Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Well then, I guess we just see this differently then.
I believe we had control of our boarders into the late 20th century, from that point, the criminals from Mexico have grown from a trickle, to a 100 year flood.
It would be more accurate to say that for most of our history we made no effort to control our borders.
BTW I oppose illegal immigration, I also support monitoring the borders. But, being a realist means that I recognize the truth instead of making inflamatory statements or getting angry over artificial issues.
I'd say the last time the US had control of the border with Mexico was 1846.
I know that during the indian wars in the Southwest, the Commancheros and Apaches raided across the border pretty-much at will.
It would be more accurate to say that for most of our history we made no effort to control our borders.
BTW I oppose illegal immigration, I also support monitoring the borders. But, being a realist means that I recognize the truth instead of making inflammatory statements or getting angry over artificial issues.
1920's and there were other periods. US didn't really care, Mexico was bad politically and we were open to 'cheap labor.' Prior to 9/11, it was an issue for some of the border states, but not that loud. It's changed, though not because of 'them' but because of US.
http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/projects/border/page01.html
I agree with that historical take. 9/11 happened though and now 'the people' want the borders enforced. There has always been criminal elements crossing the border I'm sure, the 'pickings' are better here, jails too. But now, well the possibility of terrorists from ME or South of Mexico-ie Venezuala and such, is causing Americans to say, 'Do something!'In 1915, following Pancho Villa's invasion of the US and burning Columbus to the ground, we had the US military deployed to the border, and Pershing led an expedition into Mexico. One could say we had control of the border then, but against armed invasion, not individual illegal immigrants.
In all honesty, the same could be said about my previous post ... 1846. The military was there in a military engagement, not immigration enforcement. That's if they were even called illegal immigrants back then.
From an immigration standpoint, we probably never have had control of our borders.
It's changed for us because of the increase in numbers of illegals, along with ever-decreasing space and opportunity for them here.
It hasn't changed for the politicians though. None of them want to touch it unless forced to, and then all they can come up with is some plan of appeasement.
I agree with that historical take. 9/11 happened though and now 'the people' want the borders enforced. There has always been criminal elements crossing the border I'm sure, the 'pickings' are better here, jails too. But now, well the possibility of terrorists from ME or South of Mexico-ie Venezuala and such, is causing Americans to say, 'Do something!'
I think the politicians are going to be surprised, I think they will be forced to 'do something,' they just can't believe it yet, including GW.
In this case, the government is not representing the will of the people. They are representing their own political agendas. If they were that concerned, something more than a band aid would have been applied by now.
Seems like we are pretty much in agreement here pegwinn. Pretty much
I don't believe, other than calling a "spade a spade", that I've made any inflammatory statements, if I have, please, educate me. That was intended to be a general statement, not directed specifically at you. I am not the great communicator. My apologies.
As to being angry over artificial issues. Well, really, I'm actually more disappointed than angry, but I'll accept angry. I won't however accept "artificial issues" as to what I'm disappointed/angry about. It's an artificial issue because we haven't cared about it until the various media and political types began to spin it. Mr and Mrs McUSA really couldn't care less about reform.
I don't see anything artificial about what I've talked about here. If you break the law, your a criminal, yes, your ALSO illegal, but thats putting spin on it, trying to make what is wrong, sound, and "taste" less wrong. That's the favorite tactic of the radical left. I just know, from enjoying your past posts, that ISN'T the way you feel. Personally, I feel that they should be picked up, chipped, prosecuted and then following punishment, deported. I support putting RPV/UAV up to monitor traffic and then randomly interdicting it, say with artillery. Problem is that as an "issue" very few people in America demonstrate that they really care at all about it.
Our country is being invaded by CRIMINALS, and if we don't recognize that fact, we are doomed to loose this invasion.
Isnt there something in the presidents swearing in cerimony about protecting the United States?
Yeah. It's in EVERY President's swearing-in ceremony. To date there are 33 who have ignored this particular problem. I discount Washington through Tyler (1-10) Since Polk (11) is the one who annexed Texas and inherited the border problems with Mexico.
If a hundred Islamic terrorists started to cross the Mexican border with the United States tonight on foot, at midnight, how many could successfully make it into our country 24 hours from then and fade into the woodwork?
So even after an invasion of our real estate, a terrorist attack upon our countrymen, we continue to fall back on the old system of thats the way its always been?
If a hundred Islamic terrorists started to cross the Mexican border with the United States tonight on foot, at midnight, how many could successfully make it into our country 24 hours from then and fade into the woodwork?
Probably all 100. Which is why we're upset nothing is being done. What's your point?
My National Guard in Iraq - protecting those people. That’d be my point.
Your president - your fault. There's another.
My National Guard in Iraq - protecting those people. Thatd be my point.
Your president - your fault. There's another.
How did you stay in the Navy long enough to become a Master Chief? I mean was it the thrill of the job or the retirement check? Because I'd think---->Key work think that having stayed in the Navy well over 20 plus years as a senior enlisted and being a shoe you'd not be such a liberal. Sorry Master Chief but with politics comes faults and one thing is this if a liberal president was in office right now I'm sure the same issues that we all are facing today with be the same with the liberals then what would you do?
Being King is Good - Being the Chief is Better.
I find from my experience that most senior enlisted are quite different and express more positive remarks that your statements posted. That is why I asked what the deal was. Yeah I know all about earning freedoms many take for granted.1,966 days ago (since 9/11). Being Liberal has zero to do with that reality.
Blinkys been in charge for that long.
My career was completed by following orders - with zero politics involved. Thats part of being a professional. It does not preclude your brain from operating. Politics (along with deep sea fishing) is my hobby.
I earned the right to do so.
