US Soldiers NOT Allowed To Defend US Borders From Foreign Enemies

[jc456]

every foreigner that enters illegal enters as an enemy. don't need to be a soldier.

Soldiers cannot enforce civil laws. End of discussion.

illegal entry to my country is an act of war, military can be used.

I have a say too and apparently the Pentagon agrees with me.

it says so right here in the oath of office our representative swear on...

"The oath used today has not changed since 1966 and is prescribed in Title 5, Section 3331 of the United States Code. It reads: “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
what does this mean? enemies, foreign and domestic;

Use Google and read up on the Posse Comitatus Act. The military can't be used as law enforcement.

i'm not asking them to, they are protecting us from foreign invaders. isn't that their job? protect us from foreign invaders?

maybe you can provide us with what their objectives are.

 

[longknife]

'Does the United States military exist only to defend the borders of foreign countries in the Middle East or is it allowed to defend the borders of the U.S. against terrorist cartels, espionage, infiltrations, and smuggling?'

Sound like a stupid question? Here's one that's going to sound even MORE stupid:

Do US military troops have the right to DEFED THEMSELVES in their own country, on their own die of the border, when approached by foreign troops who order them to surrender their weapons?

According to a NorthCom spokesman, the military troops are there NOT in a Law Enforcement capacity.
-- Well, NO SHIT! The US military is used for the defense of the United States...and since there is an illegal invasion going on right now, why can't they be accepted as being there to protect this nation during this 'invasion'?


Military's mission doesn't include enforcement, so smugglers cross Rio Grande right in front of them

The posse comitatus act specifically forbids the military from enforcing civilian law. We are not being invaded by any enemy soldiers. You want to blow up a minor incident and turn it into a shooting incident? You are crazy.

You just pointed out something interesting.

The posse comitatus act specifically forbids the military from enforcing civilian law.

Is protecting the border "civilian law?"

It seems to me the definition is burred when it comes to protecting our borders and stopping the current invasion of our country by illegal immigrants, gang members, and terrorists.

Send fully-armed troops with the responsibility of protecting our border using whatever means are necessary.

 

[jc456]

'Does the United States military exist only to defend the borders of foreign countries in the Middle East or is it allowed to defend the borders of the U.S. against terrorist cartels, espionage, infiltrations, and smuggling?'

Sound like a stupid question? Here's one that's going to sound even MORE stupid:

Do US military troops have the right to DEFED THEMSELVES in their own country, on their own die of the border, when approached by foreign troops who order them to surrender their weapons?

According to a NorthCom spokesman, the military troops are there NOT in a Law Enforcement capacity.
-- Well, NO SHIT! The US military is used for the defense of the United States...and since there is an illegal invasion going on right now, why can't they be accepted as being there to protect this nation during this 'invasion'?


Military's mission doesn't include enforcement, so smugglers cross Rio Grande right in front of them

The posse comitatus act specifically forbids the military from enforcing civilian law. We are not being invaded by any enemy soldiers. You want to blow up a minor incident and turn it into a shooting incident? You are crazy.

You just pointed out something interesting.

The posse comitatus act specifically forbids the military from enforcing civilian law.

Is protecting the border "civilian law?"

It seems to me the definition is burred when it comes to protecting our borders and stopping the current invasion of our country by illegal immigrants, gang members, and terrorists.

Send fully-armed troops with the responsibility of protecting our border using whatever means are necessary.

yep exactly. what I've been saying. so far they have zip to say otherwise.

 

[easyt65]

Then they became Republicans.

'Speaking of 'ignorant unsubstantiated opinion'.....here comes that unsubstantiated revisionist Dem/snowflake history again....

No, they remained Democrats. Democrats / snowflakes don't like this brought up and do their best to engage in revisionist history.....

The Republicans were responsible for the Passage of Civil Rights. President Johnson may have signed the legislation into law, but he is known for saying about Civil Rights:

"These Negroes, they're getting pretty uppity these days and that's a problem for us since they've got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we've got to do something about this, we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference... I'll have them ******* voting Democratic for the next two hundred years".




Jim Crow laws - Wikipedia


The Republican Party was formed in 1854 as an abolitionist movement as expressed by a great black American, Frederick Douglass: “I am a Republican, a black, dyed in the wool Republican, and I never intend to belong to any other party than the party of freedom and progress.”

The Republicans / Republican Party founded the NAACP.

'Yes, Lincoln was a Republican who freed the slaves. Yes, Republicans founded the NAACP. But that’s because African Americans were Republican back then, in part out of gratitude and loyalty to the party of the man who freed them and their ancestors. But blacks got off the GOP bus after passage of the Civil Rights Act, thanks to the leadership of two Democrats, President John F. Kennedy and President Lyndon Baines Johnson.'



https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...1e2-ba29-238a6ac36a08_blog.html?noredirect=on

 

[danielpalos]

in right wing fantasy you can appeal to All of the ignorance you want, and still be right.

