So much for controlling the border

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter edward
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around an incident involving National Guard troops near the Mexican border who were approached by armed individuals. Participants explore the implications of this event for border security, the rules of engagement (ROE) for the National Guard, and broader issues related to immigration policy and public safety.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the incident may be a diversion tactic by drug runners, linking drug smuggling to illegal immigration.
  • Questions arise regarding the rules of engagement (ROE) for National Guard troops, with some expressing concern about their ability to defend themselves.
  • There are conflicting reports about whether the armed individuals approached National Guard troops or Border Patrol agents, leading to confusion about the nature of the incident.
  • Participants note that not all National Guard members are armed, and there are strict protocols to avoid friendly fire incidents.
  • Some express frustration over the perceived lack of effective immigration policy and the political handling of border security issues.
  • Concerns are raised about the adequacy of the National Guard's response to armed threats and the implications for public safety.
  • Several participants share personal opinions on how they would react in a similar situation, reflecting on the challenges of decision-making under pressure.
  • There is mention of varying accounts from local news sources regarding the details of the incident, indicating uncertainty about the facts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the incident and its implications, with no clear consensus on the effectiveness of the National Guard's response or the adequacy of current immigration policies. Disagreement exists regarding the interpretation of the rules of engagement and the nature of the threat posed by the armed individuals.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the available information, including varying accounts from news sources and the ambiguity surrounding the rules of engagement for the National Guard. The discussion reflects ongoing concerns about border security and the complexities of immigration policy.

  • #31
Astronuc said:
No, apparently X-43D is serious, as one would see if one were to read our exchanges in this thread - Bush: Border Security Working
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=165091
I think it's time to crack down, this is getting too silly. While we're getting rid of countries, let's just all work for free and force all companies to give all their products and services away, then we can all join hands and sing. :rolleyes:

Can we get back to realistic discussions, please?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Whats the matter comrade Evo, not feeling the communist spirit? :smile:

shirtsquare-commies.jpg
 
  • #33
From a local point of view there has been no significant change on the border even with the National Guard there. Illegals and drug dealers managed to find ways around the outposts.

One of the most common methods was a simple diversion tactic. A group would cross the border, be spotted, and then retreat back into Mexico. About the time the Border Patrol would arrive on the scene the real crossing would take place at another location.

There will be no fence in the Tucson sector. Lockheed has a multi million dollar contract to install high tech surveillance equipment on 100 ft. tall towers.

It takes feet on the ground to catch anyone so I would imagine that the same diversionary tactics will be used to defeat the towers.

Locally our schools are burdened with non English speaking anchor babies, who are now of school age.

We have the highest vehicle theft rate in the country. Most of the vehicles end up in Mexico where they are used to smuggle both drugs and people.

We still have an incredible burden on our health care system. One of our two trauma centers has closed due to the expense of treating non paying patients.

So far for the month of July 23 "crossers" have been found dead in the desert from heat exposure , dozens more have been found and treated. The Border Patrol has even installed tall blue poles that can be seen from a distance. The poles have emergency phones located at ground level.

Half of the National Guard troops will be leaving next month. The Border Patrol has resumed flying those detained in this country to Mexico City via Aeronaves de México.

All in all nothing has changed. If the Feds want to pick up the tab it would be fine with me.

edit: Just to make this a little less cold hearted several groups here leave barrels of water in the desert for the illegals.

http://www.gismonitor.com/images/20060803/desert_2_lg.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • #34
Beeza said:
So maybe I should be able to build myself a house on the front lawn of the white-house or wherever I please too right?

No that's a bad example. Without political borders everyone would be able to live and work where he wants, without being deported and arrested by the state. For example i could go to live in Canada without asking for state permission. Countries are also unequal in land. Canada owns 480 times more land than Israel. It would be better if countries were equal in land so there would be no big inequalities between countries.
 
Last edited:
  • #35
X-43D said:
No that's a bad example. Without political borders everyone would be able to live and work where he wants, without being deported and arrested by the state. For example i could go to live in Canada without asking for state permission. Countries are also unequal in land. Canada owns 470 times more land than Israel. It would be better if countries were equal in land so there would be no big inequalities between countries.
You don't seem to even grasp the issues involved with something like you are proposing. It's ridiculous. Taxes & medical care are two right off the top of my head.

Canada has a lot of land that not very suitable. Are you proposing that Canada send portions of it's land to the Middle east or that Israelites move to the uninhabited frozen tundra?

Please do not make any more of these silly posts.
 
Last edited:
  • #36
I say we fence the entire border. Have cameras all along it, response teams at the ready every 50-100 miles or so. It's certainly doable and necessary in my opinion.

I've heard that almost a third of our prison population is comprised of illegals. I would propose having separate prisons specifically for the illegals and sending a bill to the respective countries for the costs.
 
  • #37
I think Raj from The Apprentice made a strong statement about the state of U.S. border security when he took his elephant and mariachi band down to the Rio Grande:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #38
Math Is Hard said:
I think Raj from The Apprentice made a strong statement about the state of U.S. border security when he took his elephant and mariachi band down to the Rio Grande:


LOL gees don't give the crossers any ideas.:biggrin:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #39
In my opinion the best would be if political borders between countries were
abolished, the world would be unified and everyone could live and work
where he wants without being deported and arrested by the state.

http://www.abb.hardcore.lt/joomla/index.php
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #40
X-43D said:
In my opinion the best would be if political borders between countries were abolished, the world would be unified and everyone could live and work where he wants without being deported and arrested by the state.
It just doesn't work that way.

It would be nice if there were no crime, no aggression, no injustice, no exploitation, no suffering, . . . . Unfortunately, that is not way of the world at the moment.

The best we could hope for is for each nation to work on it's own economic development and social justice.

It is rather impractical to advocate complete removal of national borders in the forseeable future - even if it is a noble goal.
 
  • #41
Astronuc said:
It just doesn't work that way.

It would be nice if there were no crime, no aggression, no injustice, no exploitation, no suffering, . . . . Unfortunately, that is not way of the world at the moment.

The best we could hope for is for each nation to work on it's own economic development and social justice.

It is rather impractical to advocate complete removal of national borders in the forseeable future - even if it is a noble goal.

I agree. Humanity is just not ready for this at the moment. Maybe it will be in 500 years from now.
 

Similar threads

News Searching for the call for Kerry's DD SF-180
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
News Is a Standing Army Necessary for a Peaceful Future?
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
7K
News Should the US intervene in world problems?
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
10K
News Renaissance and reaction to Islam.
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
8K