Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: RevDisk on July 22, 2014, 01:10:39 PM
-
Official:
http://governor.state.tx.us/news/press-release/19925/
Regular media:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/gov-rick-perry-deploying-up-to-1000-national-guard-troops-to-border/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/07/21/texas-gov-rick-perry-plans-to-deploy-1000-guardsmen-to-border/
Meh, I doubt it will be any substantial change and most likely just be political grandstanding. NG will round up teenagers, who are looking for folks in uniform anyways, who will then be handed off to Border Patrol. Have we started sending the illegal immigrant minors home, or are they being settled here in the US?
-
Most of these teenagers coming in probably have no love for Mexico. So put them on a bus, surprise cupcake, next stop Parris Island, followed by a scenic beach vacation in Veracruz. =D Well, I can dream right?
They get food, a home, something to do, and a substitute parent. What's not to like?
-
"In other news, Gov Perry launches Operation Dog and Pony to facilitate moving the invading hordes into posh day spas in conservative areas faster. Sources report he anticipates it will help low information voters forget the tuition for illegals policy in 2016."
-
I thought this was a response to the cartel shooting at people, not the Children's Crusade.
-
I thought this was a response to the cartel shooting at people, not the Children's Crusade.
Whatever the purported reasoning, what I posted is what will happen. Be interesting to see if they're carrying Condition 1, or even if they're issued live ammo at all.
-
Whatever the purported reasoning, what I posted is what will happen. Be interesting to see if they're carrying Condition 1, or even if they're issued live ammo at all.
That was my question on this. NG always seems to be sent to the crappiest of situations sans ammo. I've never understood that.
-
News Flash...
I know a couple of the 1000+ Texas National Guardsmen who are likely going to be part of the deployment. I triple dog dare any of you instantly jumping on the "political grandstanding" bandwagon to say it to their face.
Brad
-
That was my question on this. NG always seems to be sent to the crappiest of situations sans ammo. I've never understood that.
Because better an enlisted man die due to lack of ammunition than an officer's career die due to a ND by one of his men.
News Flash...
I know a couple of the 1000+ Texas National Guardsmen who are likely going to be part of the deployment. I triple dog dare any of you instantly jumping on the "political grandstanding" bandwagon to say it to their face.
Brad
A reasonable man would understand that the accusation is directed toward Gov Goodhair.
Unless they are sent down there with a combat load, reasonable ROEs, and the mission to intercept and turn back all comers, this is grandstanding.
"In other news, Gov Perry launches Operation Dog and Pony to facilitate moving the invading hordes into posh day spas in conservative areas faster. Sources report he anticipates it will help low information voters forget the tuition for illegals policy in 2016."
Pretty much.
-
A reasonable man would understand that the accusation is directed toward Gov Goodhair.
Unless they are sent down there with a combat load, reasonable ROEs, and the mission to intercept and turn back all comers, this is grandstanding.
This. And unless they're still urinating water from Ft Benning or Ft Jackson, they already know it.
-
News Flash...
I know a couple of the 1000+ Texas National Guardsmen who are likely going to be part of the deployment. I triple dog dare any of you instantly jumping on the "political grandstanding" bandwagon to say it to their face.
Brad
You want to fly me out all expenses paid to Texas and I'll be more than happy to say it to their face. Hell, I'll even tell some farmers what I think of the welfare subsidies they get from fed.gov too while I'm at it. I'd love a chance to do some hog hunting on someone else's dime.
-
That was my question on this. NG always seems to be sent to the crappiest of situations sans ammo. I've never understood that.
When we went into New Orleans in 2005 after Katrina we are armed with ammo, was locked and loaded each and every time I went anywhere.
Saw elsewhere and posted on the other thread along these same lines that some reports is they want 20K on the border. That is a division plus.
-
TX Nat Guard Adjutant General laying it down on what they'll be doing. They're "supporting" DPS, who are as far as I can tell, just bussing illegals to the camps.
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Maj-Gen-John-Nichols-on-Texas-Border-Security-072114_Dallas-Fort-Worth-267982631.html
-
You want to fly me out all expenses paid to Texas and I'll be more than happy to say it to their face. Hell, I'll even tell some farmers what I think of the welfare subsidies they get from fed.gov too while I'm at it. I'd love a chance to do some hog hunting on someone else's dime.
Okay. When? I'll make sure to have my Guard and farm/ranch buddies at the airport to help celebrate your arrival.
Brad
-
I've read nothing that stated a withdrawal date for the Guard.I expect an Executive Order to order the NG back to base.And probably a lawsuit over it too.
A couple of articles indicated that some would prefer more law enforcement assets than soldiers.(Is there a store where you can just order up a couple hundred trained cops?)
I wonder if the Guard won't,mostly-save for photo ops-be tasked in support so that the regular cops can concentrate on the border.Seems to make more sense to me?A Texas sherriff(with a truly impressive mustasche-Tom Selleck would approve)I just watched seemed to indicate otherwise.
I'm in favor of patrolling with AC-130s myself.No need for guys on the ground to get shot at.
Do we have any dumb bombs left?Don't want the BUFFs to get too dusty.Be nice to have a no-mans-land or buffer zone along the border.
I wonder how much ordnance it would take to carve out a canal across northern Mexico?
-
A reasonable man would understand that the accusation is directed toward Gov Goodhair.
Unless they are sent down there with a combat load, reasonable ROEs, and the mission to intercept and turn back all comers, this is grandstanding.
At least the man is taking a real and measurable action, not sitting around giving lip service (or grousing incessantly on internet forums) about it.
Brad
-
At least the man is taking a real and functional action, not sitting around giving lip service (or grousing incessantly on internet forums) about it.
Brad
Unless the NG is given the authority to detain and remove illegals, they'll merely be handing them to Border Patrol, who will ask them to show up in court (knowing they won't) then release them. Illegal immigrant minors are apparently not being released, but also not being deported.
http://www.sandiego6.com/news/local/Border-Patrol-dumps-undocumented-immigrants-in-Murrieta-until-city-leaders-put-a-stop-to-it-261923781.html
I'm missing the part with "real and functional action". Please cite for us?
-
For a definition of "real", consult Mirriam-Webster.
Brad
-
I'm actually not trying to be sarcastic, but quite serious. It looks like it's just political grandstanding or raising awareness?
Admittedly, a positive one to hopefully shame the Obama administration or Congress into doing something. I'm gathering that is the real and function part? Or maybe the notion is to give the false impression to the adult illegals that Border Patrol is not doing catch and release?
I still have no idea what CBP is planning to do with the flood of minor illegals. I'm not sure if they're legally allowed to just dump them at the border.
-
It may well have some grandstanding component, but if so it's functional grandstanding. Boots on the ground is a damn sight better than anything the dems/libs have done, or even proposed for that matter. Texas deals sith the lion's share of illegal border crossings, most of which are in areas so sparsly populated they might as well be the ass end of fhe moon. Texans in those areas have been inundated with all manner of crime which the Bordrr Patrol is neither equipped, authorized, or manpowered-up enough to handle. Getting personnel into those areas will help deal with the issue.
