Clark Griswold

Just watched the video from the link, that is quite a stretch to believe the Canadian film company had nothing to do with it. When I first saw it, I decided to repost for the discussion but it reminded me of an article I read a while ago, the author made the case the Cartels will keep the mayhem in El Norte to an acceptable level and in Mexico to just below a threshold that would trigger a US response (military or direct LE involvement). I agree with that idea and it surprised me that they would start to invite a massive US security and LE response in the border areas. Still think a physical barrier and surveillance system with a NG mission on the border is what we need but glad that it appears to be a hoax.

Yes, I think raising the minimum wage would be a good idea but I also think MASSIVELY simplifying our Orwellian tax code (both corporate & individual) while lowering the corporate tax and lowering the marginal rates for individuals are a good ideas also. Not exactly related, but could be politically possible to both labor and business oriented political actors but we can't get anything done anymore so put that in the snowball's chance in hell column... National policy can not be solely on what is beneficial to certain business interests, we had a war about this around the 1860's or so... there was a labor system that made a lot of people very rich directly by producing a commodity very cheaply and indirectly by supplying that commodity cheaply for production but we decided as a nation that it was not right and we weren't going to allow it anymore. Your right money talks and people flock to the cheaper option but does that mean we should allow: Goods produced by slave/child labor and/or sweatshop labor? Counterfeit or stolen goods produced and supplied illicitly? Goods produced from enemy nations to be freely traded in our economy? Should we allow Iran to directly supply the US energy market? Why do we control commerce and business on the national, state & local level? Should we let toxic waste dumps be put in the middle of low income neighborhoods because the land is cheaper? I also have to take issue with your idea that a genocide is required to secure the border and that it would be unbelievably expensive. Israel built a 143 mile fence system in two years for a cost of $377 million, it works and has dropped illegal crossing from 14,715 in 2010 to 36 in 2013 for the same stretch of the Sinai. We don't have to fence nor should be fence the entire border, we need only fence the adjoining urban areas, road crossings, and patrol with a combination of Federal & State LE in areas adjoining those areas, let the National Guard patrol the remote and wilderness area. The cost is not so great we can not afford it and it DIRECTLY adds to the security and sovereignty of the United States of America by keeping people out that are attempting to cross into it illegally. The combined cost of the CBP & ICE is $18 billion, that is equal to 2% of the entire DoD budget. It cost about $400K for every soldier to support & pay on average each soldier during the Iraq War, this is just a WAG but even at $200K per year to support & pay a soldier on the border, you could have 10,000 National Guardsmen for $2 billion or 0.2% of the DoD budget. That would average 5 soldiers for every mile of the 2,000 mile border but coordinating them with CBP, you have for a small cost in the overall scheme of things, actual boots on the ground in sufficient numbers to be in control. The ground and air support could average to $200K per soldier and you would still be spending only 0.4% of the entire DoD. Just to take another WAG at a part of the possible air support piece, you could have 25 MC-12s deployed to the border patrol mission, flying a 6 hour mission per day at a cost of $1,500 per flight hour (WAG) and cost $82 million per year for good ISR support, that is chump change in terms of the DoD budget and it would saturate high traffic areas with ISR to enhance your ground forces. Again, this is affordable, it is possible and it is what we should be doing. A border security system that is designed and funded to be effective does nothing more than stop illegal activity, if you have a problem with our labor & immigration laws then try to change them legally. Do not advocate for allowing illegal alien criminals, because they are criminals, to be allowed to keep committing their crime(s) by confusing the argument (whether or not we should defend our nation, enforce our laws and assert our sovereignty) by raising the red herring and emotional argument of it is cheap labor that benefits some businesses and individuals as being in some ways economically efficient so therefore, screw it let's allow it. The almighty dollar is not the end all be all of our decision making, it is a balance of what is right, prudent and in our long-term interest.

No, they keep the poor and working class of a first world nation from ever having anything by keeping wages artificially low by allowing corporations and wealthier individuals to employ people who work off the books, for less than legal wages in shitty conditions and who either bring with them problems, require gov assistance and keep our supposedly free market from balancing itself The free market only works if there is rule of law, turning a blind or apathetic eye to illegal immigration / unsecure borders is suicidal and knowingly employing illegals is no different than buying stolen goods. BTW, our highly specialized skill set is under attack. When aircraft that are flagged in other nations start flying domestic routes with aircrew and support who work for less money that 'Mericans, the end is nigh for having a protected occupation, even for pilots. How to Revive Airline Competition

