Don’t you get the Soldier’s Medal for saving other soldiers? I thought that you got the Medal of Honor for valor in combat. Usually at the cost of your own life.
That requires the 35 civilian firefighters actually know how to command, train, and mobilize a hastily trained group of amateurs (albeit physically fit amateurs who are trained to follow orders).
I know it sounds easy but actual leadership is hard, especially in an emergency. Worse, you’re taking them from a job they know how to do (fight fires) and have just put them into the stressful situation of doing a job they don’t know how to do (directing and training other people in fighting fires on a moment’s notice).
It’s just a bad idea unless you run coordinating exercises before there are fires (which adds extra expenses we can’t afford anyway). When the fire is upon you is the worst time to try to set it up.
And, in general, when it seems like it should be trivially easy but isn’t being done, it’s most often because it’s not as trivially easy as an armchair QB makes it out to be.
There are currently over 500 military personnel responding to domestic events across the country. The military just doesn’t go wherever they think they might be useful. The governor has to request assistance, and then the Emergency Management people need to have specific needs and requests. If the state’s National Guard can’t meet the demands, then they request additional support from the Active Army through specific taskings. Units need to show up with a specific job to do. Otherwise, they would show up and just be in the way. I don’t think the military has ever said “Nope, we’re busy” when a state actually requests support.
Best training for what? A tank isn’t very helpful after a tornado. When needed logistical units are used. We had 10th Mountain Division soldiers from Fort Drum come down to run fuel trucks after Sandy. We didn’t need the infantry.
After 4 years of active duty I’ve been in the National Guard for the last 21. Our domestic mission is just part of what we do. And not what we train for. The Army Reserve is mostly Combat Support and Combat Service Support. The National Guard is where the Combat Arms soldiers are. We have the Infantry, Tanks and Artillery. I used to be a Tanker until they restructured. I’m now an engineer. But I’m not a build stuff Army Engineer. I’m a blow shit up Engineer. The National Guard is not being used in war because we don’t have the manpower. The National Guard is has always been there to be the manpower and we are being used the way in which we were intended.
No, but bulldozers, backhoes, loaders, forklifts, dump trucks, lowboys, chain hoists, etc. sure are. The Naval Construction Force is highly trained in disaster relief, demolition, construction and equipment operation, with skilled construction workers in all trades. They are also prepared to mount out (deploy) in short order. The construction force is led by the Civil Engineer Corps officers, who are highly skilled engineers. Why would we not want to use this resource for disaster relief for our own people?
Usually because there is already such equipment in place or much closer by. When logistical support is needed it is given. The Army Corps of Engineers is always there to work on the infrastructure. But usually the states can handle it and mostly just need and want help from the federal side in the form of money.
I really think their non-use is attributable to mostly the following factors: they (and other) military units are supposed to be given a particular task before they are sent somewhere, as opposed to “let’s get everyone to show up and we’ll sort out what they need to do later,” so local authorities need to say, “We need equipment to do [y] job at [z] location.” Also, it’s expensive to move lots of stuff around on an emergency basis (I believe when Seabees are deployed overseas, they will use equipment already there, not haul their tractors and graders with them 8,000 miles, then bring it all back when they’re done a few months later).
And also, it isn’t like Seabees are sitting around with nothing to do. They have been one of the most heavily deployed military units for the last decade. I’m not sure of the most recent statistics, but I recall during the last years of Iraq, they had a deployment to dwell ratio of something like 1.4: for every deployment of 180 days (I think that was the duration, can’t recall exact number), they would go home for 72, and then back deployed for another six months, back home for eight weeks, etc.
Are these things ever really in short supply, though? Seems that by the time Emergency Management figures out where/how this heavy equipment is needed, the private sector is ready to jump on it. Or is that not the case?
ETA: And by using the private sector, insurance companies pay the bills, which they should. Why let them reap all those profits just to have tax payer money do all the fixing, privatizing profits by not losses.
Gulfport, MS: ground zero for hurricanes
Port Hueneme, CA: next to ground zero for forest fires in CA
True dat, but I would think the preservation of life and property would take priority in most cases.
Ever try to shoot a flood?
Damn I wish that had gone into Blow Shit Up Engineering when I was younger. I didn’t know it was an option when I was a lad, but it sounds so fulfilling. That and it would look cool on a business card. 
I’m not going to lie. It’s very satisfying.
Ever try to read an entire thread?
Agreed with the preservation of life part. I was thinking about that earlier, but couldn’t really come up with many situations where that heavy equipment would help aid in search or rescue. Even in areas where there are collapsed buildings and stuff, I think they need the rescue dogs and stuff to go through rubble before tractors come in. Maybe cranes would help, though?
Bulldozers are the bull in the china shop and are the ideal tool for things like making fire breaks, getting piled up cars out of the way, and pushing debris into a big pile. Most other equipment can be used to lift and separate. Even a front loader can be used for delicate work with the right operator at the controls. Once a person is located, they still have to be extracted. That’s where equipment and good operators come in handy.
No, but I did see a documentary recently where dynamite was used to dissipate a shark-laden tornado. It was pretty incredible.
Some folks shoot rapids in flood.
Want to use the military’s destructive power for flood damage control? Blow up shit that is built on flood plains, and whenever someone tries to build something there again, blow it up again.
More seriously, don’t build on flood plains in the first place, and protect (and build if necessary) upstream wetlands and reservoirs to act as buffers. For example, Toronto was hit by Hurricane Hazel in the mind-50s, which caused a lot of death and destruction by flooding (81 deaths and about a billion in damage in today’s dollars). The government took heed, and changed its planning and development policies to dramatically limit building on flood plains. The change has paid off, for example the recent severe flood had caused relatively little damage ($850 million, despite the city being much greater in population and having far more structures than it did back in the 50s).
I would expect that resources put into planning, development and re-development (in which the US Army Corps of Engineers already has considerable experience) would have a better pay-off for flood damage control than resources put into re-training and re-equipping the USA military to intervene in the middle of floods.