RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico?

RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

popeye1250 -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 4:18:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Personally I find it distressing that folks ,who up till this point I held in some regard,actually believe militirizing our border is a viable and workable solution.The funny thing is none who advocate this have even contemplated that this is not the sort of mission our military trains for.Soldiers are not law enforcement personel....but as long as we go with servants shoot first,screw the questions idea that should be an issue. Wall building is supposedly done to strike a sort of "peace", but it is a "negative peace", and unsustainable because sooner or later walls come down. But until the wall does, and while in place, it creates even more distance, making a positive peace even harder to attain when it does... Think of all the walls that have been built throughout history... how effective have they been? And why is a wall necessary between Mexico and the US but not Canada and the US, and why aren't we worried about Canadians taking our jobs, lord knows they are more competitive than Mexicans are for the good ones Julia, if a "wall" only last for 100 years I'll take it! C'mon Julia, Canada is a first world country with better benefits than we have! "Mexico" is a country in name only and rapidly descending into a fourth world country because of drugs and corruption.

slvemike4u -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 4:21:31 PM)
Did Popeye just concede that Canada has better benifits than we do.....could he have been referring to health care?

popeye1250 -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 4:25:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Did Popeye just concede that Canada has better benifits than we do.....could he have been referring to health care? Mike, I did, look at this POS healthcare bill that Bush 3 has given us!

jlf1961 -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 4:38:51 PM)
I do believe, with the costs that I pointed out, the logistics of militarizing the border, and the fact it is not just illegal immigrants that have to be dealt with, securing the southern border is not going to be an easy task. While I have noticed more conservatives and conservative leaning independents advocating such a program, the problems of detention, deportation of illegals remains. This means in addition to the bases to house the troops, detention centers (NWO conspiracy theorists will point out we can use the FEMA detention Camps) and personnel to guard the detainees. There is this article concerning the project: US-Mexico Border Fence / Great Wall of Mexico Secure Fence. quote: In November 2005, DHS announced the launch of the Secure Border Initiative (SBI), a multiyear, multibillion-dollar program aimed at securing U.S. borders and reducing illegal immigration. CBP’s SBI program office is responsible for managing the SBI program and for developing a comprehensive border protection system. This system has two main components: SBInet, which employs radars, sensors, and cameras to detect, identify, and classify the threat level associated with an illegal entry into the United States between the ports of entry, and SBI tactical infrastructure (TI), fencing, roads, and lighting intended to enhance U.S. Border Patrol agents’ ability to respond to the area of the illegal entry and bring the situation to a law enforcement resolution (i.e., arrest). The current focus of the SBI program is on the southwest border areas between ports of entry that CBP has designated as having the highest need for enhanced border security because of serious vulnerabilities. full article here. Then there is this nice little tidbit: quote: Study: Price for border fence up to $49 billion Study says fence cost could reach $49 billion / Lawmakers' estimate falls far short of total, research service says The cost of building and maintaining a double set of steel fences along 700 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border could be five to 25 times greater than congressional leaders forecast last year, or as much as $49 billion over the expected 25-year life span of the fence, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. A little-noticed study the research service released in December notes that even the $49 billion does not include the expense of acquiring private land along hundreds of miles of border or the cost of labor if the job is done by private contractors -- both of which could drive the price billions of dollars higher. full article Alright, we have conservatives and neoconservatives screaming about the budget deficit, screaming about higher taxes, and President Obama not doing anything about the problem. Alright, for everyone advocating a fence, with military patrols and guards, where in the hell are you going to come up with the money to do it? It is going to either 1) raise taxes across the board, and primarily the wealthy, or 2) increase the deficit.

LadyPact -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 4:45:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Personally I find it distressing that folks ,who up till this point I held in some regard,actually believe militirizing our border is a viable and workable solution.The funny thing is none who advocate this have even contemplated that this is not the sort of mission our military trains for.Soldiers are not law enforcement personel....but as long as we go with servants shoot first,screw the questions idea that should be an issue. Actually, it does. Soldiers of the National Guard have been brought in specifically to police people many times where there has been a state of emergency. That includes having to handle a situation such as this. I don't think that you're suggesting that the INS has superior training to our Nation's military. The thread original asked what would work. Militarizing the boarder would work. A wall would work. The Berlin wall, in it's four different phases, worked for twenty-eight years. That's a pretty effective wall. This is a bit over the top, but people need to start thinking of the United States less as a country of unlimited resources for the world and start thinking of it with the realization that we have limited means. If you had some type of emergency shelter that had enough food, water, and medical supplies to sustain a dozen people for the six months you needed to stay in there, if there was an emergency, you and eleven people would go in it. You wouldn't invite the whole neighborhood along. Even if you stretched a bit and let more people in, at some point, you would have to say it is holding all that it can and there just wasn't enough resources for everybody.

slvemike4u -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 4:51:27 PM)
When the nationaln guard is called in a "state of emergency" is declared...with corresponding rules of engagement...such as shoot on sight those caught looting.What you are basically calling for is for troops to act as law enforcement officers absent the state of emergency and its roe.....soldiers do not make good jailers nor policeman....every historical attempt to use troops in such a capacity has led to lousy results....not to mention the corresponding degradation of their combat abilities....their is also the loss of unit morale that inevitably accompanies prolonged exposure to such duty.

thishereboi -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 4:57:22 PM)
quote: Think of all the walls that have been built throughout history... how effective have they been? And why is a wall necessary between Mexico and the US but not Canada and the US, and why aren't we worried about Canadians taking our jobs, lord knows they are more competitive than Mexicans are for the good ones Are you suggesting that the situation in Canada is the same as it is in Mexico? Do you really believe that things are so bad for our northern neighbors, that they would be willing to do anything to come here for a better life?

thishereboi -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 5:01:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Personally I find it distressing that folks ,who up till this point I held in some regard,actually believe militirizing our border is a viable and workable solution.The funny thing is none who advocate this have even contemplated that this is not the sort of mission our military trains for.Soldiers are not law enforcement personel....but as long as we go with servants shoot first,screw the questions idea that should be an issue. But are they seriously suggesting this is a good idea or are they responding to jlf who keeps going on about it and how it won't work. I think putting up a wall is the wrong way to go, but I acknowledge that if that is the what they decided to do, it is possible.

HardHum -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 5:02:50 PM)
Huge staples...and lots of them.

jlf1961 -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 5:18:37 PM)
Skvemike, that is, as you have stated, a problem. However, at one time, it was the job of the US Army to guard the border, now granted that was over 100 years ago, and they were guarding the border against Indians raiding into the US from enclaves in Mexico, but still, it was their job. Today, we would be looking at a mechanized infantry force, over 221,000 men who would have to be rotated off the border every few months to keep them effective. And you are right concerning the ROE. I still want to know where the conservatives and neocons are going to come up with the funding to do anything that is even remotely workable.

juliaoceania -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 5:19:52 PM)
quote: Julia, if a "wall" only last for 100 years I'll take it! C'mon Julia, Canada is a first world country with better benefits than we have! "Mexico" is a country in name only and rapidly descending into a fourth world country because of drugs and corruption I notice something about your posts... you completely skip over any sort of information in them that does not agree with your so-called "moderate" agenda, and then you post sound-bytes that you get from listening to whatever talking head pundit has your attention this week. You think taking other people's opinions and parroting them as your own somehow disguises your very obvious ignorance, while at the same time attacking anyone who desires to learn more and makes an effort to. You ridicule knowledge and celebrate ignorance... you, simply put, are a fool

LadyPact -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 5:27:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u When the nationaln guard is called in a "state of emergency" is declared...with corresponding rules of engagement...such as shoot on sight those caught looting.What you are basically calling for is for troops to act as law enforcement officers absent the state of emergency and its roe.....soldiers do not make good jailers nor policeman....every historical attempt to use troops in such a capacity has led to lousy results....not to mention the corresponding degradation of their combat abilities....their is also the loss of unit morale that inevitably accompanies prolonged exposure to such duty. This is a side debate in it's entirety. In most military deployments that include the active duty and activated Reservists, the term is one day short of one year. At that time, they are rotated out. There is nothing here saying that the same thing couldn't happen. I tend to think that morale would be a bit better for those who are still in the country and have more opportunity to see their families than those who are deployed abroad. We're not talking about people being put at the post for a multiple year term. Unless I'm missing it, there really is no reason not to consider the boarder issues a state of emergency. I think it is important to remember that we are not dealing with US citizens here. They are not entitled to the same rights within out boarders. We, as a nation, have every right to close that boarder to anyone not using the visa process. Again, it was asked what would work. I stand in My opinion of saying this would accomplish what the OP brought in his question.

slvemike4u -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 6:01:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: Julia, if a "wall" only last for 100 years I'll take it! C'mon Julia, Canada is a first world country with better benefits than we have! "Mexico" is a country in name only and rapidly descending into a fourth world country because of drugs and corruption I notice something about your posts... you completely skip over any sort of information in them that does not agree with your so-called "moderate" agenda, and then you post sound-bytes that you get from listening to whatever talking head pundit has your attention this week. You think taking other people's opinions and parroting them as your own somehow disguises your very obvious ignorance, while at the same time attacking anyone who desires to learn more and makes an effort to. You ridicule knowledge and celebrate ignorance... you, simply put, are a fool Julia please lay all blame at the feet of some guy named Howie Carr....seems to be Popeyes sole source of information.....lol.

slvemike4u -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 6:07:33 PM)
Thier most certainly would be a morale problem LP.Asking young men to stop,detain and perhaps shoot unarmed civilians(no matter what country they are citizens of) will extract a price on their psyches.Not to mention the sheer boredom associated with such duty. Seconds would seem as minutes.....minutes like days.....a day short of a year,nothing less than a lifetime.

thornhappy -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 6:07:46 PM)
Hey, you're leaving out the meatpacking operations in the high plains! quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead Maybe stopping employers in California and Texas from hiring Mexicans who've sneaked across the border would have the desired effect, but paying a living wage is something the neocons have been dead against since long before Futuyama disowned them.

juliaoceania -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 6:17:45 PM)
quote: Julia please lay all blame at the feet of some guy named Howie Carr....seems to be Popeyes sole source of information.....lol. Yes, I caught Domi's expose' on the Howie Carr/Popeye connection... he really showed us where all the dots were

slvemike4u -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 6:23:12 PM)
Seems all of these "independants"have some whack job whispering in their ears.Pops has chosen Howie over Rush and Beck.[:D]

thornhappy -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 6:23:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Still, no answers to the question, interesting. Are you fucking kidding me here? I could think of several ways off the top of my head. #1 We have advanced technology and can send people to the moon but we can't secure our own borders? 8 years, $170 billion in 2005 dollars just for the Apollo program, a whole bunch of people. That's just a bit of what it took to get to the moon.

DomImus -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 6:24:55 PM)
Get a shitload of white paint. Locate every point on the border that is easily crossed or popular for crossing. Paint a crosswalk at each of the above points. Problem solved.

juliaoceania -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 6:25:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Seems all of these "independants"have some whack job whispering in their ears.Pops has chosen Howie over Rush and Beck.[:D] Well if Carr tells popeye he is a "moderate independent" it must be true... irrefutable source, and all

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.882813E-02