Obama: No U.S. Troops to Mexico Border

[Burp]

While I'm not a big fan of President Obama, I have to agree with him on this. He should not deploy US combat troops on the border.

The US military is a warfighting organization. It engages targets and destroys them. This is not that type of situation.

Think the situation in Baghdad or Kabul is complicated? Try deploying US forces along the border. What will their instructions be? Shoot anyone coming over the border? There are refugees, illegals as well as smugglers crossing the border. Sorting them out and determining the applicable punishment is a law enforcement duty NOT a military one. Using military technologies such as infrared radar, motion detectors, communications intercepts, etc. is certainly acceptable, and there are laws that allow the military to assist in this manner. But deploying combat troops is not and should not be an option.

Obama got it right on this one.

It would certainly stem the flow.

Not to mention that after a couple of weeks, when the "number-shot" count rises to 60 or 70, I'm thinking the illegals would find someplace else to go.

Yukon? Room up there?

 

[Toome]

While I'm not a big fan of President Obama, I have to agree with him on this. He should not deploy US combat troops on the border.

The US military is a warfighting organization. It engages targets and destroys them. This is not that type of situation.

Think the situation in Baghdad or Kabul is complicated? Try deploying US forces along the border. What will their instructions be? Shoot anyone coming over the border? There are refugees, illegals as well as smugglers crossing the border. Sorting them out and determining the applicable punishment is a law enforcement duty NOT a military one. Using military technologies such as infrared radar, motion detectors, communications intercepts, etc. is certainly acceptable, and there are laws that allow the military to assist in this manner. But deploying combat troops is not and should not be an option.

Obama got it right on this one.

It would certainly stem the flow.

Not to mention that after a couple of weeks, when the "number-shot" count rises to 60 or 70, I'm thinking the illegals would find someplace else to go.

Yukon? Room up there?

These are all very macho tough guy comments. Soldiers are trained to kill enemy soldiers and would do so without hesitation. They are not butchers of unarmed men, women and children, which is exactly the situation you have along the US-Mexican border if they were to be deployed.

The show of force argument is equally weak. When you put a soldier in position, be prepared for that soldier to use all resources at his disposal to accomplish his mission from using his weapon to calling in fire support to complete his combat tasks.

Spare me the tough guy comments, please and come up with a rational reason for using US combat troops along the border without violating the constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.

 

[Burp]

It would certainly stem the flow.

Not to mention that after a couple of weeks, when the "number-shot" count rises to 60 or 70, I'm thinking the illegals would find someplace else to go.

Yukon? Room up there?

These are all very macho tough guy comments. Soldiers are trained to kill enemy soldiers and would do so without hesitation. They are not butchers of unarmed men, women and children, which is exactly the situation you have along the US-Mexican border if they were to be deployed.

The show of force argument is equally weak. When you put a soldier in position, be prepared for that soldier to use all resources at his disposal to accomplish his mission from using his weapon to calling in fire support to complete his combat tasks.

Spare me the tough guy comments, please and come up with a rational reason for using US combat troops along the border without violating the constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.

A bit sensitive aren't we? It's called a joke.

A rational reason for using combat troops on the border?

How about the millions of people who are ready to do anything to stop the flow of illegal aliens?

 

[Toome]

Not to mention that after a couple of weeks, when the "number-shot" count rises to 60 or 70, I'm thinking the illegals would find someplace else to go.

Yukon? Room up there?

These are all very macho tough guy comments. Soldiers are trained to kill enemy soldiers and would do so without hesitation. They are not butchers of unarmed men, women and children, which is exactly the situation you have along the US-Mexican border if they were to be deployed.

The show of force argument is equally weak. When you put a soldier in position, be prepared for that soldier to use all resources at his disposal to accomplish his mission from using his weapon to calling in fire support to complete his combat tasks.

Spare me the tough guy comments, please and come up with a rational reason for using US combat troops along the border without violating the constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.

A bit sensitive aren't we? It's called a joke.

A rational reason for using combat troops on the border?

How about the millions of people who are ready to do anything to stop the flow of illegal aliens?

Well, I guess I should have seen it as sarcasm before I posted. No combat vet would seriously entertain the notion.

I see this as a law enforcement issue and fully support the idea of giving the Border Patrol the tools necessary to do its job more effectively. There are certainly military-type tactics and principles that could help improve such as the correct application of basic intelligence collection methods (IPB, HUMINT, IR/MTI sensor technologies, IMINT, SIGINT, the list is endless).

There's also another piece that is conveniently overlooked: US businesses who deliberately hire illegals. They need to be shut down if we are to seriously make an effort to stop the flow of illegal immigration. Very few, if any, politicians are willing to go after these businesses because of the political risk involved. They're long on rhetoric but short on action. Putting combat troops on the border only serves to result in more window dressing and put the lives of both the troops and innocent civilians who should be prosecuted for breaking the law but not be shot for it.

 

[Burp]

These are all very macho tough guy comments. Soldiers are trained to kill enemy soldiers and would do so without hesitation. They are not butchers of unarmed men, women and children, which is exactly the situation you have along the US-Mexican border if they were to be deployed.

The show of force argument is equally weak. When you put a soldier in position, be prepared for that soldier to use all resources at his disposal to accomplish his mission from using his weapon to calling in fire support to complete his combat tasks.

Spare me the tough guy comments, please and come up with a rational reason for using US combat troops along the border without violating the constitutional principles this nation was founded upon.

A bit sensitive aren't we? It's called a joke.

A rational reason for using combat troops on the border?

How about the millions of people who are ready to do anything to stop the flow of illegal aliens?

Well, I guess I should have seen it as sarcasm before I posted. No combat vet would seriously entertain the notion.

I see this as a law enforcement issue and fully support the idea of giving the Border Patrol the tools necessary to do its job more effectively. There are certainly military-type tactics and principles that could help improve such as the correct application of basic intelligence collection methods (IPB, HUMINT, IR/MTI sensor technologies, IMINT, SIGINT, the list is endless).

There's also another piece that is conveniently overlooked: US businesses who deliberately hire illegals. They need to be shut down if we are to seriously make an effort to stop the flow of illegal immigration. Very few, if any, politicians are willing to go after these businesses because of the political risk involved. They're long on rhetoric but short on action. Putting combat troops on the border only serves to result in more window dressing and put the lives of both the troops and innocent civilians who should be prosecuted for breaking the law but not be shot for it.

I agree 100% with you. Up to your last sentence.

It's getting to the point, especially with the latest news (kidnappings in Phoenix, drug cartels joining forces, etc), that drastic action has to be taken.

I don't advocate shooting moms and kids. However, if the United States puts there troops on the border, maybe the illegals will see that we are finally serious about stopping them from entering the country illegally.

Border Patrol agents are shot at. They fire back. What is the difference if they are supplemented with troops?

 

[Toome]

A bit sensitive aren't we? It's called a joke.

A rational reason for using combat troops on the border?

How about the millions of people who are ready to do anything to stop the flow of illegal aliens?

Well, I guess I should have seen it as sarcasm before I posted. No combat vet would seriously entertain the notion.

I see this as a law enforcement issue and fully support the idea of giving the Border Patrol the tools necessary to do its job more effectively. There are certainly military-type tactics and principles that could help improve such as the correct application of basic intelligence collection methods (IPB, HUMINT, IR/MTI sensor technologies, IMINT, SIGINT, the list is endless).

There's also another piece that is conveniently overlooked: US businesses who deliberately hire illegals. They need to be shut down if we are to seriously make an effort to stop the flow of illegal immigration. Very few, if any, politicians are willing to go after these businesses because of the political risk involved. They're long on rhetoric but short on action. Putting combat troops on the border only serves to result in more window dressing and put the lives of both the troops and innocent civilians who should be prosecuted for breaking the law but not be shot for it.

I agree 100% with you. Up to your last sentence.

It's getting to the point, especially with the latest news (kidnappings in Phoenix, drug cartels joining forces, etc), that drastic action has to be taken.

I don't advocate shooting moms and kids. However, if the United States puts there troops on the border, maybe the illegals will see that we are finally serious about stopping them from entering the country illegally.

Border Patrol agents are shot at. They fire back. What is the difference if they are supplemented with troops?

Troops don't wait to be shot at first. (Unless the ROE is weak. But speaking on a doctrinal basis, they should not be put in such a position. Otherwise, it's a foolish risk. I credit President Obama for at least not making it worse, but I don't credit him with coming up with any viable solutions yet.)

 

[Jon]

He wants his future voters to keep pouring in......

you know they aren't citizens and can't vote, right?

Jillian, your right they aren't citizens, and shouldn't be able to vote. When I lived in Southern Ca., they had a real problem with them voting. Voter fraud ran rampant.

H.J.Res. 2 (ih) Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States
regarding presidential election voting rights for residents of all
United States territories and commonwealths. [Introduced in House]
(Gives voting rights to non-citizens)