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

thishereboi -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:29:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Did I say they did? But since you brought it up, why don't you enlighten us all. My post was in response to E3's assertion that the main reason for closing the border was drugs. Then why did you ask me the question? We have had an open border north and south for 230 years. The current hysteria over drugs and terrorists is a bogus attempt to hide our xenophobia. You mean your xenophobia, because honestly, you really can't speak for anyone else We are selectively obsessed with the southern border. Drugs and terrorists can presumably cross just as easily from the North. It is a much longer border. There is no demand for a fence there, however. That because they don't grow good pot in the North duh. My conclusion is that drugs and terrorism are bogus issues. Well the subject has been illegals moving over and getting jobs, so no I don't think the big stink right now is about drugs. Not sure about the terrorism part, I didn't even realize Mexico was know for its terrorists. Maybe you don't understand the differences between races and think everyone with dark skin is the same. It would explain why you keep referring to yourself as xenophobic.. I did not contest that Latinos are motivated by the need for jobs as well. I did not even mention the jobs issue. You brought it up with your comment on the Canadian living conditions. Why? Because you responded hastily and thoughtlessly? No because you said "As Domiguy pointed out, all the anger is focused on the southern border, not the Canadian line. Why? Because the Latinos "are not like us." I was merely pointing out a logical reason for this. Or you really have no answer to my principle statement? I will repeat it: America has a history of xenophobia. Many fear the cultural invasion of brown people, and use other issues to camoflage their real agenda. America has a history of a lot of things, hopefully that is changing. Personally I think your projecting, but if it keeps you happy, knock your socks off. If you wish to debate my point, all well and good. Please do so in a forthright manner without changing the subject of my post.

jlf1961 -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:31:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini I seriously doubt we would need the draft here, Jeff. Does anyone else SEE the number of able bodied, healthy unemployed people we have in this country? I mean, hello? We can also use some of the millions of young strong men in prisons on minor charges {under 10 years for minor offences} that would be willing and gladly work for an early release. It is very doable, the point is not in the doing, the point is, do we want to do it? IMHO the "issue" has never been whether we could or could not build a fence, of fucking course we could. The issue is do we want to build it, and why or why not, we don't want to build it. Marini, the manpower alone is 216,792 men and women, not counting NCOs and Officers, that is that is seven full divisions plus a regiment or two. Once you build a fence it is going to need constant patrols, so again, you are looking at manpower and cost. And once more, you cant build a fence in the middle of a river (the Rio Grand) which is so shallow you can wade across it in most places.

thishereboi -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:34:14 PM)
Define "neocon"

Marini -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:38:01 PM)
Jeff seriously, do you realize that we have millions of people in prisons for minor offences, often serving short prison sentences, that will be out in society in a few years anyway, that would volunteer to work on the wall? Can you please tell me why we could not use some of the millions of men and women that are healthy, able bodied, and would gladly work for some time off of their minor prison sentences? I see many prisoners out picking up trash, working with road crews, and "outside" of prison working on supervised work details all the time. Given prison guards constantly monitoring them, what would be the problem here?

popeye1250 -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:38:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 These are the only figures I could come up with, and they deal with Iraq, but it costs $390,000 to support one US soldier in Iraq or $1068 a day. As of Oct. 2009, total cost per month for operations in Iraq was $7.3 billion. For FY 2004, it was estimated that the average US soldier NOT on combat deployment cost $112000 a year, that is to feed, clothe, house, train, and equip. Now the border between the US and Mexico is, as previously stated, 1969 miles. Let us estimate 25 men per mile on foot patrol, that totals 49,225 men and women. That is a cost of $5.5132 Billion dollars per year, and that is the cost of just the foot soldiers. For one shift, so four shifts would be 196000 men and women and cost a total of $22billion dollars. Lets put a guard tower every two thousand feet, that is 5198 guard towers, each with four men, that is another 20,792 men, costing approxiamately $2.3 billion dollars a year. Again, one shift, so 83,168 men and women for a cost of $9.2 billion dollars for four shifts. Now then there is the cost of the additional military installations along the border to house these men and the equipment that will be needed, detention facilities to hold captured illegal aliens, the new road network so these installations can be maintained and supplied. Figure an installation to house a battalion every 20 miles, so you may as well use eminent domain and seize all the land along the border to a depth of say five miles, so that 9845 square miles of land that needs to be purchased to with more land needed around the bases established to house the troops. Considering the scope of such a project, I do believe we may have found a way to end unemployment in the United States. One more thing, we would probably need to reinstate the draft to cover the manpower needs both on the border and internationally. JLF, that's a bargain! Two years ago illegal aliens were costing us $93 Billion per year. This year I think that figure is $104 Billion! And Soldiers and Marines don't do "shifts." They can stay for a month at a time then give them two weeks off or whatever and they're already being paid so they won't cost us anymore than they are now. Hell, they can raise my taxes for that!

thishereboi -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:39:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl They came the same way as any other group... work visas that expired and they never went home. Makes me think the work visa program needs to be redesigned. That's something that should be looked at if they are serious about the problem. I thought this thread was a serious attempt at something until jlf admitted he started it to show everyone how stupid and xenophobic those neocons are. Talk about a bigot.

jlf1961 -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:40:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Define "neocon" New conservatives or the militantly right wing republicans that seem hell bent on wanting the impossible and not raising taxes to pay for it, such as a 100% secure southern border. neoconservatives are generally comfortable with a welfare state; and, while rhetorically supportive of free markets, they are willing to interfere for overriding social purposes. The term "neoconservative" was the subject of increased media coverage during the presidency of George W. Bush. with particular focus on a perceived neoconservative influence on American foreign policy, as part of the Bush Doctrine.

thishereboi -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:42:12 PM)
Thanks. I miss kittin too. I hope she is ok and just got sick of us for a while.

popeye1250 -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:44:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Define "neocon" New conservatives or the militantly right wing republicans that seem hell bent on wanting the impossible and not raising taxes to pay for it, such as a 100% secure southern border. neoconservatives are generally comfortable with a welfare state; and, while rhetorically supportive of free markets, they are willing to interfere for overriding social purposes. The term "neoconservative" was the subject of increased media coverage during the presidency of George W. Bush. with particular focus on a perceived neoconservative influence on American foreign policy, as part of the Bush Doctrine. Well thank God there's none of them in here! We get all the bleeding heart Lefties in this site who want to raise EVERYONE's taxes for some reason.

thishereboi -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:47:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Define "neocon" New conservatives or the militantly right wing republicans that seem hell bent on wanting the impossible and not raising taxes to pay for it, such as a 100% secure southern border. neoconservatives are generally comfortable with a welfare state; and, while rhetorically supportive of free markets, they are willing to interfere for overriding social purposes. The term "neoconservative" was the subject of increased media coverage during the presidency of George W. Bush. with particular focus on a perceived neoconservative influence on American foreign policy, as part of the Bush Doctrine. Oh ok, so it's a cute little phrase used to belittle others. Thanks for clearing that up. Kinda what I thought.

realwhiteknight -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:48:27 PM)
quote: lol, another poster I love to read! There are so many people posting these days that can debate and chat, without the 4th grade name calling and acting ugly. I am moved to tears. I am a sensitive soul, and mean people scare me. The Chinese will certainly own us all soon, lock, stock and barrel. Let's see how we fare under having to dance to their music. Wait. The first post I read I thought you were being serious, then I thought you were being sarcastic, and your second post (this) was sarcastic, but then I realized it was serious? Seems like I have a lot of ground to cover before I can keep up with this conversation. Oh well, at least it's not 2000 miles long, devoid of food and water and covered by landmines or pissy border patrol officers...

slvemike4u -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:48:51 PM)
Yep and all the simple minded old men who see simple answers to what they view as simple problems....it sucks,but what can you do its the internet...anyone can play!

vincentML -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:50:04 PM)
quote: We should bring the troops home from Iraq/Afghanistan and invade 75 miles into Mexican territory and set up shop. This would force not only the Mexican Oligarchy but the people there to face up to the internal problems that are Mexico. There will be no change at the border no matter what we do unless the internal problems if Mexico are addressed. DYB, I hope you are being facetious. We already did that in 1846. "Polk asks for war with Mexico. Northern Whigs fear victory would add more slave states to U.S. Declaration passes 40-2 in Senate, 174-14 in House. Whig Congressman Lincoln asks for the spot on American soil where American blood was shed." Since then our policy toward the Mexicans has been conflicted. Sometimes we want them; sometimes we don't. During the Great Depression we deported 500,000 Mexican-Americans. Then oops, along came the Second World War and we discovered we had a labor shortage so we negotiated the Bracero Program with Mexico to provide labor for our farms and railroads. This program brought many millions into the US between 1942 to 1967. But it became too costly because the Mexican Govt demanded their workers be treated humanely and given decent wages. Can you imagine the ingratitude of those fuckers not wishing to be exploited and treated like yanno slaves!! So, now with the "undocumented alien program" (bullshitting a bit here) American Corporations can freely exploit the Mexies. Given that history, the Mexicans are probably wondering why we can't face up to our internal problems [8\|] What's my point? The presence of Mexicans in the US is not a new phenomena. Nor is the hysteria over their presence. It just takes on new clothing. It has just as much to do with our internal problems as theirs.

jlf1961 -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:50:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini Jeff seriously, do you realize that we have millions of people in prisons for minor offences, often serving short prison sentences, that will be out in society in a few years anyway, that would volunteer to work on the wall? Can you please tell me why we could not use some of the millions of men and women that are healthy, able bodied, and would gladly work for some time off of their minor prison sentences? I see many prisoners out picking up trash, working with road crews, and "outside" of prison working on supervised work details all the time. Given prison guards constantly monitoring them, what would be the problem here? You seem to missing the point I was trying to make. I was talking about what it would take to patrol the wall or fence after it was built. You cant just put the thing up and not guard it. Hell, people used pick axes to go through the Berlin wall on occasion. Granted if they were caught they either ended up in prison or were shot.

Marini -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 1:59:29 PM)
Are you aware that there are area's in the United States, that has an unemployment rate of around 20%? I seriously doubt we would have any "problem" finding guards to sit in the little guard towers/and or monitor the surveillance equipment. Using all the modern technology that is available, it would hardly be comparable to the "Berlin Wall". [8\|] I think at this point, you are searching hard and trying to create reasons why this wouldn't work.

popeye1250 -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 2:04:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini Are you aware that there are area's in the United States, that has an unemployment rate of around 20%? I seriously doubt we would have any "problem" finding guards to sit in the little guard towers/and or monitor the surveilance equipment. I think at this point, you are searching hard and trying to create reasons why this wouldn't work. Marini, when someone kills someone and it costs $500k to prosecute them that doesn't seem to be a problem does it?

jlf1961 -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 2:08:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 JLF, that's a bargain! Two years ago illegal aliens were costing us $93 Billion per year. This year I think that figure is $104 Billion! And Soldiers and Marines don't do "shifts." They can stay for a month at a time then give them two weeks off or whatever and they're already being paid so they won't cost us anymore than they are now. Hell, they can raise my taxes for that! I think you missed part of what I am saying. The US Army, counting Guard and Reserves is 1,067,400 men and women. That does not count civilian personnel working for the army. We would be putting 216,792 men and women on the southern border to patrol and guard it 24/7. There would have to be a network of roads built to facilitate transporting these men and women to patrol areas, there would have to be installations built to house these men and women, plus the support forces, detention and deportation facilities to house those illegals caught crossing the border, more personnel to process the detainees, finally, you need personnel to maintain the frigging fence. I covered just one part of the cost. Figure 98 bases to house a battalion of troops plus support personnel, figure the cost at 2 billion per base, then you have to build roads to these bases for support and supply. Figure a totals of $250 billion dollars, figure a few hundred million a year to maintain the new bases and roads. Is it still a bargain?

Marini -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 2:09:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: Marini Are you aware that there are area's in the United States, that has an unemployment rate of around 20%? I seriously doubt we would have any "problem" finding guards to sit in the little guard towers/and or monitor the surveilance equipment. I think at this point, you are searching hard and trying to create reasons why this wouldn't work. Marini, when someone kills someone and it costs $500k to prosecute them that doesn't seem to be a problem does it? Of course not Popeye. Lawsuits, lawyers, judges, courts, courtrooms, jails, prisons, prison guards, etc. is one of the most profitable industries these days. 500K is small potatoes, what does it cost to keep the average prisoner on death row? I think at least a cool million.

vincentML -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 2:10:47 PM)
quote: Then why did you ask me the question? Sorry. You are a bit confused. I did not ask you any question. You replied to my post. quote: Well the subject has been illegals moving over and getting jobs, so no I don't think the big stink right now is about drugs. Not sure about the terrorism part, I didn't even realize Mexico was know for its terrorists. Maybe you don't understand the differences between races and think everyone with dark skin is the same. It would explain why you keep referring to yourself as xenophobic.. Not that Mexico is known for its terrorists but the fear of Islamic terrorists coming across the border with Mexicans has been a constant theme by the fence-builders since 9/11. And recently there has been a bit of a drug war between Mexican gangs going on along the border. That has become a cause for the fence-builders as well. It has been reported in the papers and on TV. quote: No because you said "As Domiguy pointed out, all the anger is focused on the southern border, not the Canadian line. Why? Because the Latinos "are not like us." I was merely pointing out a logical reason for this. Let me get this straight. You are saying we are angry at the Mexicans and not the Canadians because the Mexicans are poor and the Canadians are not. Really?

jlf1961 -> RE: What would it take to actually secure the border with Mexico? (7/27/2010 2:15:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini Are you aware that there are area's in the United States, that has an unemployment rate of around 20%? I seriously doubt we would have any "problem" finding guards to sit in the little guard towers/and or monitor the surveillance equipment. Using all the modern technology that is available, it would hardly be comparable to the "Berlin Wall". [8\|] I think at this point, you are searching hard and trying to create reasons why this wouldn't work. There would be more involved than just having people sitting in towers. I am pointing out that it is possible, what it would take and what it would cost, annually to secure the southern border. You will not be able to use just anyone off the street, people will have to be trained, either by the military or Border Patrol. The military is in the best position to mobilize a large enough force to do the job, just you have to build the support facilities for the men and women. I am also trying to point out that you CANNOT build a wall along the entire border, there is the border between Texas and Mexico which happens to be a river.

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875