Rhodesians?
I love Rhodesians!
Posted on 05/28/2004 9:03:44 PM PDT by FairOpinion
Well .. technically that's correct, but I was speaking about Iraq .. guess I didn't think I had to make that clear.
thread bump
I'm in a ... different mood tonight ... my best friend left for Iraq this morning. He's going to be working as a warehouser (civilian contractor) in Badgag... I've already lost a best friend in a war zone ... Vietnam but at least I was there with him that time ... This time I'm not there to cover his sorry ass ... hate to lose another bro ... But he is former military ... 4 tears Army ... 4 years Marine ... If I was 10 years younger and un-married I'd go with him.
May God watch over your friend and keep him safe. Send a FReepmail to "Kayak" and she will place his name on a prayer list. She can explain what info to give her.
Perhaps your friend will allow you to share his experiences with us while he's there. It helps those of us at home to have the truth .. and not the media spin.
May God keep you strong .. for him!
It's obvious that you wish to replicate the MacNamara Line. The MacNamara Line was a brilliant idea that had only one minor failing--said failing being that it never worked.
I can think of at least three different ways to beat your sea frontier security plan; your plan also involves stripping AWACS aircraft and the US Navy from combatant commanders into a mission that they are ill-suited for. So far, you've refused to say which mission you'd drop to gain the assets.
What I hear out of you is a lot of rhetoric, and very little substance. What substance you offer is inaccurate at best.
Rhodesians?
I love Rhodesians!
Good grief, you have missed the point entirely, again.
Nowhere in my post did I state I worked with SF and Rhodies on this issue. Indulging in a bit of misdirection again? Or you just can't stay focused? My background with them is in infantry tactics period. In other words, what works. In this specific scenario the only thing that will work is to make the stupid ba$tard on the south side of the river (or trampled barbed wire fence) have an intense burning desire to STAY on the south side.
This does have an answer and it does not involve passing numb-nutted laws that impose a fine or two on employers. Never worked in the past, lord only knows why anyone except a politician though it would work now. So, that's out.
Jail and deportation? Nope. Got that now and guess what? Now we have very full jails. Big deal.
How about public outcry and major majority support for getting rid of the illegals? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Public outcry and majority of opinion does not mean squat to politicians that accept contributions for ignoring the issue.
Nope, the one thing that is gonna make Jose the border bunny give pause is seeing his good buddy Pedro with a blank stare, a hickie on his forehead and most of the back of his skull headed for mexico city. This is accomplished by placing troops on the border (specifically not SF or Rangers, just as I stated in my concept) which, btw, is not in violation of PCA in any way. (more misdirections).
As for blocking a major incursion by airdropping a small force directly onto the block point, the concept is quite valid and worked well enough for the Rhodies (as taught to them by SF vets) to achieve kill ratios in excess of 40 to 1. And those guys were under a $hitload of sanctions, had little equipment beyond chutes and rifles, used ordinary trucks for the after action transportation back to the point of deployment. A few more trucks would retrieve equipment from the DZ and transport the (few) prisoners. By the time the troops got back (30-45 minutes) a new set of packed chutes were laid out on the tarmac and the aircraft was refueled. It was not uncommon for a couple of sticks from a single commando to repeat this process 3 times a day. Try that in today's "Army of One." No, this would never be accomplished by current SF or Rangers. I specifically stated . . . .
""I want full company, Airborne infantry. Nothing fancy they just need to be able to exit the aircraft and not shoot each other once they get on the ground.""
I suppose making crap up is just a habit with you, ya sure did it a lot in your reply.
OK, we ain't talking anything NEAR as scary as Ranger qualified SF. I specifically DO NOT want them educated enough to even think that this will not work. I want them to pay the fu<& attention to what I tell them to do.
Exit the aircraft when the little light turns green and the mean man begins yelling.
Perform all checks and prepare for landing.
Land.
Get out of harness.
Ready your weapon.
Regroup.
Face south.
Prepare to fire on command.
It ain't rocket science, son.
Buy the way, coyotes and border bunnies are not know for sacrificial deployments. Perform well once or twice and that part of the border will be out of business for a while. Perform well on several occasions across the border and George will be getting some very panicky calls from `ol Fox.
Not to worry, this is only until the blockhouses are finished. Speaking of which, I just reread your "analysis" of my longer post. Had to take a break from laughing. Do you work for the fed.gov? You seem to have the government mindset of turning something as simple as a blockhouse into a palace. Dual purpose construction has passed you by as well. You think I am describing building a new State Highway down the entire border! Where the hell did a road come from??? There is no frickin road at all in the concept. (making crap up AGAIN?) Build a road and you have only provided high speed escape routes for the invaders. Your inability to maintain the concept through the description is telling. Think > closure < dude.
No road.
No exotic electronics.
Off the shelf works great, if you know what you are doing. If that means kicking every damn worthless fed out of the concept and construction process so be it. We did that very thing when FAA tried to stick it's nose into a project of upgrading cell towers for MCI. Locked the dude inside the fenced area of a cell antenna site on top of a bare mountain in New Mexico and left for lunch and eventually dinner, back in town, Let him out right about sundown. He suddenly had a lot of things to do back at his office.
As for the earth shattering threat of identifying an inflatable assault boat somewhere on the east or west coast, well I suppose that would be a great job for you. It will certainly keep you occupied looking for those terrorist crossing the Atlantic in a Zodiac. Or was it deployed from an Afghani sub? I will leave that burning question for you to answer. In the meantime 90% of the threat is right here on the mexican border. As well as economic disaster if the border is not closed. And yes sir, it can be closed. If the damn politicians and payed off LE would get the fu<& out of the way, and the nod from George. Hell, with Presidential approval, even the corrupt LE would not be a problem.
Of course, there will be the whiners that will pee on themselves at the mere mention of actually doing something constructive and spend a great deal of time explaining how it can not be done . . . .
They will stay busy writing reams of details and make thousands of plans. All of which is worth absolute zero if Jose is not "convinced" that it is in his "best interests" to stay south of the border.
You wrote this:
Six of it was spent learning what is crap from what works from Vet Nam Special Forces and Rodesian Light Infantry veterans.
And now you say you didn't.
You've been caught out in at least one lie.
Nope, the one thing that is gonna make Jose the border bunny give pause is seeing his good buddy Pedro with a blank stare, a hickie on his forehead and most of the back of his skull headed for mexico city.
Congratulations. You just created the world's first capital felony. What next? Shooting people for smoking in the park?
You've also created a class of citizen (i.e., those who have served on the border) who cannot travel outside the United States for any reason, because Mexico will request their extradition for murder. And most of the world will cheerfully grant said extradition. So these people cannot travel outside the US. Are you going to explain that to them when they sign up?
This is accomplished by placing troops on the border (specifically not SF or Rangers, just as I stated in my concept) which, btw, is not in violation of PCA in any way. (more misdirections).
Actually, it is, because the Posse Comitatus Act covers ALL civil law enforcement functions, including the federal government's.
As for blocking a major incursion by airdropping a small force directly onto the block point, the concept is quite valid and worked well enough for the Rhodies (as taught to them by SF vets) to achieve kill ratios in excess of 40 to 1.
I assume the drop zone will be well inside the United States, unless you're willing to start a war with Mexico.
OK, we ain't talking anything NEAR as scary as Ranger qualified SF. I specifically DO NOT want them educated enough to even think that this will not work. I want them to pay the fu<& attention to what I tell them to do.
Exit the aircraft when the little light turns green and the mean man begins yelling.
Perform all checks and prepare for landing.
Land.
Get out of harness.
Ready your weapon.
Regroup.
Face south.
Prepare to fire on command.
It ain't rocket science, son.
Yup, all you need are people on a moral level equivalent to Lon Horiuchi.
Buy the way, coyotes and border bunnies are not know for sacrificial deployments.
Of course, as a smuggler, I could just send one of my less-liked lieutenants through with a big group that's mostly women and children...
And make sure CNN is there to record the results.
How long would your policy survive having its results splashed across America's television screens while Mr. and Mrs. John Q. Public are eating breakfast?
Yup, when a tape showing US personnel shooting large numbers of unarmed women and children hits the networks, I'm sure America will say, "Good show!"
Not to worry, this is only until the blockhouses are finished. Speaking of which, I just reread your "analysis" of my longer post. Had to take a break from laughing. Do you work for the fed.gov? You seem to have the government mindset of turning something as simple as a blockhouse into a palace.
Considering that some of these blockhouses are going to be over 100 miles from civilization, and that all of the water in the area is already allocated for other "beneficial use" (suggested reading: anything to do with water rights in the Southwest), yeah, you're going to have to build some palaces--and you're going to have to import water from a long ways away.
And, bottom line, unless you're paying the border guards at rates that illegal aliens would turn up their noses at, you're paying $150K/year for each body on the border. Bodies are expensive.
As for the earth shattering threat of identifying an inflatable assault boat somewhere on the east or west coast, well I suppose that would be a great job for you. It will certainly keep you occupied looking for those terrorist crossing the Atlantic in a Zodiac. Or was it deployed from an Afghani sub?
Nope, from a freighter that is operating in international waters and never enters US territorial waters. Or are you going to have a P-3 Orion on 24/7 surveillance of each and every ship within 20 miles of the US coastline?
How about public outcry and major majority support for getting rid of the illegals? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Public outcry and majority of opinion does not mean squat to politicians that accept contributions for ignoring the issue.
Money does not win elections.
Votes win elections.
If the public really wants to station people on the border with orders to shoot women and children, then candidates running on that platform have an advantage in getting votes over candidates that don't. Period. End of discussion.
And don't give me crap about "it's not about Mexicans, it's about lawbreakers" either, it was you who used "Pedro" and "Jose" when creating your freak fantasy world.
And don't give me crap about "it's not about Mexicans, it's about lawbreakers" either, it was you who used "Pedro" and "Jose" when creating your freak fantasy world.
Would you prefer me to use examples such as Clarence and Egbert? Shall we call them "slightly underdocumented migrant/immigrants? And of course they are not "lawbreakers." Just because they entered the country knowing 100% that it is illegal to be here, illegal to apply for benifits available to American citizens and walk around with forged identification, hell no, let's not DARE say out loud that they are lawbreakers. GOOD GRIEF NO!!! We might offend someones feelings.
Plus another 17,900 miles of wide-open frontier that can be used, as well. Again, your CONOPS would require each and every ship within 20 miles of the coast to have 24/7 surveillance on it.
If I were trying to enter another county and there was a border like that to my south, not in my wildest dreams would I consider atempting anything else.
Maybe they're not as smart as you are. Then again, and far more likely, maybe you are not as smart as you think you are.
Kindly note that the "Millenium Bomber" arrest happened at a border checkpoint--but only through blind frickin' luck. Kindly note that the 9/11 hijackers came through border checkpoints with passports and visas. They didn't think at all in terms of crossing the Mexican border illegally.
So then, why did every one of the 9/11 hijackers enter the country by other means?
As a matter of fact, why did German spies try to infiltrate the US via the coastline rather than over the Rio Grande...I am assuming of course that the border was just as wide back then as it is now.
The fact of the matter is that whether you like it or not, if you try running the border there is a chance that you will get stopped. In Fiscal 2002, nearly one million people were apprehended at the SW border trying to enter the country illegally.
Why would you run the chance of being apprehended, when all you need is a student's visa?
Your wildest dreams are tainted by your obsession with Mexicans.
So then, why did every one of the 9/11 hijackers enter the country by other means?
Because they had the backing of a large organization, quite possably an entire unfriendly government to provide them with cover stories, background, money etc. BTW, having an entire team use the same entry method ain't real bright. Once we nailed one, the rest were easy. To many trips to the well so to speak. Quick reminder, we are discussing the illegal border crossers from mexico. This will become relevant to you momentarily.
As a matter of fact, why did German spies try to infiltrate the US via the coastline rather than over the Rio Grande...I am assuming of course that the border was just as wide back then as it is now.
When was the last time you heard of a mexican sub? Or are you out there with poobear looking for that Zodiac crossing the Atlantic? Again, we are not discussing WWII.
The fact of the matter is that whether you like it or not, if you try running the border there is a chance that you will get stopped. In Fiscal 2002, nearly one million people were apprehended at the SW border trying to enter the country illegally.
It ain't up to me to like or dislike anything Skippy. For someone like me crossing the mexican/u.S. border would be incredibly easy. Fortunately, we are all only created equal. Some folks continue to learn and reason beyond the age of 11. They reexamine knowledge and advice previously gleaned from others that in the past have resolved similar problems and devise new methods to successfully achieve current objectives. If one's objective is simply crossing the u.S./mexican border without a representative of an understaffed fed.gov agency detaining said illegal border crosser, well, suffice to say the odds of sucess for someone with a background in infantry operations are about 99%, perhaps higher, as opposed to the majority of illegal invaders. Now remember I told you to hold that thought about the hijackers.
Why would you run the chance of being apprehended, when all you need is a student's visa?
Student visa? Now you have already not only identified yourself but you have given just cause for the u.S. Government to look for you at any time and toss you out at their whim. Ya can't look for something that you don't know even exists. If one crosses as a "poor peasant looking for meager work" and is confronted they would simply be questioned and sent on their way , no real suspicion aroused. Just another speck in the sandstorm of the southern invasion. This becomes important to your above mentioned 911 boys. They had something working for them that a properly educated and motivated individual would never intend. They were not coming back.
Your wildest dreams are tainted by your obsession with Mexicans.
Your attempts at racism are pitiful to watch. Quite typical among liberals I might add. We are discussing criminal acts. Specifically, illegally crossing the u.S border with the intention of defrauding State and Federal government. That constitutes felonies.
When you can steel yourself to endure some reasoned thought and confine yourself to the subject at hand you might ask a relevant question. So far you seem to resemble an out of control fire hose.
You admit that you abhor quoting other people's arguments and rebutting them? How interesting.
So then, why did every one of the 9/11 hijackers enter the country by other means?
Because they had the backing of a large organization, quite possably an entire unfriendly government to provide them with cover stories, background, money etc.
Congratulations, you just identified the difference between illegal aliens and terrorists.
Terrorists have organization. They have funds. They don't need to smuggle themselves across the Rio Grande and take their chances sans papers.
BTW, having an entire team use the same entry method ain't real bright. Once we nailed one, the rest were easy.
Only because they didn't expend any effort on concealing their operations. Also note that we had passenger manifests for all four aircraft, and were able to identify the hijackers only AFTER the fact, and only because they all were dead in the same operation. If other terrorists entered the country at the same time, and haven't done anything, we would have no idea who they are.
When was the last time you heard of a mexican sub? Or are you out there with poobear looking for that Zodiac crossing the Atlantic? Again, we are not discussing WWII.
One more time, for possible penetration into your brain (but I shan't hold my breath waiting for said event): the Zodiac boat is launched from a ship (a freighter) offshore. Maybe you are too slow of wit to think of that idea, or maybe you have amnesia and can't remember that I've mentioned this already.
Also, al-Qaeda operatives can enter Canada (and live off that country's generous welfare benefits), then cross the CANADIAN border. Your proposal completely ignores that threat.
For someone like me crossing the mexican/u.S. border would be incredibly easy.
But, somehow, you can't figure out how to cross the US-Canadian border, or how to hitch a ride on a freighter and ride a small boat in to shore.
Student visa? Now you have already not only identified yourself but you have given just cause for the u.S. Government to look for you at any time and toss you out at their whim. Ya can't look for something that you don't know even exists.
But, of course, they actually have to FIND you to do so.
If one crosses as a "poor peasant looking for meager work" and is confronted they would simply be questioned and sent on their way , no real suspicion aroused.
An Arab without any legitimate papers is going to attract a s***load of attention if he is stopped in any chance encounter with law enforcement. But if he has a legit ID, and if he is marginally more polite and respectful to the cops than some loudmouth FReepers (most notably the late and unlamented matsuidon), the odds are that the cops won't even run a background check on the license--and, if they do, the vagaries of transliterating Arabic into English are sufficient to keep the name from generating a hit.
That's why terrorists spend a lot of time, money, and effort on legitimate papers and traveling under same.
Specifically, illegally crossing the u.S border with the intention of defrauding State and Federal government. That constitutes felonies.
You are making presumptions far beyond what the observable facts at the time of the illegal border crossing allow--or do you think that the BATF charging you with having "bomb-making materials" if you have common household chemicals, electrical wire, batteries, duct tape, PVC pipe, and gunpowder in your home is a legitimate exercise in law enforcement?
Now, one more time: CNN splashes video of American soldiers shooting unarmed women and children in Texas or Arizona as America eats breakfast. You thought the media went overboard with the Rodney King video? Just wait until you hand them something like THAT.
Now, this tape was shown at breakfast.
Would your proposed program still be in operation at lunchtime?
Southack wins again...
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.