Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The US is sending more troops to the border. Here's what they can and can't do
WRAL-TV ^ | 10/26/18 | Catherine E. Shoichet, CNN

Posted on 10/29/2018 8:02:24 AM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt

(CNN) — Defense Secretary James Mattis has authorized the deployment of more troops to the US-Mexico border, the Pentagon announced Friday.

The deployment will start with an undetermined number of forces heading to the border by the end of the month, and could eventually grow in size to 800 troops or more, a defense official said.

It's a move aimed at sending a message as a migrant caravan makes its way through Mexico, bound for the US border, drawing the ire of President Trump.

But it's important to note that even though troops are involved, the military isn't bracing for battle.....

(Excerpt) Read more at wral.com ...


TOPICS: Local News
KEYWORDS: aliens; armchairidiot; border; caravan; honduras; illegals; immigration; mexico; troops
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last
To: HombreSecreto

That’s what I thought. Good to know.


21 posted on 10/29/2018 8:13:38 AM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: WMarshal
Defending the territory of the United States from invasion is not law enforcement, it is national defense and requires a military response.

In furtherance of the border-defense mission, the military could use their UAV assets to monitor border crossings, and alert border patrol to locations where people are trying to cross.

22 posted on 10/29/2018 8:14:08 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 ("Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." -- Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: WMarshal

I wonder if a declaration of Martial Law is in the plan. Invasion is one of the justifications for a declaration.


23 posted on 10/29/2018 8:14:48 AM PDT by cannonball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare
Is there any precedent preventing active military from being deputized as Border Security ?

It would seem to me that if I was President and I COULD do it, I'd make the active and armed military a force directly attributable FOR border security.

Just because you don't WANT to shoot somebody shouldn't inhibit your DUTY to do so.

Cops face this every day and are trained to think in a certain fashion controlling bad shoots.

24 posted on 10/29/2018 8:14:49 AM PDT by knarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WMarshal

No she did not.


25 posted on 10/29/2018 8:15:02 AM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: HombreSecreto

There is ample SCOTUS precedent which states that until you have cleared customs and immigration you are not technically in the United States, and constitutional protections do not apply.

This is how ICE gets away with invasive examinations of laptops and cell phones at border posts.

So as long as the migrant has not cleared customs it would seem he is technically not here, and they can do what they want with him.


26 posted on 10/29/2018 8:15:28 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt

This is infuriating. Like the “stand down” orders for police as Antifa beats, kicks and tear gasses a white haired man who went to an outdoor political gathering. Just watch or lean against a building as anti-white male agitators surround and threaten a man in his car driving on city street and can’t go in reverse to leave. They also hit his nice car with a metal rod-—and the driver was in trouble the next day with police for not properly letting “pedestrians” have right of way as they illegally mobbed the street! What happened to their needing a signed parade permit? I thought this was America.

What I want:
Troops receive new orders in message.
Supplemental and replacing directive 21-A. 21-B states “If migrant applicant resists then beat his sorry rear end to kingdom come. No quarter.”


27 posted on 10/29/2018 8:15:43 AM PDT by frank ballenger ("End vote fraud,noncitizens & illegals voting & leftist media news censorship or we're finished.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

“Trump can send 100,000. Crappy rules of engagement will render them worthless.”

Jeb! is that you? Are you gonna tell us next that the invasion is an “act of love?”


28 posted on 10/29/2018 8:15:46 AM PDT by WMarshal (America First)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt
The Army under janet Reno destroyed the Branch Davidians so there is precedent for what ever can be dreamed up.
29 posted on 10/29/2018 8:16:12 AM PDT by mountainlion (Live well for those that did not make it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf

We had the military active on the Southern border in response to Pancho Villa.
So we have precedence to respond.


30 posted on 10/29/2018 8:17:17 AM PDT by Darksheare (Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion

Oh, how I remember that debacle. You are right. But then what Janet Reno did was obscene.

It seems to me the declaration of Martial Law is a good tactic to use.


31 posted on 10/29/2018 8:19:15 AM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt
Here's more (I posted previously on another related thread - intro edited from previous)

For those snowflakes claiming "Posse Comitatus," here's the applicable portion under 18 USC 1385

18 U.S. Code § 1385 - Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus

Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

(Added Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, § 18(a), 70A Stat. 626; amended Pub. L. 86–70, § 17(d), June 25, 1959, 73 Stat. 144; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

Note it says "Army" or "Air Force." What military branches are NOT mentioned?

Coast Guard
Navy
Marine Corps

Now, this State of Emergency may be enough but don't forget this item:

Congressional authorization of the use of force after 9/11 (de facto declaration of war)

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ40/pdf/PLAW-107publ40.pdf

This has NEVER been rescinded and is STILL IN EFFECT.

Applicable portion is below. Note the wide latitude the President has with regard to determination and to prevent FUTURE attacks, as well as his (Chief Executive) constitutional authority.

Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This joint resolution may be cited as the ‘‘Authorization for Use of Military Force’’.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES. (a) IN GENERAL.—That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

(b) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS.— (1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION.—Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
32 posted on 10/29/2018 8:19:25 AM PDT by HombreSecreto (The new Oldsmobiles are in early this year)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt
...... I think it is becoming increasingly self evident that the US is going to have to take action on this .... Sooner or Later ..... I believe the old adage .... "An ounce of Prevention is worth .... A Pound of Cure..." would certainly neuter the situation.

..... What I am taking about is that this whole problem becomes real when these invaders set foot on OUR soil ....... So it should be incumbent upon our Government to prevent these Trespassers from crossing onto US Soil. Always Remember .... Once they are here they become the responsibility and wards of the United States and all of it's laws until they can .... if ever .... be deported back to their origin.

... I figure that the US, If the Powers that Be haven't already done so, need to tell Mexico to immediately begin setting up holding facilities on their side of the border at the prospective crossing areas to handle this crisis located at least a mile from our border on Mexican Soil. ..... Then quickly negotiate an agreement between the two nations to have American personnel interview prospective refugees. Then any that are deemed non acceptable should be returned to their originating country and charge the processing and transportation expenses billed to their home countries. The proceeds garnered could then be added to the Build the Wall fund.

.... Hey .... It's not perfect .... But heck ..... It would at least be a start ..... But to repeat my previous statement ..... This whole problem becomes an absolute reality when these invaders set foot on OUR soil ....... So it should be incumbent upon our Government to prevent these Trespassers from crossing onto US Soil.

33 posted on 10/29/2018 8:20:38 AM PDT by R_Kangel ("A nation of sheep will beget a nation ruled by wolves")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt

I’ll leave it to the President to do what he can. I don’t need a lecture fro CNN.


34 posted on 10/29/2018 8:21:16 AM PDT by Savage Rider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Darksheare

I hope the President has a ton of historians and Constitutional scholars researching and telling him the FACTS about his options.

The article’s author at least says this: “Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen told Fox News on Friday that the military has “no intention” of shooting at anyone in the caravan, but she noted that officers of her agency and troops alike have the right to defend themselves.”


35 posted on 10/29/2018 8:21:46 AM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Savage Rider

Agreed.

I should have posted a “barf alert” with this article.


36 posted on 10/29/2018 8:22:44 AM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt

Don’t be fooled.

“Posse Comitatus” has absolutely f&$k all to do with securing the border. It refers to (generally) the prohibition on using US military as law enforcement on US citizens within the confines of the US.

What do these airheads think the military is actually for? If not to protect against invasion, then they are dumber than I thought, which is saying something.

I like the way US military assets are spread far and wide across the globe for decades now, requiring many trillions of dollars, countless injuries and deaths, yet somehow, Americans are enjoined from using the military to protect our own borders, due to a somewhat obscure piece of legislation that is not even remotely applicable. I’m sure Random Hawaiian Judge will set us all straight. F these people.


37 posted on 10/29/2018 8:22:58 AM PDT by Freedom4US
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HombreSecreto
nothing prevents the US Military to defend the territorial integrity of the nation against a foreign invader.

In fact, it is required.

38 posted on 10/29/2018 8:24:57 AM PDT by Don Corleone (Nothing makes the delusional more furious than truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt

Don’t have to shoot anyone.
Just prevent them from coming in.
If they get violent, THEN shooting becomes warranted.


39 posted on 10/29/2018 8:25:26 AM PDT by Darksheare (Those who support liberal "Republicans" summarily support every action by same.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Freedom'sWorthIt

If this is what the troops can and cannot do they send them home and pull down the existing fence and fill America with the worst bunch of criminals in South America. Sorry, Trump but an invasion is war. Just don’t get it yet. When these start killing Americans, your heart will bleed for the dead. Don’t worry, I’m loaded and will get a few before they get me.


40 posted on 10/29/2018 8:25:29 AM PDT by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson