May 12, 2006
National Guard to the Border?
NRO's The Corner gets an e mail which calls into question the ability of the President to deploy troops along the border for the purpose of law enforcement:
As the "details" have not been released, I can tell you what the details will be as this is taught in the military law phase of ROTC Cadet instruction.. This is Hurricane Katrina redux.
President Bush can not send National Guard Troops to the border for law enforcement. If the President federalizes the National Guard they no longer can perform law enforcement per the Posse Comitatus Act.
They would not be able to lawfully aprehend migrants under a Presidential mobilization.
This e mail is described as coming from an Army colonel - and I think he's right in once sense: the Guard, on Federal service, cannot act as a law enforcement agency; at least, not without a specific law being passed by Congress allowing them to do so. But I also think he's a bit wrong - the President can call the Guard to Federal service, deploy it along the border and give it orders to prevent anyone from coming over...it isn't a matter, at that point, of arresting someone - it is the physical prevention of their crossing in to US territory.
I think it is high time we did this - we have an Army, after all is said and done, to secure our nation - and preventing people from illegally crossing our border is inherent in that basic military function.
Posted by Mark Noonan at May 12, 2006 07:34 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.blogsforbush.com/mt/president.cgi/7124 Comments
Bush can save his Presidency if he takes charge of the immigration issue. It's time to do it now.
Sorry, I'm not a Republican and I don't swallow the GOP kool aid like some do. I love Bush on taxes, gay marriage issue, anti-abortion, the war on terror. But he has really ticked many of us conservatives off on immigration, judgeships and some other issues.
He has an issue sitting in his lap that close to 80% of the people (Dem and GOP) alike want TOUGH POLICY on immigration. Take the lead W, or you will have that Jack Ass (Donkey) House staring you down.
Enforce the borders now!! With FORCE!
Posted by: Warriornation at May 12, 2006 08:00 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AMEN!!
Posted by: phnxbmed at May 12, 2006 09:09 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The National Guard should be used as a reserve for the reserve. Disasters, invasion, wars - yes. Long term border problem? No.
If we need to use them for the short term, that would be OK. But, a wall and a more militarized border guard service might be a better long term solution.
Posted by: Kahn at May 12, 2006 10:22 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree with Warriornation with the exception of judges (sorry friend). I think he has been really good on judges, especially the 2 supreme court justices. Hopefully, he gets a third in September/October and appoints former CA Supreme Court justice Brown. A battle over immigration, tax cuts, spending cuts, NSA, and judges are the issues. Here in CA, a liberal judge just indicated that students who failed a state test did not have to pass it. In addition, eminent domain and no punishment for rapists/pedophiles are big issues.
Posted by: Tina at May 12, 2006 11:04 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some Demorat pundits are "troubled and concerned" that Bush has found his mo jo on NSA, tax cuts, and immigration.
Posted by: Tina at May 12, 2006 11:05 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree. The military's job is to protect America against foreign agression. What agression are the unarmed men and women (non-military men and women) fleeing Mexico exacting on America? A desire to earn an honest wage is agression?
At least GWB is advocating guest worker and a modified amnesty program. At some level he sees the value of America as the land of the free. The rest of you Repubs(or are you Dems?), I don't see how you can claim to value Capitalism and come out so vehemently against immigration. Essential to capitalism is the free flow of capital which in turn demands the free flow of the most fundamental resource in a free market; human resources.
Are you hanging your hat on the claim that the immigrants are breaking the law? All you Rush-babies know that our legal system and legislators have been largely irresponisble when it comes to making law consistent with the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Just look at the recent New London Ct. ruling. You mean to say they got it right when it came to immigration? Puleeeeaaase!
Are you worried about terrorists? Then bomb Iran. Annihalating them will send the right message to all other wanna-be's (i.e. Chavez and his cronies).
But, really, this is all just a rouse anyway. For the dems, an opportunity for more smearing. For the Repubs, a chance to get the attention off Iran where talk of military action appears to be just that (if it wasn't for GWB's military deployment in Iraq, I'd be more certain that he's all bluster and no bite with regard to Iran).
Posted by: JLMarquez at May 12, 2006 11:50 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree. The military's job is to protect America against foreign agression. What agression are the unarmed men and women (non-military men and women) fleeing Mexico exacting on America? A desire to earn an honest wage is agression?
At least GWB is advocating guest worker and a modified amnesty program. At some level he sees the value of America as the land of the free. The rest of you Repubs(or are you Dems?), I don't see how you can claim to value Capitalism and come out so vehemently against immigration. Essential to capitalism is the free flow of capital which in turn demands the free flow of the most fundamental resource in a free market; human resources.
Are you hanging your hat on the claim that the immigrants are breaking the law? All you Rush-babies know that our legal system and legislators have been largely irresponisble when it comes to making law consistent with the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Just look at the recent New London Ct. ruling. You mean to say they got it right when it came to immigration? Puleeeeaaase!
Are you worried about terrorists? Then bomb Iran. Annihalating them will send the right message to all other wanna-be's (i.e. Chavez and his cronies).
But, really, this is all just a rouse anyway. For the dems, an opportunity for more smearing. For the Repubs, a chance to get the attention off Iran where talk of military action appears to be just that (if it wasn't for GWB's military deployment in Iraq, I'd be more certain that he's all bluster and no bite with regard to Iran).
Posted by: BeSelfish at May 12, 2006 11:51 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The military's job is to protect America against foreign agression. What agression are the unarmed men and women (non-military men and women) fleeing Mexico exacting on America? A desire to earn an honest wage is agression?"
Dear BeSelfish,
You've phrased the argument incorrectly. First of all, they aren't ALL about coming here to earn a living or have a part in a better life. Many of them are hardened criminals, members of gangs, or simply interested in grabbing as much money as they can, and sending it back to Mexico. It isn't "aggression" that many people are worried about - it's the "invasion" aspect. Millions of people are clambering across our borders, against our laws, and embedding themselves in our society. They are exploited by ruthless and cunning "coyotes," who engage in human trafficking at the behest of greedy businesses who know that they can further exploit them by hiring them with lower wages and no benefits, even as they pocket the difference in payroll costs as "profit." Then, these very workers, who amount to little more than slave labor, access our social services such as Food Stamps, Welfare, WIC, Headstart, Schools, and FREE medical services (FREE to THEM, that is...). In the process, they cross the line from being exploited, to becoming exploiters of our social support systems, for which neither they nor the greedy employers have contributed. That is, in my book, a "threat." It doesn't have to be in the form of a gun or knife. Instead, it saps our social institutions on many levels - especially on the economic level. Consider that in many instances, these social services are obligated to staff and communicate in the Mexicans' native language, thereby raising the cost of doing business even further (at the taxpayers' expense, no less!). Our institutions simply cannot support this flood of people who contribute nothing, but demand the maximum.
On so many levels, an argument can be made that these illegal trespassers, which is what they are, have conspired with the human traffickers to arrive here illegally. They further their conspiracy by entering into a tacitly illegal agreement with greedy businesses to defraud the American workers, many of whom ARE willing to take these jobs (but not at the slave labor offered by the greedy business owners). They conspire with fraud specialists, who extort large sums of money to provide counterfeit documentation such as birth certificates, social security cards, and the like. They further conspire to drain our social services, for which neither they nor their co-conspirators are contributing.
This conspiracy must end! The working people of this country simply cannot stand by as the fruits of their labor are plucked away from them in front of their eyes.
All we are demanding is that our laws and customs be obeyed and respected. Thus far, it is clear than neither respect nor allegiance has been forthcoming on the part of the illegal trespassers or the rapacious businesses who are willing to sell out their countrymen for their thirty pieces of silver. At some point, their presence becomes a de facto "threat" because of the unsustainability of their continued pillaging of our social support institutions. Those who have contributed to these institutions will soon see nothing for their abiding by the rules set down as others continue to thumb their noses at these rules, even as they push their way to the front of the line to grab at everything that's available.
The free lunch and silence is about to be over. It's time we took our country back. If our politicians cannot or will not recognize that serious action needs to be taken, then the American public must take matters into its own hands and boot them out of office. The time is ripe for the rise of a third, alternate political party. This party must be willing and able to act decisively and without hesitation to secure our borders, punish the sleazy capitalists among us, and turn back the human tide of trespassers who threaten to overwhelm this country by virtue of their continued lawless behavior.
If it takes a military presence on our borders for a short period of time - so be it. Meanwhile, we MUST build a fence, a wall, or some sort of barrier to keep these trespassers from flooding across the borders just because their country's political and economic system is so horrible. Instead, they should focus on changing their system with an eye toward making it more sustainable and equitable for them. By opting, instead, to come to the USA for a better life, they are only dragging us down, instead of helping us to lift them up.
Posted by: dbogdan at May 13, 2006 02:20 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beselfish,
40% of the prisoners in the california penal system are ILLEGAL ALIENS.
40%!!!!
And NONE of them are their accused of violating our immigration laws. They are all there for committing FELONIES!!!!
If the rest of the peaceful ILLEGAL aliens amount to slave labor as you say, then I say FREE THE SLAVES and SEND THEM HOME!!!!
Posted by: phnxbmed at May 13, 2006 07:17 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bush can't order the National Guard - it's a govenor's act - remember Katrina - he did not have the authority to send them. There was mention that congress could change the law though! I don't know.........
Posted by: semby at May 13, 2006 08:23 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As I remember it, my oath was to protect against threats forgein and domestic ....
Posted by: Jo at May 13, 2006 08:38 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't get too excited. This is all a big show from both sides of our government. Bush and his posse and Democrats won't do anything to eliminate the problem, because that will cause prices of many products we enjoy to go up. For example, fruits (since we'll have to start paying the pickers minimum wage) and clothes (since much of the minute details tend to be done by illegal immigrants). The increase in prices will negatively affect our economy in the short term, which could cost Republicans the election (or Democrats, when they control the gov't).
It's a nice dream to have illegal immigration curbed, but realize that no one will do anything, because getting reelected is more important.
If you don't believe me, come back to me in 7 months, and tell me what was accomplished to stop illegal immigration...
Posted by: Energy girl at May 13, 2006 08:57 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
President Bush can and should do everything in his power to protect America.
-Deploying the National Guard to the Border with the Authority it needs to stop the human tide of Illegals from entering the United States is imperative, not only as a reality but also as requirement of 80% of American Citizens and the law abiding immigrants that are so welcome to Americans, generally.
-The President of the United State would mobilize the entire Nation if the Senate tried to stop him from passing a Bill that made it legal for the National Guard to stop, detain, arrest and even shoot armed drug/human traffickers (bandidos) who wish to cause further harm to this Nation.
-Ultimately, this would place an enormous amount of pressure on President Vicente Fox and the ruling elites of Mexico to improve the treatment of their people and to stop passing the buck and conveniently blaming Los Gringos (Americans) for being such awful people. Regime change, why not? The Mexican elites should not be allowed to turn their country into a paracytic leach, when they should be working overtime to elevate their people's living standards.
-Plus the illegals that are in the US conducting crimes should be sent to...Guantanamo Bay? Maybe.
This may sound like a hard stance to take. But I don't think that it is when you consider that Americans are under undeserved attacks from all directions. There are many foreign leaders and elites outside (and within) the US who constantly blame America and Americans, when, if they were even partially honest, they would have to take credit for harming the livelihood of their own people - but I guess they can't do that lest their own people would rise up and take their privileged lifestyle away. Let's place the blame where it deserves to be, rather than taking on the burdens of others.
Kind regards,
RPaine
Posted by: RPaine at May 13, 2006 09:01 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Physically preventing illegal border crossings has its merits, but the national guard is not the correct instrument to do so (at least not a federalized national guard).
As soon as federal troops fire on any foreign national, it's an act of war, and acts of war are bad.
Posted by: Georgia Frawg at May 13, 2006 11:16 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Physically preventing illegal border crossings has its merits, but the national guard is not the correct instrument to do so (at least not a federalized national guard)."
Why not and whats your alternative.
"As soon as federal troops fire on any foreign national, it's an act of war, and acts of war are bad."
I understand corrupt Mexican army soldiers have already shot at our border patrol. By that definition Mexico has already declared war on the U.S. Wars can be fought in many ways, make no mistake we are at "war" with mexico. Its just on a level that the mexicans hope we dont notice.
Posted by: ZootAllure at May 13, 2006 12:28 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frawg,
Wouldn't an invasion of a foreign country be an act of war? If so, Mexico declared war on us a long time ago.
I single out Mexico because that's the only government that is actively assisting in the invasion.
These invaders are stealing US$60 Billion dollars per year of our national treasure and sending it back to their countries of origin, while at the same time consuming $200 Billion in government, social, and hospital services without reimbursement. This drain on our economy is adversely affecting the health and strength of the nation.
Posted by: phnxbmed at May 13, 2006 02:20 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BeSelfish,
As long-time readers here know, I am in favor of a guest-worker program...but we must control our borders, and those who are in America must respect their host nation...
If you want to know who is at fault for the toughening up, please apply yourself to MALDEF and MeCHA...it was those racist groups which pressed the issue and only made illegal immigration odious enough to convince the vast majority of Americans that something must be done.
Posted by: Mark Noonan at May 13, 2006 03:05 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One quick sort of unrelated note.
One thing I noticed about this post, which is quite nice, There doesnt seem to be any trolling moonbats whining and complaining and spouting out random arguements. Its kind of nice. Even though I dissagree with some of the people in here, they seem to be tame at least. And worth responding to.
Posted by: Calvin at May 13, 2006 06:32 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
phnxbmed, I'm curious where you're getting your statistics. 40% of the prison population are illegals? Illegals are sending $60B/year back to their country of origin? Those are some awfully big numbers, dude. Do you care to back them up?
Posted by: Ricorun at May 13, 2006 07:13 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would seriously doubt we had the man/womanpower to guard the borders. And won't have till we bring troops back from Iraq.
Posted by: Ash at May 13, 2006 08:20 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ash,
That would only be the case if you actually believed our troops are over-extended in Iraq...actually, the Army has 480,000 men. There are 130,000 troops in Iraq - but that also includes Air Force, Marines and Navy - lets say its 110,000 Army troops; meaning 370,000 Army troops are not in Iraq at any given time...which means we can easily replace some Guard units with active units, thus freeing up the Guard to watch the borders.
Posted by: Mark Noonan at May 13, 2006 08:43 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Georgia Frawg,
RE: "As soon as federal troops fire on any foreign national, it's an act of war, and acts of war are bad."
If an illegal alien is on our side of the border and told to stop, it's an act of war to shoot him or her?
Not in my book. We are protecting our borders and have every right to do so. I guess you'd better tell the Coast Guard they can't shoot at drug runners trying to bring drugs into our country by boat. And I guess we will need prior approval to shoot down a terrorist airplane coming in from another country to blow up another American building or city?
Does that mean that if our police shoot an illegal immigrant commiting a crime, that is an act of war too? Do our law enforcement officers have to ask to see their passport before they can shoot? Oh, I forgot. They don't have one. Perhaps they have diplomatic immunity?
Do liberals ever have any thoughts of protecting America rather than protecting those who try to invade our country or kill our citizens?
AAR
Posted by: AAR at May 13, 2006 09:44 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the President invokes the Insurrecton Act, he can indeed use National Guard troops legally for law enforcement purposes. No further act of congress would be required.
Posted by: Bob Waters at May 14, 2006 05:55 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After his having met with southern border state politations last week, the National Guard border placement idea is clearly a political poll boosting Karl Rove Tactic...
With Bush's approval rating above 50% in only 4 states (Idaho, Wyoming, Nebraska and Utah), at an all-time overall low of 29% and with the Republican's losing traction for the mid-term election, moving the National Guard to the border has the political/tactical move smell written all over it.
Seventy five pecent of the Guard's equipment is now in Iraq. Don't try to boost to polls with them, they need a well deserved break to return to their homes and jobs. WE ALREADY HAVE A BORDER PATROL HERE that could actually use the vast amount of money that will be spent on the Guard move.
Posted by: Lon at May 14, 2006 12:21 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a former NG soldier and I support securing the border, but long term the NG can not be expected to solve the problem . It is true federally activated NG troops can't function as law enforcement. Example: New Orleans after Katrina, all active duty and reserve troops (federal) were required to have NG soldiers (state) with every patrol. The reason being that federal troops can not arrest or detain or subdue citizens of the US, in the US, outside a military base without martial law being declared, but the NG can when activated by their govenor. However, aliens entering this country illegally are not protected from being arrested, detained or subdued by federally activated troops. Therefore, Pres. Bush Can use the NG on the borders, but only temporarily because federal law states unless he/she volunteers that a NG soldier can only be activated 2 out of 5 years. With so many NG soldiers that have already done their two years elsewhere around the world they can't be expected to volunteer for another deployment. I would suggest that the border patrol be militarized into the border guard and function in the same fashion as the coast guard. This would eliminate the buraucracy that has prevented the border patrol from doing its job and bring an end to our border security problem.
Posted by: J C at May 14, 2006 08:32 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post a comment