GEOFF BENNETT: Well, part of the# administration's efforts to be## able to send National Guard troops into# cities is a new order by President Trump## to modify the Guard's organization and# training and create rapid response units.

Our Nick Schifrin is here with# that part of the story -- Nick.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Geoff, yesterday, President# Trump signed an executive order that each## state's National Guard units would be --# quote -- "resourced, trained, organized,## and available to assist federal, state, and local# law enforcement in quelling civil disturbances."

And the secretary of defense will create# -- quote -- "standing National Guard quick## reaction force that shall be resource, trained# and available for rapid nationwide deployment."

For perspective on this, we turn to# retired Army Major General Randy Manner,## the former acting vice chief# of the National Guard Bureau.

General Manner, thanks very# much.

Welcome to the "News Hour."

What's your reaction to the president's order,## both this quick reaction force,# as well as the Guard's priority?

MAJ. GEN. RANDY MANNER (RET.

), U.S.# National Guard: I think this is## unneeded and also very dangerous...

This is something where, when I was the acting# vice chief of the National Guard Bureau,## we absolutely already put into place the ability# of having quick reaction forces in every state,## depending on the size, but also the state would# depend on the size of these quick reaction forces.

They were at the time, of course,# targeting the ability to respond## to emergencies in the state such as# floods, hurricanes, forest fires,## earthquakes, and so on to be able# to save lives.

The difference here## is that it's focused on -- quote, unquote# -- "public order."

That's very disturbing.

And also the idea of creating a unit whose# primary mission is to deploy anywhere in## the country to deal with potentially# demonstrations or civil disorder,## as the president sees fit out of the D.C.# Guard, that is not in keeping with the## mission of the National Guard as a strategic# reserve for our military and for our nation.

NICK SCHIFRIN: But if I may ask, one# of the missions of the National Guard,## is it not, to be able to help with law# enforcement.

So what's so wrong if this## vision is to have the National Guard# in fact help with law enforcement?

MAJ. GEN. RANDY MANNER (RET.

): The key# difference is that the governors control## the National Guards whenever they# are not deployed by the president.

As we have seen, not the mayor of# D.C., the mayor of Los Angeles,## no one is requesting this additional assistance.# This is something where the president is imposing## the armed military to go into American cities.# That is the most significant difference.

And## it's very important to remember that civil# disturbance deployments by governors is## actually the smallest amount of missions that have# ever been -- that are done by the National Guard.

It is a rarity, whereas now the# president is elevating it to be## a significant capability for the National Guard.

NICK SCHIFRIN: So let's just step back.# This focus on resourcing, training,## organizing to quell civil disturbances,# how different would that be from how## the National Guard is currently organized?

MAJ. GEN. RANDY MANNER (RET.

): All our young men## and women signed up for perhaps three reasons, to# serve our country, to defend our citizens overseas## against threats and, number two, to be able to# save our citizens in times of natural disaster.

And the third objective, of course, which,# by the way, it's been a very distant third,## but it's on the list, is to be able to# -- as needed by the governor or mayors,## to back up their local authorities, their# law enforcement authorities as needed,## to back them up if perhaps they are overwhelmed# with some kind of an emergency that occurs.

It is not the predominant mission of the# National Guard to do this.

If the president## is concerned about law enforcement, then what# he should do is restore the $100 million to## law enforcement for community engagement to# recruit and train officers in that capacity.

Our Guardsmen on the streets of D.C. right now,# which I was a D.C. Guardsman for 13 years, they## are not trained in law enforcement.

Whereas law# enforcement officers receive four to six months## of training, our young men and women receive# three or four hours of training, not months.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Let's talk about the impact on the# Guard -- Guardsman themselves.

Defense officials## tell me that the quick reaction force would# be able to cover the entire continental U.S.,## which would require splitting up a quick# reaction force, a few hundred in the West,## perhaps Arizona, a few hundred in# the South or East, perhaps Alabama.

Could that work?

And what would be the# impact on the Guard's overall staffing,## the ability to perform those other functions, if# this quick reaction force were created like that?

MAJ. GEN. RANDY MANNER (RET.

): First of# all, the use of the National Guard in## all of these deployments, 4,000 down in# Los Angeles, over 2,000 into Washington,## D.C., are decreasing military readiness because# those soldiers are no longer training for their## combat operations missions.

That's very# important for your viewers to understand.

They are not doing their principal job.

We should# not be using the military against our own people## in any capacity.

This is not the history of# our military, and we should not go there.

NICK SCHIFRIN: And finally, sir, the Guardsmen# who would be part of a quick reaction force## would be on perhaps a one-hour or two-hour# time frame to be able to deploy.

It means,## for example, soldiers couldn't drink.

They# couldn't travel very far with their families.

They would have to be close enough# to the base to be able to respond## that quickly.

What is possible under the# current level of National Guard staffing,## and is that vision something that the# National Guard could even execute today?

MAJ. GEN. RANDY MANNER (RET.

): I was a member of# the 82nd Airborne Division.

We rotated readiness## and we had anywhere between four to eight hours# whenever we were on division ready brigade status.

The National Guard does not operate# that way.

These are part-time citizen## soldiers.

It is something where this# is not physically possible to have a## unit of any size ready to go with 400# people in that way, unless, of course,## you were to triple or quadruple the cup the# size of the unit and rotate people through.

This is not thought through.

This is not# representative of a good, thorough mission## planning.

Even within -- when I was in charge# of Army operations worldwide on the Army staff,## we obviously had to rotate units through Iraq# and Afghanistan, both from the point of view## of those that were in the combat theater, those# that were training up for the combat theater,## and then those that were returning from, so that# they could focus on getting individual training,## as well as, of course, have# some time with their families.

It is not possible and it# is not thought through the## way that it is being talked about at this time.

NICK SCHIFRIN: Retired Army Major General# Randy Manner, thank you very much.

MAJ. GEN. RANDY MANNER (RET.

): Thank you.