Complete failure? lol......just because we can't achieve a 100% apprehension you consider it a "complete failure?" Logic isn't your strong suit, apparently.
The real mission you have in mind (lowering the number of illegal aliens entering this country for economic reasons)
Try to restrain yourself from putting words in my mouth, boy. My primary concern is homeland security, and for you to assert otherwise is presumptuous in the extreme.
People like you would reliably demand that the Army stay home.
How many times do I have to tell you that I advocate National Guard deployments on the U.S. border, not the U.S. Army. 10? 20? You're either insane or a complete moron. And since I don't suffer such types, please refrain from posting to me in the future.
Don't miss the FR poll!!!
Which of the following is the best way to solve the illegal immigration problem?
Seal and militarize the borders
47.9%
Beef up and enforce existing law
37.1%
Some form of guest worker program
9.9%
Other
3.1%
Undecided/Pass
1.9%
For your stated mission of stopping WMD-carrying terrorists, less than 100% apprehension gets counted in numbers of cities vaporized.
If less than 100% apprehension is acceptable to you . . . how many vaporized cities are you willing to accept?
Try to restrain yourself from putting words in my mouth, boy. My primary concern is homeland security, and for you to assert otherwise is presumptuous in the extreme.
I pointed out the performance criterion for the "homeland security" mission in an era of manportable nukes. If that mission is, by your own mission, utterly unachievable, then what is the real mission?
How many times do I have to tell you that I advocate National Guard deployments on the U.S. border, not the U.S. Army. 10? 20?
The problem is that the US Army relies on the National Guard to be deployable. Put them on the border, and the US Army can't go anywhere else. Put them on the border, and the US Army is forced to stay home. Deploy the Army, and those National Guard units have to come off the border. And the prospect of massive illegal immigration would serve as a powerful deterrent to deploying the Army.
You're either insane or a complete moron.
And out comes the personal attack.
Neither assumption is correct, BTW; I merely am pointing out the consequences of the policies you advocate.
And since I don't suffer such types, please refrain from posting to me in the future.
I see that this is a new trend across multiple posters--demand that the other person shut up so that you can have the debate to yourself.