Posted on 03/17/2005 7:03:53 AM PST by OXENinFLA
Did we send half our BP's over there ?
Or did some go over there to TEACH the Iraqis on how to stop the terrorists from trying to harm and kill our troops??
IMO ... I don't see a problem in sending some BP over there to help.
Maybe others do .. but I don't
You aren't really addressing the concerns that Happy2BMe was raising when he said "The fact is that they went in the first place while an invasion was occurring on their own territory (at the direction of the president.)" In reply you said you guessed he had "a problem with the facts," yet in the same post your facts were off about the Border Patrol agents who went to Iraq.
We have millions of illegal aliens in this country and millions of illegal border crossings every year. Our current Border Patrol doesn't have adequate manpower to secure our borders, and sending some of them to Iraq gives us an even less adequate force here at home.
In December the President signed an Intelligence Bill that authorized the hiring of 2,000 additional Border Patrol agents every year for the next five years, for a total of 10,000, in addition to the 10,000 or so we currently have. Those 2,000 new agents would make the assignment of the agents to Iraq less of a concern, except the President only wants to hire 210 of those first 2,000, as per his February Budget Request.
This very thread is about an effort to restore the new BP funding to the levels authorized by the bill the President signed just last December.
Do you see why people have a problem with diverting BP agents to Iraq while simultaneously declining to adequately man the Border Patrol at home?
She wasn't claiming that 70% thought it was the "best way" to address the problem.
Here's how the polls should be interpreted:
60% (not 70%) support some form of guest worker program, but only 10% think a guest worker program is the best way to solve the illegal alien problem.
I completely agree, which brings us back the question I first asked you on this thread. Which guest worker plan in the poll you posted do you prefer?
FGS, beat a point to death, why don't you?
You knew what I meant; you even tried to skew what I said with a poll that wasn't one we were discussing.
And I repeat: ANY poll can be worded to get the results you want.
That is exactly what they are doing.
Do you have a problem teaching Iraqis to help prevent terrorists from Iran and Syria that want to harm OUR soldiers?
Not at all.
That's one agent for about every 3 or 4 miles of border, and they have to stay on duty 24 hours a day.
LOL!
Manpower won't solve this. It's gonna hafta be solved with technology.
No, we sent almost 20%. That's a big chunk of our own Border Security that we no longer have.
And she said this in capital letters at the bottom of the Poll she posted to Happy. If that's not what she meant, then she needs to clear that up on this thread. Keep in mind I am saying this is a "Discussion Mode".
In a previous post to me, (Not by you) it was implied that the BP were over their guarding there borders
Reword post #48 (specifically at the bottom in bold print), and I will stop pointing out that you posted one thing and are now saying another.
Well, I am dealing with what's on the table with "tweaks" since I don't believe anybody will pass a law sending them back.
I believe if we don't get something like that, we aren't going to get anything.
And I know all the arguments; I'm just saying something is better than nothing.
Say what you want; heck, you'll make stuff up if you want to; who can stop you?
Technology won't solve it either. It has to be a balance of both manpower and technology.
Here is a good example of good technology without proper manpower.
Well, who ever implied that is wrong.
Typical response. Ahh well #48 proves my point, and with that I am out of here.
Thanks for proving my point!
What's to clear up? You inferred something Howlin hasn't said.
If you aren't clear on that, see her post to me at #123.
Yep. That's what I meant, but it's good that you said it. I should have.
If by "sending them back" you mean widescale roundups, I agree. But a lot of the proposals floating around involve encouraging the illegals to return voluntarily. The Tancredo plan is one, and Tom DeLay has also expressed interest in the idea. In fact, DeLay brought it up with President Bush at the GOP retreat earlier this year, and said that Bush was open to discussing it.
Is that the kind of tweak you mean?
Just to clear up my misconception then, you also think that 70 percent of the people on this forum support some sort of Guest Worker's plan? Whereas the latest poll says otherwise?
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.