US/Mexican Border Discussion

[lcpl seilicki]

I still don't like the idea of deploying a formal military on a peaceful border. (Peaceful = not going to be fighting a formal war). The problem is all about policing the border, not occupying it. And I think the military usually go a poor job at policing. They are trained, organised and equipped to follow orders and be professional killers. Not civilian-managing (It is by no mean a fault. They are the State's tool, and using a hammer when you need a screwdriver isn't usually efficient).

But what I wonder if the problem would about their training or their organisation. If you take the military, you take them our of those kaki uniforms, you give them civil authority to deal with the border and you lax on the organisational structure (making it a loosely-controlled force of Border Ranger), would they be better equipped to deal with patrolling the border than if they were organised like the classic military grunts?

(please do not think I am dismissing the military as inneficient. They are probably one of the best for what they are meant to do. It's when they are asked to do things they aren't meant to do that they screw up. I'd put my money on the U.S. military against any military force in the world right now, but I don't want to see them within a hundred mile of a riot in Chicago, for example).

So if I understand you correctly your advocating a federal/state sponsored police force to secure the border. If I'm mistaken please correct me. how would you train, and equip said police force?

[Tyyr]

Just because you don't agree with an idea doesn't make it stupid.

No, the fact that you think we can actually secure a 2,000 mile border sufficiently to prevent the incursion of small groups on immigrants with National Guardsmen on their one month a year stint is what makes this idea stupid. It's like suggesting you can dam the Mississippi with one overturned car and a couple loads of cement.

[SolkaTruesilver]

I already given an idea. Veterans from the Wars.

Offer them those jobs. Make them live down south, where it's warm and confortable. Spread them along the border in small groups, with support of experience law enforcement agents. Make sure they aren't allowed to arrest citizens and the like, but they are allowed to stop people from crossing the border, and to defend themselves.

This isn't the best idea in the world, but I think it has some potential. You would financially help the veterans without simply paying them a pension to do nothing. You might actually avoid the Vietnam Veteran fiasco by making them useful and appreciated by the local population. Also, taking them out of the cities might do them some good if they are having psychological problem. After Afghanistan or Iraq, Kanzas would probably be a vacation.

Now, I know there might be a hundred problems with the idea. But try to correct parts of it rather than dismiss it out of hand. Maybe they would need a different organisational structure? I dunnow, but maybe you would.

[SolkaTruesilver]

Just because you don't agree with an idea doesn't make it stupid.

No, the fact that you think we can actually secure a 2,000 mile border sufficiently to prevent the incursion of small groups on immigrants with National Guardsmen on their one month a year stint is what makes this idea stupid. It's like suggesting you can dam the Mississippi with one overturned car and a couple loads of cement.

You know, just stating that immediately would have saved some grief in this thread

You are a very good arguer, as you know many of your facts and state them quite well. I don't see why you think you need to add insult to genuinely good argument. (there I was to try to make a pun with "adding insult to injury", didn't turned out well)

[Tyyr]

You know, just stating that immediately would have saved some grief in this thread

I did. You even read and responded to it.

Congratulations, you just firmly secured about 3% of the border. The other 97% is still wide open. Do you honestly realize just how long the border with Mexico is and how narrow a front a man in foxhole can control? Your idea successfully does several things though, wastes a s**t load of money, wastes a month of time the National Guard could have spent training to fight a real war, and congratulations you've now got soldiers doing police work and that always ends well.

[SolkaTruesilver]

You know, just stating that immediately would have saved some grief in this thread

I did. You even read and responded to it.

Indeed. But in the latest post, you actually gave the numbers that, to be honest, were quite on the mark about why it was ludicrous to expect the National Guard to be able to guard the border. Giving the number of people, and the fact that they have only a 1-month rotation (fact that I didn't knew. Actually, I know next to nothing about the National Guard) made it quite clear that it wasn't an option.

So rather than simply stating that the other guy was wrong, you explained in very good detailed why. 100% convinced me, and furthermore, dismissed any further arguments that could have been brought about using the National Guard.

[Tyyr]

Indeed. But in the latest post, you actually gave the numbers that, to be honest, were quite on the mark about why it was ludicrous to expect the National Guard to be able to guard the border. Giving the number of people, and the fact that they have only a 1-month rotation (fact that I didn't knew. Actually, I know next to nothing about the National Guard) made it quite clear that it wasn't an option.

So rather than simply stating that the other guy was wrong, you explained in very good detailed why. 100% convinced me, and furthermore, dismissed any further arguments that could have been brought about using the National Guard.

...I'm sorry. You're right. Expecting people to have even a basic understanding of what they're discussing is too much. From now on when people post ridiculous ideas I'll be sure to include all the numbers and figures as to why it's fucking ridiculous. In other news, the one month the Guard has was referenced both in the original fucking stupid idea, again when I quoted the original stupid idea in my response to said idea which you responded to, and then alluded to again in my latest post. Your poor reading comprehension is not my problem.

[lcpl seilicki]

Just because you don't agree with an idea doesn't make it stupid.

No, the fact that you think we can actually secure a 2,000 mile border sufficiently to prevent the incursion of small groups on immigrants with National Guardsmen on their one month a year stint is what makes this idea stupid. It's like suggesting you can dam the Mississippi with one overturned car and a couple loads of cement.

Allow me to clarify my statement, I didn't mean for a single unit to stationed on the border, I ment for as many units as it takes to cover the ENTIRE border. Also with the included use of the air national guard flying over watch in EC-130's useing FLIR and SLIR they can notify the troops on the ground as to the location of illegals are.

Edit the gaurdmen would be rotated to keep a constant presence on the border

[lcpl seilicki]

Sorry for the late post you guys dropped a couple while I was typing. I hate posting from my phone

[SolkaTruesilver]

Sorry for the late post you guys dropped a couple while I was typing. I hate posting from my phone

Me too. I hate when you post from your post.

So stop posting.





Edit: Now I feel silly.

I meant "post fron your phone"

[lcpl seilicki]

I kinda have to use my phone, my puter got fried last night

[Tyyr]

Allow me to clarify my statement, I didn't mean for a single unit to stationed on the border, I ment for as many units as it takes to cover the ENTIRE border. Also with the included use of the air national guard flying over watch in EC-130's useing FLIR and SLIR they can notify the troops on the ground as to the location of illegals are.

Ya know... sometimes reading something can be physically painful.

It's a 2,000 mile border. We have 7 EC-130's. We do not have enough national guardsmen to seal the border. Period. If we called every last one of them up we don't have enough. We're not talking about stopping the incursion of armored brigades, we're talking about small groups, with no warning, with nothing to lose. You are not understanding the scale of this problem. If you want to "seal" the border you will have to put two guys in a fox hole every fifty feet, for 2,000 miles. That's 422,000 guardsmen. Mind you, this is just infantry. The grunts. Tanks aren't much use here, or APC's, or anything like that. If you actually want to "seal" it with nonlethal weaponry then you need guys in foxholes. Then of course you need supporting troops, relief troops, guys to get supplies there. You'd need to expand the national guard by a factor of about 30 to do what you're suggesting and that would be with stationing them there permanently. If you want to rotate them out you'd have for just their month long stint you'd need about 300 times more Guardsmen than we actually have. So really, we'd only need about a 1/3 of the country to enroll in the National Guard to carry out your plan.

[lcpl seilicki]

I already given an idea. Veterans from the Wars.

Offer them those jobs. Make them live down south, where it's warm and confortable. Spread them along the border in small groups, with support of experience law enforcement agents. Make sure they aren't allowed to arrest citizens and the like, but they are allowed to stop people from crossing the border, and to defend themselves.

This isn't the best idea in the world, but I think it has some potential. You would financially help the veterans without simply paying them a pension to do nothing. You might actually avoid the Vietnam Veteran fiasco by making them useful and appreciated by the local population. Also, taking them out of the cities might do them some good if they are having psychological problem. After Afghanistan or Iraq, Kanzas would probably be a vacation.

Now, I know there might be a hundred problems with the idea. But try to correct parts of it rather than dismiss it out of hand. Maybe they would need a different organisational structure? I dunnow, but maybe you would.

The only real problem I see with your idea is funding. With our cash strapped economy. That and how would you get the existing land owners to give up their property to give to your new border rangers?

@ tyyr, point conceded

[SolkaTruesilver]

The only real problem I see with your idea is funding. With our cash strapped economy. That and how would you get the existing land owners to give up their property to give to your new border rangers?

@ tyyr, point conceded

Marginally more costly than whatever pension they would get anyway, I hope. But I might be mistaken about it.

Also, these people would at least be consuming in these locations, so maybe some help to the local economies, less of a social drain on the cities.

Finally, I don't think it's gonna be that hard to find land that needs to be bought at discount, with your current Real Estate situation.

[Deepcrush]

Wow, were you shitting a brick when you wrote this? What crawled up your ass?

Since when have you treated stupid ideas with kid gloves?

I don't have a problem with ideas, I have problems with people. For whatever reason I just don't get along with them.

However, I just don't have a problem with the National Guard helping on the Border. It would add to border protection, services required would be a nice employment boost and it would for field training for troops who may have to go to combat.