Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Bush To Militarize Us Mexican Border


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#1 dc3

dc3

    Bleeping Treehugger


  • Members
  • 30,036 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sierra Foothills of Northern Ca.
  • Local time:08:43 AM

Posted 16 May 2006 - 01:33 AM

How do you people feel about Bush using our over taxed reserves to "police" the US Mexican border. These soldiers have been subjected to multiple tours of duty in the mid east, being kept from their families and job, and now Bush wants to further stretch our military resources.

Wouldn't we better off hiring more border patrol who would be trained for the specific job, and wouldn't be rotated out at the end of a tour?

Family and loved ones will always be a priority in my daily life.  You never know when one will leave you.

 

 

 

 


BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


m

#2 groovicus

groovicus

  • Security Colleague
  • 9,963 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Centerville, SD
  • Local time:10:43 AM

Posted 16 May 2006 - 09:44 AM

Sure, but 3000 new border guards are not just going to show up tomorrow. They are only meant to be there as a temporary measure until more border patrol are trained.

As far as "soldiers being subjected to multiple tours of duty", do you not suppose that they knew it was a possibility when they joined in the first place? I appreciate the sacrafices they have made, but a smart person doens't make that sort of committment without realizing the potential consequences.

Citizens of the United States overwhelmingly have made the case that border security needs to be strengthened, and the President is respecting those wishes.

#3 jgweed

jgweed

  • Staff Emeritus
  • 28,473 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Il.
  • Local time:11:43 AM

Posted 16 May 2006 - 10:17 AM

I understood the President to say that the Guard is intended to help existing law enforcement for approximately one year while the central government adds 6,000 Border Patrol agents to its forces and, as these new officers become available, Guard forces will be reduced. Moreover, the Guard forces will be there, not in a combat or police role, but to provided technical and logistic assistance; this would suggest that the President envisioned deploying a differently composed group than would presumably be required in the Middle East.
Regards,
John
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one should be silent.

#4 boopme

boopme

    To Insanity and Beyond


  • Global Moderator
  • 72,239 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ USA
  • Local time:11:43 AM

Posted 16 May 2006 - 10:55 AM

I think it's good. These troops are already trained to use the surveillance and tech equip. They will train the New border agents. And they are cheaper. Personnally I feel it should be twice as many now and then less. As the runners are going to double up their efforts in the near term to "beat the system."
How do I get help? Who is helping me?For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear....Become a BleepingComputer fan: Facebook

#5 snyper

snyper

  • Banned
  • 513 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:43 PM

Posted 16 May 2006 - 11:37 AM

Its obvious that border security needs to be tightened, and as already posted extra border patrol are not going to come out of thin air, so i dont see a particular problem, however i would even think en extra 3000 not been sufficent, if they were to take some bach from the middle east and in remote stations in europe to protect the border for the near future i would imagine the American taxpayer would prefer this, not saying that they troops dont do a necessary job in the middle east, but its a matter of whats more important..?

#6 medab1

medab1

  • Members
  • 698 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:earth
  • Local time:11:43 AM

Posted 16 May 2006 - 01:30 PM

America learned a lot from the Germans after WW2.
The Germans learned from the Boer War how to deal with unwanted people.
They weren't involved,they just learned about fences & camps.
Maybe Bush will come up with a Final Solution to the problem soon...
Sure would save a lot of money.
Of course,that could never happen in America????
America doesn't violate human rights,right?

#7 Scarlett

Scarlett

    Bleeping Diva


  • Members
  • 7,479 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:As always I'm beside myself ;)
  • Local time:11:43 AM

Posted 16 May 2006 - 01:49 PM

It is a security issue. First and foremost.
Im all for it.
Posted Image

#8 seafox14

seafox14

  • Members
  • 266 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:Bossier City, Louisiana
  • Local time:10:43 AM

Posted 16 May 2006 - 11:23 PM

I say place infantry shoulder to shoulder across the border and have a ground penetrating radar satellite over head to find the tunnels. Lock down the border and then start rounding up the illegals and:
1) send them back to where they came from (a just punishment for breaking U.S. law)
2) send them to the back of the line of people waiting to get in. (to be fair to those who honored U.S. immigration law and waited their turn instead of sneaking in)
This brings justice to those who have ignored our laws and compassion for those who work within the law by not rewarding the law breakers. People from the U.S.A that have gone to live in other countries have been treated much worse and yet the world thinks we are being unreasonable if we actually TRY to enforce immigration law. This country has one of the most open immigration laws in the world.

I say, If you can find a better country move there. :thumbsup:

Respectfully
Seafox14 :flowers:
5 So put to death the sinful, earthly things lurking within you. Have nothing to do with sexual immorality, impurity, lust, and evil desires. Don’t be greedy, for a greedy person is an idolater, worshiping the things of this world

#9 dc3

dc3

    Bleeping Treehugger

  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 30,036 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sierra Foothills of Northern Ca.
  • Local time:08:43 AM

Posted 16 May 2006 - 11:58 PM

groovicus...want to make a bet as to the duration of this "assistance"? As for the multiple tours, I'll bet you that nine out of ten of these "weekend warriors" who have done multiple tours had no idea at the time that they signed up that they would be expected to pull more than one tour in a war zone, much less several. The majority of these people signed up were expecting a "part time job", one weekend a month, two weeks once a year, and maybe the occasional emergency, then bank the extra money and get on with life.

Social Costs to the Military: Thus far, the Army has extended the tours of duty of 20,000 soldiers. These extensions have been particularly difficult for reservists, many of whom never expected to face such long separations from their jobs and families. According to military policy, reservists are not supposed to be on assignment for more than 12 months every 5-6 years. To date, the average tour of duty for all soldiers in Iraq has been 320 days. A recent Army survey revealed that more than half of soldiers said they would not re-enlist.

Read more here

Do we need to address the lack of security on our borders, you bet, but what has prompted Bush to suddenly enlist the use of the national guard in such large numbers, does Mexico have oil we don't know about?

jgweed...I'll extend the same bet to you, talk to you in a years time.

boopme...The average reservist earns less than they would in their normal line of work, but that dosen't mean that they going to be cheaper, for get about the pay per soldier, you need think in terms of how much resources are going to be needed to support number of troops to be employed it this deployment.

As for the national guard training the border patrol, that's not going to happen, all Border Patrol agents spend 19 weeks in training at the Border Patrol Academy in Artesia, New Mexico, which is a component of the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center.

What I keep coming back to is why is Bush doing this now, it's not like this just came to his attention, and if there isn't some impending crisis why such a large deployment now? National security is the first thing to come to mind, but in what form, perhaps the need to quaratine?

Family and loved ones will always be a priority in my daily life.  You never know when one will leave you.

 

 

 

 


#10 seafox14

seafox14

  • Members
  • 266 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:Bossier City, Louisiana
  • Local time:10:43 AM

Posted 17 May 2006 - 08:15 AM

It's simple. Bush and the other Republicans have ticked off their voting base with what amounts to amnesty for illegal aliens. This is an "oh crap! got to make our voting base happy or we'll lose power" moment. This is what happens when your have career politicians. I say Limit ALL Elected officials to 1 single turn. yes that would mean that eventually everyone would have to do a stint in government office (legislative or executive). That may be the only way to get some people to live up to their civic duty as citizens of the U.S.


Those that don't vote because they don't want to get called for jury duty have no right to complain about what happens in Washington. They helped cause it by inaction.

Respectfully
Seafox14
5 So put to death the sinful, earthly things lurking within you. Have nothing to do with sexual immorality, impurity, lust, and evil desires. Don’t be greedy, for a greedy person is an idolater, worshiping the things of this world

#11 currmac

currmac

  • Members
  • 126 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:01:43 PM

Posted 17 May 2006 - 08:29 AM

Get ready for the 10.00 dollar apple who do you think picks the produce and not to mention all those other jobs no one and i mean no one wants to do or should i say wont do.
INSPIRE TO VICTORY

Posted Image

#12 snyper

snyper

  • Banned
  • 513 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:43 PM

Posted 17 May 2006 - 08:41 AM

Get ready for the 10.00 dollar apple who do you think picks the produce and not to mention all those other jobs no one and i mean no one wants to do or should i say wont do.



If this work is been done by illegal immigrents then the employer is acting illegal too and this practice wont continue for too long, however there are plenty of people willing to work legally to "pick apples at the min wage" they may not be american but they could and probab;y will be legal foregin workers.

Edited by snyper, 17 May 2006 - 08:42 AM.


#13 currmac

currmac

  • Members
  • 126 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:01:43 PM

Posted 17 May 2006 - 08:47 AM

If this work is been done by illegal immigrents then the employer is acting illegal too and this practice wont continue for too long, however there are plenty of people willing to work legally to "pick apples at the min wage" they may not be american but they could and probab;y will be legal foregin workers.




In order to be an legal foregin worker in the us you have to have skills (college trained) ex nurse, doctor, IT. un skilled labour will not be allowed UNLESS THE LAW CHANGES
INSPIRE TO VICTORY

Posted Image

#14 Scarlett

Scarlett

    Bleeping Diva


  • Members
  • 7,479 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:As always I'm beside myself ;)
  • Local time:11:43 AM

Posted 17 May 2006 - 09:25 AM

Get ready for the 10.00 dollar apple who do you think picks the produce and not to mention all those other jobs no one and i mean no one wants to do or should i say wont do.



Employers of illegal aliens pay them at below market wages, which undercuts American employment.

Immigration and Job Displacement
One of the overlooked ways in which immigration harms the American workforce is displacement, that is, when natives lose their jobs to recent immigrants who will work for substandard wages.



Lower Wages for American Workers
Wages Are Lowered By Competition From Immigrants.

The effect of immigration on those low-skilled Americans is profound, and the government knows it: “Undoubtedly access to lower-wage foreign workers has a depressing effect [on wages],” says former Labor Secretary Robert Reich.12 Research suggests that between 40 and 50 percent of wage-loss among low-skilled Americans is due to the immigration of low-skilled workers.13 Some native workers lose not just wages but their jobs through immigrant competition. An estimated 1,880,000 American workers are displaced from their jobs every year by immigration; the cost for providing welfare and assistance to these Americans is over $15 billion a year.14


And since their pay is sub standard, they then rely on public assistance/welfare.......

Immigration and Welfare
Although the United States’ welfare rolls are already swollen, every year we import more people who wind up on public assistance: immigrants. Many immigrants are poor; indeed, that is why they come here. The immigrants we admit are much poorer than the native population and are increasing the size of our impoverished population. As a result, the share of immigrant households below the poverty line (18 percent) is much higher than the share of native households that are poor (11 percent)—nearly twice as high. And immigrant households are more likely to participate in practically every one of the major means-tested programs. Immigrant use of welfare programs (21 percent) is 43 percent higher than non-immigrants’ use (15 percent).1

Each year, state governments spend an estimated $11 billion to $22 billion to provide welfare to immigrants.2






The true bottom line is that they are illegal!
So in all reality no other argument is valid. IMHO
Posted Image

#15 currmac

currmac

  • Members
  • 126 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:01:43 PM

Posted 17 May 2006 - 09:35 AM

The true bottom line is that they are illegal!
So in all reality no other argument is valid. IMHO




There is always room for debate :thumbsup:
INSPIRE TO VICTORY

Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users