out of curiosity what is "troubling" ? There are 27,000 fewer national guards men and women serving in iraq. If even 7000 of them, fewer than 1/3 are sent to assist the border patrol there seems to be no problem. The only problem will be if they are used as a permanent solution. we need them only as long as we are training and hiring new border patrol agents.

Politics say we are stretching the military to thin but the numbers seem not to lie.

it's just more of the same shoot now don't ask questions later policy bush seems to think is the answer to any problem.

there is no better proof that this is a dangerous game of politics to appease conservative talking heads than the fact that Bush is not going to be deploying Nat'l Guard Troops in Puerto Rico where thousands of "illegal" Dominicans step on U.S. soil and often times use it as a jumping block to NY, Fl and Ma.

mcf:

you seem to be entirely missing the point here.

let me point out just a few of the troubling aspects of deploying the national guard:

-we're effectively militarizing our border with a country that's one of our closest allies.
-we'll be turning away valuable contributors to our workforce and economy at gunpoint, further tarninsing our reputation throughout the world.
-we are, once again, using force to deal with an issue better addressed through policy.
-deploying the national guard is not a viable long-term strategy. illegal immigration has occured since the country was founded.
-it doesn't address the real problem with having a porous border - terrorism.
-people will be shot and will die only for having committed the "crime" of wanting to make life better for themselves or to be reunited with children and families.
-people should not have to suffer/die like that just to shore up politicians' poll numbers.

I do agree that I am playing devils advocate here...


The CNN article posted above states that the ng will serve in a supporting role mostly behind the scenes. I understand your passion but claiming that illegals will be shot or turned around at gun point is strictly naive. The methods of the border patrol and ng are a lot more diverse than just dudes with guns standing on some line.

I also agree that politicians are trying to make a move only because this is an election year. That is disgusting. All of this should/should not occur as a result of what the american people want not some politician seeking another inept term.

The american people overwhelmingly disapprove of bush handling of the immigration issue up to now. In addition they also favor much stronger support on the border in some polls by almost 80%. It does not take a shrewd thinker to realize americans want to get tougher on the border.

I do agree that I am playing devils advocate here...


The CNN article posted above states that the ng will serve in a supporting role mostly behind the scenes. I understand your passion but claiming that illegals will be shot or turned around at gun point is strictly naive. The methods of the border patrol and ng are a lot more diverse than just dudes with guns standing on some line.

I also agree that politicians are trying to make a move only because this is an election year. That is disgusting. All of this should/should not occur as a result of what the american people want not some politician seeking another inept term.

The american people overwhelmingly disapprove of bush handling of the immigration issue. In addition they also favor sealing the border in some polls by almost 90%. It does not take a shrewd thinker to realize americans want to get tougher on the border.

I do agree that I am playing devils advocate here...


The CNN article posted above states that the ng will serve in a supporting role mostly behind the scenes. I understand your passion but claiming that illegals will be shot or turned around at gun point is strictly naive. The methods of the border patrol and ng are a lot more diverse than just dudes with guns standing on some line.

I also agree that politicians are trying to make a move only because this is an election year. That is disgusting. All of this should/should not occur as a result of what the american people want not some politician seeking another inept term.

The american people overwhelmingly disapprove of bush handling of the immigration issue. In addition they also favor sealing the border in some polls by almost 90%. It does not take a shrewd thinker to realize americans want to get tougher on the border.

mexico a staunch ally...a separate issue all together.

Yes, the methods of the border patrol include dragging large tires along roadsides, clearing the sand so that next time they come around, they can detect fresh footprints.

Ok, so the methods may be diverse, but they have a common goal: detection and interdiction.

Also, having lived on the US/Mexico border, one notes that the National Guard is not needed to militarize the region. The Border Patrol is well-armed and employs very sophisticated surveillance equipment.

Among other things, does it not trouble you that current White House initiatives could be construed as being anti-Mexican measures? I mean, our country spends billions to find and detain enemy combatants from any country whatsoever, yet goes out of its way to pass legislation to keep people of a certain ethnicity from a specific county from entering the border?

And before one considers that such measures are aimed towards all illegal immigrants, think about how differently Cuban refugees are treated from their Mexican or Central American counterparts.

i understand what the article says about the supporting role, but we all know how these things really go. some NG soldier will claim an illegal immigrant is brandishing a weapon, making threating moves, or acting suspiciously and fire shots in self defense. whether his/her claim is legit or not doesn't matter, the incident will be used as an excuse for further force. if bush only wanted non-combative behind the scenes support I don't see why would he be sending the NG rather than unarmed civilian volunteers.

you are a moron

surprisingly, i don't think you can put first fault with the politicians here (for bringing up this issue).

i think it was the 'Minutemen' who amped up this issue. politicians then began their their shallow overtures. this was followed by the organized demonstrations. now we have even more ardent shallow overtures.

way to go mcf...resorting to personal attack once you're run out of valid counterpoints to contribute to the debate. you'd make a good politician!

no no i am sorry i just thought you had seen too many movies/tv. I really hope that what you presume will happen does not. it is a bit pessamistic on your part but it could happen. sorry for the response earlier it was out of line and just a joke on my side.

ps i have no plans to be a politician. i dont know what would be worse to be called a moron or a politician. sorry man.

the national guard would never shoot nobody...

why not lets build an ellis island at the border???we could get architecture students to do it. it could be a competition!!!

vado, thanks for not forgetting ohio.

If Bush saved a baby from a burning building, people would bitch.

Just because Mexico isn't overtly threatening to us doesn't make them our allies. Vicente Fox is a bastard in charge of a failed country, and his MO is pawning problems off on the US.

Let's all do some research into how the Mexican government treats illegal immigrants at its southern border...pretty scary.

Sorry to disagree with the all-popular Vado, but that picture doesn't mean a damn thing to this thread; it's one of the typical sensationalistic bombs thrown all over this [increasingly] ridiculous site that increase your popularity and repuatation for wittiness. Four people get killed by the NG in 1970, so obviously they are all murdering plundereres who should not be used at all in 2006. Good thinking.

ALthough, on the surface, mcf1983f's comments seem intellectually weak; sometimes that's all you can say in these threads. It's not worth the fourteen pages of discourse that would be required to debate the issue with people who are close-minded mal-contents with their 'minds' already made up.

sorry galford, my mind is made up. and i am 'mal content'.
i am waiting for a mexican response, inside the us borders. viva mexico. today los angeles tomorrow congress.

Many good points, I too am scared of a militarization of the border, but we have a problem we need to solve our borders can't just stay open. WE cannot afford to have open borders (I think we should use some NG Canada too, as that is the border terrorrists have tried to use mroe than once). The fact that we aren't protcting that border signifies to me that this is a xenophobic move by republicans (not racist as hispanics are of many races and cannot be lumped into one).

I am a-hispanic, b-an immigrant, and I think we owe the many illegal immigrants here right now as we have basically have used them for cheap produce, home-building etc.... But I would prefer to not have any more illegal immigration, we need to stop the flood. Although that would mean the minimum wage has to go up to $10 an hour just to afford lettuce and tomatoes. There is an institutional problem the illegal imigration is only a symptom. Republicans want to have cheap semi-slave labor so they don't have to raise wages at all levels, but want tougher security we can't have it both ways.

I want security (I support the use of the short-term use of the National Guard), better wages, paths to citizenship to those already here that have contributed and are otehrwise law abiding, and soem sort of legal status to people that want to come here seasonably to pick whatever is in season.

I think glaford is right, we need to push Mexico and other countries south of the border to distribute their wealth better. The problem in this front is that we push policies in Latin American countries that uphold the status quo of lots of poor and a few rich that only get richer. Many countries in South America are fairly rich and a large number of the people people dont see that wealth anywhere, and yes (north) american policies contribute to that, the solution: radical nationalist left-wingers in venezuela, bolivia, etc... that actually DO have more democratic and egalitarian societies. Once again we want to have our cake and to eat it too....

jeepers, the fbi has been notified

galford - good point about mexico's southern border. Also good point about people bitching about Bush over everything. Same was done to Clinton. It's politics.

Also, Javier had a good point about illegals from other countries. If the issue is immigration it's all our borders.

What gets me about Mexico is that a country like theirs should be very wealthy. They are oil rich. There are abundant other mineral resources in their country. Tourism is does very well there. Agriculture does very well there. NAFTA has built up good manufacturing in Mexico. Etc. Etc.

Instead all that is lost on corruption in the gov't while the masses live in poverty. National Guards at the border is just a band-aid on the issue. The root is the underlying problems in Mexico. I know the USA, politicans especially, cannot change that. But I doubt anything we do along that border will change much until things improve in Mexico enough to where Mexicans won't desire to leave Mexico.

galford, take the pic of the Kent State incident as an example of a "Know your history or repeat it" moment. Don't shoot the messenger.

As for Bush being criticized for saving a baby from a burning building, though of course this is silly hyperbole, unfortunately his past actions would force any reasonable person to wonder if he didn't save that baby for political reasons rather than humane ones. It is the same with this course of action: is he trying to make the border safer/improve relations with Mexico/etc or is he making a politcal play for more votes? Sadly I think whenever any politician makes any move (more hyperbole) the reason is the latter.

Personally, I can confidently say that I think bringing more guns/militia to any location is rarely a way to actually solve any meanaingful problem.

Did you really just try to get by insinuating that Republicans are the only ones hiring illegales? Why is there a flood of illegal immigration if the life they have waiting for them is even remotely close to semi-slave? You owe an apology to slaves and semi-slaves all over the world, past a present.

I don't think it's Republican ideology creating the problem. Why would they want to get over here so bad? Semi-slave conditions? I don't think so. How about...an entitlement society? Yes, that's it. How about a welfare state? Bingo. Free medical care, welfare and various and sundry other handouts from the government, conveniently subsidized by all of us. From whence did all of these handouts come? Anybody....anybody.......Democrats......anybody.....starting with FDR.......espoused by every Democrat since....anybody....

Though maybe if you put a gun to my head I'd be able to properly spell "meaningful". Sorry.

i think this move has a lot to do with people who support the republican representation (republican majority in short) to speed up the border control 'projects'.
last mounths' mass rallies, triggered by immigration bill proposal, has certainly raised some worries on loss of american identity and control.
yes this is how it works in washington dc. reactionary politics as ever, shortending the long term solutions and affordable plans.

if i am reported to fbi, thanks for the report but they don't pick up on me, a public nuisance material...

Previous was for melquiades

Liberty Bell, another Archinect heavyweight:

I believe all politicians are selfish and self-serving by nature. We might agree about that. However, when something good happens, I'm not going to look a gift-horse in the mouth, fall on my own sword, shoot myself in the foot, because I don't think the politicians heart is in the right place. For example, I think Bush could have been a Great President, but I think his presidency has since failed; BUT I think removing Sadam Hussein from Iraq was the best think he's done so far, and I'm happy he did it no matter what. (I have officially exhausted my reservoir of colloquialisms, my apologies)

Call me a rationalist.

I don't mean this condescendingly, but perhaps the view on violence is a gender issue to some extent, because I'm thinking that every decisive moment in human history has been decided at the point of a gun, even the ones that achieved great things for society.

"it's one of the typical sensationalistic bombs thrown all over this [increasingly] ridiculous site that increase your popularity and repuatation for wittiness." galford, then please get out now, dont let the door get your ass....

galford they are not the only ones but they are the ones having huge in-fightings.

I will stand by my semi-slave comment. You enjoy your 1.(( a pounbd tomatoes, huh? Well you are responsible for the semi-slave condtions that have been documented in farms in Florida, Georgia, etc.... Look it up, and make thougtful arguments dont just regurgitate rhetoric.

These people come to work because their $1 an hour under semi-slave conditions here is better than their $2 a week under semi-slave conditions there.

And they CANNOT take advantage of the wefare state, that is just rhetporic, you need an SSN to get any benefits from this society and many do pay taxes. Stop listening to Rush.

sameolddoctor, your defense of Vado Retro has been dually noted, you have received 13 popularity points.

If I don't agree I shouldn't say anything at all?

**sameolddoctor, AKA Thought Police.**

Border security has been beefed up with canada, and you know what, i think the resoning that we're beefing up border security to fight terrorists is absoulute bullshit. If a islamic terrorist wants in to this counrtry, he's gonna do what they've always done, fly right in from the muslim world. We WILL have hispanic terrorists on our hands though if we keep treating or Latin American brothers to the South as a problem. We are getting so unpopular down there it's not even funny. Leftists and nationalists are taking over down there, and Peru is next, and Mexico probably won't be too far behind. Vado and Brain have valid points, all it takes is one foul up between the NG and some poor bastard and the whole situation is going to get messy fast. I love instead of increasing funding and personell to the grossy underfunded and undermaned border patrol we send the NG in there to "support" them. It looks like, even though it may not be, that we're militarizing our southern border and appearances are what counts here. That could exacerbate this whole thing out of control. We reap what we sow people, we're in our current situation with islamic terrorists now partially because we used them as pawns against the Soviet Union (and the Soviets used them against us) and ignored the growing problem of islamic fundamentalism. We ignore the growing spread of socialism and nationalism in Latin America and continue to treat them like we've been doing for decades we could be at war with THEM in another 40 years. If a nationalist group of hispanic terrorists bombs washington in the next few decades, that to quote Malcom X, is "Chickens coming home to roost." I'm tired of talking politics, im gonna go find an architecture thread before i get so pissed about things as they are these days and I do something stupid...

And as I said before I think we need to control ALL our borders (for now by any means necessary) as a matter of national security, raise wages so that poor americans can take these jobs and not starve, and give the illegal immigrants already here (who have done so much for our economy) a path to citizenship.

I don't take it condescendingly, galford, because I think in this way women frankly are far smarter than men - just less effective, in the short term.

And while I agree that the history of the world has been charted at the point of a gun, I firmly believe that the guns have been in the foreground while the actual deal making has been taking place elsewhere. The guns and people on the ground are standins. I wish that we (meaning humanity, not the US) could become "civilized" enough to not need the theater of confrontation to allow us to engage in discussion.

I do however take offense for all of my gender at being called a "heavyweight" ;)

And change our policies in Latin America to support the "people" rather then our "interests" which usually means stealing their natural resources.

melquiades, to quote a friend: "You are a moron."

Teaser, and this is a year and a half old

Dateline: December, 2004

In hosting America's largest population of illegal immigrants, California bears a huge cost to provide basic human services for this fast growing, low-income segment of its population. A new study from the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) examines the costs of education, health care and incarceration of illegal aliens, and concludes that the costs to Californians is $10.5 billion per year.

full article: link

I'm sure you have a reason why that is not true.

galford (I don't mean this condescendingly), you sound like my dad, who happens to listen to a lot of Rush...

and this discussion would be dull without your varying viewpoint.

Share On Brotha!

and never stop "looking."

galford I think I am making a thoughtful interesting balanced argument, you are insulting people and just repeating fanatical rhetoric... who is the moron?

People like galford (not mexicans) is my true fear for America zealots in a holy cause.

well played, Liberty Bell.

my image post was in direct response to the "you're a moron" response to bryan, which i read as the national guard would never shoot innocent people. well, sensational or not they did. it freaking happened. also, i would never use a tragic event to be witty. i'm above that. oh yeah and we're gonna build an embassy in libya. terrorist today friend tomorrow. its real politik. hey we already had terrorist attacks by south americans here in the states. but they were working for the american backed pinochet government. quit being so naive people...

Libya was rewarded for playing ball, instead of thinking they could blow off the rest of the world like North Korea and Iran

I'm actually cool with diplomatic ties being reinstated with Libya, what is wrong with that. They were a terrorist state, what, 20 years ago. Hell, we NUKED Japan and they bombed the crap out of us about 60 years ago and we're very cool with them now. What the hell is wrong with peace?

melquiades - When America buys oil from Mexico we pay the same price as the oil we buy from Canada. Why then are avearge oil workers in Alberta getting rich while those in Mexico work for pennies?

Please provide an example of a policy change in the USA that would change the corruption in Mexico. I firmly believe that's the answer to the problem, but I don't know to get there.

the true axis of evil:
galford, parallel38, and tgv11

facile arguments for shallow minds

melquiades:

Of course YOU think YOU are making a "thoughtful interesting balanced argument." YOU'RE supposed to. I disagree, it's not personal! Would a smiley face smooth this over? :)

now children...

galford,

"I'm not going to look a gift-horse in the mouth, fall on my own sword, shoot myself in the foot" ... what the hell does that even mean?

i paid $7000 in taxes last year in a state where immigration is a huge issue, California. Please give me any reason to believe that any substantial percentage of that money went to subsidizing this so called welfare state rather than being funneled into militarization projects.

this banter against mexican immigrants draining this society is so ludicrous. just a way for the ruling class to turn the people against one another while they continue to get richer...xenophobia

guns on the border is not going to stop immigration.

oh, and this is coming from an immigrant, who was on welfare at one point, who is now a working professional along with his brother and sister.

hmmm... A good question, I think that is the true heart of the matter. I know that in many countries that is not the case we negotiate contracts in way that we don't pay equally and then only a few people in those countries reap the benefits. We reward corrupt politicians by keeping them in power a long as they deal with us in our terms, etc....

This has happened in Colombia, Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Panama, etc....

As for spcifics I am not an international politics/economics expert, but i will look into some examples. To start out I would recommend that people look closer to NAFTA and hte agreement the US is signing with a few South American countries such as Ecuador and Colombia. I know that one stalled as it wa sobvious the US just wants to plunder the countries.

galford a smiley face does smooth it over, I like it when people disagree with me, how boring would life be otherwise, but no insults and no facile rhetoric please. Show us original thought and arguments.

I don't think I earned that comparison, and I haven't tried to highjack the thread, I'm just discussing.

I think melquiades and dot are, maybe, too close to the issue to remain civil. I don't think I've been very insulting, a little facetious at times.

I think you, melquiades, are being rude and insulting. Furthermore, it's great that you don't agree, but that doesn't make my points facile and rhetorical.

If you [all] want this thread/site to be a liberal blog, let's just come right out and say it and I will leave, post haste. If not quite demanding that I not insult you, while you do nothing but insult me.

ya, comparison un-called for...

from a listener's point of view, most of this discussion is useful. Although I know where I currently stand, I am supple, considering I know how much I don't know...so, please, continue talking, sans personal attacks...

better to be too close to the issue than to be watching from the news channels and forming shallow opinions - you did just cite dateline afterall -- please!

Solution wise: i think US trade policy/aid should not go so far as helping Mexico create wages that are better than minimum wage here. That is unrealistic, and I don't think that is what most immigrants want. living wage would be enough incentive for most mexicans to stay in their communities, but that is not what they are getting. plain and simple.

"entitlement society"...give me a break.

I'm going to illegaly emmigrate to Sweden for their "entitlement society."