Why? Isn't it important enough? I'm a Navy vet, from '66-'68, have all the appropriate ribbons, and a couple extra. I may be wrong, but I think defending our own border is why we have a standing Army (Navy, and AF). I see nothing about stationing troops in foreign lands, within our Constitution...
Did I miss something? Where is the mandate for a "border patrol"?
Yes, it's important enough. But that is not what we were trained to do.
I'm a Navy vet, from '66-'68, have all the appropriate ribbons, and a couple extra.
Good for you.
I may be wrong, but I think defending our own border is why we have a standing Army (Navy, and AF). I see nothing about stationing troops in foreign lands, within our Constitution...
So you'd take former Presidents to task for stationing our troops in foreign lands to contain the spread of communism, right?
Did I miss something? Where is the mandate for a "border patrol"?
Okay. Everybody, let's do away with the Border Patrol. pageonetoo doesn't want it.
Don't be cute. And I know your style.
I agree. As a vet I also wonder why we have "peace keeping" forces half way around the world and yet live under the threat of someone walking in with a nuclear bomb. As soon as someone blows up a major city suddenly the border will become a priority and troops on the border won't seem so unpalatable.
There are no National borders any more...
"All countries are basically social arrangements... No matter how permanent or even sacred they may seem at any one time, in fact they are all artificial and temporary... Perhaps national sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all... But it has taken the events in our own wondrous and terrible century to clinch the case for world government."
The Birth of the Global Nation by Strobe Talbott
(Rhodes Scholar, roommate of Bill Clinton at Oxford University, CFR Director, and Trilateralist)
Link: http://ebird.afis.mil/cgi-bin/ebird/displaydata.pl?Requested=/ebfiles/e20050801aaindex.html (.mil address required)