Bush to send troops to border
POSTED BY: rklenseth
UPDATED: Friday, May 19, 2006 00:56
VIEWED: 8734
PAGE 2 of 8
The execution seems to be immediately allocating available manpower to the problem of border security.
I think what you're upset about isn't the execution, but rather the perceived political goals behind the execution.
But, you know, I've been advocating national guard use for border patrol. If Bush's approval has to be in the toilet before he does it? Well, ain't it all just surprising that if we don't approve of the job he's doing... he does something different?
Shocking.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't think you should attempt to read my mind.
I do think this is poor execution because I think the NG is being stretched too thin. The Guard is in Iraq fighting a war. They are in Florida helping fight fires. They were in the Gulf Coast helping with Katrina. I just think we need to find other solutions rather than military.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh the irony.
A little bit of historical perspective here...
Firstly, our country was never intended to have a standing army loyal to the FedGov alone, it was seen as opening the door to tyranny, and that dolt Madison, in The Federalist Papers, stated that no protection against such a thing would necessary because no one would ever dare stoop so low as to do such a thing, and if they did the people would not tolerate it (he was arguing against the need for the 2nd amendment, mind you) - and so, we eventally wound up with one.
The armed forces of our nation, constitutionally, have ONE primary function, and that is to defend our borders, in truth - so any screeching about it from any political angle has little to no value, and posse comitatus doesn't apply to what is, again, their primary function and constitutional reason for existance.
Historically it's always been a bad idea for any leader to have a fully mobilized standing army at their disposal, because when you have such a hammer, every problem starts looking like a nail.
In all honesty this would be a better use of their time than sinking faster into the quagmire that is Iraq, we have enough problems HERE without getting all involved in everyone elses, ole George Washington himself warned the people about foreign entanglements on his way out of office, and history has shown the wisdom of that course because most of our overseas meddling winds up coming back on us like a spiked iron boomerang.
There's a merit to leaving the hell alone, and with our nation coming apart at the seams, we need to worry about our butts first - sorry middle east, we gotta take care of the home front first, you want freedom ? start kickin enough butt to take it, simple.
So yeah, pull em out, put them on the border and start rotating them in *short* tours, enough to give them necessary training and experience, and give them enough time off to remember what they're fighting for, this will help morale a great deal, reduce logistical and transport costs significantly, and likely solve a lot of other problems too.
Sure it means abandoning Iraq, but really, what the hell do we hope to accomplish there that we stand any realistic chance of doing ?
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Is no one else bothered by the thought of armed guards patrolling the borders of this country. How sad that it comes to this.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's far from an ideal solution, but if I were given the choice between vigilantes and soldiers...
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
And as you know, these are open forums, you're able to come and listen to what I have to say.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
How about just an immigration policy that works? I think back to the happy days of seeing those hundreds of people standing in line outside the US embassy in London. Small children waiting for hours and hours in the hot sun, ok, so it was England and the sun wasn't THAT hot- but there was rain! and Kamikazee taxi drivers - I digress - and as I would stroll by those teeming masses waiting for hours on end to be told to come back yet another day - I would think to myself "SELF" I said "YES THIS is DEMOCRACY in action!"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Why penalize people who rent housing to illegals, Hero?
That's keeping money in the country right? I'm going to take a wild guess that people aren't crossing the border so that they can pay rent in America. I don't understand why you'd bother with that angle.
I agree with penalizing ocmpanies who hire illegals though...
that and granting a path towards citizenship to those who are already here, so that they can start to demand higher wages, which will hopefully improve our standard of living.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
"I do think this is poor execution because I think the NG is being stretched too thin. The Guard is in Iraq fighting a war. They are in Florida helping fight fires. They were in the Gulf Coast helping with Katrina. I just think we need to find other solutions rather than military."
So rather than re-allocate existing resources, you advocate... What? Do nothing? Create something new from nothing? Instantly double the size of the existing border patrol by... Waving a magic wand? What is our other, non-military solution?
Quote:
"Is no one else bothered by the thought of armed guards patrolling the borders of this country. How sad that it comes to this."
