• 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!

Mexico draws weapons on American soldiers on U.S. side of border

Checkerboard Strangler said:
General Jim Peyton is waiting for you to sign up.

jim-peyton.jpg


WHAT IS CARAVAN PARANOIA? BORDER MILITIA MOVEMENT TORN APART BY CONSPIRACY THEORIES: REPORT
Click to expand...


His tag originally said Dick so he changed it to Copper.
 
Evilroddy said:
A much clearer report here:

2 US Army troops were disarmed, detained by Mexican troops in TX

The US soldiers were south of the border fence but still north of the actual frontier. They handled the situation very well given the circumstances.

However the military is supposed to be limited to support roles only on the border due to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 and these two soldiers/gunners were patrolling the border in a marked Border Patrol Vehicle. One of them was armed with a side arm. Is that not illegal as patrolling the border is a law enforcement duty, and thus forbidden for US military to do by law, is it not? President Trump may have some s'plaining to do, Lucy!

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

The US Military has ZERO authority on US soil to enforce any laws...They were merely observers who should not even be there
 
TrumpMAGA2020 said:
Can't blame ya for bein' sore, cuz you have maybe Trump Junior winning in 2024 and 2028, followed by the Lovely Ivanka Kushner winning the 2032 and 2036 elections, Hell Eric might come around for 2040 and 2044, lol! Who knows which order, but you're looking at an at least 16 year Trump dynasty, way your side is playing. MAGA is not going anywhere soon!
Click to expand...

But if it is going away soon, we can probably bet that you will blame ... what was it?
Oh yeah, "the leftist media liars and anti American blue states", as you put it earlier, and don't forget George Soros, you left him out the first time.

TrumpMAGA2020 on Leftist Media Liars and Anti-American blue states

Here's a quick question: Since you think blue states are all "anti-American", shouldn't Trump have the military invade them, too...while we're at it?
 
marke said:
If the military will not be allowed to carry their weapons into battle then they may as well just volunteer for target practice by radical Muslims as in Ft. Hood or as in border skirmishes such as Brian Terry was involved in.
Click to expand...

Not be allowed to carry their weapons into battle....

Isn't happening, never happened, never will happen.

Into battle.

Battle.


Anyone who would contest this would need to document it verifiably. Undisputedly. You can't. Neither is this what is occurring at the southern border.
 
Saladin4 said:
The US Military has ZERO authority on US soil to enforce any laws...They were merely observers who should not even be there
Click to expand...

Saladin4:

The authorisation for US troops was increased unilaterally by the Whitehouse (Gen. Kelly) in November of 2018. So the troops along the border do have command authorisation from the military command to engage in some law enforcement activities. However that order may be an illegal one due to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 and May therefore be null and void. That's for the Congress and the courts to decide but they seem to have been pretty mum on the issue to date. If Kelly's attempt to override Posse Comitatus is successful then that endangers all Americans liberties from being infringed by a standing, all-professional armed forces being used as an aid to the civil power to enforce law (including potential martial law) and thus potentially control the civilian population by coercive force. This is a very dangerous overreach by the President, the White House and General Kelly and a quick end should be put to it.

White House approves use of force, some law enforcement roles for border troops

So the authority of US troops at the border is in a grey zone right now and a very dangerous grey zone to boot.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Evilroddy said:
Saladin4:

The authorisation for US troops was increased unilaterally by the Whitehouse (Gen. Kelly) in November of 2018. So the troops along the border do have command authorisation from the military command to engage in some law enforcement activities. However that order may be an illegal one due to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 and May therefore be null and void. That's for the Congress and the courts to decide but they seem to have been pretty mum on the issue to date. If Kelly's attempt to override Posse Comitatus is successful then that endangers all Americans liberties from being infringed by a standing, all-professional armed forces being used as an aid to the civil power to enforce law (including potential martial law) and thus potentially control the civilian population by coercive force. This is a very dangerous overreach by the President, the White House and General Kelly and a quick end should be put to it.

White House approves use of force, some law enforcement roles for border troops

So the authority of US troops at the border is in a grey zone right now and a very dangerous grey zone to boot.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

Damn. That's a good coherent argument. Looks like Tangmo has competition tonight.
 
dirtpoorchris said:
Theres nothing wrong with surrendering when outmatched, but Mexico shouldn't be allowed to embarrass and neuter our troops like this.
Click to expand...

Why not? They already embarrassed and neutered your POTUS.

Transcript: Trump urged Mexican president to stop criticizing wall
"You cannot say that to the press," Trump said on the phone call. "The press is going to go with that and I cannot live with that. You cannot say that to the press because I cannot negotiate under those circumstances."

OK, OK, it was Trump who embarrassed and neutered himself, wasn't it. What a snowflake, his entire plan to get Mexico to pay for the wall was getting down on his knees and begging the Mexican president.
 
Last edited:
Checkerboard Strangler said:
If the military is in "a battle" it means we have declared WAR.
I realize that isn't the custom anymore in the last forty years or so but if you're really a fan of the Constitution, you would know that Congress declares war, then the military is armed, then the battle begins, it does not work in reverse.

I realize that's very inconvenient for a few surprised soldiers but that's why we have military and congressional leadership, and a CiC. It ensures that wars do not get started by the little folks at the bottom.

Ummmm, history says that's probably a stupid idea, starting wars from the bottom up, that is.
You of all people ought to know that. :)
Click to expand...

War or no war President Trump would be foolish to put our troops in harms way on our southern border without their weapons.
 
apdst said:
There would be no mistaking where the border is, if there was a wall on it.
Click to expand...

If you could read you would know that there is a wall there and that the US servicemen were south of the wall but north of border. But what else is new?
 
TrumpMAGA2020 said:
Can't blame ya for bein' sore, cuz you have maybe Trump Junior winning in 2024 and 2028, followed by the Lovely Ivanka Kushner winning the 2032 and 2036 elections, Hell Eric might come around for 2040 and 2044, lol! Who knows which order, but you're looking at an at least 16 year Trump dynasty, way your side is playing. MAGA is not going anywhere soon!
Click to expand...

Are you now claiming that Trump is so corrupt that he's going to pass on being President-for-life to Junior?

What is my "side"? Do you even know what you are talking about or who you are talking to?
 
Evilroddy said:
A much clearer report here:

2 US Army troops were disarmed, detained by Mexican troops in TX

The US soldiers were south of the border fence but still north of the actual frontier. They handled the situation very well given the circumstances.

However the military is supposed to be limited to support roles only on the border due to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 and these two soldiers/gunners were patrolling the border in a marked Border Patrol Vehicle. One of them was armed with a side arm. Is that not illegal as patrolling the border is a law enforcement duty, and thus forbidden for US military to do by law, is it not? President Trump may have some s'plaining to do, Lucy!

Cheers.il
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

It depends upon what they were doing. If just inspecting the fence for the Corps of Engineers, then there is nothing illegal. A sidearm is a personal defense weapon, not an offense weapon.
 
Atomic Kid said:
If you could read you would know that there is a wall there and that the US servicemen were south of the wall but north of border. But what else is new?
Click to expand...
Correct about the placement of the wall. Nothing new about you know who. :)
 
Reading some of the posts on this topic one can understand how dumb wars start. Put your dicks back in your pants, guys.
 
Rising Sun said:
Are you now claiming that Trump is so corrupt that he's going to pass on being President-for-life to Junior?

What is my "side"? Do you even know what you are talking about or who you are talking to?
Click to expand...

No he just came to DO THIS:

TeaPartyScooter.webp

And this:

Secret_talkingpoints.webp
 
TrumpMAGA2020 said:
Yeah, and the leftist media liars and anti American blue states are stopping him from doing what rightly needs done. There should be no limits to our military's Authurity on our border, no limits whatsoever.

This is a real invasion and should be a real "live fire" situation on our border. Screw the soft approach that has solved nothing.
Click to expand...

