Jump to content

Bush to order National Guard to border


Balta1701

Recommended Posts

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ May 15, 2006 -> 11:48 AM)
So you agree that he's the most corrupt political official of all time?

 

Wow, I'm no expert in politics, but I think I could could come up with a couple dozen political leaders who would be considered much more...

 

Silly me. How could I forget slick Willie?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 201
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(Texsox @ May 15, 2006 -> 11:55 AM)
It worked so well last time

Tex, if one or two people are killed inappropriately in this effort, but a couple hundred DON'T die of heat stroke in the desert... then from that perspective, it was a worthwhile effort. I am a lot more scared of these "militias" than I am of Guardsmen in any case.

 

I am OK with the use of troops, though I do find it bizarre they are saying the troops won't be involved in apprehension. I see no purpose in that limitation.

 

At least this isn't going to be a wall. Troops are temporary, hopefully, until the rest of the pieces can be put in place (real penalties for firms hiring illegals, a guest worker program, more use of technology for detection on the border, etc.). A wall would be a boondoggle financially, environmentally and in terms of effectiveness. For now, troops in place is good, as long as that is followed up with the rest of what I listed.

 

 

Oh, forgot to add, this is absolutely an attempt to shore up the GOP base by Bush. There are probably other motives as well, but that is #1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ May 15, 2006 -> 10:04 AM)
At least this isn't going to be a wall. Troops are temporary, hopefully, until the rest of the pieces can be put in place (real penalties for firms hiring illegals, a guest worker program, more use of technology for detection on the border, etc.). A wall would be a boondoggle financially, environmentally and in terms of effectiveness. For now, troops in place is good, as long as that is followed up with the rest of what I listed.

I for one think this is a step in the wrong direction for the creation of a guest worker program. One of the demands of the folks who don't want such a program is for a massively increased presence or a wall along the border. They're being given that in this deal with absolutely nothing in return.

 

In politics, if you want to craft a bill that pleases everyone, it also has to please no one. In other words, you have to get the 2 sides to each be willing to give up on something they consider to be vital. I.e. if the anti-immigration folks want a strong defensive line or a wall along the southern border, well then they have to be willing to accept some measure of legalization for the folks here, or something like that. This is giving them exactly that demand without getting anything in return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ May 15, 2006 -> 12:08 PM)
I for one think this is a step in the wrong direction for the creation of a guest worker program. One of the demands of the folks who don't want such a program is for a massively increased presence or a wall along the border. They're being given that in this deal with absolutely nothing in return.

 

In politics, if you want to craft a bill that pleases everyone, it also has to please no one. In other words, you have to get the 2 sides to each be willing to give up on something they consider to be vital. I.e. if the anti-immigration folks want a strong defensive line or a wall along the southern border, well then they have to be willing to accept some measure of legalization for the folks here, or something like that. This is giving them exactly that demand without getting anything in return.

I don't share that bunker mentality. I'm not a die-hard Dem, I just want to see the best stuff make it through. The GOP wants troops, and they will probably get them. Dems and some GOP want a guest worker program, and I think that will materialize too. I think both will happen because both have popular support, and support from the Prez.

 

The piece that I think will fall by the wayside, sadly, is the demand side of the equation. Little will be done to curtail the hiring of illegals, because there is almost no one available to go after violators (and Bush is pro-business to a fault). So we'll end up only fixing part of the problem, because Congress and this President lack any sort of courage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(kapkomet @ May 15, 2006 -> 12:51 PM)
In Mexico, yes. Well, wait a minute. He's actually brilliant, pawning off the poorest of his country on the good ol' US of A.

So, by your logic, it's ok then. Nice.

 

No, by my logic it doesn't do any good for someone to suggest the solution is to 'let 'em come in illegally' if such an option doesn't actually exist.

 

So, when are we going to get around to sandblasting away that misleading bit about "your tired, your poor,

your huddled masses. . . " from the Statue of Liberty?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ May 15, 2006 -> 11:55 AM)
Well if we are the worlds largest unemployment office, why are we worrying about Mexico so much, when we could be helping people who REALLY need it, such as the victims of war and genocide in Africa, who would literally kill to be here, or the families torn apart by something like the 2004 tsunami and have nothing left but disease and poverty? If our roll is to help the rest of the world, there are many, many countries in worse shape than our neighbors to the south, including the Central American countries who Mexico refuses to help.

Amen.

 

We are always better off at sending money to people, (tsunami, Iraq, Africa) but we really hate it when they show up at our doorstep and want to work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Texsox @ May 15, 2006 -> 05:46 PM)
Amen.

 

We are always better off at sending money to people, (tsunami, Iraq, Africa) but we really hate it when they show up at our doorstep and want to work.

 

 

When someone shows up at my doorstep wanting to work they stop and ring the bell. They don't come in through my cellar windows, camp in my living room then demand i open the front door for their 39 family members coming up the walk!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(juddling @ May 15, 2006 -> 11:05 AM)
When someone shows up at my doorstep wanting to work they stop and ring the bell. They don't come in through my cellar windows, camp in my living room then demand i open the front door for their 39 family members coming up the walk!

You also don't hang a help wanted sign up at your door right after the goverment fills your front lawn with razor wire & tries to arrest everyone coming across it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(juddling @ May 15, 2006 -> 01:05 PM)
When someone shows up at my doorstep wanting to work they stop and ring the bell. They don't come in through my cellar windows, camp in my living room then demand i open the front door for their 39 family members coming up the walk!

And that about says it right there. That is why I am in favor of securing the border (in addition to the other measures), and I have no desire to grant amnesty to trespassers. There is a legal, logical process in place - use it or go home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ May 15, 2006 -> 01:12 PM)
You also don't hang a help wanted sign up at your door right after the goverment fills your front lawn with razor wire & tries to arrest everyone coming across it.

 

 

As long as they come through the gate and I know who's coming in and out I dont have a problem with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ May 15, 2006 -> 02:16 PM)
As long as they come through the gate and I know who's coming in and out I dont have a problem with it.

 

I have to add, and there is a job waiting for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(SleepyWhiteSox @ May 15, 2006 -> 02:51 PM)
There is? Where?

 

Let me know when it's implemented. I'm all for a legal, logical process.

Are you serious? You apply for a visa. People do it all the time. Most countries have a very similar process in place. How hard is that?

 

You may not like the levels of visas, and a guest worker program is certainly a nice addition to things. But if you think there isn't a serviceable process already in place, you aren't paying attention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ May 15, 2006 -> 02:48 PM)
Are you serious? You apply for a visa. People do it all the time. Most countries have a very similar process in place. How hard is that?

 

You may not like the levels of visas, and a guest worker program is certainly a nice addition to things. But if you think there isn't a serviceable process already in place, you aren't paying attention.

It's not a logical system if it doesn't allow the demand for work to actually be fulfilled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ May 15, 2006 -> 04:58 PM)
It's not a logical system if it doesn't allow the demand for work to actually be fulfilled.

Its not a PERFECT system. It is, however, legal and logical.

 

I'm not saying the system is great. What I am saying is that just because it is currently not economically ideal, that is not an excuse to ignore it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least we are one step closer to some good old fashioned major urban race riots after some green weekend soldier shoots and kills someone coming over to try to make a better life for their family.

 

 

First of all National Guard are trained soldiers so the only way this situation happens is if the good ole family man shoots first. Secondly if this guy was trying to make a good life for his family why doesn't he come over legally maybe its the fact that they don't want to pay taxes or wants to live off the government or has something to hide.

Edited by minors
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't know a damn thing about the Guard if you refer to them as "green weekend soldiers". Guardsmen and Reservists are every bit as well trained as the active force and many of them are combat vets. They get the same training the active force gets. They perform the same missions the active force does and they are every bit as professional as the active force.

 

The amount of whining and complaining I hear coming from the left is just rediculous regarding this issue. The border needs to be sealed. PERIOD! The fact that the left is making excuses for and apologizing for illegal aliens just goes to uphold their long standing tradition of coddling criminals. At the end of the day thats all these people are. Criminals.

 

 

Right on these people are criminals there is a way to come to America legally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(minors @ May 16, 2006 -> 12:36 AM)
First of all National Guard are trained soldiers so the only way this situation happens is if the good ole family man shoots first. Secondly if this guy was trying to make a good life for his family why doesn't he come over legally maybe its the fact that they don't want to pay taxes or wants to live off the government or has something to hide.

 

You do realize these are people's backyards they are patrolling. Perhaps you would enjoy living in a military zone, many of us on the border would prefer a different approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Texsox @ May 16, 2006 -> 06:11 AM)
You do realize these are people's backyards they are patrolling. Perhaps you would enjoy living in a military zone, many of us on the border would prefer a different approach.

 

From what I read about that one family's back yard, which I posted in another thread a few days ago, I imagine those people would disagree with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Texsox @ May 16, 2006 -> 06:11 AM)
You do realize these are people's backyards they are patrolling. Perhaps you would enjoy living in a military zone, many of us on the border would prefer a different approach.

 

 

These people you refer to are ranchers who have been victimized by illegals for years and years. They will welcome the increased border presence by the government and have been calling for it forever and a day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ May 15, 2006 -> 11:35 AM)
Yeah, I am a touch annoyed with this decision. I'm annoyed with the fact that it will almost certainly delay the creation of a real settlement of the issue in Congress. I'm annoyed with the fact that I don't think it'll be even remotely effective. I'm annoyed with the fact that last December, the head of the National Guard said that it was rapidly becoming a "Broken Force" because of Iraq, it has 30% of it's equipment, 20% of it's force is in Iraq at any given time, and we think it can still be used for this.

 

And I think I'm most annoyed with the fact that the President is doing this not because of some crisis, or because we're at a turning point, or because there's an army of Illegals getting ready to cross the border and we need that support down there now, but he's doing this because his poll numbers are sagging so he needs to shore them up.

 

Put this stupid plan to rest, Mr. President, and act like a President. Start calling your Republican Congresspeople, who've been subservient to you so damn often, into your office, and work with them to try to find the votes for a compromise. Take care of this problem forever, and stop with the stupid window dressing.

 

Just so I'm clear, you don't think the Southern Border is nearing, if not already, a crisis mode ?

Would you do anything down there, and keep it as is ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(spiderman @ May 16, 2006 -> 07:53 AM)
Just so I'm clear, you don't think the Southern Border is nearing, if not already, a crisis mode ?

Would you do anything down there, and keep it as is ?

Of course it isn't in a crisis mode. Here's the dictionary definition of a crisis: 1.

1. A crucial or decisive point or situation; a turning point.

2. An unstable condition, as in political, social, or economic affairs, involving an impending abrupt or decisive change.

2. A sudden change in the course of a disease or fever, toward either improvement or deterioration.

3. An emotionally stressful event or traumatic change in a person's life.

4. A point in a story or drama when a conflict reaches its highest tension and must be resolved.

The situation on the southern border is not a good one. But it's certainly not at a turning point or expecting abrupt change or deterioration. If we did absolutely nothing right now, what would happen? The same number of immigrants who snuck across last week would sneak across this week. And so on through the end of the year, with only a little bit of variance. If you expected that in 1 week, 10x that number would try to cross, ok, that would be a turning point, and a crisis. But right now, the situation is at least stable. It's not stable in a good way, but it's not getting dramatically worse.

 

Of course, the situation is not good, and it is time to do something about it in terms of legislation. Guest worker program allowing a path to citizenship, increased enforcment against businesses hiring illegals, a program to register those who are already here, and criminalizing future illegal immigration would be logical steps. But anywho, it's certianly not a crisis. A crisis will be what happens when there's an earthquake in San Francisco or L.A. and the California National Guard is 1/2 in Iraq and 1/3 sitting along the southern border with 95% of it's equipment gone.

Edited by Balta1701
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...