Posted on 10/12/2004 8:42:25 PM PDT by knak
up on drudge:
WASH TIMES: U.S. security officials are investigating a recent intelligence report that a group of 25 Chechen terrorists illegally entered the United States from Mexico... Members of the group, said to be wearing backpacks, secretly traveled to northern Mexico and crossed into a mountainous part of Arizona, Gertz to report in Pgae One Splash, newsroom sources tell DRUDGE...
This is not to say that we can do a perfect job, but we can do a better job. The presence of police on our streets does not prevent crime, but crime would be worse without our police on the streets
The primary purpose of government is to secure our safety. All else hinges on that. Commerce, entertainment, art, education etc. cannot take place without people feeling secure enough to interact with one another. The costs of a future attack to the economy and the rest of our way of life will far overshadow the transaction costs and other problems associated with increased border enforcement
If you want to play statistical games, fine. We'll play statistical games. In probability theory an action should be taken if the expected value of the outcome is greater than another outcome. Or if you want to use the inverted logic, an action is a greater threat if the expected cost is greater than the expected cost of another action.
The expected cost is obtained by multiplying the probability of an action by the cost it would impose. Now, what do you think the chances are that the next attack on the United States would come from someone entering the border illegally? Furthermore, what do you think the costs would be in terms of lives?
However, all of this is academic. We should go after both sources of immigration that pose threats to our nation, illegal and legal.
We should do so to the best of our ability, knowing that no system is perfect. To do less would stand us in poor light when viewed by future generations
OK. Yes, this should not be used as an excuse to get out of Iraq. In fact, quite the opposite. We need to fight them wherever they are. And, I do think that the fight in Iraq is attracting many there that would otherwise be here.
Masher, you don't need to sling mud or take things to the gutter to defend your position. Or maybe you do, which is sad. I know they weren't directed at me but they detract from this thread and from Freerepublic. Asking someone whether they employ illegals is not akin to the questions you have asked.
No, you're just making a jackass out of yourself.
So when there is a terrorist attack in the US and the terrorists made it in thru Mexico, thank the bottom feeding Democrats who put politics above the welfare of our country YET again.
Do we need this level of personal attack crap on FR?
What world do you live in? Wise nations do not allow in endless millions into their countries illegally. LOL!
The truth is, the border is a security threat. And if the next attack, if it comes, is traced to an illegal border crossing, there will be you know what to pay for all politicians of any stripe who have supported what can loosely be called "open borders." When the voter backlash occurs, you will see a realignment of political opinion that will be stunning and we will see results.
My only point here is to cry in the wilderness and hope that somebody will do something before more people get killed.
Once again, if we are attacked again, we will see more resources poured into the War on Terror. My simple question is this, why are we waiting? Political correctness is killing us. Perhaps it is the case that Bush cannot act until another attack. This may be the sad truth.
If this is the case, then Bush has been hemmed in by the Courts, the Democratic Party, the ACLU and the rest. When it is all said and done, these folks are the real enemy and will have blood on their hands if another attack occurs.
By stipulating alive at least there would be no reason to shoot one unless it was for self defense.
I think one of the biggest problems is not in catching them but what do you do with them after you do.
That's why a lot of the regular law enforcement like sheriff offices city and state officers don't pick these illegals up. They can't afford to feed them and don't have the jail space.
We had places like Ellis Island to set up to process those coming in, but we have never had centers to process those going the other way.
I think they should have few large processing center located along our borders dedicated to removing these people and to give the police and bounty hunters a place to bring them to.
I would fingerprint, make a file photo and take a DNA swab and assign a case number to each. Then you would know if they came back after return and maybe you could catch some of these hardened criminals and potential terrorists in the country.
Letting the bounty hunters deal with the normal flow would free up the Border Patrol and INS to deal with the most serious cases.
It's the only economical way I see to have a chance to deal with such a large problem.
At the very lest they need to set up some type of centers to detain and process these illegals. If you put the money right at the point of the problem the business sector will figure out how to get it.
It would be a lot cheaper and more efficient than trying to hire train and pay salaries to another 10,000 or 20,000 INS and BP officers who will not be near enough.
No, you're just making a jackass out of yourself.
Do you sell illegal drugs and molest children? ---No Thanks for finally clearing that up.
Again, you reek with deception.
The answer was, "No, you didn't hit a nerve, you're just making a jackass out of yourself."
Your desperation is glaring. You are deceiving no one.
"On this scale"? The ratio of length of border to total population is relatively small compared to many countries who have done it successfully.
Securing the border is a necessary requirement of every civilized country that needs to survive. If a country doesn't do it, it ceases to exist as its former self and becomes like a dead thing infested with maggots. There are only so many invaders that a nation can assimilate before it becomes sick and dies. This has happened time and again throughout history when civilized people have become lazy and hedonistic and allowed foreigners in to do menial labor.
But it is not inevitable. Switzerland and England controlled their borders for centuries.
They couldn't - they were getting shot at via Belgium and every other point of entry the Germans found.
If the French had a better army they could have done it. By channeling the German army, they would not have required a force nearly as large as the Germans. One rationale for a purely defensive fortification is political -- it cannot be used to attack and therefore is non-threatening. The enemy can't use it as justification to escalate their forces.
Border defenses are not the only thing we need to do to stop the illegal invasion. We need to punish employers who hire them, we need to give people the right to discriminate, we need to stop illegals from voting, we need to prosecute them, incarcerate them and when their term is up, deport them. We need to remove the things that attract them -- subsidized housing, free welfare benefits and free medical care.
But you can't. (Stop them at the border, that is). Border too big, resources too few.
The more we stop, the more the ones behind them are deterred. We can stop most of them. Question -- If we stop 20% of them now. how much more will we need to spend on border patrol to stop 99%? Hint: it is not five times more. Why? See first sentence of this paragraph.
Yes, and the goal of "defeating evil in all its forms" is a laudable one as well.
Well, we agree on one thing. You can't stop all evil. But if you don't fight evil you will die. I think your problem is that you don't have a grasp of the nature of this evil. Do you think like Kerry? Do you think it is a "nuisance"? Or do you think like Bush? -- Immigration is some kind of benefit?
All we can do is be vigilant, fight it when we see it, and support those who are trying to do so. As the Poles found out during WW II, horse-mounted cavalry cannot defeat heavy armor.
So we use high-tech surveillance to control the border. We see them coming across the border now, so that's where we should fight it. I ask you again, if we stop X percent of illegals now using Y amount of funds then tell me what we would have to spend to stop 99 percent. I'll let you estimate the numbers for X and Y. Come up with that number and come back to me and then say it is too expensive.
One thing is for sure. The more we allow people to wander across our borders at will, the more this country will become a police state. And I have a sinking feeling that that is what many of our politicians would like to see.
Care to quote where you were accused three times of criminal acts?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.