It helps that Guard troops are mostly regular folks, not career bureau employees, and Texans arounds these parts are notoriously supportive of our Men And Women In Uniform. Mutually supportive troop/civilian interactions are pretty much a given and likely to be far more effective than the same number of additional BP agents. Ditto for rediculously over-extended local law enforcement, many of whom are also Guard members.
Brad
-
Okay. When? I'll make sure to have my Guard and farm/ranch buddies at the airport to help celebrate your arrival.
Brad
I have to schedule vacation at least 2 weeks in advance. To minimize the amount of vacation I'd prefer to do say a Fri-Mon deal. I'm perfectly happy to take a plane ride you pay for, and stay at a hotel you pay for, in exchange for telling some people the truth. What exactly do you think will happen anyway? Are your buddies going to yell at me? ZOMG I've never experienced that before! Are they going to assault me? That'd be funny, especially in an airport on camera. I'll be sure to look up local TX lawyers to sue their asses. The civil judgements will help pay for the guided hog hunts I'll go on.
Unless, of course, this is merely a rhetorical device and internet tough guying. ;/
At least the man is taking a real and measurable action, not sitting around giving lip service (or grousing incessantly on internet forums) about it.
Brad
People are going to go to the border, and it certainly will costs taxpayers in TX millions of dollars. But unless they are doing something other than handing the illegals over to the feds to get sent off to the camps then I'd be hard pressed to see how it is actually accomplishing anything other than that. Illegals these days are looking for BP agents to turn themselves in to, because they know only a tiny fraction are getting deported.
If they are going to be deporting the invaders themselves I'll retract my statement. But if all they're doing is making it so the illegals have a shorter distance to walk before they get sent to the federal day spa I stand by my assessment.
-
Balog, buddy, if you had even an inkling of what was really happening down here, or the amount of money being sucked out of the economy by the crime washing over the Texas border, you know how rediculiusly cheap paying for an additional 1000 Guard troops is for us.
As for "internet tough guying", meh. If you're trying to be sarcastic or insulting (which you obviously are), you're out of luck. I don't make offers I'm not willing to stick with. But you can forget the "here's how I'll do it" business. My dime, my time. You fly the airline I choose, travel on the dates I specify, stay in the hotel I pick, and meet with the people I select. You'll also engage in the activities I list to the extent I deem adequate. Be sure and pack a pair of old jeans and a sturdy pair of gloves.
Brad
-
How come the crime rates aren't reflecting this?
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/2647897/
-
Brad:
I've spent plenty of time down there and it is as bad as you describe. Illegals have been a scourge down there and only somewhat less as you more toward the interior.
Problem is, Gov Goodhair is not above grandstanding and has a crap record on illegals.
Like I wrote:
Unless they are sent down there with a combat load, reasonable ROEs, and the mission to intercept and turn back all comers, this is grandstanding.
Considering the last couple times troops have been sent tot hte border it was all eyewash, a healthy skepticism is warranted.
-
And then there is this
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/02/17/us/texas-agencys-web-site-warns-of-border-violence.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
And this
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/txcrime.htm
Is there a hidden explanation for the crime trends?
-
And then there is this
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/02/17/us/texas-agencys-web-site-warns-of-border-violence.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Is there a hidden explanation for the crime trends?
I'm doubting you actually read that entire article, which gives as much support to your argument as it does to the other point of view.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/gov-rick-perry-deploying-up-to-1000-national-guard-troops-to-border/
The additional resources are not aimed at the children themselves, Perry said, describing them instead as a "force multiplier" to help the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) "combat the brutal Mexican drug cartels that are preying upon our communities."
"I will not stand idly by while our citizens are under assault and little children from Central America are detained in squalor. We are too good of a country," Perry said.
The troops could detain people if asked, Texas Adjutant General John Nichols said at the press conference with Perry, but they are planning to play a "referring and deterring" role by deterring cartels with their visible presence and referring any immigrants suspected of being in the country illegally to DPS.
Perry argued that the elevated response at the border by DPS personnel has already has already acted as a deterrent force and reduced apprehensions.
Call me crazy, but I'm willing to wait and see what the NG actually does. Americans have been demanding a National Guard presence on the border for years and years. At least we're actually trying it now.
I never knew we had so many Saturday evening quarterbacks on this board.
-
Balog, buddy, if you had even an inkling of what was really happening down here, or the amount of money being sucked out of the economy by the crime washing over the Texas border, you know how rediculiusly cheap paying for an additional 1000 Guard troops is for us.
What, exactly, will they be doing to prevent that? If they actually do anything other reduce the wait time for illegals to get shipped off to the federal day spas then I'll retract my statements.
As for "internet tough guying", meh. If you're trying to be sarcastic or insulting (which you obviously are), you're out of luck. I don't make offers I'm not willing to stick with. But you can forget the "here's how I'll do it" business. My dime, my time. You fly the airline I choose, travel on the dates I specify, stay in the hotel I pick, and meet with the people I select. You'll also engage in the activities I list to the extent I deem adequate. Be sure and pack a pair of old jeans and a sturdy pair of gloves.
Brad
:rofl:
Saying "I'll fly you out to TX so you can say that to my face! Oh, but you'll have to stay in a Vietnamese prison camp on the way and I get to sodomize you." is not a legitimate offer. It's pathetic internet tough guy BS. You're really embarrassing yourself.
-
Saying "I'll fly you out to TX so you can say that to my face! Oh, but you'll have to stay in a Vietnamese prison camp on the way and I get to sodomize you." is not a legitimate offer. It's pathetic internet tough guy BS. You're really embarrassing yourself.
Hey, I offered. If you want to weasel out under the guise of absurdly rampant speculation, that's your choice.
Brad
-
:facepalm:
For cryin' out loud, dude, nobody insulted your precious TX Natl. Guard. ;/
-
^^I'm up for the offer.
1)I could use a vacation.
2)I'm looking for work anyways.
Can I laugh at the way yoo'all talk?
I'd prefer less hard work though.I can supervise pretty well.
I'll need a place to stay.You still a realtor?Find me a fixer upper above the local record flood stage.
-
Hey, I offered. If you want to weasel out under the guise of absurdly rampant speculation, that's your choice.
Brad
:rofl:
So this
I triple dog dare any of you instantly jumping on the "political grandstanding" bandwagon to say it to their face.
Brad
morphed into this
Okay. When? I'll make sure to have my Guard and farm/ranch buddies at the airport to help celebrate your arrival.
Brad
which is obviously supposed to be a veiled threat. When I called you on that you moved the goalposts to this
Balog, buddy, if you had even an inkling of what was really happening down here, or the amount of money being sucked out of the economy by the crime washing over the Texas border, you know how rediculiusly cheap paying for an additional 1000 Guard troops is for us.
As for "internet tough guying", meh. If you're trying to be sarcastic or insulting (which you obviously are), you're out of luck. I don't make offers I'm not willing to stick with. But you can forget the "here's how I'll do it" business. My dime, my time. You fly the airline I choose, travel on the dates I specify, stay in the hotel I pick, and meet with the people I select. You'll also engage in the activities I list to the extent I deem adequate. Be sure and pack a pair of old jeans and a sturdy pair of gloves.
Brad
Which, again, is a very weaselly way of setting up conditions that make it impossible to take you up on your obviously bullshit offer. There is no way in hell you would actually front the cash to fly me out there just to as you say in your first post "say that to their faces" so you make veiled threats and set vague conditions. You are completely unserious, and it's only your pathological inability to back down or admit you said something wrong that is propelling you to these absurdities. Your offer is not genuine, it is posturing of the first order and does not reflect well on you.
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.freesmileys.org%2Fsmileys%2Fsmiley-eatdrink062.gif&hash=6351767d570339129b1d7a62ffad11efc1c95342)
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.freesmileys.org%2Fsmileys%2Fsmiley-eatdrink062.gif&hash=6351767d570339129b1d7a62ffad11efc1c95342)
Indeed [popcorn]
-
Both o' y'all are wound a little tight.
-
Both o' y'all are wound a little tight.
To keep the Texas theme, as one of my old friends from Texas used to say, "Wound up tighter than an eight day clock up a rooster's ass." =D
-
Both o' y'all are wound a little tight.
COME SAY THAT TO MY FACE!!! I'LL FLY YOU OUT HERE, BUT IT'LL BE WHEN I TELL YOU, HOW I TELL YOU, YOU'LL WEAR WHAT I TELL, AND YOU'LL TAKE WHAT I WANT TO GIVE YOU WHERE I WANT TO PUT IT!!!!! AND BRING YOUR KNEE PADS!!!
-
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2014/07/18/the-obama-dallas-immigration-visit-the-curious-case-of-obamas-faith-leaders-and-obamas-faith-based-groups/
Looks like this whole immigration mess is bigger than Perry. Perry isn't going get in the way of Obama criminally funneling 100s of millions of taxpayer money to new acornesque organizations.
-
Getting any Guard troops to the border is a good start.
They shouldn't have to do anything with illegals other than turn them over to those who should be sending them back.
I want them there to give pause to the military/para-military types who are flaunting our good will at the border.
Perry may never get my vote but this is a positive step in the right direction.
-
Perry may never get my vote but this is a positive step in the right direction.
I just hope it's followed with more.
Brad
-
Geraldo Rivera ✔ @GeraldoRivera
Follow
Gov Rick Perry's grandiose deployment of Ntl Guard to the border is all show They are war fighters who will be thirsty & ineffective as cops
-
Having dealt quite a bit with the TX national guard, I can almost assure you they won't help at all.
The TX national guard is the complete polar opposite of the positive experiences I've had with the VA guard. It's why I cancelled my IST and went back into the reserves.
-
We'd be better off with the Coast Guard. We'll even bring our own ROE. I've been volunteering for Afcrapistan but this might be as close as I get! And I can get by in Spanglish.
-
Oh Jesus Christ, everybody go ahead and put your dicks away. Nobody wants to see that *expletive deleted*.
The NG is being used as political pawns. Believe me, I am behind the Guardsmen 100% but only a fool would deny what this actually will mean- that the Guardsmen are being forced to waste time and resources in a futile "deterrence" mission. And what happens if some cartel aholes or Mexican military/police unit opens fire and some of the good guys die? You think they will be able to retaliate? Or if one of the Guardsmen shoots an illegal, then what?
BTW, how long are they going to be kept deployed? The feds aren't paying the tab for this, so where is the funding for this deployment coming from? If they are kept out there for a couple or three weeks and then sent home because of a lack of funds, the situation will be right back to square one. It'll be right back to square one once the NG packs up and leaves, can't keep them deployed forever you know.
Am I saying give up? *expletive deleted* no, I'm saying it requires a different course of action than throwing a bunch of NG members at the problem without giving them ability to really do anything about it.
Having dealt quite a bit with the TX national guard, I can almost assure you they won't help at all.
The TX national guard is the complete polar opposite of the positive experiences I've had with the VA guard. It's why I cancelled my IST and went back into the reserves.
Oh no you din't! ARE YOU PREPARED TO TELL THAT TO THE TEXAS NG MEMBERS TO THEIR FACES!!!!???
-
Let us not forget that President Bush the younger was in the Texas ANG.
-
I'm broadly okay with militarizing the border, but I question if the Guard will be given the leeway they need to be effectual.
What's actually needed is a goodly amount of chain link fence and a large number of landmines backed by infantry and cameras.
Effective area denial isn't hard or expensive - but that's not what the vast majority of Americans want anyway. At a time where the feds are busing illegal immigrants further *into* the country to release them, what you have is an open borders country.
That's the program. Sending in the Guard with no proper ROE is a token gesture to win some votes, nothing more.
-
Let us not forget that President Bush the younger was in the Texas ANG.
Of course flying a fighter jet competently, even just to the point of "not dying" > painting rocks white, or policing up cigarette butts. =D
-
I'm broadly okay with militarizing the border, but I question if the Guard will be given the leeway they need to be effectual.
What's actually needed is a goodly amount of chain link fence and a large number of landmines backed by infantry and cameras.
Effective area denial isn't hard or expensive - but that's not what the vast majority of Americans want anyway. At a time where the feds are busing illegal immigrants further *into* the country to release them, what you have is an open borders country.
That's the program. Sending in the Guard with no proper ROE is a token gesture to win some votes, nothing more.
Basically this. And if done right, I'd volunteer.
But they'll be issued weapons and no ammo (if they even GET weapons) and stand around, do water detail for people, and generally waste money and time
-
Let us not forget that President Bush the younger was in the Texas ANG.
Yeah, 'cause nothing is more illustrative of today's Texas Army National Guard than sumdood's service in the Texas Air National Guard 45 years ago. :lol:
-
I've heard reports from Texans on other boards that the AG has been on the radio saying that the TNG and TSG will be there solely as an "observe and report" force alongside DHS. Anyone in Texas heard that?
-
I've heard reports from Texans on other boards that the AG has been on the radio saying that the TNG and TSG will be there solely as an "observe and report" force alongside DHS. Anyone in Texas heard that?
Havent heard it, but it makes sense. The guard is NEVER given any authority, any tools, or any mission when used domestically.
-
Havent heard it, but it makes sense. The guard is NEVER given any authority, any tools, or any mission when used domestically.
This. They won't be allowed to be effective. No chance.
You could easily rustle up some combat engineers to start improving border security, an MI unit to operate some drones, bunch of MPs for detaining illegals, some infantry for grunt work and security, JAG ready to go, enough logistics folks to make sure everyone is fed and supplied, etc.
Not. A. Chance.
