For over 35 years, I’ve been a part of our armed forces, serving in both the Army and the National Guard. After my mobilization in September 2001, I took on roles as a part-time civic soldier and a full-time officer. Throughout my career, I’ve had the opportunity to lead various military branches, including active duty and National Guard personnel, as well as sailors, airmen, and Marines.
I’ve been in some significant places—like Red Square in Moscow, Tiananmen Square in China, and near the DMZ in North Korea. Different nations sometimes showcase their military in ways that support their domestic agendas, and that’s something I’ve seen firsthand.
Recently, the President dispatched the National Guard to one of America’s largest cities, which raises concerns, particularly as it was against the wishes of the state governor. Shortly after, active-duty Marines were also ordered to the area. On June 14th, we witnessed military personnel parading in tanks during a celebration for the military’s 250th birthday in Washington, DC.
Given my background with the National Security Agency, I’m quite uneasy about this trend. There seems to be a shift in the military’s role, moving from national defense to law enforcement, which is, to put it mildly, alarming. This could lead to severe legal and ethical issues.
Deploying military forces for policing blurs the critical line between military and civilian roles. Essentially, the military is equipped to defend against external threats—not to oversee domestic law enforcement. The Posse Comitatus Act restricts military involvement in such matters for good reasons. Maintaining that separation is vital to our identity as a country that values freedom.
The U.S. military is exceptionally trained for combat, but it is not suited for immigration enforcement or civil arrests. This use of military resources increases risks for the rights of the people in Los Angeles.
Furthermore, this deployment detracts from appropriate military readiness and reallocates vital resources away from essential defense tasks. The National Guard, which consists of community members ready to help during crises like hurricanes and floods, should not be diverted for political protests. It’s like conducting an orchestra out of tune.
It’s worth noting that the administration didn’t just send the National Guard; they also sent active Marines. Using military personnel in domestic protests undermines the primary mission of national defense, particularly when threats loom overseas.
The Pentagon has already estimated that this military deployment could cost $134 million, and that’s just the start. There are real consequences to how this is being handled. Reports indicate that service members are even finding themselves sleeping on the floor due to the chaos.
While the President’s recent actions may raise logistical and legal questions, they generally come across as attempts to silence opposition. By using militaristic means, there’s a misuse of power that undermines freedom of speech amid growing tensions.
Regardless of political affiliation, it should be unacceptable for any president to dispatch troops against political adversaries. Such actions risk eroding the trust between military personnel and the communities they serve.
It’s important to hold those who engage in violence responsible, but the right to peaceful protest and free expression needs protection as well. It’s disturbing to see images of public officials handcuffed merely for opposing these military actions.
Ultimately, the beauty of our country lies in our constitutional rights, including free speech and due process. That’s precisely why many of us choose to serve. My family has a proud legacy, with my grandfather and father both serving honorably. Many veterans, including myself, oppose the President’s actions, which seem to misuse military power to instill fear in American citizens. This needs to change now.