We already have armed guards patrolling the borders of this country. We have always had armed guards patrolling the borders of this country. The problem is that we do not have enough armed guards patrolling the borders of this country.
Quote:
"How about just an immigration policy that works? I think back to the happy days of seeing those hundreds of people standing in line outside the US embassy in London. Small children waiting for hours and hours in the hot sun, ok, so it was England and the sun wasn't THAT hot- but there was rain! and Kamikazee taxi drivers - I digress - and as I would stroll by those teeming masses waiting for hours on end to be told to come back yet another day - I would think to myself "SELF" I said "YES THIS is DEMOCRACY in action!""
There are only two immigration policies that would prevent people from trying to illegally cross our borders.
1) Let anyone who wants to come here, come here.
2) Make sure our nation is crappier than every other nation, so no one wants to come here.
Other than those two options, people will try to come here illegally. And the only way to stop them is with... Armed guards patrolling the borders of this country.
Quote:
"that and granting a path towards citizenship to those who are already here, so that they can start to demand higher wages, which will hopefully improve our standard of living."
I agree that rounding up and exporting millions of illegal immigrants is impractical. Amnesty and citizenship for those already here. Then lock down the border tight, and control your population. Once population increase is predictable, and all residents have legal rights, then an appropriate economic plan can be developed to supply your citizenry with necessary goods and services. The price of work can also be stabilized at a livable wage.
We don't need a sub-class of illegal working poor in this country. We don't need unchecked and unlimited immigration. We do need armed guards, and we don't have anywhere else to get them in a hurry BUT from the military.
For my part, it will be nice to have more of our boys doing security work within the 50 states.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Is it at all possible that someone might want to place controls on unlimited immigration without being racist or xenophobic? Is it possible that someone might be Republican without being racist or xenophobic?
Just checking.
--Anthony
The answer is yes, it is possible, but not in this case. I can copy Josh Bolten's statement regarding the Guns and Badges strategy for the midterms if you'd like. Clearly this is a political play aimed at firing up racists and xenophobes. There is no other explanation given Bolten's statement. The solution is to add many more Border Patrol agents since that agency is designed specifically to deal with illegal immigration. As I mentioned before, the original plan was to allocate money to put 10,000 additional BP agents into the border with Mexico, but that was deemed too expensive by Congress (the Republican Congress of course) and the 10,000 was trimmed down to 310. The reason Bush is using National Guard troops rather than training BP agents is simply the difference in publicity. It would take time for him to get Congress to authorize a spending bill for the additional BP agents, and more time to hire and train them. Although he would be able to announce the bill prior to this year's midterm elections, the agents would not actually be deployed in time for a photo op for Bush before the midterms. On the other hand there are 10,000 Guard troops ready to go now, in plenty of time for lots of photo ops leading up to the election. This is all about politics, period. The problem with using Guard troops is that they aren't trained for this sort of operation, and frankly they didn't sign on for this. Recruitment numbers will drop drastically because of this. The US-Mexico border is 99% barren, inhospitable land, not exactly the kind of duty that will get young men and women to want to sign up for Guard duty. I was born in El Paso and I've travelled along stretches of the Border in Arizona, New Mexico, and California, as well as Texas. There isn't an uglier, hotter region in the US, and Guard troops will not want to be there indefinitely. So you will have a situation in which untrained personnel (untrained for this operation) will be deployed indefinitely, stretching the already thin Guard resources that much more, when the logical solution is to actually fund the increase in Border Patrol agents as many members of Congress from both parties and the White House had wanted. This is typical of the Bush Administration, putting party ahead of country, playing politics with the military, and doing absolutely anything for a good photo op to fire up their knuckle dragging base. At the same time, also typical of this administration, the program won't work as well as intended, and it will lead to to multiple problems with both the National Guard and the Border Patrol Agency. If you want to get the job done, give the professionals in the Border Patrol the money and resources they need to do the job, don't turn guarding the border over to a bunch of unprepared, untrained, part time soldiers, many of whom won't want the job.
I wanna be Mr. Baccarin!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Load of BS Anthony. There is a VAST difference between a border patrol agent and the National Guard.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME