Thread: border securty, aye

Originally Posted by Jefe

As others have already mentioned, the border will remain porous no matter what we do. Build an impenatrable wall, they'll just take to the air or ocean, or tunnels, etc. I don't know how we would fund such a wall, but I imagine more taxes would do the trick. As much as I'd like to see a 100% secure border, I don't think it's feasible.

ahoy Jefe,

respectfully matey, do ye think the border between North and South Korea be porous? also me friend, how would taxes do the trick when the folk who most forcefully advocate buildin' and mannin' this wall have thar representatives in Washington chantin', "no new taxes!!!"?

- MeadHallPirate

Why is the there such issue with those of us that favor border security? The interest in securing the border, in my opinion, goes far past just the issue of immigration. Another way to say it is if we cannot control who comes into the country and when then just about all other conversations on security has a real issue. The drug trade, terrorism, whatever else. All of those conversations have a stake in border security as well as the issue of immigration control. However, it is an important aspect of immigration as well thus should be considered in any conversation about dealing with what happens to those here illegally now. I am not sure myself about calling for some 2000+ mile wall (new, different, addition, completion, or otherwise) as what we have now seems to be a small road bump for those coming in but something does need to change. Part of me is in favor of something as extreme as a wall with respect to what other solutions are there? What other choice do we have but to consider thinking of soultions like a wall to deal with what every other solutions to date has not stopped? I understand the cost is there for something along these lines but at the same time what are we spending on all of these other failed mechanisms in "border security" now? What are we spending now fighting the drug trade, as an example, all the while having this step of entry into the country being something that we obviously cannot control? I am not sure that we will ever get it completely secure but something is needed to improve what is there now.

Originally Posted by Sluggo

Why is the there such issue with those of us that favor border security? The interest in securing the border, in my opinion, goes far past just the issue of immigration. Another way to say it is if we cannot control who comes into the country and when then just about all other conversations on security has a real issue. The drug trade, terrorism, whatever else. All of those conversations have a stake in border security as well as the issue of immigration control. However, it is an important aspect of immigration as well thus should be considered in any conversation about dealing with what happens to those here illegally now. I am not sure myself about calling for some 2000+ mile wall (new, different, addition, completion, or otherwise) as what we have now seems to be a small road bump for those coming in but something does need to change. Part of me is in favor of something as extreme as a wall with respect to what other solutions are there? What other choice do we have but to consider thinking of soultions like a wall to deal with what every other solutions to date has not stopped? I understand the cost is there for something along these lines but at the same time what are we spending on all of these other failed mechanisms in "border security" now? What are we spending now fighting the drug trade, as an example, all the while having this step of entry into the country being something that we obviously cannot control? I am not sure that we will ever get it completely secure but something is needed to improve what is there now.

Legalize pot, Mexico will be happy for the reduction in gang warfare, and maybe the ATF will stop allowing shipment of weapons to arm them. Worry about coke later.

Originally Posted by michael h

Take away the labor of illegals and there's gonna be some pissed off Republicans.

Yet, you seem to be living on excessive intelligence-destroying pissed-off Demotard pablum, and we are still stuck with society destroying illegal millions (99% Mexican campesinos with no education, no grasp of how things work here, Mexico in their brains, obese wives and children ...at least 5 or six at the 1 a year rate...a black hole society of no hope and despair ) who can be counted on to vote Demotard in large numbers due to their pro-Mexico attitude and the free stuff the Dems keep voting in.
The funny thing is...that you seem to actually believe only Repubs have companies and businesses and hire illegals....
Since most La Raza types hire only illegals, and most Demotard citizens are the first to save a buck and hire illegals for everything from yardwork to cafeteria servers, it's a pretty much Demotard scourge being perpetuated.
'Cept for the large Black Demotard population, they prefer hiring Blacks only, as America's inheritors of the Racist Crown.
Thanks for trashing the place, Dems!

Please hurry 2012!!!:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Philbert

Yet, you seem to be living on excessive intelligence-destroying pissed-off Demotard pablum, and we are still stuck with society destroying illegal millions (99% Mexican campesinos with no education, no grasp of how things work here, Mexico in their brains, obese wives and children ...at least 5 or six at the 1 a year rate...a black hole society of no hope and despair ) who can be counted on to vote Demotard in large numbers due to their pro-Mexico attitude and the free stuff the Dems keep voting in.
The funny thing is...that you seem to actually believe only Repubs have companies and businesses and hire illegals....
Since most La Raza types hire only illegals, and most Demotard citizens are the first to save a buck and hire illegals for everything from yardwork to cafeteria servers, it's a pretty much Demotard scourge being perpetuated.
'Cept for the large Black Demotard population, they prefer hiring Blacks only, as America's inheritors of the Racist Crown.
Thanks for trashing the place, Dems!

Please hurry 2012!!!:rolleyes:

Tell me how you really feel.

It actually wasn't a flamer post, just a little humor.

Read more then 1 post in the thread.

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

ahoy Jefe,

respectfully matey, do ye think the border between North and South Korea be porous?

Good point.. I believe that border (much shorter than ours with Mexico) is sealed off fairly tight. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the "demilitarized zone" is something like ten miles on either side of the border, where no one can live, work, do anything.. it's just a large, twenty mile wide jungle area, as I understand it.

So, yes, the land border between North and South Korea is sealed up nice and tight. Anyone who wanders in to North Korea from China or via the ocean is probably rounded up fairly quickly as well. This, I'm sure, takes a huge military effort on N. Koreas's part.

Bottom line, I belive North Korea's border is porous.. less porous than ours, but it's penetrable. Reporters are able to sneak there way in and out of NK, if they're brave enough.

also me friend, how would taxes do the trick when the folk who most forcefully advocate buildin' and mannin' this wall have thar representatives in Washington chantin', "no new taxes!!!"?

I'd say they've got a bit of a problem, then. They want a wall, but they don't want to fund it. I suggest a bake sale.

Originally Posted by Jefe

As others have already mentioned, the border will remain porous no matter what we do. Build an impenatrable wall, they'll just take to the air or ocean, or tunnels, etc. I don't know how we would fund such a wall, but I imagine more taxes would do the trick. As much as I'd like to see a 100% secure border, I don't think it's feasible.

You remind me of the teen who leaves their room a complete shithole of dirty clothes, old food, and crap piled everywhere who says," If I pick it up, I'll just use it again, and it'll get dirty and end up there again 'til I need to wash it and use it again. Too much extra work for nothing, it just gets dirty again."
Why do what can be done to slow things to a small trickle and deal with just a few illegals, like before the current millions flooded the place?:rolleyes:
If I gotta 'splain it to you, you just wouldn't get it.

Originally Posted by Sluggo

Why is the there such issue with those of us that favor border security? The interest in securing the border, in my opinion, goes far past just the issue of immigration. Another way to say it is if we cannot control who comes into the country and when then just about all other conversations on security has a real issue. The drug trade, terrorism, whatever else. All of those conversations have a stake in border security as well as the issue of immigration control. However, it is an important aspect of immigration as well thus should be considered in any conversation about dealing with what happens to those here illegally now. I am not sure myself about calling for some 2000+ mile wall (new, different, addition, completion, or otherwise) as what we have now seems to be a small road bump for those coming in but something does need to change. Part of me is in favor of something as extreme as a wall with respect to what other solutions are there? What other choice do we have but to consider thinking of soultions like a wall to deal with what every other solutions to date has not stopped? I understand the cost is there for something along these lines but at the same time what are we spending on all of these other failed mechanisms in "border security" now? What are we spending now fighting the drug trade, as an example, all the while having this step of entry into the country being something that we obviously cannot control? I am not sure that we will ever get it completely secure but something is needed to improve what is there now.

Exactly.
At last some common sense, so very uncommon!

Originally Posted by Philbert

You remind me of the teen who leaves their room a complete shithole of dirty clothes, old food, and crap piled everywhere who says," If I pick it up, I'll just use it again, and it'll get dirty and end up there again 'til I need to wash it and use it again. Too much extra work for nothing, it just gets dirty again."
Why do what can be done to slow things to a small trickle and deal with just a few illegals, like before the current millions flooded the place?:rolleyes:
If I gotta 'splain it to you, you just wouldn't get it.

*admires Philbert's avatar*

ahoy oh Philbert!

so then, to just wander back to the OP, what be yer proposal on sealin' the border, how much would it be costin' us, and how would ye then raise said revenue fer yer this border sealin' project?

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by Jefe

Good point.. I believe that border (much shorter than ours with Mexico) is sealed off fairly tight. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the "demilitarized zone" is something like ten miles on either side of the border, where no one can live, work, do anything.. it's just a large, twenty mile wide jungle area, as I understand it.

So, yes, the land border between North and South Korea is sealed up nice and tight. Anyone who wanders in to North Korea from China or via the ocean is probably rounded up fairly quickly as well. This, I'm sure, takes a huge military effort on N. Koreas's part.

Bottom line, I belive North Korea's border is porous.. less porous than ours, but it's penetrable. Reporters are able to sneak there way in and out of NK, if they're brave enough.



I'd say they've got a bit of a problem, then. They want a wall, but they don't want to fund it. I suggest a bake sale.

At last, a new and effective concept...a bake sale just might do it!

Originally Posted by michael h

Legalize pot, Mexico will be happy for the reduction in gang warfare, and maybe the ATF will stop allowing shipment of weapons to arm them. Worry about coke later.

The legalization of drugs is an important conversation to have but just "legalizing pot" to then "worry about coke later" is completely unrealistic of a stance to take in regard to border security. I could not help but note that you did not have an answer to really dealing with illegal immigration or the issue of having an open border being something that terrorism cannot help but be watching. Anyway, back to your post. Mexico will not see gang warfare drop on the legalization of pot alone. If anything I'd assume the opposite would occur in fight to control the other drugs clearly making their way into this country with little to no trouble. They are not all of a sudden going to disappear just cause pot is legal. As for the ATF statement. I agree that was a real mistake and perhaps (unfounded) has origins in political gain over any real criminal investigation matters. Regardless, this ATF weapons tracking issue is one of leadership and investigation tactics over any real "border security" impact. Just my take on the ATF issue probably worthy of its own OP and thread.

Originally Posted by Sluggo

The legalization of drugs is an important conversation to have but just "legalizing pot" to then "worry about coke later" is completely unrealistic of a stance to take in regard to border security. I could not help but note that you did not have an answer to really dealing with illegal immigration or the issue of having an open border being something that terrorism cannot help but be watching. Anyway, back to your post. Mexico will not see gang warfare drop on the legalization of pot alone. If anything I'd assume the opposite would occur in fight to control the other drugs clearly making their way into this country with little to no trouble. They are not all of a sudden going to disappear just cause pot is legal. As for the ATF statement. I agree that was a real mistake and perhaps (unfounded) has origins in political gain over any real criminal investigation matters. Regardless, this ATF weapons tracking issue is one of leadership and investigation tactics over any real "border security" impact. Just my take on the ATF issue probably worthy of its own OP and thread.

I was attempting to separate issues, drugs, work, ... the reason being our border would still accessible to terrorism from Canada, so unless we address it as a whole ... it would go beyond the border issue at the Mexican border.

2 walls is a whole other can of worms.

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

*admires Philbert's avatar*

ahoy oh Philbert!

so then, to just wander back to the OP, what be yer proposal on sealin' the border, how much would it be costin' us, and how would ye then raise said revenue fer yer this border sealin' project?

- MeadHallPirate

First would be to remove most Democratic power in the Congress, allowing re-election paranoia to cut way back on govt spending and pork programs...then put what ever is needed into the security program...by using military and Border Patrol input as the basis...to make it tedious and unprofitable to cross over in large numbers for the cartels; then clamp down harder on business and individuals per existing laws and regulations to make it inhospitable for illegals to openly work with stolen ID and fake documentation. This would use many employed Fed workers and at least get some use out of the underused Federal, State, and local gov't workers whose Unions have created a paradise for incompetent employees.
Remove at almost no cost unqualified Welfare recipients from the rolls and see that Americans get the actual help the program was designed for.
No proof of citizenship, with criminal penalties for false ID, will dry up the flow by more word of mouth than actual feet on the street...also cheaper than hiring new workers in the overpaid and overfull Gov't.
Once this has become the norm and the Border has become a harder nut to crack, the fewer avenues available to smugglers and others will be much easier to monitor.
There will always be a way through a controlled situation whether it's a border or a regulated environment; the gov't needs some covert access, LE needs some flexibility, and just societal pressure needs some small relief.
So..."perfection" aka Korea or the Berlin Wall? Not that much needed...just close enough. Reduce the flood to a trickle, and maintaining it will be easier and cheaper.
Let the pendulum swing hard back the other way for a few generations.
We need millions more of Thai, Somali, Greek, Korean, Chinese, Laotian, Kenyan, and Russian immigrants instead of many millions of Mexico's lowest level of citizens.
I love many individual Mexicans, but I can't handle the tsunami of crap Mexico has sent us.

Maybe later I'll tell you how I really feel...!