Clark Griswold Posted July 13, 2014 Author Posted July 13, 2014 See above as the counter to this ### Billion dollar system. The system would have tunnel detection capability - plus with the setback of buying property on the border makes tunnels have to run that much longer thereby discouraging them and making them more likely to be detected But look at the South Koreans - the crazy North Koreans dig underneath the DMZ does that mean they should get rid of their fences? Some illegal crossing will still happen but we will reduce it to a trickle then we will be in a position to deal with all the other related issues Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
HeloDude Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 See above as the counter to this XXX Billion dollar system. What percentage of illegals are crossing the border in underground tunnels? I don't doubt that people would still try and find a way in, but what percentage of illegals (compared to now) would then cross via tunnels if the border was mined? Or are you saying there wouldn't be a noticeable reduction? Besides, you could have technology where unmanned ground vehicles would patrol the fenceline (in my mine scenario) and can pick up tunnels/tunneling activity...similar technology is already used in oil exportation, etc. As a Liberatarian I'm all for allowing people to go back and forth, but not with the massive welfare system we have now. Either secure the border the best we possibly can, or get rid of all the welfare, min wage laws, public education, etc. I'm a bigger fan of the latter.
hispeed7721 Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 I feel like Vertigo's answer to all these is "we can't stop it 100% so let's not even try" Big 2 to Charles Krauthammer, his statements on it are the most on point I've heard yet Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 1
Fuzz Posted July 14, 2014 Posted July 14, 2014 The EU has tried this "open borders" crap and while I love it when I travel to ETAR, it has allowed the free flow of those in countries without generous welfare benefits to those that do (Reference the influx of people from the Balkans to the UK). Will building a fence or a wall stop everyone? No, not even the Berlin Wall could stop everyone. The solution is two part, secure the border (why not use the NG as a temporary stop gap for the overwhelmed border patrol?) and start cracking down on employers, stop welfare benefits without proof of legal residence, stop allowing illegals to fly, yes fly on U.S. airliners, without ID (see links below, yeah they're from breibart, sorry CNN doesn't seem to care). Remove the incentive, stop those that still come, and send those here back home as we find them. https://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/07/12/TSA-Lying-and-Changed-Policy-After-Breitbart-Report-says-Border-Patrol-Union https://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2014/07/12/USA-s-Most-Privileged-Illegal-immigrant-Stuck-in-Texas-Border-Town
Breckey Posted July 14, 2014 Posted July 14, 2014 Let the guys out of DM and Fort Bliss some practice with moving targets. Just tell them that they're commie sappers or something and let the 30mm roll.
hispeed7721 Posted July 14, 2014 Posted July 14, 2014 Gunships. THISlet the 30mm roll Nah, we actually want to hit something in less than 75 shots Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Clark Griswold Posted July 14, 2014 Author Posted July 14, 2014 Doesn't have to go loud - border security should still be deterrence, apprehension and then force as required but that force could be lethal if required Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Majestik Møøse Posted July 14, 2014 Posted July 14, 2014 We'll never be able to kill every member of al Qaeda, why try at all? We'll never stop all the highway accidents, why even have a speed limit? We'll never win the championship this year, why bother playing any of the games? Not building a fence because "some will still get through" is a logical fallacy. 1
zach braff Posted July 14, 2014 Posted July 14, 2014 Why not take a hard look at our war on drugs? Seems to me that a big part of this mess is folks wanting to escape the criminal organizations that have grown & prospered due to our own demand for their products. And also members of criminal organizations trying to get over here to help their gangs with distribution & such. Long term solution I know - and I agree 100% that border security is the short term solution - but in the long term so long as we want their drugs the narcos and gangs will continue to wreak havoc in Central America. That's going to keep both the gangsters & the refugees flowing our way. Not saying I have the specific plan or answer, but any real fix is going to require people smarter than I to look what's causing this mess. zb https://www.militarytimes.com/article/20140708/NEWS01/307080064/SOUTHCOM-chief-Central-America-drug-war-dire-threat-U-S-national-security 1
Vertigo Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 The EU has tried this "open borders" crap and while I love it when I travel to ETAR, it has allowed the free flow of those in countries without generous welfare benefits to those that do (Reference the influx of people from the Balkans to the UK). Will building a fence or a wall stop everyone? No, not even the Berlin Wall could stop everyone. The solution is two part, secure the border (why not use the NG as a temporary stop gap for the overwhelmed border patrol?) and start cracking down on employers, stop welfare benefits without proof of legal residence, stop allowing illegals to fly, yes fly on U.S. airliners, without ID (see links below, yeah they're from breibart, sorry CNN doesn't seem to care). Remove the incentive, stop those that still come, and send those here back home as we find them.https://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/07/12/TSA-Lying-and-Changed-Policy-After-Breitbart-Report-says-Border-Patrol-Unionhttps://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2014/07/12/USA-s-Most-Privileged-Illegal-immigrant-Stuck-in-Texas-Border-Town You think we'd see a reduction in expenditures? Whether we're spending tax dollars on welfare or on border enforcement, UAVs, investigating employers, etc we're still spending tax dollars. Once that money starts flowing to the new pots, those pots will continue to grow. Like I said during the last election- the only difference between Democrats and Republicans is who is getting the tax payer dollars. We'll never be able to kill every member of al Qaeda, why try at all? We'll never stop all the highway accidents, why even have a speed limit? We'll never win the championship this year, why bother playing any of the games? Not building a fence because "some will still get through" is a logical fallacy. You're right. As I stated in the other thread, we shouldn't be hindering humans freedom to travel and seek out a better life for themselves. We should have a process in place that allows unrestricted movement but still lures them here through legal means so that they become another cog in the machine and not just a taker. 1
Fuzz Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 So spending money on border security is bad, how exactly do we enforce your "legal freeflow" idea without securing the border. I think the current system for people to enter the country is ridiculous. If we have no reason to keep them out (I.e. criminal history, disease etc) then they should be allowed to come, but they shouldn't be eligible for welfare under any circumstances.
hispeed7721 Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) we shouldn't be hindering humans freedom to travel and seek out a better life for themselves. We should have a process in place that allows unrestricted movement but still lures them here through legal means so that they become another cog in the machine and not just a taker. Guess what, this already exists...it's called LEGAL immigration. But it's not mutually exclusive to border security by any means Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Edited July 16, 2014 by hispeed7721
Vertigo Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 Guess what, this already exists...it's called LEGAL immigration. But it's not mutually exclusive to border security by any means Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk If that was a viable option for most immigrants, don't you think they'd go that route? It's not. It's expensive, it's laborious, it's beauracratic, and the wait is unrealistic. So they do what they must because the legal option isn't really an option. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! 1 1
Clark Griswold Posted July 16, 2014 Author Posted July 16, 2014 If that was a viable option for most immigrants, don't you think they'd go that route? It's not. It's expensive, it's laborious, it's beauracratic, and the wait is unrealistic. So they do what they must because the legal option isn't really an option. It may be a pain but so it driving the speed limit, paying your taxes and pretty much anything else customer service related with the government but it is what we've got. Without it (the law, due process, general order and civility) we're nothing more than another loosely governed country that is not ruled by law but whatever group is the loudest or most violent. 1
Vertigo Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 It may be a pain but so it driving the speed limit, paying your taxes and pretty much anything else customer service related with the government but it is what we've got. Without it (the law, due process, general order and civility) we're nothing more than another loosely governed country that is not ruled by law but whatever group is the loudest or most violent. Are you saying you've never sped? If so, you just placed yourself in the same boat as illegal immigrants. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! 1
Clark Griswold Posted July 16, 2014 Author Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) Are you saying you've never sped? If so, you just placed yourself in the same boat as illegal immigrants. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying, I've never broken the law intentionally or unintentionally. Ever. I'm perfect in every way. Thanks for using your insightful prowess to brutally and completely prove that if you have ever violated any law or regulation in he US that you have no legal or moral right to expect that the laws of the US concerning illegal immigration should be enforced. Edited July 16, 2014 by Clark Griswold 1
Vertigo Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying, I've never broken the law intentionally or unintentionally. Ever. I'm perfect in every way. Thanks for using your insightful prowess to brutally and completely proving that if you have ever violated any law or regulation in he US that you have no legal or moral right to expect that the laws of the US concerning illegal immigration should be enforced. No what I'm saying is if you've ever gone over the speed limit on purpose you know why illegals come across illegally. Because the law was a hindrance and not a help to their goals. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! 3
HeloDude Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 No what I'm saying is if you've ever gone over the speed limit on purpose you know why illegals come across illegally. Because the law was a hindrance and not a help to their goals. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! I may have gone over the speed limit to get to grocery store before they were closed...but if they were closed when I arrived I never broke in just because the store didn't meet my level of convenience. 4
Vertigo Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 I may have gone over the speed limit to get to grocery store before they were closed...but if they were closed when I arrived I never broke in just because the store didn't meet my level of convenience. You may have if the store is only closed for you. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! 2
Clark Griswold Posted July 16, 2014 Author Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) No what I'm saying is if you've ever gone over the speed limit on purpose you know why illegals come across illegally. Because the law was a hindrance and not a help to their goals. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! So there is no level of degrees in law-breaking? Illegally crossing into a foreign country is the equivalent to a minor civil involvement? Illegal immigration is a major civil offense but it should be a major criminal offense. Just my two cents. This may be getting to a boiling point, human freedom and humanitarian assistance are important but what the advocates of the recent surge of illegal aliens from Central America and other areas are calling for is chaos, capitulation, resignation and acceptance that other people who are not citizens of this country, who have no legal or political rights in the US are imposing themselves on us and will by their choice remain here indefinitely. That is an invasion not by arms but by using our laws and best qualities of kindness and charity against us. Some would say we did this to others when European settlers first arrived here so why do we have the right to stop them? There is no good answer to that other than that was several hundred years ago, we have evolved into a modern orderly nation, we have the right and ability to control our borders and immigration. We will not be a nation but just a geographic description at that point we can't or won't control them. Going back from the philosophical to the practical, we have the National Incident Management System (NIMS) designed specifically for these kinds of problems and if several hundred women and children crossing and surrendering immediately every day in one particular sector of the SWB is not a national incident requiring a coordinated WOG approach I don't know what is then. NIMS and the National Response Framework are part of the National Strategy for Homeland Security and we are not using the plans and procedures that supposedly we are going to use if SHTF. I would have confidence that this is not a disaster destined for epic proportions and long term national consequences if something substantial was being done. That the situation was being handled if you saw any of the basics for this type of incident being stood up: The Incident Command System being stood up for C2 The Multiagency Coordination System working to get LE, Mil, Legal and NGOs together in a coherent plan. The Public Information System formally up and running giving a daily briefing on the state of the incident and the response to it. None of this is being done, the debate about illegal immigration, how much border security is necessary or what is the LONG term status of these people are other issues compared to the ACTUAL primary problem: our Federal Government is doing almost nothing to handle the problem or to stop the problem. Water is pouring into the boat but they don't want to plug the hole in the boat and bail out the water, nah just keep bailing some of the water out not even as much water as is coming in. The Federal Government and specifically the Executive Branch could cool down the rhetoric and tempers if they surged and put together a strong response. They roasted President Bush for a tepid first response to Katrina, the media are giving a free pass to President Obama and actually poisoning the national debate about this latest illegal immigration crisis. Edited July 16, 2014 by Clark Griswold
hispeed7721 Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 If that was a viable option for most immigrants, don't you think they'd go that route? It's not. It's expensive, it's laborious, it's beauracratic, and the wait is unrealistic. So they do what they must because the legal option isn't really an option. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! This is one of the most ridiculous and absurd rationalizations I've ever seen. Are you actually trying to legitimize what illegals do because "it's too hard" to come here legally?!?! I'm not saying the process couldn't be better, but give me a fucking break... So every law you find too annoying or inconvenient to follow you just disregard? What a joke Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Vertigo Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 This is one of the most ridiculous and absurd rationalizations I've ever seen. Are you actually trying to legitimize what illegals do because "it's too hard" to come here legally?!?! I'm not saying the process couldn't be better, but give me a fucking break... So every law you find too annoying or inconvenient to follow you just disregard? What a joke Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk So your line of thinking is they come in illegally just because they want to break the law. Brilliant! If the process worked, they would use it. There's no reason not to. Why risk coming in to the country illegally if it was easy, and cheap for them to come in legally? Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! 2
hispeed7721 Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) So your line of thinking is they come in illegally just because they want to break the law. Brilliant! If the process worked, they would use it. There's no reason not to. Why risk coming in to the country illegally if it was easy, and cheap for them to come in legally? Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! Ummm...no. Not once did I suggest they want to break the law just for the sake of breaking it. And, oh yeah, the process does work. It doesn't work as well as it should, granted, but it does work. There's plenty of people who have immigrated here LEGALLY. You keep ignoring the fact that, regardless of their reasoning, they are coming here illegally. Let's give up the bleeding heart bullshit, ok? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Edited July 16, 2014 by hispeed7721
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now