First off, if I was the Texas NG commanding general, I'd have my entire JAG staff looking up the legalities of returning fire across an international border. Texas doesn't have the authority to do jack one inch beyond their state line. Returning fire, even defensive fire, into Mexican territory will start an excrement storm. The cartels would have to be absolutely dumber than a box of rocks to not take some potshots at the Texas NG, shoot some random illegal, and then have their shills screaming about the Texas NG murdering poor innocent migrants. Much as I berate our modern officer corps as a bunch of political hacks that weed out competent officers, even THEY can see the thorns on this situation.
Second off, I sincerely doubt Gov Perry has the stones to actually deal with the problem. Pandering to his base? Absolutely. Which means lots of faces and camera time at the border looking very serious. If the Texas NG on a state mission essentially starts a war with Mexico, it could have extremely serious consequences. Any serious actions at border security run this risk. Mexico is not exactly polite and welcoming of non-Mexican illegal immigrants. Care to imagine if we DID clamp down on the border, and you ended up with tens of thousands of illegals sitting right at the border? Mexico is already in the middle of a medium scale civil war.
-
Mexico is not exactly polite and welcoming of non-Mexican illegal immigrants. Care to imagine if we DID clamp down on the border, and you ended up with tens of thousands of illegals sitting right at the border? Mexico is already in the middle of a medium scale civil war.
Mexico certainly seems to welcome them in just fine at their southern border. Close our border and make Mexico's problem into Mexico's problem.
-
Second off, I sincerely doubt Gov Perry has the stones to actually deal with the problem. Pandering to his base? Absolutely. Which means lots of faces and camera time at the border looking very serious. If the Texas NG on a state mission essentially starts a war with Mexico, it could have extremely serious consequences. Any serious actions at border security run this risk. Mexico is not exactly polite and welcoming of non-Mexican illegal immigrants. Care to imagine if we DID clamp down on the border, and you ended up with tens of thousands of illegals sitting right at the border? Mexico is already in the middle of a medium scale civil war.
This. No gov wants to start a war unilaterally. (even Texas govs don't do that). This will be TV face time and soldiers, but no real teeth.
About the most effective thing Perry could do is order the NG to set up minefields and wire about 100yds this side of the border. Order the troops no to return fire while setting up the obstacles. Then set up with troops and cameras on ourside and snipe anyone that crosses the border with a weapon. let the "imigrants" sit in the desert between the border and the obstacles.
Anyone here think most Americans are ready to watch people starve in the desert on CNN?
-
Regardless, if the cartels and Mexican government want to see Joe Sixpack get engaged in the subject of border security I can't think of a better way for that to happen than for them to fire upon a very public presence of US Military on the border. Both of those parties know that and will make sure they rein in their guys.
The press can bury the occasional spat involving border patrol agents. Ignoring US Military personal being fired upon at our own border will nigh be impossible.
I suspect that where there is National Guard troops there will be no gunfire. If i am wrong the next public discussion becomes rules of engagement and that probably won't go the way Mexico and the cartels would prefer.
-
Regardless, if the cartels and Mexican government want to see Joe Sixpack get engaged in the subject of border security I can't think of a better way for that to happen than for them to fire upon a very public presence of US Military on the border. Both of those parties know that and will make sure they rein in their guys.
The press can bury the occasional spat involving border patrol agents. Ignoring US Military personal being fired upon at our own border will nigh be impossible.
I suspect that where there is National Guard troops there will be no gunfire. If i am wrong the next public discussion becomes rules of engagement and that probably won't go the way Mexico and the cartels would prefer.
If there is any firing on our troops, it will only lead to orders to back down from higher levels.
Remember, this is the administration that sold weapons directly to the cartels in order to undermine our citizen's rights. Obama will not allow Texas to hamper the cartels' free reign over the border nor will he allow the slowdown or stoppage of illegals crossing the border.
-
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/14/night-time-on-border-endless-wave-illegal-immigrants-floods-rio-grande-valley/
Bloody hell. 30k per month in the Rio Grande Valley Sector alone? And they're essentially being resettled throughout the US?
Seriously, this will get ugly.
-
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/14/night-time-on-border-endless-wave-illegal-immigrants-floods-rio-grande-valley/
Bloody hell. 30k per month in the Rio Grande Valley Sector alone? And they're essentially being resettled throughout the US?
Seriously, this will get ugly.
All according to plan.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-26/new-york-to-issue-id-cards-for-undocumented-immigrants.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/16/us-usa-immigration-seattle-idUSKBN0FL2MW20140716
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/16/us-usa-new-york-votingrights-idUSKBN0ER2KU20140616
-
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/14/night-time-on-border-endless-wave-illegal-immigrants-floods-rio-grande-valley/
Bloody hell. 30k per month in the Rio Grande Valley Sector alone? And they're essentially being resettled throughout the US?
Seriously, this will get ugly.
It's like reverse Russification. Instead of a conquering army displacing the native population, the fed.gov is bringing in an invasion to displace their own native population.
-
It's the Chinese into Tibet.
-
The NG has been deployed to the border before. Didn't do any good then because it wasn't supposed to. Won't do any good now because it isn't supposed to this time, either.
Not worth debating.
-
<smirk> And the Channel 2 Denver lead news tonight is some owner of some local sports team is "stepping down."
They've been yakking about that for 9 minutes so far and they're still at it. Turned the sound off right after they started, but they've still got images of some kind of sports field and other people.
7:10 PM: Some guy is holding up some kind of shiny trophy.
7:13 PM: They broke away to a commercial. I guess that's that, and they'll talk about lesser news items now.
Ooops, I was wrong. They're back at it at 7:17 PM.
I'm turning the TV off.
Say, what were all those horse's heads they were showing through all that?
Terry
-
I still have no idea what CBP is planning to do with the flood of minor illegals. I'm not sure if they're legally allowed to just dump them at the border.
They claim they aren't allowed to do that. I don't believe them, I think it's more of the Obama administration's creative extrapolations from the law. If it is true that they can't deport them without a hearing, then get on the stick and hold hearings. Meanwhile, house the kids in old prisons, with adequate but minimal rations and no perks. After all, they ARE criminals. They are not entitled to luxury housing, they are not entitled to free clothing, they are not entitled to education, they are not entitled to cell phones or computer games, they are not entitled to surrogate families. What they ARE entitled to is a one-way ticket back to wherever they came from.
-
They claim they aren't allowed to do that. I don't believe them, I think it's more of the Obama administration's creative extrapolations from the law. If it is true that they can't deport them without a hearing, then get on the stick and hold hearings.
Yup. Pick any handful of the crap traffic offenses, (expired registration, etc.) and pardon all of them that are pending. Boy, that just freed up some courts' time to handle a more pressing issue. Line them up, march them through, and load them on a boat. Surely something large and uncomfortable needs a shakedown cruise along Central and South America after refits.
-
Time to build a fricken fence already. SHeesh. ;/
-
When I heard Perry was sending NG to the border I thought, "Well some just lifted a finger. Not really sure what good it will do". Then I heard that Perry just made an announcement and that it would take 30 to 45 days before boots made it to the ground. Pathetic.
-
Pathetic.
Procedure, actually. Orders have to be cut, people contacted, logistics emplaced, materiel and supplies transported... none of which happens overnight.
Brad
-
Procedure, actually.
Brad
If the situation were truly viewed as serious they could be down there in less than a quarter of the time I bet, maybe even faster.
Too bad, I actually thought something positive was happening. Just more theater and posturing. :mad:
-
Never dealt with event planning or logistics, I take it.
Brad
-
Never dealt with event planning or logistics, I take it.
Brad
So there aren't plans on mobilizing troops to the border already sitting in a file someplace ready to be implemented?
That timescale would have been appropriate back when the administration was first warned about the coming flood of illegals.
This should have been used as a good excuse to practice rapid deployment to potential hot spots on our border. Surely there is a plan on how to do that isn't there?
Beginning to look like inconsequential theater designed to pull one over on the low information anti illegal immigrant crowd.
-
It's painfully obvious you aren't familiar with the sheer magnitude of military mobilization logistics. And these are Guard troops, not standing army. 30-45 days is actually pretty damned impressive for a force that size. If they'd said 90 days I would not have been surprised.
Brad
-
It's painfully obvious you aren't familiar with the sheer magnitude of military mobilization logistics. And these are Guard troops, not standing army. 30-45 days is actually pretty damned impressive for a force that size. If they'd said 90 days I would not have been surprised.
Brad
Well I hope you are correct and that they actually have an impact when they finally get there.
I'm less optimistic than I initially was when the news first came out.
-
Well I hope ... that they actually have an impact when they finally get there.
Me too, brother. Me too.
Brad
-
I will give Perry benefit of the doubt that contingency plans are in a 3 ring binder. I will also grant the actual implementation will take time reaching into multiple weeks. Furthermore I will assume Perry and his team war gamed the federales' counter move and that accounts for letting the problem go for a couple of months before taking "action". Assuming the foregoing is true simply keeping his mouth shut until action becomes visible seems to be advisable. Then again, I am more concerned with results and not playing media games.
-
It's painfully obvious you aren't familiar with the sheer magnitude of military mobilization logistics. And these are Guard troops, not standing army. 30-45 days is actually pretty damned impressive for a force that size. If they'd said 90 days I would not have been surprised.
Brad
So how come the NG can be on-scene right away in the case of natural disasters and the like?
-
So how come the NG can be on-scene right away in the case of natural disasters and the like?
Yeah, this...
Unless TX is abnormally bad at mobilizing forces for State Missions, 30-45 days is unacceptable. We had a brigade out to areas all over VA during the nasty storm and power outage aftermath. Vehicles, supplies, helicopters, the works. In less than 2 days.
I'm calling BS on it taking that long to get them there.
-
It's painfully obvious you aren't familiar with the sheer magnitude of military mobilization logistics. And these are Guard troops, not standing army. 30-45 days is actually pretty damned impressive for a force that size. If they'd said 90 days I would not have been surprised.
Brad
Bullshit.
How long did it take for tens of thousands of people from several different third world countries to coalesce into an invasion force? Or are you simply trying to make the point the the texas national guard is wildly ineffective at stopping foreign invasions?
-
Yeah, this...
Unless TX is abnormally bad at mobilizing forces for State Missions, 30-45 days is unacceptable. We had a brigade out to areas all over VA during the nasty storm and power outage aftermath. Vehicles, supplies, helicopters, the works. In less than 2 days.
I'm calling BS on it taking that long to get them there.
A lot of that was the head's up on the storm's path, the national coordination of disaster resources, and the fact that it was a recognized national disaster with predetermined response procedures. Plus, they had several days to get resources mobilized prior to the storm making landfall.
Also, with the border thing there is a lot more to do interms of getting facilities planning in place. Not exactly a lot of Holiday Inns, or even readily accessible water, along thst stretch of border. Getting arrangments made for that little inconvenience takes time.
Another issue is the immense scale of deployment. The Texas/Mexico border stretches more than 1200 miles, almost two thirds of the total US/Mexico border's 1900 mile length. Lots of ground to cover, and a little different from having a military depot, airport, or industrial campus where the deplyment is handled with troops housed in a single common location.
Is it a long time iterms of getting troops in trucks and on the way? Sure. They could be on their way tomorrow. But trucking in troops just to say boots are on the ground does not a well planned and executed deplyment make.
Brad
-
Bullshit.
How long did it take for tens of thousands of people from several different third world countries to coalesce into an invasion force? Or are you simply trying to make the point the the texas national guard is wildly ineffective at stopping foreign invasions?
Well...
-
A lot of that was the head's up on the storm's path, the national coordination of disaster resources, and the fact that it was a recognized national disaster with predetermined response procedures. Plus, they had several days to get resources mobilized prior to the storm making landfall.
Also, with the border thing there is a lot more to do interms of getting facilities planning in place. Not exactly a lot of Holiday Inns, or even readily accessible water, along thst stretch of border. Getting arrangments made for that little inconvenience takes time.
Another issue is the immense scale of deployment. The Texas/Mexico border stretches more than 1200 miles, almost two thirds of the total US/Mexico border's 1900 mile length. Lots of ground to cover, and a little different from having a military depot, airport, or industrial campus where the deplyment is handled with troops housed in a single common location.
Is it a long time iterms of getting troops in trucks and on the way? Sure. They could be on their way tomorrow. But trucking in troops just to say boots are on the ground does not a well planned and executed deplyment make.
Brad
I dunno, man. It's fairly easy to bring a battalion of troops into an area with MREs and shelter halfs. I don't buy that it should take that long.
I'll tell you precisely why it'll take that long.
Because they have to find them a mission.
They are doing this to appeal to voters. They know there wont be a mission, so they need to find one
thats the delay
-
They've already stated the general mission... support and assist the Texas Dep of Public Safety.
Brad
-
That's a very slow deployment. They should be able to get a BCM and supporting units out there inside of a week. That's exactly why we stage and train for things like this.
I helped get the better part of a battalion into Haiti in less then 12 days from a cold start after the earthquake.
If I had to guess, I'd say that part of the delay is lawyers coming up with the ROE, and what can and can't be done.
-
Heard the Texas AG on the radio this morning. NG troops will be unarmed and working support rolls that DPS and BP don't want to do. I'm thinking that if I was Texas NG that nagging medical issue that I've been putting off would suddenly need attention.
-
We had a BDE in New Orleans on Sunday night after being called up on Wednesday after Katrina in 05.
-
They've already stated the general mission... support and assist the Texas Dep of Public Safety.
Brad
That's not what I mean....
-
Call my cynical, but a month and a half also gives the news cycle time to move on to Americas Next Top Hotel Cook Looking for Love Among the Stars. So the ineffectiveness of neutered boots on the ground doesn't get near as much air time. Heck, it's possibly even enough time to work out a "deal" that keeps them from going down there at all or for the administration to find a reason Texas can't send in the NG on it's own and we can add to the current scandal list.
There is simply no way in hell it takes that long to deploy a thousand men domestically unless they choose for it to be on that timeline. And if it really DOES take the units involved that long to deploy, someone needs a swift kick in the balls and walking papers.
-
I dunno, man. It's fairly easy to bring a battalion of troops into an area with MREs and shelter halfs. I don't buy that it should take that long.
I'll tell you precisely why it'll take that long.
Because they have to find them a mission.
They are doing this to appeal to voters. They know there wont be a mission, so they need to find one
thats the delay
Ayup.
Heard the Texas AG on the radio this morning. NG troops will be unarmed and working support rolls that DPS and BP don't want to do. I'm thinking that if I was Texas NG that nagging medical issue that I've been putting off would suddenly need attention.
Mission Found: Stand around with their thumbs up their asses. Which will be no detriment to accomplishing their "mission," since they will be unarmed. Because issuing folks in the (dis)armed forces rifles is just crazy talk anyways.
Didn't someone say something about this, upthread?
Unless they are sent down there with a combat load, reasonable ROEs, and the mission to intercept and turn back all comers, this is grandstanding.
Let me make this clear for all of Gov Perry's boosters:
Perry has supported illegal aliens over Texans in the past and he supports them over Texans today. He loves them so much he thinks giving them in-state tuition is a grand idea. He thinks shoveling welfare and health care and public education tax dollars at them is terrific. In this, he is no different from the dirty RINO SOBs in Washington. He will sell out the taxpayer so that companies & donors can privatize profits, nationalize costs, and cut the legs out from under working class American citizens.
Butbutbut he called out the National Guard!
-
It may well have some grandstanding component, but if so it's functional grandstanding. Boots on the ground is a damn sight better than anything the dems/libs have done, or even proposed for that matter. Texas deals sith the lion's share of illegal border crossings, most of which are in areas so sparsly populated they might as well be the ass end of fhe moon. Texans in those areas have been inundated with all manner of crime which the Bordrr Patrol is neither equipped, authorized, or manpowered-up enough to handle. Getting personnel into those areas will help deal with the issue.
It helps that Guard troops are mostly regular folks, not career bureau employees, and Texans arounds these parts are notoriously supportive of our Men And Women In Uniform. Mutually supportive troop/civilian interactions are pretty much a given and likely to be far more effective than the same number of additional BP agents. Ditto for rediculously over-extended local law enforcement, many of whom are also Guard members.
Brad
Getting any Guard troops to the border is a good start.
They shouldn't have to do anything with illegals other than turn them over to those who should be sending them back.
I want them there to give pause to the military/para-military types who are flaunting our good will at the border.
Perry may never get my vote but this is a positive step in the right direction.
These remarks get to the heart of the matter. The Texas NG may not be the best solution, but they're a helluva lot better than nothing, and nothing is all we're gonna get from anyone else.
It's a damned sight better than the empty hot air we're getting from all of the jaw-flappers around. It's easy to criticize, 'specially when nobody expects anything from you. A bit harder to step up.
Claiming the Texas NG will be useless because they won't have ammo is just ridiculous. Nobody wants the Texas NG to start shooting it out with the children flooding across the border. We want the illegals found, apprehended, and returned home. You don't need ammo for that, you need lots of bodies out searching and some radios to call in to the Border Patrol when you find something. The NG actually sounds pretty well-suited to that.
-
These remarks get to the heart of the matter. The Texas NG may not be the best solution, but they're a helluva lot better than nothing, and nothing is all we're gonna get from anyone else.
It's a damned sight better than the empty hot air we're getting from all of the jaw-flappers around. It's easy to criticize, 'specially when nobody expects anything from you. A bit harder to step up.
Claiming the Texas NG will be useless because they won't have ammo is just ridiculous. Nobody wants the Texas NG to start shooting it out with the children flooding across the border. We want the illegals found, apprehended, and returned home. You don't need ammo for that, you need lots of bodies out searching and some radios to call in to the Border Patrol when you find something. The NG actually sounds pretty well-suited to that.
It isn't the children I'm concerned about. It is the cartel members, Mexican military and MS13 that I'm concerned about coming across and/or shooting across the border. How many more dead BP agents or heaven forbid how many dead NG troops will it take for someone to actually grow a set of balls and do something?
-
"Doing someing" of the sort you have in mind requires executive action from Washington. Only Obama holds this power, not state govs or legislators.
So, when will someone do something? Not until at least 2016, if not later.
-
"Doing someing" of the sort you have in mind requires executive action from Washington. Only Obama holds this power, not state govs or legislators.
So, when will someone do something? Not until at least 2016, if not later.
Actually I believe a Governor does have the power to allow the NG to have police powers and defend themselves if they so choose. It all comes down to the way you word the orders.
-
Can a governor activate his state's NG to go to war within his state or across the border, against cartels ferrinstance, without Washington's say-so? I don't know. I thought not, war making and foreign relations and suchlike being a federal executive thing, but maybe I'm wrong.
If it's just arming the NG against possible attack from the cartels, then yeah, a gov can probably do that on his own. But that's not going to do anything to stop the cartels, it doesn't give the soldiers any authority to go after the cartels.
-
Can a governor activate his state's NG to go to war within his state or across the border, against cartels ferrinstance, without Washington's say-so? I don't know. I thought not, war making and foreign relations and suchlike being a federal executive thing, but maybe I'm wrong.
If it's just arming the NG against possible attack from the cartels, then yeah, a gov can probably do that on his own. But that's not going to do anything to stop the cartels, it doesn't give the soldiers any authority to go after the cartels.
It does when they step over the border.
-
The oath of enlistment I took when I joined the Oklahoma National Guard was identical to the oath I took when I went on active duty with the exception of adding the line in there about the orders of the Governor as well as the President and officers.
And that would defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I would say a cartel member shooting at me would be an enemy and if I'm on the receiving end of that I'm shooting back and would expect those under me to do the same.
-
Aye, if you're fired on, I would expect you to return fire. But that's a whole lot different than proactively going after the cartels.
I'm against using the military to attack people inside the US just because they're suspected of smuggling or other border crimes. We have law enforcement and courts for that sort of thing.
-
They won't, but they could erect military grade defensive lines inside the border of Texas on the gov's orders. (assuming the state has the ordinance. I don't think Obama would give them federal supplies) Think Concertina wire, minefields, HUGE steep ditches, stuff like that. Let the combat Engineers get their woody on. Don't do anything to the folks coming over. Just make the area just inside our border very dangerous to cross.
Then put huge signs up in Spanish. Let them decide to take a risk or not.
I think that would be about the most effective the NG could get without starting a shooting war.
-
How long would 1200 miles of that take to build?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
They won't, but they could erect military grade defensive lines inside the border of Texas on the gov's orders. (assuming the state has the ordinance. I don't think Obama would give them federal supplies) Think Concertina wire, minefields, HUGE steep ditches, stuff like that. Let the combat Engineers get their woody on. Don't do anything to the folks coming over. Just make the area just inside our border very dangerous to cross.
Then put huge signs up in Spanish. Let them decide to take a risk or not.
I think that would be about the most effective the NG could get without starting a shooting war.
I might only add audio warnings at high-traffic points to cover the illiterate.
-
How long would 1200 miles of that take to build?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
eh. Depends on some factors that are hard to predict. Also Engineers are, IME, loathe to stop building fortifications. They won't give timelines, they just keep mining things until the enemy get's there. See Fortress Europe.
But let's say that they have the raw materials in Tx, and are willing to use NG Logistics Units (HEMMIT's, PLS's, UH-60's) to get it where it needs to be. That leaves the CE's free to do nothing but build and mine *expletive deleted*. Last time I played it an Infantry Platoon could easily put up 3 strand concertina 1 mile perimeter in a day. That's after securing the perimeter and leaves time to dig in. Engineers have (I've heard) a vehicle that'll do it. But let's be conservative, it's hot in the TX. Work rest cycles and all that. Say three mile/plt/day. If TX can get one CE Bn down there that's 50 miles/day of three strand. Give them a head start and have combat aviation use the aerial mine spreaders for the mine field. A week for the signage. A week for SNAFU's.
Call it 35 days or so.
And I suspect that's a pretty long timescale. These troops would be pretty motivated. (protecting hearth and home). As long as orders were placed for extra material at the beginning so that when existing stocks were used up the new stuff was delivered, I'd bet they'd beat that timeline. Then they'd go back to the beginning and start building more stuff until Perry stopped funding them. 6 months and we'd have a wall. A year? Who knows,but no one would cross it.
-
And I suspect that's a pretty long timescale. These troops would be pretty motivated. (protecting hearth and home).
Don't forget friendly locals, most of whom have a lot of experience putting up fences.
Hell, they could just drop supplies every mile or so, go have a beer and come back to find that the house elves have done all the work while they were out.
-
http://www.cochranesteel.com/SD_300_Rapid_Deployment_Perimeter.php
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBnWHBZDItg
Yeah, you have to go back and stake it down, and you'd need a team reloading trailers. That's where the HEMITT's come in. But the Army is pretty quick at this kind of thing. We've been doing it for a day or two now.
All that "10 years and a gazzilion dollars to build a fence" BS is just that. BS propaganda to try and make people think that a border is impossible to secure.
-
That's one hell of a slinky.
-
The oath of enlistment I took when I joined the Oklahoma National Guard was identical to the oath I took when I went on active duty with the exception of adding the line in there about the orders of the Governor as well as the President and officers.
And that would defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I would say a cartel member shooting at me would be an enemy and if I'm on the receiving end of that I'm shooting back and would expect those under me to do the same.
Which is precisely why the NG troops are unarmed. Can't have NG members shooting back, they are to die defenseless instead of shooting future voters.
-
Tangential, but interesting. Published about a month ago:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/06/27/fact-sheet-changes-us-anti-personnel-landmine-policy
The United States announced today that it will not produce or otherwise acquire any anti-personnel landmines (APL) in the future, including to replace expiring stockpiles. The announcement, delivered at the Third Review Conference of the Ottawa Convention in Maputo, Mozambique, underscores the U.S. commitment to the spirit and humanitarian aims of the Ottawa Convention, the treaty that prohibits the use, stockpiling, production, and transfer of APL. The U.S. delegation in Maputo further announced that the United States is diligently pursuing solutions that would be compliant with and that would ultimately allow the United States to accede to the Ottawa Convention.
-
By the way, for those confused...
"Assist the DPS/BP with whatever" is not a mission
A mission looks like this:
"<unit> will do <patrol/perimeter defense/raid/whatever> at location IVO grid <a concrete location or area> in order to <very *expletive deleted*ing specific goal in mind>"
"Go there and do whatever" aint a mission. it's grandstanding
-
Which is precisely why the NG troops are unarmed. Can't have NG members shooting back, they are to die defenseless instead of shooting future voters.
NG troops have been armed in the past in similar situations. 2005 New Orleans we were armed and had orders to shoot back.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
NG troops have been armed in the past in similar situations. 2005 New Orleans we were armed and had orders to shoot back.
Yes, but that was against citizens exercising their Constitutional rights domestic terrorists, not criminal invaders absolutely peaceful downtrodden refugees.
-
Historically a couple countries have done the fence wall thing. Their logistics were pretty impressive. For fairly short borders. And that was to keep folks in where they were able to control movements and access on the border approaches
It's particularly problematic to stop foot traffic.
The last few paragraphs in this outline what it took to seal less than 100 miles. Of far less challenging terrain.
http://www.faqs.org/espionage/Ba-Bl/Berlin-Wall.html
-
How long would 1200 miles of that take to build?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
A large portion of the border runs through Big Bend Nat'l Park. Mostly steep cliffs in there. No fence needed,
-
Historically a couple countries have done the fence wall thing. Their logistics were pretty impressive. For fairly short borders. And that was to keep folks in where they were able to control movements and access on the border approaches
It's particularly problematic to stop foot traffic.
The Chinese seemed to have managed it about 2 millennia ago...
-
A large portion of the border runs through Big Bend Nat'l Park. Mostly steep cliffs in there. No fence needed,
Maybe maybe not
https://nacla.org/blog/2013/3/13/big-bend-border-unpoliced-and-unequal
-
The Chinese seemed to have managed it about 2 millennia ago...
Are you familiar with the logistics of that endeavor?
http://www.thechinaexpat.com/facts-about-the-great-wall-of-china/
-
Are you familiar with the logistics of that endeavor?
http://www.thechinaexpat.com/facts-about-the-great-wall-of-china/
Enough to know that 2000 odd years of technology invalidates your assertion that putting up any sort of barrier is pointless.
-
Not pointless. Just not that easy. Look at what the Germans had to do. And they controlled the inbound real estate. And they had modern machines
-
Aren't there a couple of Indian Reservations along there which cross the borders as well? How would one fence off half a reservation... a different sovereign entity?
I may be off-base here, but I thought that was another problem.
Terry
-
And let's not forget the zomg the (insert non endangered critter here) migrates across the border!
I think that's mostly a ploy but it will bog you down in court
-
This is an incremental step on our part, a baby step. It is potentially a step in the right direction.
US military personal coming under fire at our own border will be hard for the media and Dems/Rinos to spin. Esp if they are there in a non combat role.
Perry could be milk toast on the issue and is pulling a scam. Or he could be laying the groundwork for what will become part of a new narrative. Flooding our country with dependents and criminals is a subversive act of war. How do you convince the sheeple to take notice? You have to build a case.
My mother in Florida had a reasonably high opinion of the Guatemalans down there. Hard working friendly folks. They do a lot of the landscape work in FL. My concern is the real bad guys slipping in during the confusion using the Guatemalans as cover. Not to mention it's our flipping border, respect it.
-
Indeed. look at what the Germans did. They secured 900 mile of border for 41 years. Yes it took logistics, and money. But it was done with tech of almost 60 years ago. SOVIET tech of almost 60 years ago and conscript labor.
Aprox. half a million folks made it over in that 41 years. and most of those were in Berlin.It's much harder to secure something like that in a city with buildings right up on the border and bad sight lines. But even so, if we slowed the flow of illegals to 12 thousand/ year, I'd take that.
It's not nice, and it's not clean. But it's not technically challenging either. Do you honestly believe that our current military (if given permission and support from above) can't deny humans the use of any stretch of land in the world that we want to? Do you have ANY IDEA how much effort a modern military puts into area denial and control? It's like WHAT WE DO. You do realize that never in your lifetime has the US military been publicly used to anywhere close to it's capacity? Give the US military the order today, and in less then three weeks that border would be closed. if only the TXNG gets to play, it'll take longer.
It's also moot, because I've seen no evidence that any government entity in the US actually wants to stop border crossings.
-
[quoteAnd let's not forget the zomg the (insert non endangered critter here) migrates across the border!][/quote]
If we actually closed the border, we'd be killing enough Mexicans in the first month that desert tortoises would be the least of the worries.
Aren't there a couple of Indian Reservations along there which cross the borders as well? How would one fence off half a reservation... a different sovereign entity?
We moved the reservations before. Jus' saying. Everyone cries that this is a HUGE problem, but no one wants to put up with the cost of fixing it. Or just route the DMZ* around the northern part of the rez, and let Mexico deal with them.
*Let's call a thing by it's name. If you want the border closed, it'll take more then a fence.
-
The Germans used 10k troops to secure less than 100 miles of border.
sed.
The border fencing off West Berlin from East Germany was 155 km. (96 mi.) in length. The actual concrete structure that became infamous was only 107 km. (66.5mi.) in length, the remainder of the border was sealed off by wire and fences. More than 300 watch towers were built along the border, as well as 105 km. (65 mi.) of anti-vehicle ditches, more than 20 concrete bunkers, and all patrolled by several hundred dogs and more than ten thousand guards.
Read more: http://www.faqs.org/espionage/Ba-Bl/Berlin-Wall.html#ixzz38XEOJUQr
-
We moved the reservations before. Jus' saying. Everyone cries that this is a HUGE problem, but no one wants to put up with the cost of fixing it. Or just route the DMZ* around the northern part of the rez, and let Mexico deal with them.
*Let's call a thing by it's name. If you want the border closed, it'll take more then a fence.
I wonder how many folks are gonna shoot kids. Not talk about it but do it.
And the last time we bent the tribes over they hadn't figured out to send their kids to law school. It won't be as easy this time. No gatling guns and cannons against bows and rifles.its gonna be lawyer vs lawyer
-
That's one hell of a slinky.
Everyone loves a slinky
-
Here's a couple interesting opinions
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/04/30/226103/keep-beefing-up-border-patrol.html
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/28/nation/la-na-texas-fence-20110228
-
I wonder how many folks are gonna shoot kids. Not talk about it but do it.
And the last time we bent the tribes over they hadn't figured out to send their kids to law school. It won't be as easy this time. No gatling guns and cannons against bows and rifles.its gonna be lawyer vs lawyer
You're missing the point. The point I always make when we talk about sending troops to the border. It's a binary solution set.
Either there's the political will in this country to let the.mil actually close the border. That means marshal law in the border region and a bunch of dead Central Americans.
Or there's not the will. In which case you are wasting time and money with troops doing things that could be accomplished cheaper and easier with cops, farmers, volunteers, or hell migrant workers hired from Home Depot's parking lot.
If the political will exists, the exercise is trivially easy. All the wailing of "borders are hard to close" is BS. Just do it. Let the lawyers sue. What are they going to do? Even if they get an injunction before the borders sealed, which is unlikely, who will enforce it?
If the will doesn't exist (and it currently, emphatically does not) then quit crying about "sending the troops" and quit deploying guardsman who have probably already spent plenty of time away from home in a desert.
I wonder how many folks are gonna shoot kids.
What part of "mine field" did you not understand? There are no kids anywhere nearby when you fly and/or drive the vehicle by. And there'd probably be plenty if you wanted to mount an AC-130 or Stryker over watch. There always seems to be enough.
Read what I'm saying. All this political rhetoric about "sending troops to the border" is dangerous not because it's hard to close the border with a military, but precisely because it's not hard. It's just costly. And one day soon, mark my words, someone's going to give it a shot.
-
You missed the part about no more mines? And when those mines blow up someone nonbrown? That's gonna upset even the faithful. And realistically it's gonna happen.
I think you are correct in saying we lack the political will.
I think we are approaching this with the same mindset we used on the war on some drugs. Same mistake different problem
-
The southern border is not going to mined in our lifetime. It probably never will.
Just an administration being serious about border security (building walls, increasing resources to patrol, sending back those who enter without permission etc) would slow the flow down to something more manageable.
The lack of will to enforce our existing laws as well as the nearly treasonous comments from elected officials regarding the border are the major problem. Not the lack of mine fields.
-
Tangential, but interesting. Published about a month ago:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/06/27/fact-sheet-changes-us-anti-personnel-landmine-policy
The United States announced today that it will not produce or otherwise acquire any anti-personnel landmines (APL) in the future, including to replace expiring stockpiles. The announcement, delivered at the Third Review Conference of the Ottawa Convention in Maputo, Mozambique, underscores the U.S. commitment to the spirit and humanitarian aims of the Ottawa Convention, the treaty that prohibits the use, stockpiling, production, and transfer of APL. The U.S. delegation in Maputo further announced that the United States is diligently pursuing solutions that would be compliant with and that would ultimately allow the United States to accede to the Ottawa Convention.
That is not good news for the Korean DMZ and Gitmo...
-
The objective behind calling out the TNG has been accomplished:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2014/07/28/polling-trends-that-matter/
Early 2016 polling, as I’ve said before, is of limited utility. However, dramatic movement for or against a candidate is worth noting. In that department, Texas Gov. Rick Perry stands out. He is in a statistical tie for first, up five points in a month, in the latest CNN poll. We’ve noted his great improvement and impressive performance on immigration and foreign policy. Others seem to agree.
"Impressive performance on immigration." In this case, "performance" is the sort that occurs on a stage.
I would like to be proved wrong to the extent that Perry has had a real change of heart from supporting illegals' gobbling up of taxpayer dollars, their free movement, and their displacement of Americans in jobs and the culture. Given past performance, that is not the way to bet.
-
No worries. Whatever happens you'll find some way to be irritated about it, so you're safe. :laugh:
Brad