I don't know anything about 'Right wing fantasy; - fantasy seems to be where Democrats and snowflakes like yourself have lived since Hillary lost the 2016 election. I also don't believe in 'appealing to ignorance' - I find doing so only encourages snowflakes to continue to deny reality and engage in emotional irrational defense of the indefensible.

only if you appeal to ignorance of our supreme Law of the land.

 

[Vandalshandle]

What a terrible injustice. All those brown people committing misdemeanors by crossing the border without papers, and our military can't even blow them up with grenade launchers.

 

[jc456]

What a terrible injustice. All those brown people committing misdemeanors by crossing the border without papers, and our military can't even blow them up with grenade launchers.

sure they can, they are invaders. what else do you call them?

 

[FA_Q2]

No. Not even close (and I cant have hell freezing over )

The military is not equipped, trained or even chartered to deal with civilians or criminal matters. They exist for a singular purpose - to obliterate the enemy. There is a stark difference in what the military does and the police, ICE or any of the alphabet soup that deals with criminal matters such as smuggling. If you really do want to end crossings and treat this as a military matter then use them but that does not involve detaining or stopping immigrants. It involves military control and killing anyone that disobeys. It is very ugly.

I do not view border defense as a civilian or criminal matter, it is national security. Yep it would be ugly for about a week, but it would stop the flow of people coming into our country illegally.

Did you not complain about the current tratment of immigrants?

What you are talking about makes what we are dong now look like a free paid vacation in Hawaii.

Smugglers should have a zero chance of crossing active military personnel. What we need is proper staffing and funding of our forces that are supposed to be dealing with this kind of problem. Equating this 'border defense' to military border defense is silly. They are not even remotely the same thing.

I disagree, I think the smugglers should have 100% chance of running into armed military personnel.

Yet smuggling IS a criminal matter. There is no other way to slice it.

And illegal crossings are not border defense. Do you really want to see anyone crossing turned into a crater because that is what military defense is.

 

[FA_Q2]

The entire US military has become a court-martial red-light district:

• Sex segregation & discrimination
• Rape, sexual assault & false accusations thereof
• Commercial sex trafficking NXIVM, ALVN, #MeToo, etc.

If it isn't sex, they're dealing drugs, and if you don't have enough rank, you keep your mouth shut & just take the drugs they deal. Murder for hire is rampant.

The Mafia establishment has “made men” in the military: usually pretty good rank, but they keep most of the dirty work “below the Beltway” — that is, below the rank of general, outside the Pentagon.

Those fellows tend to have too many masonic degrees and secret handshakes, unusual decorations from out of left field somewhere, VFW, American Legion, other fraternal organizations.

Clearly you have not served.

 

[WillPower]

No, they can't shoot unarmed civilians. So sorry about that.

No way to know if they're armed or not until you shoot em and roll em over.....Oops...sorry about that, Miguel.

 

[Third Party]

'Does the United States military exist only to defend the borders of foreign countries in the Middle East or is it allowed to defend the borders of the U.S. against terrorist cartels, espionage, infiltrations, and smuggling?'

Sound like a stupid question? Here's one that's going to sound even MORE stupid:

Do US military troops have the right to DEFED THEMSELVES in their own country, on their own die of the border, when approached by foreign troops who order them to surrender their weapons?

According to a NorthCom spokesman, the military troops are there NOT in a Law Enforcement capacity.
-- Well, NO SHIT! The US military is used for the defense of the United States...and since there is an illegal invasion going on right now, why can't they be accepted as being there to protect this nation during this 'invasion'?


Military's mission doesn't include enforcement, so smugglers cross Rio Grande right in front of them

We are not being invaded. Illegal immigrants are not our enemies.

Just try to take your head out of your ass for a change!

Uh, yeah they are our enemies-anyone crossing our borders without permission IS an enemy. The Dems have given them a pass on law breaking.

 

[Meathead]

'Does the United States military exist only to defend the borders of foreign countries in the Middle East or is it allowed to defend the borders of the U.S. against terrorist cartels, espionage, infiltrations, and smuggling?'

Sound like a stupid question? Here's one that's going to sound even MORE stupid:

Do US military troops have the right to DEFED THEMSELVES in their own country, on their own die of the border, when approached by foreign troops who order them to surrender their weapons?

According to a NorthCom spokesman, the military troops are there NOT in a Law Enforcement capacity.
-- Well, NO SHIT! The US military is used for the defense of the United States...and since there is an illegal invasion going on right now, why can't they be accepted as being there to protect this nation during this 'invasion'?


Military's mission doesn't include enforcement, so smugglers cross Rio Grande right in front of them

It has to do with state's rights and activation of federal troops.

 

[WinterBorn]

Soldiers cannot enforce civil laws. End of discussion.

illegal entry to my country is an act of war, military can be used.

I have a say too and apparently the Pentagon agrees with me.

it says so right here in the oath of office our representative swear on...

"The oath used today has not changed since 1966 and is prescribed in Title 5, Section 3331 of the United States Code. It reads: “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
what does this mean? enemies, foreign and domestic;

Use Google and read up on the Posse Comitatus Act. The military can't be used as law enforcement.

i'm not asking them to, they are protecting us from foreign invaders. isn't that their job? protect us from foreign invaders?

maybe you can provide us with what their objectives are.

Your "invasion" is unarmed poor people who walked hundreds of miles fleeing oppression. Yes, stop them. But opening fire with automatic weapons is not the way to do it.

 

[justinacolmena]

Clearly you have not served.

I never claimed to have "served" in the US Armed Forces in any capacity.

There is a case of altogether too much "service" and not enough delivery. They sold us a bill of goods on the Second Amendment.

Gun rights cannot be conditioned on official "service" to the executive branch of the U.S. government.

 

[easyt65]

illegal entry to my country is an act of war, military can be used.

I have a say too and apparently the Pentagon agrees with me.

it says so right here in the oath of office our representative swear on...

"The oath used today has not changed since 1966 and is prescribed in Title 5, Section 3331 of the United States Code. It reads: “I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
what does this mean? enemies, foreign and domestic;

Use Google and read up on the Posse Comitatus Act. The military can't be used as law enforcement.

i'm not asking them to, they are protecting us from foreign invaders. isn't that their job? protect us from foreign invaders?

maybe you can provide us with what their objectives are.

Your "invasion" is unarmed poor people who walked hundreds of miles fleeing oppression. Yes, stop them. But opening fire with automatic weapons is not the way to do it.

Lie. They make up SOME of the invasion.

Also, whether they mean to be or not, they are thieves 'breaking into our house' taking money that is not theirs. Their motivation to do so is the same as anyone who breaks into your house at 2 am looking for cash / valuables - to steal from YOU to make THEIR life better somehow...

Next time someone breaks in your house, don't call the cops or shoot them - Empathize, make them a f*ing sandwich, and fill up their bag with some of your money.

It's what Dems and snowflakes are insisting we do with the criminals invading our 'home' on the border.

 

[danielpalos]

What a terrible injustice. All those brown people committing misdemeanors by crossing the border without papers, and our military can't even blow them up with grenade launchers.

the right wing only cares about natural rights in abortion threads.

 

[danielpalos]

What a terrible injustice. All those brown people committing misdemeanors by crossing the border without papers, and our military can't even blow them up with grenade launchers.

sure they can, they are invaders. what else do you call them?

refugees from our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

refugees from our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror.

This mother, who's son was murdered by MS-13 and everyone affected by illegal immigrant violence should file a class action lawsuit against you personally and everyone who thinks like you and encourages this.

Police: 5 MS-13 Gang Members Arrested in Virginia Teen's Murder
Police: 5 MS-13 Gang Members Arrested in Teen's Murder

The fact that you condone drug use, terrorist activity and crime are NO EXCUSE.

 

[Vandalshandle]

refugees from our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror.

This mother, who's son was murdered by MS-13 and everyone affected by illegal immigrant violence should file a class action lawsuit against you personally and everyone who thinks like you and encourages this.

Police: 5 MS-13 Gang Members Arrested in Virginia Teen's Murder
Police: 5 MS-13 Gang Members Arrested in Teen's Murder

The fact that you condone drug use, terrorist activity and crime are NO EXCUSE.

You know, your ignorance would be amusing, if it wasn't so pervasive in the world of Trump. MS-13 is a gang that started in Los Angeles, and spread from there to Central America, but don't let the facts get in the way of your bigotry:

MS-13 - Wikipedia

 

[danielpalos]

refugees from our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror.

This mother, who's son was murdered by MS-13 and everyone affected by illegal immigrant violence should file a class action lawsuit against you personally and everyone who thinks like you and encourages this.

Police: 5 MS-13 Gang Members Arrested in Virginia Teen's Murder
Police: 5 MS-13 Gang Members Arrested in Teen's Murder

The fact that you condone drug use, terrorist activity and crime are NO EXCUSE.

there is no general warfare clause or common offense clause.