Notice how the Congress still has the duty to organize the militia, to arm it and to define the discipline under which it will be trained. I don't see anything in there about an independent state militia. The states get the right to assign officers and have the authority to train the militia, as long as they follow the discipline prescribed by Congress.
I can certainly understand the confusion you are having.
congress has powers over
the national guard of the united states.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_of_the_United_Statesthe national guard of a state ( is the states defense force SDF )
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_of_the_United_States#State_defense_forces State defense forces[edit]
Main article: State defense force
Many states also maintain their own state defense forces. Although not federal entities like the National Guard of the United States, these forces are components of the state militias like the individual state National Guards.
These forces were created by Congress in 1917 as a result of the state National Guards' being deployed and were known as Home Guards. In 1940, with the onset of World War II and as a result of its federalizing the National Guard, Congress amended the National Defense Act of 1916, and authorized the states to maintain "military forces other than National Guard."[17] This law authorized the War Department to train and arm the new military forces that would come to be known as State Guards. In 1950, with the outbreak of the Korean War and at the urging of the National Guard, Congress reauthorized the separate state military forces for a time period of two years. These state military forces were authorized military training at federal expense, as well as "arms, ammunition, clothing, and equipment," as deemed necessary by the Secretary of the Army.[18] In 1956, Congress finally revised the law and authorized "State defense forces" permanently under Title 32, Section 109, of the United States Code.[19]
As far as states not attacking each other, the idea that all interstate activities are to be controlled by the federal government, and that all states are treated equally. The following kind of gives that idea.
if all states are to be treated equally and if one state were to attack another state then how can the us or federal army attack the attacker?
the us military cannot go to war with its citizens.
the combined forces of the FBI and all of a states law enforcement agencies could not repel an invasion of one state against another state.
however the us constitution does give power to the peoples
of a free state to have a well regulated militia for the security of the free state.
article 4 , the bill of rights
a well regulated militia , being necessary to the security of a free state , the right of the people to keep and bear arms , shall not be infringed.
united states code
title 32
section 109
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-1996-title32/html/USCODE-1996-title32-chap1-sec109.htm the maintenance of other troops.
32 U.S.C.
United States Code, 1996 Edition
Title 32 - NATIONAL GUARD
CHAPTER 1 - ORGANIZATION
Sec. 109 - Maintenance of other troops
From the U.S. Government Printing Office,
www.gpo.gov §109. Maintenance of other troops
(a)
In time of peace, a State or Territory, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, or the District of Columbia
may maintain no troops other than those of its National Guard and defense forces authorized by subsection (c).(b)
Nothing in this title limits the right of a State or Territory, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, or the District of Columbia
to use its National Guard or its defense forces authorized by subsection (c) within its borders in time of peace, or prevents it from organizing and maintaining police or constabulary.
(c)
In addition to its National Guard, if any,
a State or Territory, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, or the District of Columbia
may, as provided by its laws, organize and maintain defense forces. A defense force established under this section may be used within the jurisdiction concerned, as its chief executive (or commanding general in the case of the District of Columbia)
considers necessary, but it may not be called, ordered, or drafted into the armed forces.
(d) A member of a defense force established under subsection (c) is not, because of that membership, exempt from service in the armed forces, nor is he entitled to pay, allowances, subsistence, transportation, or medical care or treatment, from funds of the United States.
(e) A person may not become a member of a defense force established under subsection (c) if he is a member of a reserve component of the armed forces.
so , a states defense force (SDF) is the only entity that
is in place (if a state has one )
that could properly (if well regulated)
and legally (article 4 bill of rights and USC 32,109)
defend its states borders from an invasion.
thus my reality shows its evidence , were it a theory it
would not have gained enough evidence strong enough to
move it from theory to reality.
so what you claim is a conspiracy theory of mine
all turns out to be reality.
so am I a conspiracy realist.