Are you sure you weren't around in 1914? Yours is the sort of dick-waving logic that gave the world millions of dead and wounded with Hitler for desert.
 
dirtpoorchris said:
Right.. We had leftists on the boards screaming "Just wait till these vigilante militia get met by Mexican Special Forces!" hoping for their death and now the next day we have incursions by mexican soldiers CROSSING THE RIO GRAND RIVER WHICH IS THE BORDER and leftists just dont care. The river is the damn border!!! how could they cross it on accident???

Its time we build a Wall just to fix the issue.

I am now official Wall supporter because of the left just not caring.
Click to expand...

Obviously this defeat, this stab in the back on the border was due to international Jewry and their Wall Street co-conspirators, and the US needs to immediately occupy the Rhinelan... er, I mean the Rio Grande Land...
 
Atomic Kid said:
If you could read you would know that there is a wall there and that the US servicemen were south of the wall but north of border. But what else is new?
Click to expand...
So you read the OP's article in the link?
 
Evilroddy said:
Saladin4:

The authorisation for US troops was increased unilaterally by the Whitehouse (Gen. Kelly) in November of 2018. So the troops along the border do have command authorisation from the military command to engage in some law enforcement activities. However that order may be an illegal one due to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 and May therefore be null and void. That's for the Congress and the courts to decide but they seem to have been pretty mum on the issue to date. If Kelly's attempt to override Posse Comitatus is successful then that endangers all Americans liberties from being infringed by a standing, all-professional armed forces being used as an aid to the civil power to enforce law (including potential martial law) and thus potentially control the civilian population by coercive force. This is a very dangerous overreach by the President, the White House and General Kelly and a quick end should be put to it.

White House approves use of force, some law enforcement roles for border troops

So the authority of US troops at the border is in a grey zone right now and a very dangerous grey zone to boot.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

JustHanging said:
Damn. That's a good coherent argument. Looks like Tangmo has competition tonight.
Click to expand...


The post is to Saladin4, not to me.

Evil isn't arguing with or against me on anything in his post. If I may refer to him as Evil for short and for no other reason.

What I do say about it from my own perspective is this. The Kelly Cabinet Memo is OTT concerning Posse Comitatus. But that would be up to a federal court and who knows how that might go. Somebody would need to find someone suing Kelly / Potus over the Cabinet Memo because I'm not going to try to hunt that one down, i.e., whether the Memo is being challenged in federal court. Evil doesn't say because Evil doesn't know either.

I would add the significant fact that the Kelly Cabinet Memorandum deals with SRUF rather than the RoE. That is, the Standing Rules on the Use of Force, rather than the Rules of Engagement. Kelly didn't say this specifically but that's what it's about and the General Kelly retired fully well knows this. SRUF are overarching rules whereas the RoE are "combat rules." SRUF would apply at the southern border whereas RoE would not. In other words there isn't any combat situation involved in the deployment of active duty troops and NG troops to the southern border.

Pentagon in fact smacked down Trump on his shoot migrants throwing rocks as rifle equivalent nonsense, which is a SRUF policy and not a RoE doctrine. SRUF enable military commanders to identify who is an enemy to be shot on sight, whereas for RoE to be applied troops need to be in an engagement or situation and circumstance, either occurring or imminent. Regardless, every active duty general or admiral who's spoken on the southern border deployment says there isn't a military threat there.

Indeed, the Commandant of Marine Corps who retires in June as scheduled said the deployment has no legitimate military rationale and deprives the Corps of badly needed funds for essential missions to include training. This is all policy stuff, not combat. And have no doubt CMC Gen. Robert Neller speaks for the Joint Chiefs of Staff whose primary remit is policy. Whether Gen. Neller spoke for the outgoing chairman JCS, Marine Gen. "Silent Joe" Dunford is an open question still unanswered. What we do know is that both sides on this want Dunford to retire ahead of his September date but that Dunford is dug in on staying till then. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley the Russia hawk will succeed Dunford as CJCS but Milley can't change offices until Dunford closes the door behind him without it hitting himself in the ass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom