Let's say the border was not an actual target. Let's say instead that terrorists merely had to transit the border to attack the US.
Would the US still be jumping the gun by maintaining border concerns?
But then that reasoning still misses the point; the US should enforce its borders irrespective of the small chance terrorists will use our open southern border to make war on us. Indeed, the US should enforce its borders even if it's "just" 3,000 mexicans that invade the country every night for a whole bevvy of lesser crimes.
A growing concern in the the Middle East is whether Iran will take advantage of Iraqi unrest. To that extent, our involvement there involves border concerns.
I find it really, really interesting that Iraqi border concerns command more concern from US authorities than does US border integrity.
I'm not saying that this state of affairs is unprecidented, but can anyone point out a case in which a country was demonstrably concerned more about foreign borders than it's own borders?
#10 - good post. It is only recently that we've heard anything from the White House about protecting our borders. With thousands of illegal aliens coming over every night, their statements are not believable. I consider it election time chatter, nothing more.
A lot of others here on FR share your concern and have said the same thing. Do you think this or past administrations would allow a massive influx of illegal aliens to cross the border from North Korea into South Korea? Nope - the US would get all bent out of shape and take steps to put an end to it.
Things aren't going to get any better if Bush is reelected and will only get worse if Kerry is elected.