Political rhetoric ignores reality at United States border with Mexico

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

All network TV news is terrible.

[Pooky 3,805]

All network TV news is terrible.

Yes, but blaming Fox News for this one was a Fail.

Fox may be the right-wing poster-channel, and articles they air are routinely ignored because of the source, but people have less excuse to ignore something like this when it's not Fox putting forth the argument.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvyX-CwHpAQ

[Pooky 3,805]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvyX-CwHpAQ

I preferred Brass Eye myself.

[SMR 368]

We currently have border security along the US/Mexico border. The highest it has been in history. Yet, the current talking point among many on the Right is that the border is not secure, that Obama and DHS isn't doing enough. So what exactly does the Obama Administration need to do more in terms of securing the border that isn't already being done?

There are lots of things that the Obama administration could do in order to increase border security. While a wall has been suggested, I don't really see it as necessary. Simply creating a 10 mile dead zone around the border and patrolling it would be sufficient. We would need to commit troops to this, arm them like troops, and give them rules of engagement like troops. Anybody in that zone should be seen as an enemy combatant. While I wouldn't require shoot first and ask questions later (if someone looks harmless apprehensive would probably be a reasonable course of action), I also wouldn't require an explanation at the hands of any troops that shot invaders beyond the obvious that they were invading. If you see a jeep of people that look like gangbangers, I would shoot first and not ask questions later.

But this is only the first half of successful border security. In order for border security to be taken seriously, we need to be serious about punishing anybody who violates the border whenever we find them. That means treating illegal aliens like they don't exist. They can't work, can't go to school, can't get government aid, and can't be treated in hospitals. Also, in order for someone to be born a citizen, at least one parent should be at least a permanent resident. If you simply ignore illegal immigrants and make it a crime not to ignore them, they will go away.

If this seems xenophobic, I would clarify that I support a much more open border than we have currently. I think we need to make reasonable paths and quick paths to permanent residency for any person with a clean record who wants it and is willing to contribute to society. But in order for such a policy to be realistic, there would have to be a significant decrease in handouts. Also, I don't support amnesty for illegal aliens. Let them go back and live out their ban. If they want to come then, they can do so legally.

[mawilson 2,133]

The post above this gives an effective method and yet you completely ignored it. Why is that?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

when security has historically been very very low, adding a few more guards to make it the "highest in history" doesn't mean it is anywhere near adequate.

also, this talking point about an insecure border is actually shared by the right and the middle which includes a lot of dems and independents. only the left will try to tell me that the border is secure enough already.

So what more needs to be done, in your opinion, to the point where you are satisfied that the border is secure enough? And does cost factor into that equation or should we 'spare no expense'?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The post above this gives an effective method and yet you completely ignored it. Why is that?

Building a 2,000 mile wall across the US/Mexico border to those specifications is not only financially unfeasible, but geographically impossible. If you don't have any original ideas of your own, feel free to post someone else's idea of how to adequately secure the border more than what we are already doing.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

There are lots of things that the Obama administration could do in order to increase border security. While a wall has been suggested, I don't really see it as necessary. Simply creating a 10 mile dead zone around the border and patrolling it would be sufficient. We would need to commit troops to this, arm them like troops, and give them rules of engagement like troops. Anybody in that zone should be seen as an enemy combatant. While I wouldn't require shoot first and ask questions later (if someone looks harmless apprehensive would probably be a reasonable course of action), I also wouldn't require an explanation at the hands of any troops that shot invaders beyond the obvious that they were invading. If you see a jeep of people that look like gangbangers, I would shoot first and not ask questions later.

But this is only the first half of successful border security. In order for border security to be taken seriously, we need to be serious about punishing anybody who violates the border whenever we find them. That means treating illegal aliens like they don't exist. They can't work, can't go to school, can't get government aid, and can't be treated in hospitals. Also, in order for someone to be born a citizen, at least one parent should be at least a permanent resident. If you simply ignore illegal immigrants and make it a crime not to ignore them, they will go away.

If this seems xenophobic, I would clarify that I support a much more open border than we have currently. I think we need to make reasonable paths and quick paths to permanent residency for any person with a clean record who wants it and is willing to contribute to society. But in order for such a policy to be realistic, there would have to be a significant decrease in handouts. Also, I don't support amnesty for illegal aliens. Let them go back and live out their ban. If they want to come then, they can do so legally.

Cost is a factor. Just like our prisons. I'm sure if we employed a prison guard for every inmate, we could virtually eliminate all prison contraband and drug smuggling as well as prison escapes, but would it be worth it? You have to be pragmatic about it and look at what you are actually trying to achieve. We currently have border security and are spending hundreds of millions of dollars in trying to keep people out. Doing much more will not get the results that you are wanting, at a cost that would be astronomical.

..............

The increased enforcement that began with Operation Gatekeeper in 1994—and produced the corrugated metal and chain-link fence—dramatically cut illegal border crossings in the Tijuana-San Diego area, but overall, they kept their pace. Total arrests along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico has ebbed and flowed since then but changed little: 1.3 million in 1995, compared with 1.2 million in 2005.

http://www.truthdig....rb_immigration/

Edited June 22, 2010 by El Buscador

[mawilson 2,133]

Building a 2,000 mile wall across the US/Mexico border to those specifications is not only financially unfeasible, but geographically impossible. If you don't have any original ideas of your own, feel free to post someone else's idea of how to adequately secure the border more than what we are already doing.

The Israeli border is 460 miles long - almost 1/4 of the length of the US-Mexico border.

Financially unfeasible? How is it that Israel, a tiny country with a GDP less than that of Connecticut,

can afford a 460 mile wall, but the United States, supposedly the richest country in the world, finds

it financially unfeasible?

[lostinblue 1,989]

Building a 2,000 mile wall across the US/Mexico border to those specifications is not only financially unfeasible, but geographically impossible. If you don't have any original ideas of your own, feel free to post someone else's idea of how to adequately secure the border more than what we are already doing.

land mines

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

land mines

Most western militarys have actually outlawed these. I'm guessing the US has not.

[mawilson 2,133]

land mines

Bad idea. Guess who's going to end up footing their hospital bills? (Hint: not Mexico)

[Ban Hammer 13,395]

Bad idea. Guess who's going to end up footing their hospital bills? (Hint: not Mexico)

pun intended when talking about land mines?

[SMR 368]

Cost is a factor. Just like our prisons. I'm sure if we employed a prison guard for every inmate, we could virtually eliminate all prison contraband and drug smuggling as well as prison escapes, but would it be worth it? You have to be pragmatic about it and look at what you are actually trying to achieve. We currently have border security and are spending hundreds of millions of dollars in trying to keep people out. Doing much more will not get the results that you are wanting, at a cost that would be astronomical.

..............

http://www.truthdig....rb_immigration/

I think you overestimate the cost of securing the border and underestimate the cost of not securing the border. Note that my plan could easily be implemented with the current border patrol. Mainly I'm suggesting a change in equipment and tactics. It wouldn't be free but it also wouldn't be unfeasibly expensive.