Looks like you want to let the cancer to continue to grow inside the united states. There will be no government left when the invader takes over. Why is it good enough for South Korea but not good enough for the USA poohbah? The mexican and other misc foreign invaders bring diseases, drugs and crime into this country, i say the military should be placed on the border along the vast open spaces, you deter terrorist and illegals from crossing with heavily armed U.S. troops and armored. vehicles.
There will be no government left when the invader takes over.
Sticking soldiers on the border is a recipe for hastening
We can survive some corrupt cops. We cannot survive having a military where some members are taking bribes. That's an inevitable consequence of putting military assets into law enforcement roles.
Why is it good enough for South Korea but not good enough for the USA poohbah?
I was not aware that several mechanized armies were poised on the Rio Grande, ready to storm across the border at any minute. However, my solution to Korea, free of outside considerations (like the PRC) would be to invade the North and remove Kim Jong-Il's regime from power.
Armies work very well at stopping armies or invading other countries to remove their governments. They work very badly at this mission.
The mexican and other misc foreign invaders bring diseases, drugs and crime into this country, i say the military should be placed on the border along the vast open spaces, you deter terrorist and illegals from crossing with heavily armed U.S. troops and armored. vehicles.
We don't have enough troops for the job--and we aren't, as a nation, willing to pay the price (both monetary and philosophical--as I indicated, I do not like the idea of using military forces for law enforcement).
If you think a military response is needed, then use that force correctly.