TreeA10

What Mexico and Guatemala Just Did Could Make Our Border Crisis 10 Times Worse by Brian Hayes | Top Right News If good fences make good neighbors, it is most certainly true that NO fences can make very bad neighbors, as this week’s treacherous agreement by two of America’s neighbors has proven. A joint press conference was held yesterday by Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto and Guatemalan president Otto Perez Molina to announce their agreement to jointly cooperate in and facilitate the invasion of their northern neighbor, the United States. Labeled “The Southern Border Program to Improve Passage,” it is an official effort on the part of Mexico and the nations of Central America to invade the United States. You read that right. Check the masthead…this is NOT The Onion. The agreement provides a network of border checkpoints through which an internal Mexican travel document will be issued, which is valid for a period of 72 hours. That document, known as a Regional Visitor’s Card, will provide temporary legal status to those in Mexico illegally for the sole purpose of invading the United States – completely bypassing Mexico’s immigration laws, which as Michelle Malkin has detailed, are among the toughest in the world. The announcement, officially granting the “privileges” to illegals from Guatemala and Belize, applies to anyone who reaches the southern Mexican border with the intention of invading America. Almost unbelievably, the joint policy will also provide financial assistance to unaccompanied minors — in effect paying them to invade the United States. 50,000 illegal alien children have already crossed the border in just the past few month –being delivered to their destinations of choice by Obama. Mexico’s treachery will surely only provide further incentive for the illegal invasion, as Central Americans can rest assured their passage through Mexico will be an easy one — and in some cases a profitable one. How is this anything but a Mexican-sponsored hostile act of aggression upon the sovereignty of the United States? It is a planned invasion across our border — a virtual act of war by Mexico. And what responsibility does Barack Obama have to stop it? The U.S. Constitution’s Article IV Section 4 is clear and unambiguous: The United States shall protect each of them [the States] against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence. Yet Obama is refusing to do any such thing, by design. Far from repelling this invasion, he encouraged and is accelerating it. Does the “I-word” come to mind? Forget it. Speaker John Boehner has already said impeachment is off the table. So what can be done? It is up to the States, specifically Arizona and Texas, to sue Obama for violation of Article IV, Section 4, deploy their own forces to the border to halt and return all illegal alien invaders, and refuse to abide by any DOJ or Federal court commands to release illegal aliens until their Article IV lawsuits have been resolved. Will they do it? Rick Perry and Jan Brewer’s timid responses thus far doesn’t give on much hope. I will agree prior administrations were also guilty of failing to stop the flood of illegals. Both sides are guilty.

FIFY

I agree we need more on the border in the form on barriers and people. The situation was magnified, however, when our Organizer in Chief decided to not enforce deportations and give young illegals amnesty and an education under the DREAM act. A more forceful message of "You get nothing and we will send you home" might have a measurable effect, as well.

Vertigo envisions every person wanting to come to this country as having higher ideals of personal responsibility and jobs skills. I like those people. My neighbor is a OB/GYN from Mexico, my sister in law is from Ukraine working on her PhD, and I've met met many other LEGAL immigrants along the way. Great people with a dream. Got no problem with that. I'm not sure what or how the current torrent of children are going to add to our tax base in contributions. Maybe we should bring back child labor. Little fingers do so much better at detail work, I guess.

I'm not the one wanting to volunteer the full faith and credit of the US Treasury, i.e. We the People, to take care of millions of people who want to come here illegally. That would be you. I just thought that you felt so strongly about it that you could not in good conscious fail to contribute more of your income to help those in need. I think we can come up with a couple churches that will gladly take your money. The church will be happy, you'll be happy, and the illegal immigrants will be happy. Win, win, win. (This could be mixing Government and religion and the whole thing might go critical mass.)

For such an enthusiastic cheerleader for the cause you don't want to make their lives better by letting them stay at your place. Don't you realize that these people are sleeping on concrete floors, eating cold food, aren't being educated and have a whole host of disease issues! Okay, just send me a third to a half of your paycheck and I will see that it gets to the appropriate agency so you can be a beacon of social justice. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

I get now! My desire for national sovereignty and willingness to pay for that right is trumped by illegals and their desire to break our laws so I should just accept it and pay for it. Glad you straightened that out. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

Hardly obtuse, even a caveman can understand it. You say we, the people, should open the border and let everyone in which means we, the people, pay for those items such as education, health care, etc. And since you can't give anyone anything without first taking it from someone else, it means we, the people, must pay for it in the form of taxes which monies were formerly the private property of we, the people. So, private property rights are already being stepped on before anyone steps foot through your doorway. So, if you think opening the border is the most humane act of human kindness, I invite you to demonstrate your gushing appreciation of your fellow man by stepping up by example and housing, feeding, educating, and providing for the medical needs of those you verbally support. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App!

In a different thread, I suggested that Vertigo should take in a house full of illegals and pay for their food, shelter, health care, and education. I think that would be very considerate and show what a concerned and caring person he is.

Any form of defense can be defeated. Moats, the castle wall, the Maginot line, trenches, and even the Great Wall of China all had a purpose and all subsequently were overcome. Any solution will not be 100% effective 100% of the time but I'm willing to bet not just every Jose is going to be willing to schlep lumber, ladders, etc. to some remote desert location to scale the fence. (I can envision liberals saying we need to build a handicap accessible fence with child safety features.) We will slow down and put a serious dent in the current torrent of illegals coming across the border which will certainly save us money in the long run. If a fence isn't effective, why does the White House have one?

$4 to $6 billion to build a wall/fence/moat w/alligators and Obama wants $3.7 billion to deal with the current mess which of course means he'll want more money to deal with future illegals. I'd say the fence is a great bargain and will pay for itself in a couple of years.

I wonder if Boeing has "Scratch and Dents" sales.

It was the one armed man!

Airbus is coming out with a change in their training program where you have to hand fly the jet. Who'd ah thunk it. Even with that, I've seen guys go heads down inside of 10 miles in VFR clear and a million conditions to hand jam a landing runway change into the FMS and getting behind the jet in the process. Leaves me baffled and worried at the same time.

I've never seen anyone use FLCH on final in 8000 hours on Boeing jets. Could be an Airbus-ism. Anybody with Airbus time got an opinion?

The A model has the same boat anchor fuselage as the B model....which is the problem that drives everything.

Hawk. Then moved across the street into academics then exec then class commander.

The ability to choose to enter the fight or run away from the fight is huge. Giving up that option is a mistake of historical epic proportions. Having to base your fighting decision as a reaction to the bandits decision means you are no longer driving the fight. Everybody is going to have helmet mounted cuing so that is not an advantage and still assumes you acquire the bandit, have a missile to shoot, and have a Pk suitable to kill him.

I was a T-38 IP there in that timeframe. We had a class come over from T-37s that only lost students to SIEs and medical issues. The resulting bloodbath was epic. 50% of the class was washed out.

Look at the F-16A. It had a small radar and was a day only BFM monster. The AF added crap until it became kind of a pig. A LGPOS dude in Korea said his BLK 42 was thrust limited which I found hilarious. The F-35 is going to have to rely on stealth to save it because opponents can out turn, out climb, out accelerate, and out run it. What are the odds of all future engagements remaining BVR? Sounds like a time in the past when we thought guns were obsolete.

Hey, the B model comes with auto-eject in case of fan or engine failure.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fd-how-the-u-s-and-its-allies-got-stuck-with-the-worlds-worst-new-warplane-5c95d45f86a5

https://www.duffelblog.com/2014/06/bus-defense-secretary/#!Z4sHg White House bus runs over Hagel.

Spent many Saturday mornings hungover in the Club assessing and repairing damage. The only complaint I recall was to stop using real dairy products when "pig piling" victims. Beer and whiskey was okay but knock off the dairy stuff because it reeked after a couple days. Left AD a long time ago but the Club issues was the least of my concerns regarding staying in the AF.

Back in the 80's I was tasked by my Sq CC to look into why the O'Club was losing money. At the time, funds from the club were siphoned off to other base MWR activities. I found the only time the Club showed a profit was when it was closed because no money was sent out the door. Saw a Club Manager get fired at Shaw because he was not impressed with our Fighter Pilot Bar Olympics and, trying to get us to stop, told us "This is not your club." He was proven wrong. Score one for the good guys. Sounds like mandatory supervised fun is still alive and well.