• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama: Troop move to Mexican border under consideration

Renae

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
In a recent visit to El Paso, Texas Gov. Rick Perry called for 1,000 troops to protect the border.

Obama was cautious, however. "We've got a very big border with Mexico," he said. "I'm not interested in militarizing the border."
Click to expand...
Obama: Troop move to Mexican border under consideration | McClatchy Washington Bureau

The man's ability to say two things at once and get away with it amazes me.


"We're going to examine whether and if National Guard deployments would make sense and under what circumstances they would make sense," Obama said during an interview with journalists for regional papers, including a McClatchy reporter.

"I don't have a particular tipping point in mind," he said. "I think it's unacceptable if you've got drug gangs crossing our borders and killing U.S. citizens."
Click to expand...
Obama: Troop move to Mexican border under consideration | McClatchy Washington Bureau
 
MrVicchio said:
Obama: Troop move to Mexican border under consideration | McClatchy Washington Bureau

The man's ability to say two things at once and get away with it amazes me.



Obama: Troop move to Mexican border under consideration | McClatchy Washington Bureau
Click to expand...

I don't see how he is saying two things at once. It makes sense to want to do something about it but be cautious about it also. Sending troops to combat the cartels may result in an even higher amount of violence in the border cities, so you want to approach this is a sensitive manner that would least effect the innocent people caught in the middle.
 
americanwoman said:
I don't see how he is saying two things at once. It makes sense to want to do something about it but be cautious about it also. Sending troops to combat the cartels may result in an even higher amount of violence in the border cities, so you want to approach this is a sensitive manner that would least effect the innocent people caught in the middle.
Click to expand...

He doesn't want to militarize the border, yet he's considering putting troops on the border...
 
MrVicchio said:
He doesn't want to militarize the border, yet he's considering putting troops on the border...
Click to expand...

He doesn't want to militarize the border to combat illegal aliens, but he wants to send troops to protect our border towns in case the cartels stir up trouble.

There is DEFINITELY a difference.
 
Why can't the govenor put 1,000 troops on his states border if he feels the need to?
 
One wonders whether such obscenely inefficient measures would be necessary if not for the attempts to "criminalize" drugs and immigration, which have the effect of causing more problems than they prevent...hasn't there been an Eighteenth Amendment that's indicated the nature and consequences of prohibition schemes?
 
TheNextEra said:
He doesn't want to militarize the border to combat illegal aliens, but he wants to send troops to protect our border towns in case the cartels stir up trouble.

There is DEFINITELY a difference.
Click to expand...

There is.

One has been going on for a while and no one is stopping it, the other has been happening more lately and gee... no one wants to do anything about it. He'll talk tough... kinda, and do nothing.
 
Let's not rush into anything, I think we should wait until San Diego or El Paso surpass Phoenix as the kidnapping capital of America.

ABC News: Kidnapping Capital of the U.S.A.

What's it going to take before our government decides to do something?

It's estimated that there's 11-13 million illegal aliens in our country, receiving free health care, education, public assistance, not to mention the crimes they commit.

Now add to that, the drug cartels, they aren't spilling over our borders, they are here and are wreaking havoc.

A new Pentagon study “concludes that Mexico is at risk of becoming a failed state,” said Joel Kurtzman in The Wall Street Journal, thanks to its ongoing “vicious drug war.” The violence and corruption are so bad that Mexico, like Pakistan, could see a “wholesale collapse of civil government.”

No, “I’d bet money,” said Rod Dreher in Beliefnet, that President-elect Obama “will have to fully militarize the US-Mexico border before he leaves office.” And he might even have to “invade Mexico” to “fight the narcotraffickers and prop up the government.” The only questions are how and when.


What's Napolitano doing about it? Looks like nothing, as a matter of fact, she's pretty much stymied most attempts to enforce any type of immigration law.

Bills Napolitano Vetoed

How can the former governor of Arizona be our DHS Secretary and not be responding to the border crisis?

Her priorities are a complete joke:

During my short term as Secretary, DHS has helped respond to ice storms in the Midwest, rescued ice fishermen on Lake Erie, helped secure the Super Bowl, and even assisted in capturing pirates off the coast of Somalia – all since January 21.

DHS: Testimony of Secretary Janet Napolitano before the House Committee on Homeland Security on DHS, The Path Forward

They need to put troops on the border, and finish the fence we paid for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom