Author Topic: Senate set to consider fence bill  (Read 9492 times)

Desertdog

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,360
Senate set to consider fence bill
« on: September 19, 2006, 08:21:51 AM »
Senate set to consider fence bill
By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://www.washingtontimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20060919-122133-1476r

 
The Senate, which has been the major obstacle to strict border-security legislation this year, will take up a bill this week that calls for constructing 700 more miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border.
    "It's time to secure the border with Mexico," Majority Leader Bill Frist said last night before filing the parliamentary motions to force the House-passed bill onto the Senate floor in a final effort to get a major immigration bill on the president's desk before the elections.
    Jim Manley, a spokesman for Minority Leader Harry Reid, said the move "smacks of desperation" and was a "clear repudiation of President Bush's call for comprehensive legislation."
    The Secure Fence Act of 2006, which was easily approved by the House last week, contains none of the "comprehensive" measures that President Bush, Democrats and some Senate Republicans have demanded. Those include provisions to grant citizenship rights to about 10 million illegal aliens living in the country and a guest-worker program that would usher hundreds of thousands more foreign laborers into the U.S.
    "Mr. Frist was for comprehensive reform before he was against it," Mr. Manley said.
    On the Senate floor last night, Mr. Frist said he still supports comprehensive immigration reform legislation. But, he said, because no consensus can now be reached on other issues, Congress should move ahead with border security. It's not "enforcement only," he said, but "enforcement first."
    "Border security is the essential first step of any effort to enact immigration reform," Mr. Frist said. "Only when we have convinced the American people of our commitment to securing our borders will we be able to reach a consensus on comprehensive immigration reform."
    The last time the Senate considered a border-security-only bill, the measure failed, with all but two Democrats and 20 Republicans refusing even to debate it. Since then, several Republicans bent on comprehensive reform have told The Washington Times that they would now consider legislation that dealt only with stopping the flow of illegal aliens into the country.
    Among the most adamant supporters of comprehensive reform have been Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who helped form a coalition earlier this year to derail any legislation that failed to grant broad citizenship rights to illegals and create a guest-worker program. The group of Republican defectors also included Sen. John W. Warner of Virginia.
    Mr. McCain, Mr. Warner and Mr. Graham also have bolted party leadership by opposing Mr. Bush's proposed legislation for handling the terror suspects held at Guantanamo Bay. The specter of a showdown this week over both the Guantanamo detainees and immigration had some Republican staffers on Capitol Hill wondering whether the trio could wage a two-front battle against their own party during an election season in which control of both chambers is in question.
    By filing last night a cloture motion that will limit debate and let the Senate vote on the bill, Mr. Frist hopes to get the measure to the floor by week's end. If Democrats stall, they could push the debate well into next week. And if, as is expected, Mr. Frist introduces the bill so that amendments cannot be offered, the battle in the Senate likely will take even longer and could end in yet another stalemate.
    But the House's approval of the bill suggests that Mr. Frist might see some converts on both sides of the aisle in favor of a bill that deals only with border security.
    When the House last year approved its border-security legislation, it included almost exactly the same fencing provisions. The fence came to symbolize what many Democrats said was an unforgiving bill. They said the fence proved that Republicans harbored a hostility toward immigrants.
    But last week, the stand-alone fence bill was approved 283-138, with support from more than 20 Democrats and a handful of Republicans who dropped opposition to the earlier fence proposal.
    Still, most Democrats are adamantly opposed to the fence bill, calling it a new "Berlin Wall" and an election-year "gimmick" intended to portray them as weak on security measures. In addition, internal Republican polling has found that immigration is as powerful a motivator for voters as any issue with which Congress is grappling.
    "They're obviously done with legislating for the year," Mr. Manley said. "Now, they're just playing to their base."
    If approved by the Senate before month's end, the bill would reach President Bush's desk before the November elections.
    In addition to building double-layered fences along 700 miles of the southern border, the Secure Fence Act also calls for changing Border Patrol policy to allow agents to forcibly disable fleeing vehicles along the border. The measure also would deploy cameras, ground sensors and unmanned aerial vehicles to monitor the border.
    "This border-security package, coupled with the increased appropriations for border security, will have a real impact on our homeland security and is a vital step forward toward fixing the problem of illegal immigration," Majority Whip Mitch McConnell said yesterday.
    "We've added thousands of new Border Patrol agents and nearly 10,000 new detention beds and hundreds of miles of fencing along the border. But this legislation will take us much closer to the operational control of our border that our homeland security requires and provide law enforcement with the tools they need to get the job done," the Kentucky Republican said.

wingnutx

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 927
  • Danish Cartoonist
    • http://www.punk-rock.com
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #1 on: September 19, 2006, 08:24:28 AM »
I wish they'd send a battalion of Seabees to start building one.

Tomorrow.

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #2 on: September 19, 2006, 08:37:09 AM »
More political grandstanding in an election year, like AZ governor sending the National Guard.  How long is the border?  And what will fencing 700 miles do, other than make them look "tough on immigration"?
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

ilbob

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,546
    • Bob's blog
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #3 on: September 19, 2006, 08:45:05 AM »
Quote from: The Rabbi
More political grandstanding in an election year, like AZ governor sending the National Guard.  How long is the border?  And what will fencing 700 miles do, other than make them look "tough on immigration"?
Put the 700 miles of fence where it is needed the most as a good first start. Can't really build the whole thing overnight anyway. Best to get moving on part of it and finish it later.

I still think the best idea is to run a single strand of wire along the border, maybe 10 feet on our side with regular warning signs in appropriate languages that use of deadly force has been authorized to defend the border.

Add lots of remote surveillance and a few sonic weapons (like those that drove off the pirates trying to take over a cruise ship not long ago) on remote controlled airborne vehicles that loiter overhead.

Anyone that goes over the wire gets a loud blast.

100 yards inland the invader gets a bullet in the head from the remote controlled 50 cal sniper rifles controlled by border agents in anice A/C office somewhere 1000 miles away.
bob

Disclaimers: I am not a lawyer, cop, soldier, gunsmith, politician, plumber, electrician, or a professional practitioner of many of the other things I comment on in this forum.

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #4 on: September 19, 2006, 08:48:45 AM »
We get advice for this project from the Soviets, North Koreans, and Cubans, all of whom have experience building this sort of thing.
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

wingnutx

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 927
  • Danish Cartoonist
    • http://www.punk-rock.com
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #5 on: September 19, 2006, 08:55:20 AM »
Fences aren't meant to stop everyone, they are meant to control the flow of traffic to more manageable areas. Similar to how you string concertina wire is a way that channels people to where your machinegun is aimed.

An area that is naturally impassable to vehicles doesn't need a fence as much as a flat piece of ground, so picking the proper 700-mile stretch can do a lot of good.

You just can then deploy your agents to the unfenced areas in greater numbers.

Modifiedbrowning

  • friend
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 351
  • Best Avatar on APS
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #6 on: September 19, 2006, 05:55:19 PM »
"We get advice for this project from the Soviets, North Koreans, and Cubans, all of whom have experience building this sort of thing."

I don't recall that millions of people have tried or try to illegally enter into those countries every year.
Give Peace a Chance,
Kill all Terrorists.

wingnutx

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 927
  • Danish Cartoonist
    • http://www.punk-rock.com
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #7 on: September 19, 2006, 06:13:26 PM »
keeping people in != keeping people out

Otherwise putting locks on your door make one guilty of kidnapping.

Guest

  • Guest
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #8 on: September 19, 2006, 07:06:37 PM »
Quote from: wingnutx
keeping people in != keeping people out
You really think so?

Keeping Mexican people from entering the US doesnt strike me as being tremendously different from trying to keep people in Mexico. I mean the ends are different but the means are identical. Its just a matter of which side of the border the construction happens on. Either way, the objective is to keep specific people from crossing a specific line, and there are only so many ways of doing that.

wingnutx

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 927
  • Danish Cartoonist
    • http://www.punk-rock.com
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #9 on: September 19, 2006, 07:40:15 PM »
I'm making a moral distinction.

The means may be the same, as the means of defending my life may be the same as the means of committing murder.

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #10 on: September 20, 2006, 02:44:50 AM »
Quote from: wingnutx
I'm making a moral distinction.

The means may be the same, as the means of defending my life may be the same as the means of committing murder.
There is no moral distinction.  Lack of freedom is lack of freedom.  Whether it is Communisits keeping people in E.Berlin or N.Koreans keeping people from going over to China or Americans keeping out Mexicans.
The right of free movement of labor and capital is a basic human right.
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #11 on: September 20, 2006, 05:36:53 AM »
Quote from: The Rabbi
The right of free movement of labor and capital is a basic human right.
Hogwash.

Next, you will define Cadillac-style healthcare as a human right, then 32" plasma screens, cable tv, and subsidized school lunches as a basic human right.  Also, if it is a basic human right, why don't we provide free flights to the USA to every body who lives on the face of the earth who wants to come to the USA?

We, the USA, are a sovereign nation.  We, through our representatives have hte right to say who can or can not enter our country.  It is our call to make, not any body else's.  And we can do so using whatever criteria we desire.
Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #12 on: September 20, 2006, 05:38:02 AM »
Oh, and the comparison of securing our border to communist dictatorships is vile and beneath contempt.
Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #13 on: September 20, 2006, 05:51:04 AM »
Quote from: jfruser
Quote from: The Rabbi
The right of free movement of labor and capital is a basic human right.
Hogwash.

Next, you will define Cadillac-style healthcare as a human right, then 32" plasma screens, cable tv, and subsidized school lunches as a basic human right.  Also, if it is a basic human right, why don't we provide free flights to the USA to every body who lives on the face of the earth who wants to come to the USA?

We, the USA, are a sovereign nation.  We, through our representatives have hte right to say who can or can not enter our country.  It is our call to make, not any body else's.  And we can do so using whatever criteria we desire.
Very nice.  Equating the right of pursuit of happiness with government giveaways.  

Anyway, we can pass whatever laws we want.  But do you really think passing laws will help this situation?  Do you honestly expect that building a 700 mile fence will stop even one illegal immigrant?  And this is your tax money at work on this boondoggle so that politicians can call themselves tough on immigration.  If you actually believe this will help then you are more of a sheeple than any liberal on the 'net.
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #14 on: September 20, 2006, 05:52:11 AM »
Quote from: jfruser
Oh, and the comparison of securing our border to communist dictatorships is vile and beneath contempt.
That's certainly easier than trying to refute the basic fact that no free sovereign country has ever resorted to mining its borders to keep people from crossing.
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,428
  • My prepositions are on/in
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #15 on: September 20, 2006, 06:20:44 AM »
Quote from: The Rabbi
 The right of free movement of labor and capital is a basic human right.
By your own definition of rights, Rabbi, a right is what the law allows us to do.  Are you here taking the position that human rights are a higher law that transcends extant law?

I agree with this right you assert, but that does not conflict with the concept of a nation-state or the borders that go along with it.  I do not have a right to enter China, Mexico, Switzerland, Israel or Jamaica, and I'm not expecting to.  

We do not forbid foreigners from entering America; we have a system to allow just that.  If that system needs improvement, then let's do it.  In the meantime, breaking the law should be prevented and, when that fails, punished.  And how are we keeping Mexicans in Mexico?  Are we catching them out in the Pacific, and hauling them in to the authorities?
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,428
  • My prepositions are on/in
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #16 on: September 20, 2006, 06:22:30 AM »
Quote from: The Rabbi
Quote from: jfruser
Oh, and the comparison of securing our border to communist dictatorships is vile and beneath contempt.
That's certainly easier than trying to refute the basic fact that no free sovereign country has ever resorted to mining its borders to keep people from crossing.
Ever heard of that big wall in China?  No need to refute this "fact."  Whether others have done it before is not relevant.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #17 on: September 20, 2006, 08:02:27 AM »
Quote from: fistful
Quote from: The Rabbi
 The right of free movement of labor and capital is a basic human right.
By your own definition of rights, Rabbi, a right is what the law allows us to do.  Are you here taking the position that human rights are a higher law that transcends extant law?

I agree with this right you assert, but that does not conflict with the concept of a nation-state or the borders that go along with it.  I do not have a right to enter China, Mexico, Switzerland, Israel or Jamaica, and I'm not expecting to.  

We do not forbid foreigners from entering America; we have a system to allow just that.  If that system needs improvement, then let's do it.  In the meantime, breaking the law should be prevented and, when that fails, punished.  And how are we keeping Mexicans in Mexico?  Are we catching them out in the Pacific, and hauling them in to the authorities?
You make a good point.
But free movement of labor and capital is not only a desideratum, it is practically a law of nature.  Close it off and it will find some other way of getting around it.  Like currency controls, this never works.
So you'll agree that the punitive approach to illegal immigration is a failure and something better, like a guest worker program, would be an improvement?
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

The Rabbi

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,435
  • "Ahh, Jeez. Not this sh*t again!"
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #18 on: September 20, 2006, 08:04:04 AM »
Quote from: fistful
Quote from: The Rabbi
Quote from: jfruser
Oh, and the comparison of securing our border to communist dictatorships is vile and beneath contempt.
That's certainly easier than trying to refute the basic fact that no free sovereign country has ever resorted to mining its borders to keep people from crossing.
Ever heard of that big wall in China?  No need to refute this "fact."  Whether others have done it before is not relevant.
I dont understand your point.
The Great Wall was built for defense against hostile armies.  It was not built either to keep citizens/subjects in or to keep peaceful foreigners out.  And I wouldn;t call feudal China a "free sovereign country" in any sense we understand the term.
Fight state-sponsored Islamic terrorism: Bomb France now!

Vote Libertarian: It Not Like It Matters Anyway.

Matthew Carberry

  • Formerly carebear
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,281
  • Fiat justitia, pereat mundus
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #19 on: September 20, 2006, 08:35:51 AM »
Quote from: The Rabbi
I dont understand your point.
The Great Wall was built for defense against hostile armies.  It was not built either to keep citizens/subjects in or to keep peaceful foreigners out.  And I wouldn;t call feudal China a "free sovereign country" in any sense we understand the term.
Define "hostile army" in terms of effect on a society.  If you cross the border of a sovereign nation without following their rules you are "invading" and definitely trespassing and they have every right to send you home.  

On a micro level the "free movement of labor" doesn't allow you to just walk into my factory and pick up a hammer.  You have to apply for employment, compete with others for the limited number of positions, undergo my screening and only then be employed.  The same stands as true and necessary on the macro level.

I really have a problem with the idea that insisting that folks follow immigration law (ours is not particularly onerous) is, in practice or theory, tantamount to "imprisoning them in their own country".  It is a crime everywhere in the world to just walk over a border unannounced, has been since the rise of the nation-state, it's part of the definition of national sovereignty.  You couldn't even just walk into Athens and take up residence as a Thebian without undergoing some sorts of controls.  This is hardly a new idea, having rules for occupancy and citizenship.

We don't let foreign merchandise, tourists, diplomats or even non-citizen family members of citizens to come in without visas, customs controls and such.  Why is requiring them for folks who want to work any more heinous?
"Not all unwise laws are unconstitutional laws, even where constitutional rights are potentially involved." - Eugene Volokh

"As for affecting your movement, your Rascal should be able to achieve the the same speeds no matter what holster rig you are wearing."

Desertdog

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,360
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #20 on: September 20, 2006, 08:50:13 AM »
Quote
Keeping Mexican people from entering the US doesnt strike me as being tremendously different from trying to keep people in Mexico.
You seem to be forgetting that there are LEGAL ways to enter this country.  The FENCE would only be to keep them from entering the USA ILLEGALLY.

Quote
The Rabbi wrote:
The right of free movement of labor and capital is a basic human right.
If you believe this, slip across the border into Mexico, Canada or any other foreign country and set up a business or get a job.  After a few months, if you are not in prison, write and let us know how you are doing.

wingnutx

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 927
  • Danish Cartoonist
    • http://www.punk-rock.com
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #21 on: September 20, 2006, 08:53:18 AM »
A wall is just a tool used by Customs/INS to make people go through proper channels.

If it is immoral, then having customs/ins and maintaining a border is immoral, period.

Assuming that a secure southern border will keep all Mexicans trapped in Mexico forever is just silly.

mtnbkr

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 15,388
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #22 on: September 20, 2006, 08:58:04 AM »
Quote from: Desertdog
If you believe this, slip across the border into Mexico, Canada or any other foreign country and set up a business or get a job.  After a few months, if you are not in prison, write and let us know how you are doing.
Dunno about Mexico, but Canada doesn't want you working there even if you're entering legally.  Several years ago, my company sent me there to do some work for a customer in Toronto.  Being a naive international traveler and not too long out of college, I truthfully answered their Customs drone's question about my purpose for visiting.  I proceeded to receive and earful about how my company should be hiring a Canadian to do the job and how he could deny my entry, etc, etc.  I got in, but found out later that what he said was true.  From then on, I was there for a "business meeting".  I wanted so bad to point out that I didn't want to be there myself and the only reason I went was because they couldn't find a qualified Canadian to do the job.

Chris

roo_ster

  • Kakistocracy--It's What's For Dinner.
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,225
  • Hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #23 on: September 20, 2006, 09:00:07 AM »
Quote from: The Rabbi
Very nice.  Equating the right of pursuit of happiness with government giveaways.  

Anyway, we can pass whatever laws we want.  But do you really think passing laws will help this situation?  Do you honestly expect that building a 700 mile fence will stop even one illegal immigrant?  And this is your tax money at work on this boondoggle so that politicians can call themselves tough on immigration.  If you actually believe this will help then you are more of a sheeple than any liberal on the 'net.
Illegal alien labor IS a government giveaway...to those that employ them and the illegals themselves.  Or, have you forgotten that taxpayers currently fund programs like public hospitals, schools, jails, welfare, & the like?  Programs that illegals make disproportionate use of.  Those that employ illegals are doing so at the cost of their taxpaying neighbors and ought to be held in contempt.

Enforcing the law will help.  Even if no more laws were passed, merely enforcing current law would attenuate the flow of illegals to the north.  Fining and arresting those that employ them would be quite edifying to those who might contemplate fleecing their taxpaying neighbors by employing illegals.  Eisenhower was able to roust huge numbers in the 1950s merely by nailing the employers and arresting illegals where found.

Well, the Israelis have built the Gaza fence and are currently building a fence on the West Bank that is larger relative to the miles of fence and size of our respective economies (US southern border vs WB fenceline).  Is the Israeli fence nothing more than a boondoggle?  Those folks on the Gaza side of the fence sure look like they would appreciate some "free movement of labor," too.  About the only thing the Gazans seem to get over the fence is mortar rounds.  So, I will acknowledge that if the illegals develop a human mortar, those illegals that use it may very well make it over.  Luckily, we have access to counterbattery radar and can locate and estimate launch & landing sites.

Quote from: The Rabbi
Quote from: jfruser
Oh, and the comparison of securing our border to communist dictatorships is vile and beneath contempt.
That's certainly easier than trying to refute the basic fact that no free sovereign country has ever resorted to mining its borders to keep people from crossing.
Hmm, I do believe S Korea is a fine counterexample.  They are pretty free, nowadays, and have been so for several decades.  

The French used mines and sure did make some "Unwelcome" signs in the guise of border forts between WWI & WWII.  I don't think that anyone could honestly say that the French were not free & sovereign before the Germans came to town.

As long were on countries that start with "F," how about Finland?  The Mannerheim line made use of mines at points, keeping in those pesky Russians at bay for a time.  Were the Finns free & sovereign before thier subjugation?

 BTW, I guess that Israel is not a free sovereign country, then.  Who'd a thunk that a guy with the handle, "The Rabbi" would endorse anti-zionist propaganda?

If you do not understand the putrescent libel you have made against the character of our border patrol agents and their support organizations by comparing them to murderous E German border guards, I would suggest a quick review on basic morality.  And history.
Regards,

roo_ster

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”
----G.K. Chesterton

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,428
  • My prepositions are on/in
Senate set to consider fence bill
« Reply #24 on: September 20, 2006, 09:38:41 AM »
Quote from: The Rabbi
So you'll agree that the punitive approach to illegal immigration is a failure and something better, like a guest worker program, would be an improvement?
Wow, Rabbi, you're talking like a drug legalizer.  And I'm still waiting for you to admit that you haven't really thought through your approach to human rights.  Look, I don't care whether you call it guest worker, green card, or if you just make it easier for people to move into or out of the country legally.  Something probably needs to be done along those lines.  What I object to is amnesty and the notion that people have a right to enter any nation they wish and act like they belong there.  

Regarding China, I took "free sovereign country" to mean an independent nation, free of foreign control.  If that is not what you meant, then my analogy is very much flawed.  On the other hand, there is reason to regard illegal immigration as a hostile force.  Still, whether others have done or not is not important.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife