Quoted: Ok, as some of you guys know, I am most certainly NOT a supporter of attempting to physicaly secure the US-Mexico border... Of course, most folks who don't bother to think it thru knee-jerk to this position when discussing illegal immigration... Great way to start.  You've not even made a substantive point yet, but you know that your opponents are motivated by "knee-jerk" reactions, because they obviously haven't thought things out, unlike you.   Worse, they tend to see the Administration's refusal to build said wall as a 'failure' and a mark against the President... Now, before we start, I am in NO WAY defending or advocating illegal immigration. I just see it as OBVIOUS that the 'solution' is supply-side enforcement, namely cracking down on the supply of jobs, to make the US a less attractive place to illegally reside in, and to make the illegals migrate elsewhere!!! So, here's a look at why it just won't goddamn work! First, on 'the wall' itself: 1) An effective barrier CANNOT be a wire fence of any kind, electrified or not. Any idiot can cut a hole in a fence, weather or not it is electrified - and they will. But any barrier will drive up the cost of immigrating, and thus lower the demand.  Right now, there is no sophistication required to walk across the border.  The more barriers you put up, the more it becomes the province only of the professionals and those willing to pay the professionals. 2) Any idiot can dig a hole under said fence. Countering this will at least double the cost, and they will still be able to dig under that. Same comment 3) If you use a solid wall (steel or concrete), the cost goes up again... And you still have to double-size it to reduce digging.... Same comment 4) And of course, you need the cost of eminent domain to sieze all that private land next to the border... Plus infastructure to support the fence (a road running the entire 2,000 mile distance, stations/bases for the patrol force, etc)... U.S. government owns most of the land.  In addition, I suspect many of the landowners would be happy to allow a fence without selling the land.  A simple easement would likely work in most instances. Now, we've spent our $8 BN AT LEAST on our little fence... This is where most people go wrong.  Eight billion is not a lot of money for a country of this size.  The defense budget estimates for 2007 alone are $439.3 billion, and our defense budget, as a percent of GDP, is much smaller than it was during the Cold war.  Or think of it another way.  $8,000,000,000 divided by 300,000,000 Americans equals $26.67 per capita. But a fence alone is useless. We have to patrol it... So now, let's look at manpower - THE GUARD FORCE: Assuming we give each patrol a 1/2 mile stretch, and we have 2,000 miles of border, that means you need 4,000 2-man (minumum) teams... That's 8,000 men... Now, we need to run shifts... 4 shifts per day = 32,000... So that's your bare-minimum force of actual 'boots on the ground'. This is not a 'men in guard towers' scenario - that would be in the millions... This is 2 guys in a squad car or HMMWV patrolling the damn wall... Now, for every 40 men, let's say (using a military model of organization, since it's an easy one to understand) you need 5 low-to-mid level supervisors... And we'll say 2 more leadership for every 4 45-man units, plus a 10-man 'QRF' or 'SRT' in case there are 'issues' that one of the 2 guard patrol teams can't handle... 6400 more... So now, 38400 'line' personell... Now add support (say, 4 to 1 ratio for clerks, 'brass', mechanics, supply, etc), and you get 153,600 personell... Again, while the numbers seem large, such a force is quite feasible in a country this sized.  At the peak of the Reagan build-up, we had 2 million men under arms.  We are down to 1.2 million today, IIRC.  In other words, even if it took 800,000 men to guard the border, it would still be quite feasible.  And as others have pointed out, technology can reduce these numbers quite a bit.  Much of the border region is so inhospitable that a few patrols or predators would suffice. All this adds billions more in cost... They need to be paid, and recieve benefits... If you can magically get 5 more divisions of troops to join the service, they will need bases, housing, food, etc... Otherwise, they're civillians, who need competitive salaries and benefits... So lets say it doubles the cost.  That's still only $50 per person.  Quadruple it?  That's $100 per person.  In other words, for a couple months of cable TV we could end most of our immigration problem.  Sounds like a good deal.  Where do I sign up? WHERE is the government going to get 153,600 people willing to do one of the world's crappiest LE jobs (guard a little bitty strip of land all day, in all manner of conditions, for shit pay and a huge potential for graft/corruption). Not from the Army or Marines - that's 5 divisions worth of personell, we only have 9 available if you assume 2ID stays in Korea 'till hell freezes over (3x1ST, 3RD, 4TH, 10TH, 25TH, 82ND, 101ST)... And of course, we have major international committments that we need these troops to attend to... The stuff they're trained for, and joined up to do - eg killing bad guys & winning wars... Not chasing tumbleweeds and getting bribed to let things go past (corruption is 100% ensured in any border patrol force - there is no way to stop it)... Most of the combat arms folks would probably volunteer to go back to Iraq before they'd do a boder rotation, if it ever came to that... The above gives you MINIMUM security on the border.... It will stop random crossers, but the coyotes will still get people thru... So once again, I say... IT IS NOT REALISTICALLY FEASIBLE TO PHYSICALLY SECURE THE BORDER. NO WAY IN HELL As the comments indicate, it is quite realistic.  I also suspect that it is a hell of a lot cheaper than paying for all the medical and welfare expenses of the illegals.

Israel's border fence seems to work rather well.

A physical barrier is not a feel good measure, it is a necessity.  There are natural barriers in many areas already, those areas that don't are the only ones that need an artificial barrier.  Merely going after employers is not in any way going to come anywhere near helping to alleviate the problem.  

Illegal workers are not the only ones trying to come over.  Terrorists, the Mexican military, as well as drug and arms traffickers also make use of our southern border.  Going after American employers is not going to stop that, those people have no interest in employment.

While the physical barrier will be costly in terms of finances and manpower, the simple fact is that those expenditures must be made.  This nation needs to do as much as possible, whether or not you feel it is a good idea, to stop illegal border crossings.  This country is knowingly leaving the back door open to terrorists and other threats, all while making no effort to stop it.

ETA: And a massive +1 to the post above mine.  Also edited to emphasize a particularly important point.

Quoted: For those that believe the border cannot be secured... Google "Gatekeeper" Illegal entries dropped by 80% in the San Diego area when, walls. lights and extra agents made illegal entry through San Diego Co very difficult. The entire section did not need to be fenced as much is desert. Of course, liberals cried when the illegals started dying in the desert, or in the mountain show. The fencing used is old metal runways. I've yet to have seen it cut through, or dug under. -SNIP- Sure, you can try and impose sanction on employers. But every time that's been tried, it's been a dismal failure. How do you prove that an employer knew the green card he was shown by an illegal was fake? The same goes for Driver's Licenses and Social Security Cards.

Ok, Part 1 -> Gatekeeper

Such things only work when it is easier to go AROUND the barrier than to go THRU...

Gatekeeper, in all likelyhood (no way to know for sure), did not stop ONE illegal immigrant from crossing..... NOT ONE... They just went around...

Part 2 -> Employers

How do you do it? Simple, instead of all that money going to 'the wall', you expand the CAC ID (Common Access Card - the ID system used by the Military) nationwide. Since we're fond of using Korea as an example, over here we have a system called BIDS (Biometric ID System) which electronically verifies US Military IDs (CAC cards). The same system could be used for employers to verify workers. If you're not validated thru BIDS (or your CAC comes up 'fake' (they have a memory chip to store validation data), no work for you.... No more green cards, drivers licenses, SS cards, non-driving 'State IDs', etc... Everyone gets a CAC smartcard ID, nationwide....

A far better solution than 'The El Paso Line'... Workable ID (which as a side-benefit would cut down on ID fraud, and ID fraud fraud (where someone claims 'ID Fraud' falsely to avoid financial oblication)....

Walls and fences can be circumvented... Employment enforcement and verifyable ID are much harder to defeat...

Quoted: Israel's border fence seems to work rather well. A physical barrier is not a feel good measure, it is a necessity.  There are natural barriers in many areas already, those areas that don't are the only ones that need an artificial barrier.  Merely going after employers is not in any way going to come anywhere near helping to alleviate the problem.   Illegal workers are not the only ones trying to come over.  Terrorists, the Mexican military, as well as drug and arms traffickers also make use of our southern border.  Going after American employers is not going to stop that, those people have no interest in employment. While the physical barrier will be costly in terms of finances and manpower, the simple fact is that those expenditures must be made.  This nation needs to do as much as possible, whether or not you feel it is a good idea, to stop illegal border crossings.  This country is knowingly leaving the back door open to terrorists and other threats, all while making no effort to stop it.

I can't believe we're still debating this issue with the GWB Kool-aid drinkers 5 years after September 11th.  (And yes, I voted for GWB in '00 & '04)  The man has turned out to be a RINO, not a "compassionate Conservative".

Quoted: Quoted: When a nation fails to secure its borders it ceases to be a sovereign nation +1  I think this nation is f^cked.  The Illegals will get to stay when the .GOV grants amnesty.  The question is "How much more $$$$ the .GOV wants from the American taxpayer?"  Personally, I'm all tapped out- if I want to maintain my current modest lifestyle.  I don't ask anything from the .GOV and they shouldn't ask anything from me.  And I don't buy into that whole "the US military is protecting my freedom" bullshit.  I protect MY OWN FREEDOM.  If the ChiComs, Russians, or Islamofacists invaded the CONUS, the only thing I have to lose is my life.  However, the Fortune 500 companies have infinitely more to lose to a hostile invasion.  And this "peaceful" Mexican invasion benefits them.  That's why it continues.

No you can win the war yourself eh, red dawn?  And you are wrong it's not just your life, what about your family?  I guess we don't need a military huh?  You can protect yourself from the chinese, or russians.  

ETA:  I'm glad that you can protect yourself, but don't you think your family and those that Americans that can't protect themselves deserve freedom as well?  I know I don't want to see my wife or daughter murdered or raped by some piece of shit commie or terrorist.  Our military is all that keeps that scenario from becoming a reality.

Quoted: Quoted: For those that believe the border cannot be secured... Google "Gatekeeper" Illegal entries dropped by 80% in the San Diego area when, walls. lights and extra agents made illegal entry through San Diego Co very difficult. The entire section did not need to be fenced as much is desert. Of course, liberals cried when the illegals started dying in the desert, or in the mountain show. The fencing used is old metal runways. I've yet to have seen it cut through, or dug under. -SNIP- Sure, you can try and impose sanction on employers. But every time that's been tried, it's been a dismal failure. How do you prove that an employer knew the green card he was shown by an illegal was fake? The same goes for Driver's Licenses and Social Security Cards. Ok, Part 1 -> Gatekeeper Such things only work when it is easier to go AROUND the barrier than to go THRU... Gatekeeper, in all likelyhood (no way to know for sure), did not stop ONE illegal immigrant from crossing..... NOT ONE... They just went around... Part 2 -> Employers How do you do it? Simple, instead of all that money going to 'the wall', you expand the CAC ID (Common Access Card - the ID system used by the Military) nationwide. Since we're fond of using Korea as an example, over here we have a system called BIDS (Biometric ID System) which electronically verifies US Military IDs (CAC cards). The same system could be used for employers to verify workers. If you're not validated thru BIDS (or your CAC comes up 'fake' (they have a memory chip to store validation data), no work for you.... No more green cards, drivers licenses, SS cards, non-driving 'State IDs', etc... Everyone gets a CAC smartcard ID, nationwide.... A far better solution than 'The El Paso Line'... Workable ID (which as a side-benefit would cut down on ID fraud, and ID fraud fraud (where someone claims 'ID Fraud' falsely to avoid financial oblication).... Walls and fences can be circumvented... Employment enforcement and verifyable ID are much harder to defeat...

Hey Dave, I don't want or NEED a f^cking ID card.  I'm an American, not a Mexican.  I am a citizen, not a SUBJECT.  I'm self-employed.  I don't need no stinking ID card.  And what is your solution when freedom-loving American citizens like myself refuse to get the "card"?  Are you gonna impose the will of YOUR .GOV on us ?  I doubt it.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: When a nation fails to secure its borders it ceases to be a sovereign nation +1  I think this nation is f^cked.  The Illegals will get to stay when the .GOV grants amnesty.  The question is "How much more $$$$ the .GOV wants from the American taxpayer?"  Personally, I'm all tapped out- if I want to maintain my current modest lifestyle.  I don't ask anything from the .GOV and they shouldn't ask anything from me.  And I don't buy into that whole "the US military is protecting my freedom" bullshit.  I protect MY OWN FREEDOM.  If the ChiComs, Russians, or Islamofacists invaded the CONUS, the only thing I have to lose is my life.  However, the Fortune 500 companies have infinitely more to lose to a hostile invasion.  And this "peaceful" Mexican invasion benefits them.  That's why it continues. No you can win the war yourself eh, red dawn?  And you are wrong it's not just your life, what about your family?  I guess we don't need a military huh?  You can protect yourself from the chinese, or russians.

What war are you talking about ?  And I'll worry about my own family.  I said "I" don't need the military to protect "ME".  If you want to rely upon the corporate military for "Your" defense- by all means that is your right.  No Red Dawn fantasies here.  I would be killed.  But I would take at least one enemy with me.

Quoted: Quoted: Ok, as some of you guys know, I am most certainly NOT a supporter of attempting to physicaly secure the US-Mexico border... Of course, most folks who don't bother to think it thru knee-jerk to this position when discussing illegal immigration... Great way to start.  You've not even made a substantive point yet, but you know that your opponents are motivated by "knee-jerk" reactions, because they obviously haven't thought things out, unlike you.  When they advocate 100yd gard towers on a 2,000 mile border, what else would you call it? Worse, they tend to see the Administration's refusal to build said wall as a 'failure' and a mark against the President... Now, before we start, I am in NO WAY defending or advocating illegal immigration. I just see it as OBVIOUS that the 'solution' is supply-side enforcement, namely cracking down on the supply of jobs, to make the US a less attractive place to illegally reside in, and to make the illegals migrate elsewhere!!! So, here's a look at why it just won't goddamn work! First, on 'the wall' itself: 1) An effective barrier CANNOT be a wire fence of any kind, electrified or not. Any idiot can cut a hole in a fence, weather or not it is electrified - and they will. But any barrier will drive up the cost of immigrating, and thus lower the demand.  Right now, there is no sophistication required to walk across the border.  The more barriers you put up, the more it becomes the province only of the professionals and those willing to pay the professionals.First, a pair of pliers or bolt-cutters doesn't require a professional operator - ergo wire fence will not work (even electrified fence - all it takes is something non-conductive around the handles of your fence-cutting device). Second, on walls & smugglers: it then becomes 'those the professionals can extort money from en-perpetuity....' Human traffiking is not a US-Mexico border specific problem. The methods are well established worldwide, and they're allready in play under the current situation. The coyotes get their cash thru extortion (think loan-sharking) - they live off of the illegal earnings of the folks they ship up here 2) Any idiot can dig a hole under said fence. Countering this will at least double the cost, and they will still be able to dig under that. Same comment 3) If you use a solid wall (steel or concrete), the cost goes up again... And you still have to double-size it to reduce digging.... Same comment 4) And of course, you need the cost of eminent domain to sieze all that private land next to the border... Plus infastructure to support the fence (a road running the entire 2,000 mile distance, stations/bases for the patrol force, etc)... U.S. government owns most of the land.  In addition, I suspect many of the landowners would be happy to allow a fence without selling the land.  A simple easement would likely work in most instances.It's more than a fence - it's an installation with a paralell road - unless we are just going to trust the 'nice' mexican criminals not to take the fence down Now, we've spent our $8 BN AT LEAST on our little fence... This is where most people go wrong.  Eight billion is not a lot of money for a country of this size.  The defense budget estimates for 2007 alone are $439.3 billion, and our defense budget, as a percent of GDP, is much smaller than it was during the Cold war.  Or think of it another way.  $8,000,000,000 divided by 300,000,000 Americans equals $26.67 per capita. The 8 billion figure is just to build the wall... Add the road, it's much higher... And that doesn't include maintanance or patrol costs But a fence alone is useless. We have to patrol it... So now, let's look at manpower - THE GUARD FORCE: Assuming we give each patrol a 1/2 mile stretch, and we have 2,000 miles of border, that means you need 4,000 2-man (minumum) teams... That's 8,000 men... Now, we need to run shifts... 4 shifts per day = 32,000... So that's your bare-minimum force of actual 'boots on the ground'. This is not a 'men in guard towers' scenario - that would be in the millions... This is 2 guys in a squad car or HMMWV patrolling the damn wall... Now, for every 40 men, let's say (using a military model of organization, since it's an easy one to understand) you need 5 low-to-mid level supervisors... And we'll say 2 more leadership for every 4 45-man units, plus a 10-man 'QRF' or 'SRT' in case there are 'issues' that one of the 2 guard patrol teams can't handle... 6400 more... So now, 38400 'line' personell... Now add support (say, 4 to 1 ratio for clerks, 'brass', mechanics, supply, etc), and you get 153,600 personell... Again, while the numbers seem large, such a force is quite feasible in a country this sized.  At the peak of the Reagan build-up, we had 2 million men under arms.  We are down to 1.2 million today, IIRC.  In other words, even if it took 800,000 men to guard the border, it would still be quite feasible.  And as others have pointed out, technology can reduce these numbers quite a bit.  Much of the border region is so inhospitable that a few patrols or predators would suffice.The 1.2 million figure includes all of the National Guard and Reserves. We have less than 800,000 on active duty - and there aren't 800,000 people waiting to join the service either.... We're breaking even, maybe getting a little bigger... In other words, we barely have the manpower to meet our '2 major war plus a regional flare-up' international committment (the 2-major wars being Iraq and A-stan), much less sacrifice combat troops to border-police duty... Further, there are much better uses for the extra 1.2million troops you wish we could raise - like dealing with Iran... But we can't raise a force like that now (esp since recruits know they'll be doing more than pressing uniforms and shining boots (which we fortunately no longer do)... Amazing where the willingness to serve goes when it's not a garrison Army anymore!), so Iran gets 'watched', and your concept won't work... All this adds billions more in cost... They need to be paid, and recieve benefits... If you can magically get 5 more divisions of troops to join the service, they will need bases, housing, food, etc... Otherwise, they're civillians, who need competitive salaries and benefits... So lets say it doubles the cost.  That's still only $50 per person.  Quadruple it?  That's $100 per person.  In other words, for a couple months of cable TV we could end most of our immigration problem.  Sounds like a good deal.  Where do I sign up?It more than doubles the cost. Take the Army's total budget, divide in half. There's your cost for the '20th Century boots-on-the-ground' plan, as advocated by ARF WHERE is the government going to get 153,600 people willing to do one of the world's crappiest LE jobs (guard a little bitty strip of land all day, in all manner of conditions, for shit pay and a huge potential for graft/corruption). Not from the Army or Marines - that's 5 divisions worth of personell, we only have 9 available if you assume 2ID stays in Korea 'till hell freezes over (3x1ST, 3RD, 4TH, 10TH, 25TH, 82ND, 101ST)... And of course, we have major international committments that we need these troops to attend to... The stuff they're trained for, and joined up to do - eg killing bad guys & winning wars... Not chasing tumbleweeds and getting bribed to let things go past (corruption is 100% ensured in any border patrol force - there is no way to stop it)... Most of the combat arms folks would probably volunteer to go back to Iraq before they'd do a boder rotation, if it ever came to that... The above gives you MINIMUM security on the border.... It will stop random crossers, but the coyotes will still get people thru... So once again, I say... IT IS NOT REALISTICALLY FEASIBLE TO PHYSICALLY SECURE THE BORDER. NO WAY IN HELL As the comments indicate, it is quite realistic.  I also suspect that it is a hell of a lot cheaper than paying for all the medical and welfare expenses of the illegals.Adjusted, it's not... Once again, you are overly optimistic

It wasn't realistically feasible for us to go to the moon either, yet we did....

Seems to me from many of your posts you may be a libtard in Army clothing, or maybe just have libtard tendencies....I don't know.....

Look, all of this is pie in the sky discussion....many of us would love to see a giant wall of death on the Southern Border, where any who tried to cross would be killed before they got 5 feet into US territory. Its not going to happen, but its fun to think about.

Lets face it, it will never happen because our gov is a gov full of pussies, pansies, and libtard douchebags. My BIGGEST disappointment in Bush has been the immigration issue, I mean WTF, does Vincente Fox have pics of Bush making it with a donkey or something, I mean he literally bends over and kisses Mexican ass....

The gov will never stop the economic incentive for the illegal invasion, much less start racking up a abody count, which is what they should be doing...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: When a nation fails to secure its borders it ceases to be a sovereign nation +1  I think this nation is f^cked.  The Illegals will get to stay when the .GOV grants amnesty.  The question is "How much more $$$$ the .GOV wants from the American taxpayer?"  Personally, I'm all tapped out- if I want to maintain my current modest lifestyle.  I don't ask anything from the .GOV and they shouldn't ask anything from me.  And I don't buy into that whole "the US military is protecting my freedom" bullshit.  I protect MY OWN FREEDOM.  If the ChiComs, Russians, or Islamofacists invaded the CONUS, the only thing I have to lose is my life.  However, the Fortune 500 companies have infinitely more to lose to a hostile invasion.  And this "peaceful" Mexican invasion benefits them.  That's why it continues. No you can win the war yourself eh, red dawn?  And you are wrong it's not just your life, what about your family?  I guess we don't need a military huh?  You can protect yourself from the chinese, or russians.   What war are you talking about ?  And I'll worry about my own family.  I said "I" don't need the military to protect "ME".  If you want to rely upon the corporate military for "Your" defense- by all means that is your right.  No Red Dawn fantasies here.  I would be killed.  But I would take at least one enemy with me.

'Corporate'? Hardly... Federal? Yes... No other way to do it in this day and age...

As for 'defending yourself', the enemy of today is overseas... What are you going to do, buy a plane ticket, pack your AR and go to Iraq?

The idea that you are capable of defending yourself in a military sense, by yourself, died when Maxim invented the modern machinegun. The British pounded nails in the coffin when they invented the tank, and the Wrights & Sirkorsky buried it... It's gone, finished, DONE...

Quoted: What war are you talking about ?  And I'll worry about my own family.  I said "I" don't need the military to protect "ME".  If you want to rely upon the corporate military for "Your" defense- by all means that is your right.  No Red Dawn fantasies here.  I would be killed.  But I would take at least one enemy with me.

"corporate military"??  

Well whether or not "you" need protection you are getting it.  Our military protects your very way of life so that you can do whatever it is that you do every day.  Without them you would be under the boot of an oppressor.  Whether or not they are fighting a war, their mere presence and reputation alone keep you safe.  

Quoted: It wasn't realistically feasible for us to go to the moon either, yet we did.... Seems to me from many of your posts you may be a libtard in Army clothing, or maybe just have libtard tendencies....I don't know..... Look, all of this is pie in the sky discussion....many of us would love to see a giant wall of death on the Southern Border, where any who tried to cross would be killed before they got 5 feet into US territory. Its not going to happen, but its fun to think about. Lets face it, it will never happen because our gov is a gov full of pussies, pansies, and libtard douchebags. My BIGGEST disappointment in Bush has been the immigration issue, I mean WTF, does Vincente Fox have pics of Bush making it with a donkey or something, I mean he literally bends over and kisses Mexican ass.... The gov will never stop the economic incentive for the illegal invasion, much less start racking up a abody count, which is what they should be doing...

Yet TENS of thousands of ILLEGAL Alien FELONS are ALLOWED to walk the streets in OUR country.  They kill, rape, molest, deal drugs, drive drunk, STEAL social/medical services- All the while GWB sits on his arse.  "But it's hard.  This illegal situation.  It's hard work."    Dave, I would be happy to purchase a copy of STATE of EMERGENCY and mail it to you.  It might give you a wider perspective on what we are facing back in the Homeland.

Dave A,

Where in God's name are you getting your numbers from.  I took the numbers you gave, ran with them, and it came out to $26 and change per person.  Now you are saying that it would be $200 billion?  Where do these numbers come from?

Edited to Add:

Here are some numbers from the debate last year.  The following is from an article on www.globalsecurity.com

But Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has said a wall running the length of a border would cost too much. A 2,000 mile state-of-the-art border fence has been estimated to cost between four and eight billion dollars. Costs for a wall that would run the entire length of the border might be as low as $851 million for a standard 10-foot prison chain link fence topped by razor wire. For another $362 million, the fence could be electrified. A larger 12-foot tall, two-foot-thick concrete wall painted on both sides would run about $2 billion. Initially it was estimated that the San Diego fence would cost $14 million -- about $1 million a mile. The first 11 miles of the fence eventually cost $42 million -- $3.8 million per mile, and the last 3.5 miles may cost even more since they cover more difficult terrain. An additional $35 million to complete the final 3.5 miles was approved in 2005 by the Department of Homeland Security -- $10 million per mile.

So again, based upon the most expensive estimate from the government, we have a cost of $26 and change per person.  Even if you quadruple the cost to include patrols in needed areas, we're still around $100 per person.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The Great Wall of China seemed to work.  I like that coupled with minefields and machinegun nests for our southern border. Create a no mans land between a sub- fence and the real wall with gun towers every 100 yards. if you get serious, you get results. If you dare venture into no mans land, see ya' 100 yards is a waste max effective range of a M-240 is 1800 meters you could make it every 500 meters and the two machine guns could still have intersecting fields of fire that would cover the area and have one man with a scoped rifle and you'd be good.  .50 cal has a feather  range but is much slower so shoot. You could also just place two mini-guns about 1000 meters from each other and you'd have the area with a nice intersecting fields of fire. Where do the gunners come from? See numbers above... 5 divisions worth of personell to patrol WITHOUT towers...

Patrol would be cut down a hell of a lot by adding two men to a tower. They can cover more area from the high ground then a patrol can that is on ground level.

Quoted: I just see it as OBVIOUS that the 'solution' is supply-side enforcement, namely cracking down on the supply of jobs, to make the US a less attractive place to illegally reside in, and to make the illegals migrate elsewhere!!!

Good thing there are zero terrorists infiltrating our borders.

If they were, it certainly would nulify your 'enfore the laws' answer.

Quoted: Quoted: What war are you talking about ?  And I'll worry about my own family.  I said "I" don't need the military to protect "ME".  If you want to rely upon the corporate military for "Your" defense- by all means that is your right.  No Red Dawn fantasies here.  I would be killed.  But I would take at least one enemy with me. "corporate military"??   Well whether or not "you" need protection you are getting it.  Our military protects your very way of life so that you can do whatever it is that you do every day.  Without them you would be under the boot of an oppressor.  Whether or not they are fighting a war, their mere presence and reputation alone keep you safe.

Bullshit.  It sounds more like a "protection racket" to me.  Give me your money (pay your taxes) and you won't get hurt (we won't throw you in prison and take all your property).  I've read a little bit about freedom- and that isn't it.  That military/intelligence/LE complex really did a bang up job on 9/11.  God forbid we kick the illegals out, crack down on drug dealers, round up all the Islamofacist terrorists, shut down the ACLU, CAIR, etc. and truly make this country SAFE.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: What war are you talking about ?  And I'll worry about my own family.  I said "I" don't need the military to protect "ME".  If you want to rely upon the corporate military for "Your" defense- by all means that is your right.  No Red Dawn fantasies here.  I would be killed.  But I would take at least one enemy with me. "corporate military"??   Well whether or not "you" need protection you are getting it.  Our military protects your very way of life so that you can do whatever it is that you do every day.  Without them you would be under the boot of an oppressor.  Whether or not they are fighting a war, their mere presence and reputation alone keep you safe.   Bullshit.  It sounds more like a "protection racket" to me.  Give me your money (pay your taxes) and you won't get hurt (we won't throw you in prison and take all your property).  I've read a little bit about freedom- and that isn't it.  That military/intelligence/LE complex really did a bang up job on 9/11.  God forbid we kick the illegals out, crack down on drug dealers, round up all the Islamofacist terrorists, shut down the ACLU, CAIR, etc. and truly make this country SAFE.

Not kicking the illegals out, drug dealers or islamofascists has nothing to do with your military.  Take it up with your congressman.  

As for 9/11...what about Pearl Harbor?  I'd say the military did a pretty good job responding to that threat did it not?  You aren't speaking japanese or german are you?  


ETA:  No one ever said we were invulnerable, but I think the military does a pretty damn good job of protecting this country and it's people despite the limitations that are put on it.

Quoted: [Bullshit.  It sounds more like a "protection racket" to me.  Give me your money (pay your taxes) and you won't get hurt (we won't throw you in prison and take all your property).  I've read a little bit about freedom- and that isn't it.  That military/intelligence/LE complex really did a bang up job on 9/11.  God forbid we kick the illegals out, crack down on drug dealers, round up all the Islamofacist terrorists, shut down the ACLU, CAIR, etc. and truly make this country SAFE.

So basically if an organization doesn't agree with YOUR politics it has no right to exist? Glad to see that you are a believer in freedom and diversity of opinion.

Quoted: Quoted: I just see it as OBVIOUS that the 'solution' is supply-side enforcement, namely cracking down on the supply of jobs, to make the US a less attractive place to illegally reside in, and to make the illegals migrate elsewhere!!! Good thing there are zero terrorists infiltrating our borders. If they were, it certainly would nulify your 'enfore the laws' answer.

Well, considering that they don't need to 'infiltrate' via illegal immigration - they come here thru ostensibly legal channels (lie on the application, get visa, be considered a 'legal' immigrant) - that doesn't make much of a difference...

AQ is a well financed and organized group - they can easily get folks into this country WITH PAPERS, which of course makes things much easier for them operationally - no ops getting blown by simple immigration violations, etc...

For all the terror rings we've broken up, the only time immigration comes up is when people overstay their legal entry visas.... A failure of.... LAW ENFORCEMENT, not border security.....

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The Great Wall of China seemed to work.  I like that coupled with minefields and machinegun nests for our southern border. Create a no mans land between a sub- fence and the real wall with gun towers every 100 yards. if you get serious, you get results. If you dare venture into no mans land, see ya' 100 yards is a waste max effective range of a M-240 is 1800 meters you could make it every 500 meters and the two machine guns could still have intersecting fields of fire that would cover the area and have one man with a scoped rifle and you'd be good.  .50 cal has a feather  range but is much slower so shoot. You could also just place two mini-guns about 1000 meters from each other and you'd have the area with a nice intersecting fields of fire. Where do the gunners come from? See numbers above... 5 divisions worth of personell to patrol WITHOUT towers... Patrol would be cut down a hell of a lot by adding two men to a tower. They can cover more area from the high ground then a patrol can that is on ground level.

Actually, patrols cover more ground than fixed installations... 2 men in a tower aren't going anywhere, the patrol is.... Maneuver vs static defense... Maneuver allways wins....

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I just see it as OBVIOUS that the 'solution' is supply-side enforcement, namely cracking down on the supply of jobs, to make the US a less attractive place to illegally reside in, and to make the illegals migrate elsewhere!!! Good thing there are zero terrorists infiltrating our borders. If they were, it certainly would nulify your 'enfore the laws' answer. Well, considering that they don't need to 'infiltrate' via illegal immigration - they come here legally - that doesn't make much of a difference...

Wrong.

CSNNewsCast.com Texas Sheriffs Say Terrorists Entering US from Mexico By Kevin Mooney CNSNews.com Staff Writer August 21, 2006 (CNSNews.com) - The chief law enforcement officers of several Texas counties along the southern U.S. border warn that Arabic-speaking individuals are learning Spanish and integrating into Mexican culture before paying smugglers to sneak them into the United States. The Texas Sheriffs' Border Coalition believes those individuals are likely terrorists and that drug cartels and some members of the Mexican military are helping them get across the border. Sheriff Sigifredo Gonzalez of Zapata County, Texas told Cybercast News Service that Iranian currency, military badges in Arabic, jackets and other clothing are among the items that have been discovered along the banks of the Rio Grande River. The sheriff also said there are a substantial number of individuals crossing the southern border into the U.S. who are not Mexican. He described the individuals in question as well-funded and able to pay so-called "coyotes" - human smugglers - large sums of money for help gaining illegal entry into the U.S. Although many of the non-Mexican illegal aliens are fluent in Spanish, Gonzalez said they speak with an accent that is not native. "It's clear these people are coming in for reasons other than employment," Gonzalez said. That sentiment is shared by Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.). "For years, Muslims and other 'Special Interest Aliens' from places other than Mexico have been streaming into the U.S. across our porous border," Tancredo told Cybercast News Service. "These people are not paying $50,000 or more a head just to 'take jobs no American will do.' "Terrorists are working round the clock to infiltrate the United States," he added. "Congress and this administration must address this gaping hole in our national security and they must do it now." Some of the more high profile pieces of evidence pointing to terrorist infiltration of the U.S. have been uncovered in Jim Hogg County, Texas, which experiences a high volume of smuggling activity, according to local law enforcement. "We see patches on jackets from countries where we know al Qaeda to be active," Gonzalez explained. The patches appear to be military badges with Arabic lettering. One patch in particular, discovered this past December, caught the attention of federal homeland security officials, according to Gonzalez and local officials familiar with the investigation. Sheriff Wayne Jernigan of Valverde County, Texas, told members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in March about one patch that read "midnight mission" and displayed an airplane flying over a building heading towards a tower. Translators with DHS have said some of the various phrases and slogans on the items could mean "martyr," "way to eternal life," or "way to immortality." Gonzalez told the House International Relations Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation in July that the terrorists are getting smarter. "To avoid apprehension, we feel many of these terrorists attempt to blend in with persons of Hispanic origin when entering the country." Gonzalez stated. "We feel that terrorists are already here and continue to enter our country on a daily basis." Sheriff Arvin West of Hudspeth County, Texas, told Cybercast News Service that he believes some Mexican soldiers are operating in concert with the drug cartels to aid the terrorists. "There's no doubt in my mind," he said, "although the Mexican government and our government adamantly deny it." Statistics made available through the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) show more than 40,000 illegal aliens from countries "Other Than Mexico," designated as OTMs, were apprehended by the U.S. Border Patrol in the period ranging from October 2003 to June 2004, as they attempted to cross the southwestern border. An overview of border security challenges produced through the office of Texas Gov. Rick Perry indicates that almost 120,000 OTMs were apprehended while attempting to cross into the state from January through July 2005. Local authorities are particularly concerned about illegal aliens arriving from Special Interest Countries (SICs) where a radical version of Islam is known to flourish. Perry's office cites Iraq, Iran, Indonesia and Bangladesh among those countries. A Tancredo spokesperson said the list also includes Afghanistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and Yemen. As Cybercast News Service previously reported an internal audit of DHS that combines the number of illegal aliens arriving from SICs with the documented instances of illegal aliens arriving from countries identified as being state sponsors of terrorism (SSTs) yields a grand total of over 90,000 such illegal aliens who have been apprehended during the five year period from fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2005. The border security report delivered by Perry's office focuses attention on the "Triborder region" of Latin America, which spans an area between Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay. "The Triborder Region is a focal point of Islamic extremism," the report states. "Al Qaeda leadership plans to use criminal alien smuggling organizations to bring terrorist operatives across the border into the U.S." Carlos Espinosa, a press spokesman for Tancredo, said his office is aware of a training camp in Brazil that actually teaches people from outside of Latin America how they can assimilate into the Mexican culture. "They come up as illegal aliens and disguise themselves as potential migrant workers," Espinosa said.

It makes all the difference.

Terrorists are sneaking across our borders.

I'm glad it makes a difference to those that are educated.

The problem here Dave is your POV.

You're content to allow folks to cross the border, then deal with them later.

If that, or some other financially motivated like edict is allowed to continue in our elected reps, it will be a major contributring factor to our downfall.

Mark my words.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: For those that believe the border cannot be secured... Google "Gatekeeper" Illegal entries dropped by 80% in the San Diego area when, walls. lights and extra agents made illegal entry through San Diego Co very difficult. The entire section did not need to be fenced as much is desert. Of course, liberals cried when the illegals started dying in the desert, or in the mountain show. The fencing used is old metal runways. I've yet to have seen it cut through, or dug under. -SNIP- Sure, you can try and impose sanction on employers. But every time that's been tried, it's been a dismal failure. How do you prove that an employer knew the green card he was shown by an illegal was fake? The same goes for Driver's Licenses and Social Security Cards. Ok, Part 1 -> Gatekeeper Such things only work when it is easier to go AROUND the barrier than to go THRU... Gatekeeper, in all likelyhood (no way to know for sure), did not stop ONE illegal immigrant from crossing..... NOT ONE... They just went around... Part 2 -> Employers How do you do it? Simple, instead of all that money going to 'the wall', you expand the CAC ID (Common Access Card - the ID system used by the Military) nationwide. Since we're fond of using Korea as an example, over here we have a system called BIDS (Biometric ID System) which electronically verifies US Military IDs (CAC cards). The same system could be used for employers to verify workers. If you're not validated thru BIDS (or your CAC comes up 'fake' (they have a memory chip to store validation data), no work for you.... No more green cards, drivers licenses, SS cards, non-driving 'State IDs', etc... Everyone gets a CAC smartcard ID, nationwide.... A far better solution than 'The El Paso Line'... Workable ID (which as a side-benefit would cut down on ID fraud, and ID fraud fraud (where someone claims 'ID Fraud' falsely to avoid financial oblication).... Walls and fences can be circumvented... Employment enforcement and verifyable ID are much harder to defeat... Hey Dave, I don't want or NEED a f^cking ID card.  I'm an American, not a Mexican.  I am a citizen, not a SUBJECT.  I'm self-employed.  I don't need no stinking ID card.  And what is your solution when freedom-loving American citizens like myself refuse to get the "card"?  Are you gonna impose the will of YOUR .GOV on us ?  I doubt it.

Try driving without your license (ID CARD)

Try collecting SS without your SS card (ID CARD)

Try getting a job from a law-abiding employer without 2 ID CARDs

Try getting a loan, or a bank account, or any form of credit without an ID CARD of some type!

Sorry, but the 1800s are gone, you missed your bus...

And to answer your question, when we finally wake up and condense all these NUMEROUS ID CARDS into ONE ID CARD, if you refuse to get one you will not be able to vote, get a job, drive, fly, or get credit... Simple solution... And the same one you face today if you're one of those refusniks who doesn't have any of the ID CARDS that are issued by various agencies and governments, and required for those same activities...

But you've allready outed yourself, politically... Go back to your log cabin and wait for your 'revolution'... It ain't comin, and if it does, we'll win (again, just like the 1860s)...

And as for 'dobut it', what exactly are you going to do to resist? Commit treason (war against the several states, or... As in the constitution...)? Because if you do, YES, I would... It's my job (AND domestic) after all...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: What war are you talking about ?  And I'll worry about my own family.  I said "I" don't need the military to protect "ME".  If you want to rely upon the corporate military for "Your" defense- by all means that is your right.  No Red Dawn fantasies here.  I would be killed.  But I would take at least one enemy with me. "corporate military"??   Well whether or not "you" need protection you are getting it.  Our military protects your very way of life so that you can do whatever it is that you do every day.  Without them you would be under the boot of an oppressor.  Whether or not they are fighting a war, their mere presence and reputation alone keep you safe.   Bullshit.  It sounds more like a "protection racket" to me.  Give me your money (pay your taxes) and you won't get hurt (we won't throw you in prison and take all your property).  I've read a little bit about freedom- and that isn't it.  That military/intelligence/LE complex really did a bang up job on 9/11.  God forbid we kick the illegals out, crack down on drug dealers, round up all the Islamofacist terrorists, shut down the ACLU, CAIR, etc. and truly make this country SAFE. Not kicking the illegals out, drug dealers or islamofascists has nothing to do with your military.  Take it up with your congressman.   As for 9/11...what about Pearl Harbor?  I'd say the military did a pretty good job responding to that threat did it not?  You aren't speaking japanese or german are you?   ETA:  No one ever said we were invulnerable, but I think the military does a pretty damn good job of protecting this country and it's people despite the limitations that are put on it.

I would like the "limitations" removed.  My Congressman is AWESOME- Rep. Steve King- and I live in one of the most conservative districts in this nation.  Rep. King wants them kicked out.  But the RINO's still run things in Congress.

Do you honestly believe that Germany or Japan could have conquered Fortress America ?  The Nazi and Imperial Japanese didn't succeed in bombing New York City, even with all of their resources.  Yet a couple dozen Arabs armed with pocket knives and box cutters took down the Twin Towers and attacked the Pentagon, killing nearly 3,000 civilians.  I agree with the GWOT.  Take out Syria, Iran, North Korea, et. al  
Take the gloves off our military and law enforcement.  The liberals have pussified the very institutions that need to be strong- the military and LE.  I don't see the situation changing until a mushroom cloud appears over a major American city.

Quoted: The problem here Dave is your POV. You're content to allow folks to cross the border, then deal with them later. If that, or some other financially motivated like edict is allowed to continue in our elected reps, it will be a major contributring factor to our downfall. Mark my words.

I'm content to try and remove their desire to come here...

I recognise that a barrier won't work...

I also consider the 'terrorist' argument a straw-man, as no evidence points to terror operations using the Mexican option at all... They have far better (from a covert ops) possibilites... And even if we did wall that side, there's the OTHER border, which is far more accessable (having known folks who -accidentally- illegally entered Canada while canoing in MN, because they were reading the map upside down).... And you aren't even going to come CLOSE to the resources to seal that one....

Quoted: Quoted: [Bullshit.  It sounds more like a "protection racket" to me.  Give me your money (pay your taxes) and you won't get hurt (we won't throw you in prison and take all your property).  I've read a little bit about freedom- and that isn't it.  That military/intelligence/LE complex really did a bang up job on 9/11.  God forbid we kick the illegals out, crack down on drug dealers, round up all the Islamofacist terrorists, shut down the ACLU, CAIR, etc. and truly make this country SAFE. So basically if an organization doesn't agree with YOUR politics it has no right to exist? Glad to see that you are a believer in freedom and diversity of opinion.

Ok, the ACLU can stay in the "shake down" lawsuit business.  But CAIR.  Come on.  Some of their members have ties to terrorist organizations.  Linky

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: [Bullshit.  It sounds more like a "protection racket" to me.  Give me your money (pay your taxes) and you won't get hurt (we won't throw you in prison and take all your property).  I've read a little bit about freedom- and that isn't it.  That military/intelligence/LE complex really did a bang up job on 9/11.  God forbid we kick the illegals out, crack down on drug dealers, round up all the Islamofacist terrorists, shut down the ACLU, CAIR, etc. and truly make this country SAFE. So basically if an organization doesn't agree with YOUR politics it has no right to exist? Glad to see that you are a believer in freedom and diversity of opinion. Ok, the ACLU can stay in the "shake down" lawsuit business.  But CAIR.  Come on.  Some of their members have ties to terrorist organizations.  Linky

So you deal with those individuals as they are proved to violate the law. You sound like you want to shut down any organization whose politics do not agree with your own.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: For those that believe the border cannot be secured... Google "Gatekeeper" Illegal entries dropped by 80% in the San Diego area when, walls. lights and extra agents made illegal entry through San Diego Co very difficult. The entire section did not need to be fenced as much is desert. Of course, liberals cried when the illegals started dying in the desert, or in the mountain show. The fencing used is old metal runways. I've yet to have seen it cut through, or dug under. -SNIP- Sure, you can try and impose sanction on employers. But every time that's been tried, it's been a dismal failure. How do you prove that an employer knew the green card he was shown by an illegal was fake? The same goes for Driver's Licenses and Social Security Cards. Ok, Part 1 -> Gatekeeper Such things only work when it is easier to go AROUND the barrier than to go THRU... Gatekeeper, in all likelyhood (no way to know for sure), did not stop ONE illegal immigrant from crossing..... NOT ONE... They just went around... Part 2 -> Employers How do you do it? Simple, instead of all that money going to 'the wall', you expand the CAC ID (Common Access Card - the ID system used by the Military) nationwide. Since we're fond of using Korea as an example, over here we have a system called BIDS (Biometric ID System) which electronically verifies US Military IDs (CAC cards). The same system could be used for employers to verify workers. If you're not validated thru BIDS (or your CAC comes up 'fake' (they have a memory chip to store validation data), no work for you.... No more green cards, drivers licenses, SS cards, non-driving 'State IDs', etc... Everyone gets a CAC smartcard ID, nationwide.... A far better solution than 'The El Paso Line'... Workable ID (which as a side-benefit would cut down on ID fraud, and ID fraud fraud (where someone claims 'ID Fraud' falsely to avoid financial oblication).... Walls and fences can be circumvented... Employment enforcement and verifyable ID are much harder to defeat... Hey Dave, I don't want or NEED a f^cking ID card.  I'm an American, not a Mexican.  I am a citizen, not a SUBJECT.  I'm self-employed.  I don't need no stinking ID card.  And what is your solution when freedom-loving American citizens like myself refuse to get the "card"?  Are you gonna impose the will of YOUR .GOV on us ?  I doubt it. Try driving without your license (ID CARD) Try collecting SS without your SS card (ID CARD) Try getting a job from a law-abiding employer without 2 ID CARDs Try getting a loan, or a bank account, or any form of credit without an ID CARD of some type! Sorry, but the 1800s are gone, you missed your bus... And to answer your question, when we finally wake up and condense all these NUMEROUS ID CARDS into ONE ID CARD, if you refuse to get one you will not be able to vote, get a job, drive, fly, or get credit... Simple solution... And the same one you face today if you're one of those refusniks who doesn't have any of the ID CARDS that are issued by various agencies and governments, and required for those same activities... But you've allready outed yourself, politically... Go back to your log cabin and wait for your 'revolution'... It ain't comin, and if it does, we'll win (again, just like the 1860s)... And as for 'dobut it', what exactly are you going to do to resist? Commit treason (war against the several states, or... As in the constitution...)? Because if you do, YES, I would... It's my job (AND domestic) after all...

I bet you can't wait to get back here and oppress all of us freedom lovers.  Do you think you can end ID theft with your little One Card System ?

In the Land of America where the Government lies.
One Card to rule them all, One Card to find them,
One Card to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of America where the Government lies.

This actually wouldn't be as tough as the original poster made it out to be...HIS idea would cost that much..there are many other ways to do it.

Completely off topic but somebody mentioned that there was no was 2ID would be pulled off the DMZ...dude

Most of 2ID is in Fort Lewis WASHINGTON.  There is one heavy brigade left in Korea and we are a dozen miles from the DMZ.  Infact they are moving us south of Seoul in the upcoming years.  We basically have 2 artillery BNs, 1 infantry BN, 1 armor BN, and 1 cavalry squadron here...we are only here to say that the US has some troops there and my buddies and I have already said that we would MUCH rather be securing our own border than helping keep drinky girl clubs in business.  Then again I would much rather be in Iraq or Afghanistan than at the US border.

Anyways, the threat of death alone at the border would stop nearly all illegal immigration.  All we have to do is let the border guards we currently have shoot all the illegals they see...problem solved.

Highly unlikely but there's you're sure way to stop these criminals.  Actually after the first several dozen are killed you could probably half the border patrol that we currently have.  I'll buy all the ammo necessary for them to shoot the first dozen or so illegals...damn we'd end up making money.

It would work ...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: [Bullshit.  It sounds more like a "protection racket" to me.  Give me your money (pay your taxes) and you won't get hurt (we won't throw you in prison and take all your property).  I've read a little bit about freedom- and that isn't it.  That military/intelligence/LE complex really did a bang up job on 9/11.  God forbid we kick the illegals out, crack down on drug dealers, round up all the Islamofacist terrorists, shut down the ACLU, CAIR, etc. and truly make this country SAFE. So basically if an organization doesn't agree with YOUR politics it has no right to exist? Glad to see that you are a believer in freedom and diversity of opinion. Ok, the ACLU can stay in the "shake down" lawsuit business.  But CAIR.  Come on.  Some of their members have ties to terrorist organizations.  Linky So you deal with those individuals as they are proved to violate the law. You sound like you want to shut down any organization whose politics do not agree with your own.

No.  I just think that before Dave and his fellow soldiers come back home to crack my skull, they might want to stop by the CAIR house and take care of those members who advocate Sharia Law.

Originally Posted By Dave_A Actually, patrols cover more ground than fixed installations... 2 men in a tower aren't going anywhere, the patrol is.... Maneuver vs static defense... Maneuver allways wins....

Not when your on one side of a 20 foot wall it is not easy to see over that at all last time I tried. No patrol would be needed on the other side do to the fact there would be a nice 30 to 40 feet of nothing but AP/AT mines set up and before that a nice triply strain of Razor wire with some clay mortars and other explosives booby trapped on it.

Most of this land is flat and you can see miles around it. In part that are not flat or wooded you may need some more patrols out there.

Quoted: But you've allready outed yourself, politically... Go back to your log cabin and wait for your 'revolution'... It ain't comin, and if it does, we'll win (again, just like the 1860s)... I can guess which side you would have been on during the St. Louis Massacre Lyon's 2nd U.S. Infantry seized the arsenal and moved most of the weapons to Illinois for safekeeping. On May 10, he used his newly mustered force of roughly 3,000 recruits to surround Camp Jackson, a pro-secession militia encampment located several miles outside of the city. The temporary camp had been authorized by pro-Southern Governor Claiborne Jackson, and was a legal assembly according to the state constitution. Lyon did not see it that way, as he had disguised himself as a farm woman to spy on the camp and discovered that Jackson indeed planned to seize the arsenal. Lyon arrested Gen. D. M. Frost and 669 "St. Louis Minute Men" without serious incident, although the men refused to take the oath of allegiance to the Federal government. However, Lyon decided to march his prisoners through downtown St. Louis before providing them with a parole and ordering them to disperse. This lengthy march was widely viewed as a public humiliation for the state forces, and immediately angered citizens who had gathered to watch the commotion. To add to the insult, Lyon placed the captured militiamen between two lines of armed German Home Guards. And as for 'dobut it', what exactly are you going to do to resist? Commit treason (war against the several states, or... As in the constitution...)? Because if you do, YES, I would... It's my job (AND domestic) after all...

I, unlike you, have never signed a loyalty oath.  Whatever  I do in my life, it would not be treason.  I'm talking about refusing to submit to a Federally mandated ID.  I have a driver's license issued by the Great State of Iowa.  My State's motto is, "Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain."  Some of us Americans like freedom, and are willing to defend it with our lives.  

How is my getting a new End-All Be-All ID card going to make this country safe?  My neighbors know who I am.  Many people in my hometown know who I am.  The .GOV knows who I am.  I didn't sneak into this country in the dead of night.  I don't need to be treated with suspicion.

How about you and your Federales implant us with the Verichip ?  Try it.  You seem to think that .GOV is the solution to every problem.  

Quoted: Quoted: The problem here Dave is your POV. You're content to allow folks to cross the border, then deal with them later. If that, or some other financially motivated like edict is allowed to continue in our elected reps, it will be a major contributring factor to our downfall. Mark my words. I'm content to try and remove their desire to come here... I recognise that a barrier won't work... I also consider the 'terrorist' argument a straw-man, as no evidence points to terror operations using the Mexican option at all... They have far better (from a covert ops) possibilites...

Once more, with feeling:

www.washtimes.com/national/20040928-123346-3928r.htm Al Qaeda seeks tie to local gangs By Jerry Seper THE WASHINGTON TIMES September 28, 2004 A top al Qaeda lieutenant has met with leaders of a violent Salvadoran criminal gang with roots in Mexico and the United States — including a stronghold in the Washington area — in an effort by the terrorist network to seek help infiltrating the U.S.-Mexico border, law enforcement authorities said. Adnan G. El Shukrijumah, a key al Qaeda cell leader for whom the U.S. government has offered a $5 million reward, was spotted in July in Honduras meeting with leaders of El Salvador's notorious Mara Salvatrucha gang, which immigration officials said has smuggled hundreds of Central and South Americans — mostly gang members — into the United States.

If you Google “mexico border al qaeda,” you’ll get “Results 1 - 10 of about 2,360,000 for mexico border al qaeda . (1.13 seconds) “

Guess those hits don’t qualify as terror operations.

I've shown that terrorists are coming in through our southern border, and you say "no evidence..."

"Straw man"...sheesh.

You fail to acknowledge the facts.  

I don’t what the issue is; your feigned naiveté, or an ideology from way out there.  But I now question your motives.

I'll leave you to your self-masturbatory thread.

Quoted: Quoted: <snip> Now, we've spent our $8 BN AT LEAST on our little fence... This is where most people go wrong.  Eight billion is not a lot of money for a country of this size.  The defense budget estimates for 2007 alone are $439.3 billion, and our defense budget, as a percent of GDP, is much smaller than it was during the Cold war.  Or think of it another way.  $8,000,000,000 divided by 300,000,000 Americans equals $26.67 per capita. <snip>

$26.67!  I never thought of it that way.  Where do I send my check?  Hell, I'll pay for a few other people as well!

Cannt secure the border. Since when did the US not meet a problem head on. Ike did but I guess that was back when we could ACTUALLY solve problems and had polictians which were actually working for the citizens of our country. For your further reading. www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=22278&catcode=35

www.vdare.com/letters/tl_072701.htm


lyingeyes.blogspot.com/2006/07/how-ike-sent-them-scurrying-home.html


www.answers.com/topic/operation-wetback

Quoted: Ok, as some of you guys know, I am most certainly NOT a supporter of attempting to physicaly secure the US-Mexico border... Of course, most folks who don't bother to think it thru knee-jerk to this position when discussing illegal immigration... Worse, they tend to see the Administration's refusal to build said wall as a 'failure' and a mark against the President... Now, before we start, I am in NO WAY defending or advocating illegal immigration. I just see it as OBVIOUS that the 'solution' is supply-side enforcement, namely cracking down on the supply of jobs, to make the US a less attractive place to illegally reside in, and to make the illegals migrate elsewhere!!! So, here's a look at why it just won't goddamn work! First, on 'the wall' itself: 1) An effective barrier CANNOT be a wire fence of any kind, electrified or not. Any idiot can cut a hole in a fence, weather or not it is electrified - and they will. 2) Any idiot can dig a hole under said fence. Countering this will at least double the cost, and they will still be able to dig under that. 3) If you use a solid wall (steel or concrete), the cost goes up again... And you still have to double-size it to reduce digging.... 4) And of course, you need the cost of eminent domain to sieze all that private land next to the border... Plus infastructure to support the fence (a road running the entire 2,000 mile distance, stations/bases for the patrol force, etc)... Now, we've spent our $8 BN AT LEAST on our little fence... But a fence alone is useless. We have to patrol it... So now, let's look at manpower - THE GUARD FORCE: Assuming we give each patrol a 1/2 mile stretch, and we have 2,000 miles of border, that means you need 4,000 2-man (minumum) teams... That's 8,000 men... Now, we need to run shifts... 4 shifts per day = 32,000... So that's your bare-minimum force of actual 'boots on the ground'. This is not a 'men in guard towers' scenario - that would be in the millions... This is 2 guys in a squad car or HMMWV patrolling the damn wall... Now, for every 40 men, let's say (using a military model of organization, since it's an easy one to understand) you need 5 low-to-mid level supervisors... And we'll say 2 more leadership for every 4 45-man units, plus a 10-man 'QRF' or 'SRT' in case there are 'issues' that one of the 2 guard patrol teams can't handle... 6400 more... So now, 38400 'line' personell... Now add support (say, 4 to 1 ratio for clerks, 'brass', mechanics, supply, etc), and you get 153,600 personell... All this adds billions more in cost... They need to be paid, and recieve benefits... If you can magically get 5 more divisions of troops to join the service, they will need bases, housing, food, etc... Otherwise, they're civillians, who need competitive salaries and benefits... WHERE is the government going to get 153,600 people willing to do one of the world's crappiest LE jobs (guard a little bitty strip of land all day, in all manner of conditions, for shit pay and a huge potential for graft/corruption). Not from the Army or Marines - that's 5 divisions worth of personell, we only have 9 available if you assume 2ID stays in Korea 'till hell freezes over (3x1ST, 3RD, 4TH, 10TH, 25TH, 82ND, 101ST)... And of course, we have major international committments that we need these troops to attend to... The stuff they're trained for, and joined up to do - eg killing bad guys & winning wars... Not chasing tumbleweeds and getting bribed to let things go past (corruption is 100% ensured in any border patrol force - there is no way to stop it)... Most of the combat arms folks would probably volunteer to go back to Iraq before they'd do a boder rotation, if it ever came to that... The above gives you MINIMUM security on the border.... It will stop random crossers, but the coyotes will still get people thru... So once again, I say... IT IS NOT REALISTICALLY FEASIBLE TO PHYSICALLY SECURE THE BORDER. NO WAY IN HELL

Grizzly bear reintroductions.

They WERE native to that area.

Quoted: Grizzly bear reintroductions. They WERE native to that area.

With cameras and pay per view!  It could finance the wall!

I can see why a guy with over 13,000 posts who is too cheap to buy a $24 membership would think that $8 billion is too much for a secure southern border.

oK SKIPPY, how many folks do you know who can hike 3 days into the desert and then spend a week digging a hole 20 feet down and 100 long?

Your argument is a straw man: no one suggests we guard the border like the Eastern Front. Use passive barriers to channel folk into more accessible zones which can be actively manned and use UAVs and sensors for the out-in-the-middle-of-nowhere zones.

If you have a V ditch, then a Jersey wall, then a wall, road, other wall and V ditch, you have a barrier which will stop vehicles and make people crossing it too hard to do in the middle of nowhere, which will force them to try to dig/hop in more accessible areas, where you maximize your finite amount of patrols.

In the meanwhile you could use 45' dry vans stacked 2 high to build a 16' steel barrier as long as you want. Bollards work in valleys and gulleys - allowing water and critters to pass but not people.

Provided there's a serious looking barrier most won't need armed boots on the ground to inspect it...it'd be enough to fly a UAV down the line at irregular intervals and let passive ground sensors do the rest - a rapid reaction team in a helo or Humvee could solve the distance problem.

So right there take 750 miles of open desert off the "2000 MILE" BORDER equation. As for private land, re-look at a map: hundreds of miles is national forest or Indian reservations.

The real problem is the Rio Grande and where to build the defenses when the water is low... there's no real problem building a 20 foot high steel barrier from the Pacific to El Paso... Texas' border would become a problem.

But even so, there are a finite number of roads that lead out from the river. Check points near all major highways and towns would make the most sense... "papers please" solves alot of the problem.

The problem with not securing the border and just relying on a national ID card and tougher enforcement is it doesn't stop illegals from working for a restaurant, landscaper, as a nanny, etc. and be paid in cash.

A wall in the populated areas, a fence in the remote areas, and several times more border patrol officers would go a long way towards reducing the flow of illegals.

We should also make it clear that illegals will never become legal residents or citizens. A belief they might one day be granted amnesty encourages even more of them to cross the border to try to beat the amnesty cutoff.

Exactly...we're not going to stop illegal immigration to 0, but we can make it ALOT MORE EXPENSIVE for the illegals to achieve - both in time and money paid to coyotes....

After all, if you were going to hike into Canada, knowing all roads are patrolled, this means you'd need to plan on a 3-4 day trip into uncharted wilderness... that's food, water, maps, etc. not something you do regularly. Ditto with the Southern Desert... not an easy thing to hike 3-4 days into nothing and not die. If you knew for sure there was no way to cross anymore, you'd either pay more money to be snuck in....or you'd give up.

Given the economic situation in Mexico, there WILL be a point at which few of these desperate poor simply won't be able to afford entering ILLEGALLY and will start to seek ways to do so LEGALLY.

I for one really like the idea of NG troops patrolling the border. It fits in with their traditional role. I also think we need more civilians out there. Allow people with private property along the border to have the castle idea extended to their entire property.


One thing people are forgetting is even if we only make it 25% harder for mexicans to come in it will drive the price up to have a coyote bring them in which means less people will try to make come across in the first place.


Social services need to be cut off from non-us citizens. No schools, no health care so some mexican can have 10 kids in the states on our dime, no drivers licenses, and if illegals are caught they need to be deported ASAP. The more time they spend detained the more it costs us. Alteast one parent needs to be a US citizen before a child born on us soil is considered a citizen. My unit is based in germany and mil members who have kids there have to apply for us citizenship for their newborns.

Organize citizen patrols and joint Border Patrol/citizen patrols. For instance 1 BP agent would ride with 4 willing citizens. I really think if a call was put out you'd get a good response from Americans on this. You could do the same thing with NG troops.

Illegal immigrants who commit felonies get the death penalty automatically.

Punish ANY business who knowingly conducts any business with ii's. Any business found to knowingly do this will have its business license revoked and assets seized. Jail time for parties involved.

I sort of like the landmine idea. No doubt there would be many signs. I dont see the problem with this if they have fair warning about the mines in place. Shit we could have signs in 20 languages if we wanted.

How about for everytime the mexican army puts a single tippy toe on us soil we cut benifits mexico gets through the NAFTA. It is extremely insulting to have mexican mil units invading into our country at will. I wouldnt even mind it if we said if there is one more incursion we will stop all commercial products from mexico coming into the country for 1 month. Next time 1 year, next time 10 years. I bet there will never again be an incursion.

A giant wall is not needed to atleast bring the ii levels down to a small number. We have to be harder on the American side with benifits, business, and ii's themselves first. The mexican government is definately supporting illegal immigration. We have to get tough on that government.


Until tens of thousands of Americans are killed by terrorists aint shit gonna be done but to only increase the problem.

I wish someone had some solid facts on how many violent crimes have been commited by illegals. I bet it would be more than 9/11....

We don't really need a physical wall in place IF the gov't would put enough armed people on the border with orders to stop infiltrators at ANY cost.

But, let's face it, there is NO WAY in Hell that those orders with ever be given!  

The gov't is not going to shoot people who are crossing for jobs.  Hell, they won't even shoot those they know are bringing drugs into the country.

So I say, BUILD THE WALL!!  At least it will slow them down some.  

Quoted: Ok, Part 1 -> Gatekeeper Such things only work when it is easier to go AROUND the barrier than to go THRU... True if you wanted to go 150 miles east and cross through the mountains or desert. Over 500 have died trying to "just go around" the fence Gatekeeper, in all likelyhood (no way to know for sure), did not stop ONE illegal immigrant from crossing..... NOT ONE... They just went around... Stating that Gatekeeper did not stop one illegal entrant is the epitome of ignorance. It did, I was there. I also talked with those who would have entered illegally. It did stop them, unless they had a few thousand dollars to pay a smuggler. In fact, it was so effective that there was more money to be made smuggling aliens than drugs. Part 2 -> Employers How do you do it? Simple, instead of all that money going to 'the wall', you expand the CAC ID (Common Access Card - the ID system used by the Military) nationwide. Since we're fond of using Korea as an example, over here we have a system called BIDS (Biometric ID System) which electronically verifies US Military IDs (CAC cards). The newer biometric "Green Cards" have already been sucessfully counterfeited. The same system could be used for employers to verify workers. So, the US Government can force employers to spend thousands of dollers on card readers?If you're not validated thru BIDS (or your CAC comes up 'fake' (they have a memory chip to store validation data), no work for you....Again, biometric cards can be/have been counterfeited. No more green cards, drivers licenses, SS cards, non-driving 'State IDs', etc... Everyone gets a CAC smartcard ID, nationwide.... Not even remotely possible. They Government is still trying to replace "Green Cards" is issued 10 years ago. and is still years away from completion. A far better solution than 'The El Paso Line'... Workable ID (which as a side-benefit would cut down on ID fraud, and ID fraud fraud (where someone claims 'ID Fraud' falsely to avoid financial oblication).... Walls and fences can be circumvented... They worked well in Berlin and other Eastern Bloc Countries for years. How many North Koreans are getting into South Korea?Employment enforcement and verifyable ID are much harder to defeat... And yet the Employment Sanctions that have been in place since 1986 have failed to stem the tide of illegal aliens..Go figure...

Quoted: I can see why a guy with over 13,000 posts who is too cheap to buy a $24 membership would think that $8 billion is too much for a secure southern border.

First off the straw men are ridiculous. The average Mexican Peasant has neither the tools or time or $$ to dig a tunnel, cut a decent fence or tunnel under it, if it is built semi-correctly with the proper sensors to allow the border patrol to get there in a little time.  Without reading all the crud you seem to be equating the skills and available tools of the average crosser with those of the NK army.  You forgot to add in another major factor, you don't have to put the really havy barriers all along the border, just those places where the environment on one or both sides is conducive to allowing the crosser time to defeat the barrier and evade.  In or along most of the bordere the environment is a potential killer.  Crossing the border in the nasty areas will kill a lot of crossers. or you use the barriers to funnel to the nasty areas or to the buses waiting.

The further the barrier is from urban areas the less sophisticated it needs to be.  Tunneling under in the middle of the desert?? first you need to keep it form collapsing in the loose soil conditions, which means you need shoring, so how do you get the shoring there?  By truck?  no roads or if there are you just waatch for trucks or other vehicles on the roads or trails.  See where they stop and wait for them.  Same thing with approaching  to cut or climb it.  Even if you do get through before they arrive, fading into the desert is not a life enhancing proposition.

So we eliminate or try to eliminate the financial incentive by enforcing the anti-hiring laws and destroy all the water points the do-gooders have established.

I wonder if a land-owner couldn't removethe waterpoint s established on his property without his permission and I bet we could stage a desert clean-up in Anza-Borrego State Park to clen up piles of un-natural materials/trash found in the park lands???

Quoted: Quoted: When a nation fails to secure its borders it ceases to be a sovereign nation +1  I think this nation is f^cked.  The Illegals will get to stay when the .GOV grants amnesty.  The question is "How much more $$$$ the .GOV wants from the American taxpayer?"  Personally, I'm all tapped out- if I want to maintain my current modest lifestyle.  I don't ask anything from the .GOV and they shouldn't ask anything from me.  And I don't buy into that whole "the US military is protecting my freedom" bullshit.  I protect MY OWN FREEDOM.  If the ChiComs, Russians, or Islamofacists invaded the CONUS, the only thing I have to lose is my life.  However, the Fortune 500 companies have infinitely more to lose to a hostile invasion.  And this "peaceful" Mexican invasion benefits them.  That's why it continues.

+1

Quoted: Quoted: It is impossible to secure your home against robbery. Any lock can be defeated Any door can be breached Any window can be opened The manpower to patrol your home 24/7 would be prohibitive So, do we give up, remove our front door, and put out lemonade for home intruders?   Most folks just lock the door and trust that no one will come in... No moats, mines, or special fences... No patrols... No gun towers... And we haven't 'removed the front door' - that would be disbanding ICE entirely... Which is not on the menu...

The fallacy of your counter argument is people's homes do get robbed by non supply side types of intruders.   You are only counting the supply side of the equation.   There are any number of drug runners, terrorists, fugitives, molesters, and all around bad asses we need to keep from getting into this country.   Not just the illgals who wish to work.

The costs you mention are dwarfed by the economic and social costs of supporting the millions of illegals to violate our border every year.  And that cost is only going up, up, up.

How about solving two problems at once?

Scrap the moronic idea of building a geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain, and instead do above-ground dry storage along the Mexican border.  You set up your packages, build your fence, have a roving patrol, and put up a lot of signs in spanish saying DANGER: RADIATION AREA.  

Damn, I should be President.