Don't Mess with Texas

Don't Mess with Texas (Full Version)

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

Message

Arturas -> Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 9:04:46 AM)
Texas has called up the National Guard and Reserve units in Texas. They are being armed and placed on the southern Texas border by the Governor of that Great State after first asking for Federal forces, since rejected. The Governor can do this only in specific situations. One of these is to repel an invasion. He has used his power and considers it his responsibility to repel an invasion. One thousand troops are being sent to patrol the border with additional units ready to respond to trouble. Who can deny Texas the right to defend itself? Who has the power to do so? What states will be next? A new Confederation in it's infancy?

mnottertail -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 9:30:58 AM)
LOL. So long as Texas pays for it, and they don't do anything illegal....who fuckin cares?

Lucylastic -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 9:48:44 AM)
1. National guard will be there as a visual deterrent, they cannot physically detain, or arrest anyone. THey also cannot move into Customs jurisdiction unless they involve the feds. THey cannot send anyone back across the border. They also cannot use their weapons to stop illegal immigrants coming over the border(thank god) Altho I forsee various types of "Patriots" having oops moments. Its gonna cost 12 million a month, but perry wont be paying for it, the feds will, 2. In 2010 Obama ordered the National Guard in to assist border patrol. He has sent this week, several experts down to see if the national guard is needed. My question is why hasnt he been part of an effort to get an immigration bill passed?

Lucylastic -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 9:49:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail LOL. So long as Texas pays for it, and they don't do anything illegal....who fuckin cares? Perry wants the feds to pay for it

mnottertail -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 10:07:03 AM)
want in one hand, shit in another, see which one fills up faster. These huge bloated federal government big government, and handouts to these dirt poor ignorant nutsacker states and nutsacker administrations gotta quit. This borrow and spend the nutsackers been doing these 30-40 years aint working. Its fiscally irresponsible.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 10:16:31 AM)
While I do believe that Texas (or any state) has a right to "repel an invasion", I think they have to be very careful how they go about defining it. Several years ago, one of my best friends worked for the Border Patrol. This was when they were under INS; not "Homeland" Security. Two vehicles from the Mexican Federales crossed the border with military weapons (one vehicle had a mounted machine gun). They ("mistakenly", according to them) fired on USBP agents. All things considered, this was an *armed* invasion with hostilities displayed. The whole thing was kept fairly hush-hush but there were a few articles. The long-and-short of it was that our Federal government decided that it was no big deal and the Federales were released from custody with an apology. Now, these guys were in the custody of our federal agents but what if it had been the Texas Notional Guard or some Rangers, even? The federal government, stepping in, would have pissed me off. Does the governor of Texas have the legal right to call up the Guard to do something that POTUS should be doing? Well, this POTUS has proven that the rule of law means nothing to him so ... Screen captures *still* RULE! Ya feel me?

mnottertail -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 10:20:45 AM)
well, the potus et al have proven that the rule of law is inviolate. not a potus problem. its states rights issue at the moment. they want to throw money at a situation they cannot change one iota by doing this. Just to feel their nutsackerism. The governor of Texas can do quite a bit in his own state. Even use the national guard. So long as he is buying.

joether -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 11:17:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas Texas has called up the National Guard and Reserve units in Texas. They are being armed and placed on the southern Texas border by the Governor of that Great State after first asking for Federal forces, since rejected. The Governor can do this only in specific situations. One of these is to repel an invasion. He has used his power and considers it his responsibility to repel an invasion. One thousand troops are being sent to patrol the border with additional units ready to respond to trouble. Who can deny Texas the right to defend itself? Who has the power to do so? What states will be next? A new Confederation in it's infancy? It all sounds nice on paper, but reality is different. A ) Gov. Perry sent 1,000 National Guard to patrol a 1,350 mile border. Even with one soldier per mile, that's still 350 miles left unobserved. As Lucy points out, they can not do anything of a law enforcement power. They can not intimidate, bully, harass, or otherwise physically impede those crossing the border. If fired upon, they will of course return fire. But, ten armed drug smugglers verse one national guardsmen is not even a fair fight. B ) Whom ever calls up the National Guard is the one paying for the National Guard. In this case, Gov. Perry did the calling, so Texas is paying an estimated $12 million/month for those 1,000 Guardsmen to operate. The Governor would like the President to pay the bill, since that would mean the other 49 states are picking up the tab. Why should those opposed to the conservative ideology on both border security and immigration reform pay the bill? Those that want the bill paid will just have to compromise on future stuff; and they don't want to. Those that want to improve upon border security and immigration reform are just tired of the conservative bullshit, games, and excuses; when conservatives want to actually make a deal, everyone else will step in to help pay the bill. C ) A thousand soldiers is nothing more than a political stunt. To actually secure the border, week after week, day and night, would take about 6,000-11,000 soldiers. Even Gov. Perry admits that about 6,000 soldiers would be the bare minimal number as well. So this 'adding soldiers to the border' as I stated is a political stunt to appeal 'The Low Information Voters' into the false belief that Republicans are doing something about the border and not the Democrats. Time will tell us just how stupid and ignorant those people are, right? D ) That the Governor and the President are talking on the subject matter, might be a good thing. Instead of waiting until after the mid-term election, dealing with the problem NOW. A concept the Republicans in the US House of Representatives could learn from....

mnottertail -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 11:29:44 AM)
So they can radio in up their chain of command, then the big state commander can go grab up his counter part who can then down the chain of command thru ICE, and the guys will be in British Columbia, by the time the border guards get the word. Gonna work slick and be a big employment boondoggle for that poor, toothless state.

Arturas -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 11:47:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas Texas has called up the National Guard and Reserve units in Texas. They are being armed and placed on the southern Texas border by the Governor of that Great State after first asking for Federal forces, since rejected. The Governor can do this only in specific situations. One of these is to repel an invasion. He has used his power and considers it his responsibility to repel an invasion. One thousand troops are being sent to patrol the border with additional units ready to respond to trouble. Who can deny Texas the right to defend itself? Who has the power to do so? What states will be next? A new Confederation in it's infancy? It all sounds nice on paper, but reality is different. A ) Gov. Perry sent 1,000 National Guard to patrol a 1,350 mile border. Even with one soldier per mile, that's still 350 miles left unobserved. As Lucy points out, they can not do anything of a law enforcement power. They can not intimidate, bully, harass, or otherwise physically impede those crossing the border. If fired upon, they will of course return fire. But, ten armed drug smugglers verse one national guardsmen is not even a fair fight. B ) Whom ever calls up the National Guard is the one paying for the National Guard. In this case, Gov. Perry did the calling, so Texas is paying an estimated $12 million/month for those 1,000 Guardsmen to operate. The Governor would like the President to pay the bill, since that would mean the other 49 states are picking up the tab. Why should those opposed to the conservative ideology on both border security and immigration reform pay the bill? Those that want the bill paid will just have to compromise on future stuff; and they don't want to. Those that want to improve upon border security and immigration reform are just tired of the conservative bullshit, games, and excuses; when conservatives want to actually make a deal, everyone else will step in to help pay the bill. C ) A thousand soldiers is nothing more than a political stunt. To actually secure the border, week after week, day and night, would take about 6,000-11,000 soldiers. Even Gov. Perry admits that about 6,000 soldiers would be the bare minimal number as well. So this 'adding soldiers to the border' as I stated is a political stunt to appeal 'The Low Information Voters' into the false belief that Republicans are doing something about the border and not the Democrats. Time will tell us just how stupid and ignorant those people are, right? D ) That the Governor and the President are talking on the subject matter, might be a good thing. Instead of waiting until after the mid-term election, dealing with the problem NOW. A concept the Republicans in the US House of Representatives could learn from.... Nice try. They are ordered up to prevent an invasion. They don't have to be policemen or women. They are to be solders at war. The corner has been turned, Perry has taken the decision on what to do with the Texas border out of federal hands with this move. Don't think border guards, think 1000 solders patrolling a war front with more ready troops as a reaction force. The rules are changed now. Perry can only send them during a war situation and since he sent them, then he considers Texas is at war now. Besides, the 1000 are the immediate response, invasions take more. Who are you when you take control away from the Federal Government? A Confederate. You are the Confederate State of Texas in action if not in name, yet.

mnottertail -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 11:53:50 AM)
They shoot, or knife, or lay one fuckin hand on one fuckin kid there, or interfere with federal police officers in any way, they will get fuckin nuked, the entire fuckin worthless, toothless state.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 12:35:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas quote: ORIGINAL: joether A ) Gov. Perry sent 1,000 National Guard to patrol a 1,350 mile border. Even with one soldier per mile, that's still 350 miles left unobserved. As Lucy points out, they can not do anything of a law enforcement power. They can not intimidate, bully, harass, or otherwise physically impede those crossing the border. If fired upon, they will of course return fire. But, ten armed drug smugglers verse one national guardsmen is not even a fair fight. Conveniently omitting the 3,200 BP agents already stationed in the Rio Grande Valley. That's 4,200, in total. By my math, that's just over three enforcers per mile. That still leaves 3,000 yards between them (roughly) but, it's an improvement. Now, we could talk about 24 hour per day coverage and divide that 3.1 by three, giving us that magical "one soldier per mile" number. It's too bad a governor has to act where the federal government should be acting. I seem to remember some phrase about " ... provide for the common defense ..." Screen captures *still* RULE! Ya feel me?

subrosaDom -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 12:47:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas quote: ORIGINAL: joether A ) Gov. Perry sent 1,000 National Guard to patrol a 1,350 mile border. Even with one soldier per mile, that's still 350 miles left unobserved. As Lucy points out, they can not do anything of a law enforcement power. They can not intimidate, bully, harass, or otherwise physically impede those crossing the border. If fired upon, they will of course return fire. But, ten armed drug smugglers verse one national guardsmen is not even a fair fight. Conveniently omitting the 3,200 BP agents already stationed in the Rio Grande Valley. That's 4,200, in total. By my math, that's just over three enforcers per mile. That still leaves 3,000 yards between them (roughly) but, it's an improvement. Now, we could talk about 24 hour per day coverage and divide that 3.1 by three, giving us that magical "one soldier per mile" number. It's too bad a governor has to act where the federal government should be acting. I seem to remember some phrase about " ... provide for the common defense ..." Screen captures *still* RULE! Ya feel me? Well Obama does provide for the common defense ... of the Muslim Brotherhood and its proxies.

joether -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 1:04:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas Texas has called up the National Guard and Reserve units in Texas. They are being armed and placed on the southern Texas border by the Governor of that Great State after first asking for Federal forces, since rejected. The Governor can do this only in specific situations. One of these is to repel an invasion. He has used his power and considers it his responsibility to repel an invasion. One thousand troops are being sent to patrol the border with additional units ready to respond to trouble. Who can deny Texas the right to defend itself? Who has the power to do so? What states will be next? A new Confederation in it's infancy? It all sounds nice on paper, but reality is different. A ) Gov. Perry sent 1,000 National Guard to patrol a 1,350 mile border. Even with one soldier per mile, that's still 350 miles left unobserved. As Lucy points out, they can not do anything of a law enforcement power. They can not intimidate, bully, harass, or otherwise physically impede those crossing the border. If fired upon, they will of course return fire. But, ten armed drug smugglers verse one national guardsmen is not even a fair fight. B ) Whom ever calls up the National Guard is the one paying for the National Guard. In this case, Gov. Perry did the calling, so Texas is paying an estimated $12 million/month for those 1,000 Guardsmen to operate. The Governor would like the President to pay the bill, since that would mean the other 49 states are picking up the tab. Why should those opposed to the conservative ideology on both border security and immigration reform pay the bill? Those that want the bill paid will just have to compromise on future stuff; and they don't want to. Those that want to improve upon border security and immigration reform are just tired of the conservative bullshit, games, and excuses; when conservatives want to actually make a deal, everyone else will step in to help pay the bill. C ) A thousand soldiers is nothing more than a political stunt. To actually secure the border, week after week, day and night, would take about 6,000-11,000 soldiers. Even Gov. Perry admits that about 6,000 soldiers would be the bare minimal number as well. So this 'adding soldiers to the border' as I stated is a political stunt to appeal 'The Low Information Voters' into the false belief that Republicans are doing something about the border and not the Democrats. Time will tell us just how stupid and ignorant those people are, right? D ) That the Governor and the President are talking on the subject matter, might be a good thing. Instead of waiting until after the mid-term election, dealing with the problem NOW. A concept the Republicans in the US House of Representatives could learn from.... Nice try. They are ordered up to prevent an invasion. They don't have to be policemen or women. They are to be solders at war. The corner has been turned, Perry has taken the decision on what to do with the Texas border out of federal hands with this move. Don't think border guards, think 1000 solders patrolling a war front with more ready troops as a reaction force. The rules are changed now. Perry can only send them during a war situation and since he sent them, then he considers Texas is at war now. Besides, the 1000 are the immediate response, invasions take more. Who are you when you take control away from the Federal Government? A Confederate. You are the Confederate State of Texas in action if not in name, yet. Yes, an invasion of little, defenseless, scared shitless children rushing away from very violent and horrible conditions. Must take a 'big, tough, Texas guardsman' to defend the United States of America from that threat.... Those National Guardsman are NOT law enforcement but being portrayed as police officers. The only people that either cant accept that or acknowledge it are 'The Low Information Voter'. They have ZERO, Law Enforcement powers. They can not hinder, attack, or capture those crossing the border illegally. They can notify LAW ENFORCEMENT to handle the problem. In order for those soldiers to behave under a condition of war....the UNITED STATES of AMERICA has to .....DECLARE....WAR. Last I checked, the United States of America declared war in most recent records on three nations: Germany, Italy, and Japan in 1941. Maybe you should update your history books to 2014.... Also, Texas is a state within the UNITED STATES of America. The Confederacy....LOST THE WAR well over a hundred years age. How out of date are your history books, anyways? Texas can not declare war on its own towards a foreign entity; they are barred from it with a 'little known' document called the US Constitution. Again...how FREAKY out of date is your history books? That's well over 238 years....

joether -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 1:05:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrosaDom quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas quote: ORIGINAL: joether A ) Gov. Perry sent 1,000 National Guard to patrol a 1,350 mile border. Even with one soldier per mile, that's still 350 miles left unobserved. As Lucy points out, they can not do anything of a law enforcement power. They can not intimidate, bully, harass, or otherwise physically impede those crossing the border. If fired upon, they will of course return fire. But, ten armed drug smugglers verse one national guardsmen is not even a fair fight. Conveniently omitting the 3,200 BP agents already stationed in the Rio Grande Valley. That's 4,200, in total. By my math, that's just over three enforcers per mile. That still leaves 3,000 yards between them (roughly) but, it's an improvement. Now, we could talk about 24 hour per day coverage and divide that 3.1 by three, giving us that magical "one soldier per mile" number. It's too bad a governor has to act where the federal government should be acting. I seem to remember some phrase about " ... provide for the common defense ..." Screen captures *still* RULE! Ya feel me? Well Obama does provide for the common defense ... of the Muslim Brotherhood and its proxies. Immature comments like this only serve to remind the rest of the nation of why conservatives/libertarians should NEVER be given political power....

joether -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 1:20:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas quote: ORIGINAL: joether A ) Gov. Perry sent 1,000 National Guard to patrol a 1,350 mile border. Even with one soldier per mile, that's still 350 miles left unobserved. As Lucy points out, they can not do anything of a law enforcement power. They can not intimidate, bully, harass, or otherwise physically impede those crossing the border. If fired upon, they will of course return fire. But, ten armed drug smugglers verse one national guardsmen is not even a fair fight. Conveniently omitting the 3,200 BP agents already stationed in the Rio Grande Valley. That's 4,200, in total. By my math, that's just over three enforcers per mile. That still leaves 3,000 yards between them (roughly) but, it's an improvement. Now, we could talk about 24 hour per day coverage and divide that 3.1 by three, giving us that magical "one soldier per mile" number. It's too bad a governor has to act where the federal government should be acting. I seem to remember some phrase about " ... provide for the common defense ..." You misunderstood, the Governor of Texas was stating what experts on the subject have been stating: That 1,000 Guardsmen need another 6,000 at minimum to secure the border. Its taking into account all other local, state, and federal resources. How well does three 'enforcers' as you call them, handle twenty tango's armed to the teeth during a smuggling operation? They don't. They die! Here is how to...INTELLIGENTLY...get things done at a national level.... The conservatives/libertarians make a deal with moderates/liberals in the nation. Very good improvements are made to the Affordable Care Act and a 'cease and desist' towards undermining it in the future are proposed. In return, obtaining some really good border security systems (static, mobile, and operational). This is known as 'a compromise'. Both sides get something they want while having a bit of confidence the other side will not try to screw them. In a time of low trust between Democrats and Republican/Tea Party, this would be a wise course. We'll have to deal with how much this will all cost the nation. But if you want better border security along four states that do not border the Commonwealth of Massachusetts....You'll agree on better stuff on the ACA. As it stands, the President and Democrats are willing to deal. Willing to sort out the logistics of better border security and immigration reform. Republican/Tea Party have taken the 'Our Way or Hel!' stance. So if your pissed off angry about the whole thing..... ...why don't you go hold the people you support/elect to deal with the Democrats in all fairness? Or is talking tough towards defenseless children the best you can muster? Instead of holding your own party as accountable and responsible with power as you slam the President and Democrats on an hourly basis. This issue with the border would be wrapped up three months before the mid-term elections if Republican/Tea Party wanted it.

Arturas -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 1:29:14 PM)
You're putting a box around this that does not exist. "Police", "Border patrol", Ground troops. He is deploying immediately 1000 troops. Tomorrow more. He does not say he is fighting an invasion with only 1000 and you are thinking ground troops only and leaving out his air assets. Remember, he can only legally do this in case of an invasion of the Texas border. He has called it an invasion. He is taking control of the southern Texas border. Throw all your preconceived notions away because Texas is in charge there.

Arturas -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 1:31:55 PM)
whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

mnottertail -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 1:40:04 PM)
So he is gonna hover in the air and waste gas and march troops back and forth and do pretty much nothings.

DomKen -> RE: Don't Mess with Texas (7/25/2014 2:02:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas Texas has called up the National Guard and Reserve units in Texas. They are being armed and placed on the southern Texas border by the Governor of that Great State after first asking for Federal forces, since rejected. The Governor can do this only in specific situations. One of these is to repel an invasion. He has used his power and considers it his responsibility to repel an invasion. One thousand troops are being sent to patrol the border with additional units ready to respond to trouble. Who can deny Texas the right to defend itself? Who has the power to do so? What states will be next? A new Confederation in it's infancy? He may have called up the Guard but no matter what delusion you and Perry have he has no authority to activate Army reserve units. In reality a state's governor can use his NG units for pretty much anything he wants as long as they aren't in federal service at the time.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125