Open Borders = Terror Threat

[William Joyce]

Read this story. Al-Quada moves its terrorists (they're multicultural now! oh boy!) across the unprotected border with Mexico.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/US/new_york_city_terror_threat_040731-1.html

But John Kerry and GWB want to open the borders to anyone. These two clowns, in an insane pursuit of political correctness, put all our lives in danger.

 

[Hobbit]

Read this story. Al-Quada moves its terrorists (they're multicultural now! oh boy!) across the unprotected border with Mexico.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/US/new_york_city_terror_threat_040731-1.html

But John Kerry and GWB want to open the borders to anyone. These two clowns, in an insane pursuit of political correctness, put all our lives in danger.

I agree. That border is one of the biggest jokes in the country. It's about time we started taking desperate measures. Electric fences and "shoot to kill" orders come to mind, although I'd settle for rubber bullets.

 

[ajwps]

I agree. That border is one of the biggest jokes in the country. It's about time we started taking desperate measures. Electric fences and "shoot to kill" orders come to mind, although I'd settle for rubber bullets.

Right, closing the border with Mexico is really going to help? The answer seems to be bit simpler and doable. There is now a major effort to infiltrate these groups with Arab speaking and looking plants like was done with white Aryan clans in America.

The technology has also changed dramatically with which to listen, read and interpret their plans long before they carry them out.

Imagine for a minute that some terrorists were able to carry out another major attack in the USA killing thousands more like 09/11. Do you think Mr. Bush would go to France or the UN for advice and World Court at the Hague cooperation?

Would Mr. Bush sit on his hands or wring them wondering what John Kerry would do next? To maintain credibility, once the suiciders were verifiably identified do you think that Mr. Bush would hesitate using our large non-nuclear technology to destroy the country of origin. Even if that country was Saudi Arabia?

It is something to think about.

 

[Hobbit]

Right, closing the border with Mexico is really going to help?

That border has more holes than a seive. I'm all for legal immigration, but if a bunch of uneducated migrant workers (not to belittle them) making a bum rush for the nearest paying job can get across the border, how much easier will it be for well-trained terrorists trying to dot all the i's and cross all the t's. It's not the only problem, for sure, but it is a problem.

 

[dilloduck]

Both parties need the Hispanic vote--don't expect any big changes on the border.

 

[Hobbit]

If Bush wins again, then he has nothing to lose by enforcing the border, and a follow-up president would assassinate his career if he opened it back up.

 

[ajwps]

If Bush wins again, then he has nothing to lose by enforcing the border, and a follow-up president would assassinate his career if he opened it back up.

You may have to consult the World Court at the Hague before you consider closing the very long border between Mexico and America. Not to mention the unguarded border between Canada and the USA. Or the entire ungaurded east and west coasts of the United States.

No I think that America is now alert since 09/11 and has the ability to stop terrorists from our own homeland. There is the same possibility of stopping terrorists from entering our borders as there is preventing the tide from rising with a sand shovel...

 

[JIHADTHIS]

There is the same possibility of stopping terrorists from entering our borders as there is preventing the tide from rising with a sand shovel...

Sorry, No Sale. If we truly wanted to seal the borders of this country, it could be done in a very very short amount of time. Problem is, not 1 spineless politician has the balls to do it. God forbid they alienate the Hispanic vote or some other PC nonsense...............

 

[BegToDiffer]

Why should we have to close our border in a democratic society?

 

[JIHADTHIS]

Why should we have to close our border in a democratic society?

Why shouldn't we?

 

[BegToDiffer]

Why further impact our economy? We can use people, better processes and technology to achieve similar goals without constraining democratic framework.


------------------------------------
"the civic culture of a democratic society is shaped by the freely chosen activities of individuals and groups. Citizens in a free society pursue their interests, exercise their rights, and take responsibility for their own lives. They make their own decisions about where they will work, what kind of work they will do, where they will live, whether to join a political party, what to read, and so on"

 

[Annie]

Why further impact our economy? We can use people, better processes and technology to achieve similar goals without constraining democratic framework.

Why shouldn't we?

Originally Posted by BegToDiffer
Why should we have to close our border in a democratic society?

Reading from bottom to top, three we go. You opened with the premise that securing our borders was somehow undemocratic. Jihad asked a simple why. Now you come back with the top answer.

What processes and technology will achieve the goals of securing our borders? How would employing people to secure the borders NEGATIVELY effect the economy? How does securing our borders constrain our democracy, which is not what our government is, but we'll let that go for now. Last, please keep in mind we are talking of people entering ILLEGALLY, not immigrants in general.

 

[BegToDiffer]

What processes and technology will achieve the goals of securing our borders?

We can begin in this manner:

1. Seamless communications between infrastructure agencies
2. Semless integration of a high tech immigration processes and procedures
3. Improved usage of satellite imaging, shared throughout infrastructure agencies, to enable everyone to have their opionion recorded
4. Tightening ability of illegal immigrants benefiting from services and employment.

How would employing people to secure the borders NEGATIVELY effect the economy?

1. Secure boarder will require unreasonable level of human resources or a physical barrier, thus higher infrastructure cost.

2. Slower movement of people and goods to ensure compliance


I am not against preventing illegal immigrants from entering, but we must find cost effective ways of achiveing without impacting freedom of movement. Global population will increase each year, so our secure borders would always be influx of change, but still not stopping entry of illegal people.

 

[OCA]

Stopping new illegals from entering the country will not effect the economy, however deporting all current illegal immigrants would severely impact the economies of a few western agricultural states such as the 7th largest economy in the world California. Face it California goes down, America goes down.

Now i'm going to get the why don't farmers raise the wages bit, 1. farmers and farming is not a very profitable enterprise anymore, they run on very slim margins many times just making enough to pay off the loans they took out to plant year to year, therefore they cannot afford to pay high wages. 2. How many of us seriously know people who will work sunup to sundown in a hot field, in California the San Joaquin Valley where most of the produce is from the temos in the summer work peak range from 100-110, how many of us know people who would do that even making 10-12 an hour, none of us know anybody.

 

[Annie]

What processes and technology will achieve the goals of securing our borders?

We can begin in this manner:

1. Seamless communications between infrastructure agencies
2. Semless integration of a high tech immigration processes and procedures
3. Improved usage of satellite imaging, shared throughout infrastructure agencies, to enable everyone to have their opionion recorded
4. Tightening ability of illegal immigrants benefiting from services and employment.

How would employing people to secure the borders NEGATIVELY effect the economy?

1. Secure boarder will require unreasonable level of human resources or a physical barrier, thus higher infrastructure cost.

2. Slower movement of people and goods to ensure compliance


I am not against preventing illegal immigrants from entering, but we must find cost effective ways of achiveing without impacting freedom of movement. Global population will increase each year, so our secure borders would always be influx of change, but still not stopping entry of illegal people.

Again you seem to be directing the discussion towards our official borders, that never has been the problem.

You are ignoring your implication that securing our borders was somehow a cause for undermining democratic values.

 

[BegToDiffer]

You are ignoring your implication that securing our borders was somehow a cause for undermining democratic values.


No, securing our borders is does not undermine democratic values, but it does slow movement of people and goods, as by-product of enforcement. I agree we need to secure our country from illegal movement of people. I just feel, there must be an easier way.

 

[Annie]

You are ignoring your implication that securing our borders was somehow a cause for undermining democratic values.


No, securing our borders is does not undermine democratic values, but it does slow movement of people and goods, as by-product of enforcement. I agree we need to secure our country from illegal movement of people. I just feel, there must be an easier way.

Easier than what? As I responded, your prior suggestions would address the actual official crossings, that's hardly where 99% of the illegal crossings happen. For the most part, the Canadian border has been better controlled, simply because both countries are in agreement.

The question on the table then becomes basically the Rio Grande and the Mexican government encouragement to its citizens to come here illegally and send the $ back home. Actually, prior to 9/11, wasn't that big of a deal to me. I'm not in TX, CA, or AZ. For the most part, the cost of illegals on our resources is sustainable.

But now it seems our Islamic friends have figured out that perhaps Mexico is the way to enter-that is NOT sustainable.

 

[BegToDiffer]

OK.

Then maybe, we should look at getting agreement from Mexico to better patrol border by helping accomodating their need for $. This could be achieved by helping to update Mexico's state run information technology system and some form of integration with ours. We need to work together with partners to defeat angels of evil.

 

[Annie]

OK.

Then maybe, we should look at getting agreement from Mexico to better patrol border by helping accomodating their need for $. This could be achieved by helping to update Mexico's state run information technology system and some form of integration with ours. We need to work together with partners to defeat angels of evil.

So you must be an IT consultant or something?

We cannot afford to run the Mexican government and pay for all their poor people. It's not that they can't patrol their borders, they don't want to. They want this migration out. They want the $'s flowing in. Sanctioning is the most likely way to produce results, but other than trade restrictions, dang if there are many to choose from. Bottom line, Mexico due to political corruption over at least decades, is a third world nation, sharing a border with US. Until the terrorists decided to take advantage, well???

 

[JIHADTHIS]

I've said it before, I'll rehash it again.

There is no reason other then politics that stops the US from physically sealing the border with Mexico. Build a fence, a moat, fill it with alligators, whatever. Tightly manned border crossing points. Deploy the military from end to end until a physical barrier can be built. With all of the high tech equipment available, in time the human presence can be minamilized. This would not cost a lot of money.

As far as Canada, use UAV's for remote areas. Canada can be pressured to tighten up their immigration policies. You don't see thousands of Canadians over running the border on a daily basis like you do the Mexicans.

The Mexican government IMHO has no incentive to keep their people in Mexico, not when they can make money in the US and send it back home. This only helps the Mexican economy.

Oceans still divide us from the rest of the world on 2 sides. I'm pretty confident the Coast Guard can handle this quite well.

Agreements, sanctions, and treaties are a waste of time when only 1 party is going to uphold their end of the bargain.