthand knowledge of the impact that domestic terrorism has on the citizens and law enforcement. Through him, I learn the facts of these incidents without the media’s exaggerations. Today I will share with you some of these facts. I will talk to you about the impact that domestic terrorism has on our citizens. These impacts include: the monetary damages that terrorism inflicts, along with the injuries to the victims, the shocking repercussions that are embedded into the minds and souls of the people who come to sort through the rubble to find the survivors and the remaining evidence.
"POSITIONING AMERICA’S EMERGENCY HEALTH CARE SYSTEM TO RESPOND TO ACTS OF TERRORISM." A Report of the Terrorism Response Task Force American College of Emergency Physicians 1 Oct. 2002: 1-26. Web. .
First Responders have a unique and difficult challenge as they attempt to prevent, respond to and defend against international terrorist attacks in their cities, counties and states. The ability of first responders to accomplish these tasks can save countless lives, protect property and bring to justice terrorists who try to harm Americans. The risks associated with trying to counter or prevent international terrorist attack are many and diverse. There are physical and psychological effects that first responders will face when responding to an international terrorist attack. They include secondary or tertiary attacks, exposure to nuclear, chemical or biological agents, and the psychological toll. There are two main risks when attempting to counter terrorist attacks; first is a lack of intelligence in helping to identify future attacks, events or terrorist personalities, the second risk is damaging community relations (especially with minority and immigrant
Inadequate Preparations: the Primary Threat to First Responders Responding to an international Terrorist Event on US Soil
The Technical Escort Units primary mission is to prepare for rapid deployments with minimum to no notice anywhere in the world. They conduct technical escort missions immediately upon arrival. That means they must always be prepared and ready to go. The battalions conduct joint operations against many different CBRN hazards, weapons of mass destruction (WMD), toxic industrial chemicals (TIC) and toxic industrial materials (TIM) with military and civilians.( Technical Escort Battalion Operations, pgs 1-1) Fort Leonard Wood Army Base in Missouri teaches a four week course that military personnel can attend to be become knowledgeable and more profiting in CBRN Technical Operation.( CBRN Tech Escort Course comes to Fort Leonard Wood,http://www.army.mil/article/23052/CBRN_Tech_Escort_Course_comes)
I have organized this paper into five distinct sections; mission, task organization, capabilities, limitations, and finally the conclusion. After the reading and comprehension of this paper, you should have gained a basic understanding of the Special Forces (SF) Chemical Reconnaissance Detachments (CRD). The following paper is mixed with Unclassified (UCI) and For Official Use Only (FOUO) information. FOUO is annotated at the beginning of all For Official Use Only information, the rest of the paper is UCI. If you wish to share this information paper with others, please at a minimum; confirm identity of the person prior to providing (FM 380-5, 2000). For further handling instructions please refer to FM 380-5, or contact me, I will gladly answer all questions.
BENAC, N. (2011). National security: Ten years after september 11 attacks, u.s. is safe but not
- - -, dir. “Air Force Special Operations Command.” The Official Web Site of the United Stated Air Force. U.S. Air Force, 20 Sept. 2011. Web. 9 Feb. 2012. .
The Technical Escort Unit (TEU) now provides the Department of Defense and other federal agencies to include the Secret Service and the Federal Bureau of Investigation with an immediate response capability for chemical and biological warfare material. Its mission is to provide a global response for escorting, packaging, detection, rendering-safe, disposing, sampling, analytics, and remediation missions. This does not only include chemical weapons for which it was originally created, but now incorporates biological weapons, state sponsored laboratories, small independent laboratories and small non-weaponized radioactive materials. Most recently, they have been task organized to assist Brigade Combat Teams (BCT) as a force multiplier; the objective of this is to give the Battle Field Commander instant on the ground intelligence regarding Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) hazards within their Area of Operations (AO). With this new mission with the BCT, the TEU is becoming an expeditionary force.
The most important job of a first responder is to help the victims of the attack. Before first responders can help the victims, it needs to be determined if the scene is safe to enter. Part of scene safety is identifying if a WMD was used in the attack. A WMD can contain biological, chemical, or radiological agents (Federal Emergency Management Agency Manual. 2002) that can cause a wide range of effects. Unfortunately, first responders are often unequipped with the proper personal protective equipment that is required to safely work in an area where a WMD was used. Without the proper personal protective equipment, first responders can fall victim to the effects of the agent used. First responders are also at risk of being victims of a secondary device or attack directed at first responders and other citizens who gather that the scene