Militarize Our Border? O’Reilly, Here’s Your Plan

| July 13, 2014

Bill O’Reilly almost nightly calls for the militarization of our southern border, but he never has any guests to explain how this could be done. So, Bill, since I agree with you, here is a rudimentary plan worked out by someone with a working knowledge of both our military capabilities and the geographical area in question. Mind you, I have no information regarding military training budgets, but as we withdraw from large-scale overseas operations, our leadership should consider applying funds no longer needed for those to the mission of defending our currently defenseless southern border.

I have driven the border from San Diego to Brownsville, even much of the unpaved segments of it in my Jeep, and I can tell you two things: it’s huge in terms of ground coverage, and there are significant segments of it where you can drive for endless miles without any evidence of an American policing authority. My visits to those military facilities near our southern border, as well as to those positioned but a few hundred miles north of that boundary, always had me mentally gaming the situation as to where and how our military could best be employed to assist our Border Patrol in enforcing our laws, so I’m not new to this.

Our recent combat experiences have been in desert environments and a cursory look at the hottest of hot spots around the globe reveals that the likelihood of that continuing is substantial. That being the reality, why do we not focus on training our troops in the vast desert environments that extend north from our border with Mexico – those that offer the major pathways illegals follow north to our metropolitan areas?

We have but two significant Army posts on this border: Fort Bliss, in El Paso, which is huge and is home to a number of combat arms units, and Fort Huachuca, a much smaller Army intelligence base southeast of Tucson. Fort Bliss is home to the First Armored Division, which has multiple brigades, battalions, and squadrons which could be rotated in and out of close border operational areas from El Paso west to the Arizona-New Mexico line just east of Douglas, Arizona, and deployed to the east to Sanderson, Texas, just east of the Big Bend.

From the Arizona-New Mexico line west to Nogales, the duty should fall upon the more distant 4th Infantry Division based at Fort Carson, CO which could forward-stage its units at Fort Huachuca. While Fort Carson is 850 miles north, that distance is almost completely interstate highways, and Huachuca’s adjacent Libby Army Airfield has 12,000-foot runways to accommodate our largest air transports.

From Nogales westward, the border area could be the operational area of the First Marine Division, headquartered at Camp Pendleton just a few miles north of the border in coastal California. The temporary bases for Marine battalions rotating in and out of Pendleton could be Marine Corps Air Station Yuma or the much roomier Yuma Army Proving Ground just a few miles north, where Laguna Army Airfield can accommodate C-130s and, because Google Satellite shows a C-17 on the apron, apparently that larger aircraft as well. MCAS Yuma has 13,000-foot runways that can handle the largest air transports. There are also old abandoned WWII Army airfields at Dateland, Ajo, and Gila Bend that could be used for staging smaller unit operations. Farther east is Marana Field, a more active Air National Guard base.

Getting back east, from Sanderson, Texas, just east of the Big Bend, to Rio Grande City could be the operational area of the First Cavalry Division at Fort Hood, some three hundred-plus miles to the north. The only border-situated active military facility between El Paso and Brownsville is Laughlin Air Force Base in Del Rio, which is actually well-sited for a border protection base of operations. There’s enough open land east of the active runways to accommodate battalion-sized bivouacs of the 1st Cav for rotational tours of operations in that South Texas brush land, which, by the way, looks much like Mid-Eastern riverine environments where most of the populace of those regions congregates. Downriver from Del Rio is the old Laredo AFB site, which is now commercialized but still contains open land suitable for bivouacking troops and vehicles. And anchoring the eastern end of this region is old Moore AFB, just north of Edinburgh, TX, which is now under the control of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, also with sufficient land for troop bivouacs and what appear to be runways sufficient to handle C-130 transports.

Now comes the rub: liberals will scream to high heaven that our federal military cannot be used to police law violators on American soil, a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. However, troops in federal service have sworn an oath to protect this nation from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Consider if you will that some of those poised on the south side of the U.S.-Mexican border intent on illegal entry into this country, in violation of clearly promulgated immigration laws, are foreign enemies determined to cross that border, subject to military capture and incarceration. Whether or not our military has legal standing to determine illegal border crossers to search for terrorists embedded within their masses is a legal issue that will no doubt rise to the level of our Supreme Court.

A thought to keep in mind is that much of the border land I’m referring to is ranchland, much of it in the same families for decades. My wife’s extended family once held almost two hundred thousand acres right smack in the middle of the area being discussed, so we are sensitive to the ownership rights of the families there now. And as a firm admirer of those brave men and women who pioneered those lands, I believe we should respect their proud heritage. The federal government should negotiate generous leasing agreements with these ranchers and other landowners to permit military operations on their properties, with reparations for any damages.

Lastly, I apologize to the troops involved for suggesting that they be separated from their loved ones in peacetime for deployment to our lawless border. The truth is that this is not peacetime; America is under continual assault from the south by the Mid-East fanatics – those who would do us great harm, yet who easily slide through in the midst of that illegal migratory flood. Were I a serving soldier once again, I would see my duty of enforcing my nation’s borders as at least as relevant a goal as pursuing Afghan religious fanatics, the latter representing a lesser direct threat to my family’s life than do those terrorists embedded in the uncontrolled masses of illegal immigrants.

An additional issue will be the increased troop presence in the civilian community and the daily inconveniences their movements may cause. All I can say to that is that the Germans and South Koreans have put up with it for decades. If Americans can’t tolerate the active presence of our own troops defending us, then shame be upon them; it’s better to have troops than terrorists and deadly smugglers of people and drugs.

And that, folks, is my O’Reilly Plan to militarize the border.

Crossposted at American Thinker

Category: Illegal Immigrants

74 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Janaburg

I would much rather spend 3.7 Billion $ on some PFC or SPC’s payroll than put that in the pockets of (Immigration)Lawyers.

streetsweeper

*THUNDEROUS APPLAUSE*!! *WOLF WHISTLES*!! *MORE THUNDEROUS APPLAUSE*!!

Very well written, Poetrooper! Hot damn!

UpNorth

I concur with Streets. Standing O. Bravo, sir.

Ex-PH2

Sounds like a plan to me.

Isnala

Very sound reasoning. I would add that additional air assets could be based out of the old Kelly AFB, its run ways can handel everything in the invetory and is a prime spot to base air intel assets since it’s close proximity to AFISA and other intel activities in and around at Lackland/San Antonio. To the west there’s several other air bases that would like wise be able to handel the AF componet of this operation.

Navy componets could be based out of either Corpus Cristi, Tx or even Pensacola, Fl in the east and the Southern Cali bases in the west. Or better yet since San Anonio is already a joint base co-locate the eastern Naval air assets there for better Joint planning/missions. (Heck putting the JAOC (Joint Air Ops Center) for this mission also at Lackland may not be a bad idea).

All of this would be for to cover just the land boarder, Gulf of Mexico and eastern water interdictions is another story.

Eggs

I would say the same thing for Davis-Monthan AFB vs. Marana. While Marana is an established Air Guard rotary wing training center and has an adjacent runway that will handle at least 747s, DM has cargo and personnel processing facilities in place. Gila Bend is actually an active aux/emergency field used by DM and Luke, so it’s not really abandoned. We’ve actually used that facility for pre-deployment excersises.

Eggs

exercises exercises exercises

Roh-Dog

No one hold their breath waiting for Congress to come up with the money and authorization. Wouldn’t want any of y’all to pass out and crack your noggins!

Great plan though!

DK

The 11th ACR at Ft. Irwin isn’t nearly as far from western Arizona as 4th ID is… they could also fill in some of the gaps. And since they don’t normally deploy (at least not nearly as much as other units), they could free up some manpower from Carson if necessary. Just an observation.

A Proud Infidel®™

No need to take armor there via convoy, it could be easily shipped via rail!

Sparks

Well said Poetrooper. Thank you. If minds who think, put their minds to the task it can be accomplished. I pray we don’t wait until something happens in America that makes it a mandatory, catch up program. I would rather be ahead of this curve than behind it.

kirk

one carrier group parked in the Gulf would cover the back side.

Instinct

There is also NAS Lemoore CA just south of Fresno that can deploy air support or Fallon NV

DK

MCAS Miramar and Yuma, as well as Nellis AFB and several AF bases in New Mexico, are far, far closer.

NHSparky

Correct. Kirtland AFB is an excellent staging point, and plenty of facilities still exist at Cannon and Holloman AFB in NM, as well as NAF El Centro in CA.

David

You also have Biggs airfield on Ft. Bliss that can handle up to C-5s and B-52s, and little-used commercial airports like Santa Teresa which has 10,000 foot runways – both within halitosis proximity of the boarder

Hussar

Does JTF-6 (I think it’s JTF North now) still run LP/OPs for the BP? Or since Obama has double downed on the stupid Bush gave us, have those assets been directed elsewhere?

El Centro sucks ass btw.

NHSparky

Yeah, the town sucks ass, but it’s an excellent facility. Then again, Ridgecrest ain’t bad, if a bit warm as well.

gitarcarver

Let’s start with the basic premise of putting military troops on the border. While members of the service take an oath to protect the country against all enemies, foreign and domestic, there has been no formal declaration that the people crossing the borders are enemies. They are definitely breaking the law, but just as I suspect no one here wants to be stopped by a military unit outfitted with Bradley’s when they are speeding and breaking the law, there is no need to have the military involved with enforcing the law on the border at this time. Secondly, Posse Comitatus requires several things – none of which are in play here. It requires that the local (state) authorities be unwilling or unable to enforce the law. That is not what is happening at the border. It is not that the Border Patrol is unable to enforce the border laws. It is the executive branch that is restricting the Border Patrol from doing so. Furthermore, it is not the states that are not enforcing the immigration laws because the Federal government says they cannot. It is the Federal government that is restricting the enforcement of the laws – not local and state governments. Posse Comitatus allows for the military to be used when local or state governments cannot or will not enforce the law. That is not what is happening on the border. There is no way that the President can order the military to man the border to enforce civil law when he himself has ordered law enforcement authorities under his control not to enforce immigration law. It just doesn’t work like that. This wouldn’t get to the Supreme Court because the parties to the suit are acting under the direction of the President. Do you really think he is going to advance a suit against himself? Finally, the image of military vehicles on the border is not one that will play well with the world. That is the type of thing that oppressive regimes do. Does anyone really want to see some kid standing in front of a Abrams… Read more »

gitarcarver

Poetrooper, Thanks for the response. Let me try and address some of the points you raise. 1) Whether there are Muslim terrorists (or any terrorists irrespective of religion) in the group is an interesting discussion. However, unless you can say that every person crossing the border is a terrorist, I am not sure that the argument that all people crossing the border are enemies can be made. 2) Yes, the matter of stopping illegal immigrants and or terrorists at the border is a matter of common sense, but it is also a matter of what is legal. 3) The argument about being stopped by the military for a traffic violation is not bogus at all. It is directly on point in that what you are advocating is using the military for a violation of civil law. I fail to see how saying the military can enforce civil law in one case but not another is not germane. 4) As I read your third paragraph, you seem to conclude with the idea that the Border Patrol needs help. I agree. I don’t believe I have said anything differently. The question is “what is the form of that ‘help?'” As I said, I am for ramping up the Border Patrol to include more agents and lessening the rules of engagement for them. They are the ones that are going to know the routes, the hide out, the trails, etc. I am for giving them more money to accomplish that task. I am not for using the military to enforce civil law. 5) I think you are missing the point of the local / state authorities being unable or unwilling to do the job. The local authorities are not tasked with the border security. It is therefore impossible to implement the Posse Comitatus because there is no failure or unwillingness at the local / state level. 6) I care what the world sees and thinks about the US. We are the good guys in the world. I don’t want anything to diminish that. Right off the bat, I can think of 3 incidents… Read more »

Bobo

The question of the military and PC can be pretty easily solved by using National Guard forces instead of the AC. Title 32 of the US Code allows for members of the National Guard to be brought into active duty for a limited period of time. Title 32 also retains the mobilized Guardsmen in a state duty status, allowing them to perform law enforcement duties. The catch is that the SECDEF would have to authorize the Title 32 status. It looks like the only state that would be thin for forces is New Mexico. This would be a far better alternative than opening the Pandora’s Box of letting the AC do anything resembling DSCA.

Roger in Republic

Simple, really. Just hold a division formation and swear in all the troopers as border patrol agents. Just put all the names on the roster on Border Patrol commissions and issue new patches for their cammies. Coasties enforce federal laws every day in US territorial waters. If you are still queezy about it, embed PBO’s in the new units. Soldiers are used to rules of engagement and the military is very adept at promulgating them.

Wex6

I’m fairly certain that they did this with the Coast Guard on Navy ships in the Caribbean. Coast Guard officer takes command of Navy ship when making a possible drug stop. Could be mistaken but I think I read about it when I did a paper on Posse Comitatus a few years ago.

OldSoldier54

To begin with, Poetrooper was pointing out one possible way to implement O’Reilly’s demands. There’s a lot of people who agree, Posse Comitatus or not. And I agree with you, there are … risks associated with setting the precedent.

However, I do not give a flying fig what the image of an Abrams main gun muzzle in the face of some street waif from south of the border looks like to the world. I’m done giving a rat’s butt about that. “Image” and opinion polls is what this administration is all about. Where has that got us?

Then, there is the issue of Mexican police and military crossing the border and firing on Border Patrol agents with impunity.

Fear of “what it will look like,” is one of the prime drivers that got us into this mess. Time to act and let the chips fall where they may. Not that I think this has a snowflake’s chance of survival in the nether regions of being implemented.

While I agree on your take on the best solution being to uncuff the Border Patrol, that has about the same chance as the aforementioned snowflake, IMO.

OWB

Not entirely true, gt. Using our military to protect our borders is entirely appropriate. What the military cannot be used for is against it’s own citizens, which the guys on the other side of the border are not.

Governors can use their guardsmen for exactly this type duty. Maybe a few tanks patrolling the border is just what we need. A few low flying aircraft strafing those boats in the river sounds equally good.

At least using Guardsmen to search inbound trains (as they have done in decades past) would be a tiny step in the right direction. Add trucks, cars, and airplanes to the list, and it a slightly larger step in the right direction.

OldSoldier54

Works for me, Poetrooper.

I suspect the probability is high that we will have BCT’s operating south of the border within twenty years, if something serious isn’t done about our border and the Hidalgos of Ciudad de Mexico don’t wake up, pull their collective heads out of their fourth point of contact, and take a good hard look around.

Just an Old Dog

Im ot a fan of wasting the talents and time of our steely eyed killers to constantly round up guys who are looking to do landscaping work in Maryland.
While I think its fine to augment immigration enforcement agencies with air, ground and water surveillance assets, the idea of turning the 1st Marine Division into the 1st Guards division smacks of the old Soviet System.
You are going to either have an immigration enforcement agency or a military, you cant have both.

OldSoldier54

Not a real fan of it myself, but something SERIOUS needs to be done. If for no other reason than letting Mexico and points South know that we mean business, and the days of patty-cake playing on the border are over.

I would also note, our trigger pullers worked security on the western and eastern borders of Iraq with no loss of combat ability that I could discern from my admittedly distant view from the American Southwest.

UpNorth

You think MS-13 is coming here to do yard work?

Just an Old Dog

No, I do not think MS-13 is coming here to do yardwork.
The simple fact is the VAST majority of illegals coming here keep out of trouble with law enforcement. The huge problem with the overwhelming numbers of illegals is that it undercuts American labor and is a huge burden on the social services of the country.
We already have ICE/ Border Patrol in place to deal with securing our borders. That’s THEIR job. If they can’t do it with the tools they have on hand they need to be given more people and assets, and have their hands untied.
We don’t need to have Soldiers or Marines wearing out equipment and wasting time chasing down people who are unarmed and no direct physical threat.
Our Marines and Soldiers need to be on realitic training exercises, firing weapons and getting ready to deal with a trained enemy backed by Air and armor.

2/17 Air Cav

“The simple fact is the VAST majority of illegals coming here keep out of trouble with law enforcement.”

Well, thousands were caught breaking the law. Thousands more were not caught. And then you have the old folks and minors under 12 who, as a rule don’t commit felonies. So, when the illegal population is p[ared down to those most likely to commit crimes, I–and you–have no idea what percentage of the at-risk illegals commit crime.

David

You should also note that by being here illegally, they are already flagrantly breaking the law.

Isnala

By that reading, since defending our country against invasion is within the authorized activites, it would appear there is no conflict. Especially if the ROE stated detain to hand off to law enforcement. And incase anyone tries to counter with its not an invasion, exactly what would you call tens of thousands illegally trying to enter the country. An invasion doesn’t have to he armed to still be am invasion.

SFC D

Ok, so the questions of legality, necessity, and staging have been covered. The next question is just how the military will secure the border. Unless we consider the border a free fire zone and kill anyone crossing, deploying the military is expensive pointless symbolism.

GDcontractor

I vote for sharks…friggin sharks with “lasers”.

Seriously though, I remember reading a comment at least 15 years ago somewhere, it has stuck with me. The commentator said:
1. People in Mexico come here to find work.
2. The USA has a problem trying to keep illegal aliens from crossing the border.
3.. Florida has a wildlife control problem with alligators.
SOLUTION: Hire the Mexicans to dig a canal. Fill it up with water and alligators from Florida. Problems(s) solved.

OldSoldier54

Too true.

Which would require NCA to have a boron fiber reinforced ceramet spine, and balls of Chobham armor the size of basketballs.

Which leaves Obama out.

FatCircles0311

It is pretty crazy that we have hundreds of thousands of troops stationed overseas, yet at our front door, nothing.

Border patrol duties should fall under DoD and illegals that make it past them should be ICE responsibilities. Our current system isn’t working out and the Mexican military understands that well considering they frequent cross over even firing on the border patrol with little consequence.

The Other Whitey

Re: Posse Comitatus, it prohibits the Military from operating in a domestic law enforcement capacity on American soil. It does not prevent the Military from defending our borders from foreign invasions. The flow of people and contraband across our southern border is a foreign invasion. It is even sanctioned (albeit tacitly) by the Mexican government.

Foreign invasions are not police matters. They are, by law, acts of war. Posse Comitatus is a non-issue here.

AW1 Tim

We can also take a lesson from the Roman’s regarding Hadrian’s Wall. They built a solid, stone wall with forts every mile that held at a least a Century (480 men plus support) and every 1/4 mile they had a small tower with 8-12 men who rotated in and out every couple of days.

We don’t need to build a solid wall 9thought that WOULD be nice) but we CAN establish COP’s every mile or so with smaller positions in between. For God’s sake, it’s what we are ALREADY doing in Afghanistan.

It would not only provide the cover we need but also provide real-world training in the construction and manning of those facilities.

Interlace the positions with claymores and lots of signs in English & Spanish saying “MINEFIELD!”

We can, and MUST do this.

GDcontractor

PTDS aerostats stationed at every 50 miles or so. Nice visual surveillance platform, also nice antenna platform for remote sensor signals and comms. PTDS sensor capabilities are robust, but I don’t think details of them are common knowledge. Flying them at near sea level altitudes would be a dream compared to the base altitudes we flew them at in Astan. Also, a much more pressing need for them on the border looking south than over some of our cities looking 360 IMHO.

OldSoldier54

” … a much more pressing need for them on the border looking south than over some of our cities looking 360 IMHO.”

Roger that.

Bosniarat

On the ROE, we can take a page from the Ridiculous mission in the Former Yugoslavia. ROE is simple, Shoot if shot at, weapons present, or unruly and violent actors, otherwise BAT them, Process and Turn around. No holding facilities for 30 days just, process and turn them around.

john

unfortunately the US law on the books originally passed by the GOP Congress and Bush says that we cant’ just send 10 year olds back like that.

OWB

Actually it was passed under Clinton, then ran out several times, being signed into law again by both Bush and Obama. With variations, of course.

Beretverde

Who is Bill O’Reilly? What unit did he serve in?

OldSoldier54

He was a PFC in the Southie irregulars, Boston, Mass.

🙂

Thunderstixx

Good plan. Too bad it won’t even make it to the drawing board.
The Repubes and the Demonrats are thick as thieves in this entire mess.
The Chamber of Commerce continues to support this mess so the businesses can hire illegals to cut the expenses of having to pay real wages to regular Americans.
Both parties are hell bent for leather wanting this so until we can get them to understand that we regular Americans don’t want any part of this we are stuck with it.
It is interesting though top hear Gov. Perry’s consistent calls for stronger policing of it.
It almost sounds like he is about to call out the National Guard to start the policing of it.
If you really want to find out what is happening, watch Gov. Perry here in Texas.

john

During the 8 years Bush was present illegal population increased from about 8 million to about 12 million. Under Obama it dropped to 11.3 million. Most of the hysterical noise about the kids and moms now crossing commit no crime. It is NOT a crime to cross our borders without proper documentation. It IS a crime to avoid inspection . Most of these that are now in the news surrender as soon as they enter. They expect to be treated according to the applicable US law that was first signed by Bush.

OWB

No, it was first signed under Clinton.

Has everyone already forgotten Elian?

Seadog

You mean the unaccompanied minor that Eric Holder sent back to Cuba?

OWB

Yep, that’s the one.

GDContractor

“It is NOT a crime to cross our borders without proper documentation.”

You need to call John Forbes Kerry at State and let him know this!!! Afghan terp problem solved! And to think those idiots thought they needed forms, paperwork, visas…whatever. Also, inform the idiots on the left that wanted to have Sean Hannity arrested a few years ago. Also, John, you’re a dumbass.

The Other Whitey

Yes, it IS a crime to cross without documentation, and those who do so try to evade inspection for just that reason, thus doubling down on the illegality.

Dave

You’re forgetting the national guard. These guys live in the areas that these people are coming across. The Texas guard is massive and could accommodate the mission, and would be manned by soldiers who live and work in the areas that the people are moving across. The same goes for New Mexico, Arizona, and California. Colorado, Oklahoma, and Utah could augment those forces and it would provide valuable time to these soldiers who don’t always get the best funding for training. Have the northern states throw a company through at a time to augment a battalion or brigade in Texas and the other states.

That seems like mobilizing guard guys who don’t always have full time work, and enjoy being on orders to do this is a no brainer.

vietnam war protestor aka uss liberty aka deport republicans not the children

Militarize the border against children wading across the rio grande river? See what happens when you shoot a child! You would think you won the last election with self deporting mitt. YOU LOST! the voters who want the children to stay WON! Every election their is more of us and less of you! Democrats have told obama lay off the children. Even Mrs Clinton doesn’t want to be part of another iraq war vote hanging around her neck! Save the children save the country. Laura Nyro,

Isnala

Can I vote for both?

VWP, aka cock-mole. No one advocates shooting unarmed non-violent illegals merely attempting to cross the border, regardless of age.
Only a fucktard like you would picture shooting kids in the middle of the river.

vietnam war protestor aka uss liberty aka deport republicans not the children

I disagree with those who think a fertilized egg is a human being and needs protection of the state ;but these children don’t. You should have the sense of shame!

Tell us again about those 4,000 graves in just one cemetery. Because some brain-damaged, barely literate, disingenuous, lying hack who would put forth a blatant falsehood has so much room to lecture others on a “sense of shame”.

vietnam war protestor aka uss liberty aka deport republicans not the children

I saw it on nbc nightly news if you have a problem you have it with them.

You “saw” it in some deranged delusion-my problem is still with you-shitbag.

Prove it, draft-dodger. Find a reputable story on-line, and post the link here.

If you’re telling the truth, there will be a story about it prominently featured somewhere. I’d guess it will probably be on msnbc.com or the NBC News website.

If you’re dissembling, well, you won’t find anything.

So, time to put up – or STFU.

David

http://www.41nbc.com/story/d/story/immigrant-mass-graves-uncovered-in-texas-cemetery/27824/bmNy0avMYEW0V7iabv2iAg

Is the closest I have seen. Yes, there is a graveyard in Brooks County with illegal immigrants’ graves: there is a bit of a scandal because the taxpayers paid a funeral home for proper burials and instead the funeral home buried the illegals in mass graves. Remains were found in shopping bags, trash bags, etc. Instead of VWP’s allegation, the problem is that the funeral home essentially stole the money to bury them as they were paid to do. Must be hard to tell the difference between that and 4000 in a mass grave killed by US ranchers, or whatever VWP’s drug-addled anal-inserted brain thought he heard.

Should we care for the entire world’s children at the expense of our own taxpayers? At which point should we say no? Perhaps when the entire world begins to send their children here? Perhaps when our taxes are raised to over 50% of what we earn so we can support them in the system?

We are the only country in the world without some form of security to stop people from crossing the border. Our Border Patrol does not secure the border, but catches those who already cross the border.

So, as I said, at which point should we stop other countries from sending their minor children across a 1200 mile long desert without supervision for a doctor’s visit?

That figures. You are OK with killing as long as it is on YOUR terms only.

NO.. The SHAME is entirely on you.

I know you never served your country.
Obviously you have no children.

Quit using McDonalds free WiFi. Go back to your van by the river and huff some more spray paint. You are over your head here.

nbcguy54

Here’s where that 3.7 billion could be better spent:

http://www.siue.edu/GEOGRAPHY/ONLINE/Vogeler/FortifiedFenced&WalledBorders.htm

Spent a little bit of my career staring at the border.

Statistics show that between 1980 and 1988, only 334 people per year were able to get through the East German border security system to “freedom”. I reckon we could live with that number….
Out.

War of Jenkins' Ear Protester AKA Martinjmpr

I remember thinking something very similar to this back before 9/11. Is it something we could do? Certainly.

Is it something we WILL do? Almost certainly NOT. There are simply too many people in this country who have a vested interest in illegal immigration continuing, and those people are very powerful politically. Nobody wants to grasp the nettle because proposing a real solution would be political suicide.

IMO illegal immigration is probably the biggest gulf between the American people and our elected representatives.

GDContractor

You know how to take the sting away after grabbing a nettle? You piss on it.
There’s an allegory in there somewhere. Maybe.

Pigeon

You have to laugh at people who believe the American Military can be used to secure every border on the freakin’ planet that we choose to secure….EXCEPT for our own, lol. Talk about tortured logic.

And the reality is they wouldn’t have to apprehend or arrest anyone. With this show of force and warning signs posted along the border to warn people they are subject to being shot if they cross the border, there wouldn’t be anyone to arrest.

It’s all about attitude, and the message you send out. The message we’ve been projecting for years is that we don’t take border security or immigration enforcement serious. As a result, those coming here illegally don’t take it serious either.