Posted on 02/24/2019 8:28:46 AM PST by jazusamo
EL PASO, Texas — Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan said Saturday after visiting the U.S.-Mexico border that the government needs a broader, more effective approach to border control. He suggested the Pentagon might contribute with its expertise in surveillance and monitoring.
“How do we get out of treating the symptoms and get at the root of the issue,” Shanahan said in an interview while flying back to Washington.
Considering how the military could reinforce efforts to block drug smuggling and other illegal activity comes as the Pentagon weighs diverting billions of dollars for President Donald Trump’s border wall.
Shanahan said he was not volunteering the Pentagon to take over any part of border control, which is the responsibility of the Department of Homeland Security. But he said his visit led him to question whether there should be a “wholesale redesign” of the way border control is done by the federal government.
Shanahan said the Pentagon is willing to continue supporting the DHS but wants to see a longer-term solution.
“I don’t want to just add resources and not fix the problem,” he said.
The Pentagon, for example, has agreed to temporarily provide active-duty troops to operate Border Patrol vehicles whose cameras can surveil wide areas along the border. Shanahan said this will free up the Border Patrol to do other important aspects of their mission. He said this is a function that could be developed more fully with the benefit of decades of U.S. military experience with ground and aerial reconnaissance and surveillance around the world.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Sniper teams on the boarder, picking off coyotes as they approach the border.
Instant execution of all mules, regardless of sex or age.
Sounds like nonsense to me.
We see them on the fence all the time. Nothing we can do about it other than to let them know that we see them. If they dont care to get caught they just climb right over. We can not do anything to anyone climbing the fence.
Upon watching the ferociously large new bull being unloaded into the pasture with the cows, the young bull took off down the hill. He powered through the barb wire fence and accosted the big new bull.
Later as he limped back into his pasture the old bull asked “why did you do such a foolish thing.”
The young bull replied “ I wanted to be sure that big new bull knew I wasn’t a cow”
Amen. After the first hundred or so dead illegals, the flow will cease.
then there will be the whine “that’s not who we are”
It is however who we need to be
The goal of the enemy is to make you resent Trump and to hate your fellow American.
Straighten your attitude and pay attention to what they’re doing to you.
That’s coming. Going to be a veto of a congressional resolution first followed by court challenges. The USSC will hold the hammer on the latter. Meanwhile the $1.375B gets used to create “facts on the ground”. This time next year after the expedited court challenges get resolved, you’ll have significant progress on the wall.
This is the way it was always going to play out. Trump could not pre-maturely declare a state of emergency because of the impact that would have had on the political and legal processes. It’s still not a sure-thing, but it’s the last best chance.
That should change, of course.
There is nothing Trump does that I don’t approve of.
Then your judgment is intact.
You should add what I refer to as a Repatriation Performance Bond Program.” Basically, every foreigner entering the country legally or apprehended in the country illegally would be required to post a performance bond to cover the costs typically associated with the overstay risk they pose.
Example 1: If you are a paid round-trip ticket tourist from a country with a low overstay rate, the cost of the bond would probably be very low (along the lines of travel insurance).
Example 2: If you are a junior college or university student or on a work permit visa from a country that has a problem with its citizens illegally overstaying their student/temporary work visas, the cost of the bond would be substantially higher and might require periodic physical check-in with the bonding agency for bond information certification and bond renewal.
Example 3: The person is an illegal border crosser (can we at least agree that, whatever else they may be called, the person in question is at least guilty of that offence?)who was detained at the time of crossing or perhaps many years later. If they are not immediately and voluntarily returned across the international border, a bond would be required before they could be released into the United States to await their “asylum” or deportation hearing. Usual flight/court appearance risk assessment and bonding posting practices would be observed. Depending on the circumstances of the apprehension, the detainee may or may not be able to post bond using their own financial resources. In those cases where they cannot, a citizen or legal resident of the United States would be required to put up money or property to secure the bond. These bonds would probably be pretty expensive and the bonding agency could require numerous safeguard measures to mitigate its risk of forfeiture.
Example 4: Legal residents and immigrants are required to certify they will not become a public charge (go on welfare) while in the United States. Immigrants would post bond until they became citizens. Legal residents would post a performance bond of appropriate value during the duration of their residency. (Some adjustment in rates
would be needed to differentiate between legal resident foreign born spouses/other long term academic/artist/refugee residents and business persons.)
This approach would transfer the risk to the market and provide profit/cost incentives for the bond agencies and the bonded persons to fulfill their duties to leave the country when required, show up for court, etc. To avoid forfeiture, the bond companies, not the government, would employ agents to locate and detain violators. Immigration statutes would need to be adjusted, of course, to introduce the bond element, permit apprehension, and perhaps, in applicable cases, permit immediate deportation (?) as a consequence of a forfeiture ruling. The performance and bail bond as a legal mechanism is well understood, and has long established rules and procedures for administration and enforcement. In addition, there are existing bond businesses and entrepreneurs who might see the opportunity the scheme presents.
Consider these statistics:
Annual legal immigration: 1,063,134 (2010 to 2017 average)
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States
Annual visits to the US: 70,056,257 (FY 2017)
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_the_United_States
Illegal Immigrants in the US: 10,700,000 (PEW); 11,960,000 (DHS)
Source: http://www.pewhispanic.org/interactives/u-s-unauthorized-immigrants-by-state/
Source: https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/18_1214_PLCY_pops-est-report.pdf
Initial Market size is potentially 87 million bonds.
This likely a significant overestimate.
There are a lot of daily crossers for work or school in the immediate international border area and a smaller number of multiple-trips-per-year international business, government, and pleasure travelers. So information would need to be developed and an annual visitors number developed.
In addition, the illegal portion of the market would eventually decline as the bond coverage extended further and further into that population and/or they left the country.
However, the potential international traveler (once developed) and immigration/legal residence bond markets would probably remain steady at what?... 50-60 million unique issuances per year? (Add to that number the periodic recertification and reissuance of the non-short term bonds.)
Maybe I should email this business concept to President Trump. Or, better yet, Donald Jr.
End of invasion. Illegal immigration no longer a problem at border, new laws required at points of entry.
While the 50 cal solution would work at points of entry, too much collateral damage to be acceptable to squishes. Maybe 30 cal semis?
Too much?
no illegal should receive any benefit, save emergency care enough to get back home.
That definitely would be considered an overkill by Chuckie and Nan. :^)
Like adding a 50-foot “no-go zone” between the U.S. and Mexican borders?
Illegals can’t be harmed while they’re on the Mexican side, then they’re subject to U.S. law the instant they cross.
WHY ARE WE ALLOWING CITIZENS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES
ENTER US ILLEGALLY GRANT THEM RIGHTS
THAT THEIR COUNTRY DENY US HAVING
WHEN WE ENTER THEIRS LEGALLY ???
It’s time we consider illegal entry by any person who is a non Mexican citizen illegally entering the United States through the US Mexican border a defacto Mexican citizen with limited Mexican constitutional rights subject to their laws while transiting. As well as any Mexican citizen doing so. Subject to reciprocal citizen treatment a citizen of the United States receives in Mexico through the Mexican constitution on citizenship .
Besides being unable to vote one must also be a citizen to own land and Mexico is very restrictive about granting citizenship. Because of that a US citizen besides not being able to vote,and cannot have title in their name to any land property in Mexico. And until that is changed the US and the affected state should consider making that reciprocal.prohibiting citizens of Mexico or countries with similar restrictions from doing both voting and land ownership.. .
May I suggest building the Wall?
And drain the swamp.
5.56mm
That works for me, the sooner the better.
Agreed, and the latter will be tougher than the former.
Can't be said often enough. Take away their (stolen) jobs, food stamps, and welfare checks, and they'll all beat feet back to Mexico.
Turning off the magnet will also end new border crossings. We wouldn't even need a wall if we just did that.
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.