National guard troops to the border

Traveler said:
JaniceM, as you area new-comer to this thread, I'll take the time and a great deal of patience to explain to you that there are an estimated 9-11 million illegal Mexicans living in this country. That is exactly 100 times the number of illegal Canadians (if I use 10 million as an average).

It does you no good to attempt to insert race in the equation. The concept of race you bring up is, at best, disingenuous. And at worst an obvious attempt to inflame the Kool-ade drinkers. If there were only 100 K illegal Mexicans living in the U.S. no one would care. certainly I would not.

How many illegal Canadians were caught last month ? 4, 6 or even 20 ? Last month 37,393 illegal Mexicans were caught attempting to make it into the cities where they could "vanish". I suspect that even you could understand that is a phenomenal difference.

Now, I ask you, how many of those Canadians you speak of are a drain on the public treasury ? How many of them belong to super-violent gangs ? How many of them routinely commit home invasions ? How many are carjackers ? How many of them rape and murder ? How many of them kidnap 14 year old Canadian girls and sell them as sex slaves ? I'll tell you, Damn few, if any.

It never fails to amaze me how many Americans just don't care about the law and actively attempt to deny reality.

I speak thus because you have labeled me a racist.
Click to expand...

'Even' me, huh? lol
To the first bolded part of your post: similar to what I was reading on Canadian immigrants last night, it's certainly easier for a Canadian to 'vanish' into 'American anonymity' than for a Mexican to do so. If someone came here from Canada and stood beside you, would you be able to determine that the person was not a native-born American citizen? Kinda doubt it.

The second bolded part: in CA, I was quite a ways north of the location you specify as your location; however, only a 'handful' of individuals in the area were not Mexican, and it was not a 'hotbed of criminal activity.' In TX, though, I lived approx. a block from the border; while there was gang and drug activity, those who committed these illegal activities kept it amongst themselves, and those of us who were not involved in such things weren't really affected by it. I'm certainly not saying it's o.k., but what I am saying is such individuals were in the minority.

Also, someone commented about a) people who hate America, and b) people who condone lawlessness. Neither of these comments describe me. First, I love this country, and I do believe one important point it stands for is stated on the Statue of Liberty- and it does not say 'except for individuals from certain countries.' Second, I'm a law-abiding citizen- and taxpayer- and the mother of a National Guard soldier and a police officer. I do not like crime or criminals, but it is wrong to blame an entire population for the wrongs of a few. If there are more 'Mexicans' being picked up for serious crimes, it is a safe bet to say statistics like you mentioned are based on the fact that they are more easily recognized. For that matter, when others commit serious crimes, how often are their backgrounds even mentioned?
 

Gary O' said:
Ah, yes

Divide and Concur

Divide members
Concur with self

Time to move on
To something else worth hating, perhaps orphans

Your work is done here

Good job
Click to expand...

Yes, dividing the members of these forums. I personally didn't really want to know the political opinions of other members here. Really doesn't do anything for me. I thought being a friendly forum was enough with all the topics here. Apparently not good enough for a person who would rather stir up trouble to excite his life. Does not anyone else recognize the trend of his threads? No longer the nice "friendly" forum anymore. All he has to do is put the lure on the hook and he pulls 'em in. Not an argument one way or the other. Just saying. Just an observation.
 
Even though I have withdrawn from discussing this topic any more, I want to say that I find the "superior, holier-than-thou" attitude of many here to be revolting.

Moreover, the endless personal attacks on anyone who has the unmitigated gall to think for themselves, is beneath contempt.

You are not fooling anyone. Your attempts to destroy America are paying huge dividends.

You may now congratulate yourselves for having intimidated so many and in silencing them.
 

Traveler said:
Even though I have withdrawn from discussing this topic any more, I want to say that I find the "superior, holier-than-thou" attitude of many here to be revolting.

Moreover, the endless personal attacks on anyone who has the unmitigated gall to think for themselves, is beneath contempt.

You are not fooling anyone. Your attempts to destroy America are paying huge dividends.

You may now congratulate yourselves for having intimidated so many and in silencing them.
Click to expand...

Keep reeling them in. You're doing a very good job. :)
 
Pretty simple to either put a person on ignore or not open the thread started by that person. Passions run very deep on these subjects, and not a single person will be swayed by an unknown internet entity of any political stripe. The postings indicate a low tolerance of varying opinions by either side.
 
JB in SC said:
Pretty simple to either put a person on ignore or not open the thread started by that person. Passions run very deep on these subjects, and not a single person will be swayed by an unknown internet entity of any political stripe. The postings indicate a low tolerance of varying opinions by either side.
Click to expand...

Exactly why these type of topics that are really political views in disguise, which are not allowed on Sf. I've been through this kind of stuff on other forums which is why I came here. Anyone having read the words "No politics please" should have known that. As far as self-censorship, never thought I would have to do that on Senior Forums.
 
JB in SC said:
Pretty simple to either put a person on ignore or not open the thread started by that person. Passions run very deep on these subjects, and not a single person will be swayed by an unknown internet entity of any political stripe. The postings indicate a low tolerance of varying opinions by either side.
Click to expand...
I agree with you in principle. But both "sides" have to do the ignoring. Otherwise, if one side is allowed to go unchallenged, the forum gets a reputation as biased, one way or the other. Not attractive to new members in general. Only to those who agree, or those who get a thrill out of arguing.
 
NancyNGA said:
I agree with you in principle. But both "sides" have to do the ignoring. Otherwise, if one opinion is allowed to go unchallenged, the forum gets a reputation as biased, one way or the other. Not attractive to new members in general. Only to those who agree, or those who get a thrill out of arguing.
Click to expand...

I understand that, and as a rule seldom get into such conversations. Some interest me quite a bit and I don't particularly enjoy seeing one side railroaded for stating an opinion.

I've never put anyone on any forum on ignore. I'm an adult and can either handle it or move on to anther topic.

If No Politics is the policy, perhaps this section needs to be changed.
 
I actually thought that we were doing a good job of keeping politics out of this discussion and it is my hope that we can continue to have such lively discussions in the future.

I do feel bad when people can't accept the views of another without casting them into utter darkness, hurling insults or making all or nothing comments about them or their position on an issue.

I enjoy knowing a little something about the opinions of others it helps me to weigh the value of their comments to me on a variety of issues.
 
Aunt Bea said:
I actually thought that we were doing a good job of keeping politics out of this discussion and it is my hope that we can continue to have such lively discussions in the future.

I do feel bad when people can't accept the views of another without casting them into utter darkness, hurling insults or making all or nothing comments about them or their position on an issue.

I actually enjoy knowing a little something about the opinions of others it helps me to weigh the value of their comments to me on a variety of issues.
Click to expand...
I agree. I thought I remained courteous, discussing issues and avoiding personal attacks, if not, I humbly apologise if I stepped over the line.
 
Shalimar said:
I agree. I thought I remained courteous, discussing issues and avoiding personal attacks, if not, I humbly apologise if I stepped over the line.
Click to expand...

Most likely, a lot of us “stepped over the line”. That’s because there’s so much disagreement on this topic. Both sides want to be right! That’s pretty typical concerning any debate/disagreement.
 
Traveler said:
Are you and Australia volunteering to accept all 9-11 million of Americas illegal aliens ?
Click to expand...
Not at all. I just want asylum seekers to be enfolded into our population. As for illegal aliens, we have our share. Most enter the country using the visa system and overstay them or work illegally using inappropriate visas. Their 'crime' is one of deception rather than anything more serious. Most are not caught but those that are are arrested and deported.

We have recently been deporting New Zealanders, who don't need a visa, on character grounds if they come before the courts, even for very minor offences. Some of them left NZ as children and know no-one in NZ and this practice does split families. Most of the deportees are Maori. It is controversial. The reason for these policies? Not national security but the desire of politicians to appear tough on border control.

How many would I accept? I can't put a figure on it and remembering that we are but 25 million compared to the US 250+ million, but I know that we could easily absorb many more than the 20,000 or so that we take in each year while patting ourselves on the back about it.
 
Aunt Bea said:
I actually thought that we were doing a good job of keeping politics out of this discussion and it is my hope that we can continue to have such lively discussions in the future.

I do feel bad when people can't accept the views of another without casting them into utter darkness, hurling insults or making all or nothing comments about them or their position on an issue

I enjoy knowing a little something about the opinions of others it helps me to weigh the value of their comments to me on a variety of issues.
Click to expand...

You're right Aunt Bea the replies in this thread were very interesting to read and politics were kept out of the discussion. Except for a couple of people who can't accept the views of another and fire back by hurling insults this thread has been a good read. I read more than I post here but I'd like to thank the OP for bringing up this important American issue that weighs heavy on our minds every day and I learn from hearing other people's opinions and whether I agree with them or not I resent them being stifled by a few

Some of us have more up close experience with illegals than others depending on where we live so their opinions about the severity of the problem have different basis for their views. I mostly know Mexicans who have become legal citizens and they hate the illegals being here and taking advantage of our great country and its legal citizens. Someone said earlier that there are illegals from other countries too coming here and that's true but they come through our southern border

The amount of illegals coming in are unsustainable and we have to start to make a working plan. I think the children who came here illegally because of their parents should be able to stay but they have to be put on a path to citizenship if they want to stay in the United States, that's the only way it will work for the best interest of our country. Ces't Moi is right about how she would be treated if she went to Australia or Canada illegally I heard about how they do the boat people dirty in Australia and I have had to go through the third degree with Canadian border patrol they don't let anybody wander into their country like we have illegals sneaking in through the Mexican border. They have no idea of how it is in the USA but are quick to judge
 
Hmm. All of a sudden, we here in Texas and other border areas have a big emergency worth sending in troops. Wondering why? Maybe because it's an election year? Or to distract people from what's going on in that other place...Washington, D. C.?
 
Stormy said:
You're right Aunt Bea the replies in this thread were very interesting to read and politics were kept out of the discussion. Except for a couple of people who can't accept the views of another and fire back by hurling insults....
Click to expand...
Heh, I’m prolly wunna the two
Sorry for that
Truth be told, I don’t give two hoots what anyone is.
Leftist, righty? I lean both directions on many topics. I must be politidextrous.
Oopsy, did a poli poli bad bad there.

Anyway

Never been given to liking govmnt handouts to….anyone
Yet, not quite into rounding up refugees into herds until they can be properly sorted and branded.

Nutshell in regard to these thread types;
Nobody after 50 is gonna go ‘oh….well….I never knew that, I’ll jus’ turn my thinking around and go the other way for awhile, until the next pontifical revelation’

The good news is, in this day and websterrific age of spreading self centered gospel, anyone can blow like the wind, get it allllllll out
Hats off to Travy for that

I’ll work very hard to contain myself when entering these thread types, and hold it to inserting a quip here and there

Y'all keep a fire
 
Gary O' said:
Heh, I’m prolly wunna the two
Sorry for that
Truth be told, I don’t give two hoots what anyone is.
Leftist, righty? I lean both directions on many topics. I must be politidextrous.
Oopsy, did a poli poli bad bad there.

Anyway

Never been given to liking govmnt handouts to….anyone
Yet, not quite into rounding up refugees into herds until they can be properly sorted and branded.

Nutshell in regard to these thread types;
Nobody after 50 is gonna go ‘oh….well….I never knew that, I’ll jus’ turn my thinking around and go the other way for awhile, until the next pontifical revelation’

The good news is, in this day and websterrific age of spreading self centered gospel, anyone can blow like the wind, get it allllllll out
Hats off to Travy for that

I’ll work very hard to contain myself when entering these thread types, and hold it to inserting a quip here and there

Y'all keep a fire
Click to expand...

Gary, I didn't think people in Oregon said "Y'all". That's a southern word.
 
I thought I heard the troops would be used for maintenance and repair of existing walls and fences, not patrols or arrests. Just keeping on top of maintenance issues could make things easier for the Border Patrol.
 
Quote
"Never been given to liking govmnt handouts to….anyone
Yet, not quite into rounding up refugees into herds until they can be properly sorted and branded."


I thought this thread was about putting National guard troops on the border to stop illegal entry into the U. S. I think people seeking refugee status would be treated differently as in not rounded up into herds.

A lot of this could be avoided if the U. S. would adopt & enforce the same immigration laws Canada has. Or at least enforce the laws that are in place now.
 
WhatInThe said:
I thought I heard the troops would be used for maintenance and repair of existing walls and fences, not patrols or arrests. Just keeping on top of maintenance issues could make things easier for the Border Patrol.
Click to expand...

I think that's part of the Posse Comitatus Act, where the military cannot be used for domestic military or police actions (but can be used for support roles).

It doesn't apply to the National Guard, though. Not sure what their powers would be.
 
SifuPhil said:
I think that's part of the Posse Comitatus Act, where the military cannot be used for domestic military or police actions (but can be used for support roles).

It doesn't apply to the National Guard, though. Not sure what their powers would be.
Click to expand...

I thought a state of emergency would have to be declared by the locality/state governor for the guard to be used for law enforcement duty like after natural disasters or out of control rioting. This is new ground of sorts.
 
WhatInThe said:
I thought I heard the troops would be used for maintenance and repair of existing walls and fences, not patrols or arrests. Just keeping on top of maintenance issues could make things easier for the Border Patrol.
Click to expand...

As in the past, the deployment is made under Title 32. The soldiers remain under command of their respective State Governors advised and coordinated by the Pentagon and DHS. The operational directive from the President via the Pentagon and SECDEF is that they are to serve in logistical support and take over the SIGINT end of patrolling the border. Which in essence means more Border Patrol available to do the actual field operations including interception/interdiction, arrest and processing.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top