"The Last Days of Europe" and "State of Emergency" are also good primers on how the West is doing immigration all wrong for the last oh 50+ years or so. Too many immigrants, virtually no screening for immigrants that will assimilate and have something to offer and no strong effort at assimilation when here. The elites of the West just can't get it that immigration is not necessarily always enriching to a nation, that you may actually be letting in people that will not fit into your society, that Western values are not necessarily triumphant just by exposure to them. Many immigrants anyway are encouraged not to integrate as a faction of the Left of virtually the entire Western world has decided that anything like assimilation or adapting to their new country is wrong, bigoted and these people have a right to be pissed off at the society that allows them in and helps them, the counter culture morphed into some kind of deranged suicidal movement hell bent on destroying any backbone in the West and won't stop until all of it is dragged into the morass. Ok, rant complete. Not against immigrants or immigration, just the way we practice it now, which pretty much is mixture of naive-stupid-crazy-suicidal. Back to topic though, at some point something has got to give to get the US Military on the border in force, deploying State Defense Forces might do it, just by poaching on what has been traditionally the Federal Gov. territory and shaming them into doing it.

Not a good sign... ‘We Have Never Experienced This’: Chilling Drug Cartel-Style Threats Hit Texas Billboards Another reason for Operation Secure the Damn Border to go into high gear.

They are taking advantage of my country, I am advocating for protecting / defending rule of law and sovereignty. I would argue that some of it has already been lost and the secure border I am arguing for is integral to further erosion of our national sovereignty. Not a conspiracy theorist but powerful entities like trans-national corporations, ethno-centric advocacy groups, factions of major political parties view a open border as beneficial to their interests which are not always in line with those of the United States. Are they plotting Aztlan or the North American Union? I doubt it but "they" would rather see a free trade / open borders / easy residency & citizenship / demographic & political shift reality develop. That may be good for business but it is not good for a free & stable democratic republic. I see that as a race to the bottom: low wages & poor working conditions in a hyper-competitive labor market, high crime from weak states with narco gangs, divisive politics from large unassimilated minorities that are encouraged to agitate the majority to adapt to them and a dismissive attitude to the majority population of the nation.

Fair enough and I will take you at your word for it, I have read Rand (Fountainhead, Shrugged, We the Living) and the objectivist philosophy/viewpoint just seems to believe that they can set up an almost perfect world where we act in our own logical self-interest to the benefit of others and ourselves but they don't seem to factor in that people are inherently illogical and emotional. How does this relate to our discussion of border security and related immigration policy? By the fact that people let their emotions get the better of them and see only the plight of some of the illegal aliens and let that blind them to a sizeable minority of them that deserve no pity or consideration. Whatever sympathy we have for those less fortunate than us can not outweigh our right and duty for self-protection, self-defense and sovereignty .

Top 10 Reasons Ayn Rand was Dead Wrong Off topic but I just had to. My favorite reason: Reading Rand creates instant jackasses. Anyone who's been subjected to a friend who suddenly "discovers" Rand knows that reading her works causes people to act like selfish idiots. They combine a patina of "reason" over a self-righteous justification of whatever their "id" happens to want at the time and then insist that they're just pursuing their own self-interest. They also become incredibly boring, about on the level of a newly converted Scientologist.

Objectivism is not even remotely possible in the real world, there is a reason people read Ayn Rand when they are 20 and realize it is bullshit when they are 30.

Keeping it civil, nothing I said was racist and you just read into it what fulfills the fantasy of oppression you have constructed.

Why do you try to confuse legal and illegal immigration? You keep trying to equate the two. There is a process, I am sure it could be improved but there is a way to do it legally and it may not always allow everyone in (which in my opinion is good) but not everyone is guaranteed everything they want in life either.

Yours are too, the original intent of this thread was about securing the border(s) from illegal crossings, nothing to do with legal crossings / immigration. Those who argue against merely stopping illegal crossing / immigration really are saying that other people who are not citizens of this country have special rights to violate laws that actual citizens of this country do not. BTW I specified illegal aliens, not legal immigrants.

Because your "freedom" to enter into business, contracts, etc... with whomever can drag/bribe/sneak their way into the country infringes on my right to not be robbed/killed/raped/harassed by illegal aliens and infringes on the sovereignty of my nation to control it's borders

Do you wait till you get a Resolution Advisory before correcting a loss of separation problem when you can see it coming 20 miles out? Do you wait till you get a Pull-Up Pull-Up before correcting a loss of terrain clearance problem if you know you have a CFIT coming? Why do we have to wait for the pain / problem to get so severe that people will just leave a country to get away from it? Why can't we lead the turn and control our destiny? Do you wait till the stove burns your hand and you feel the pain before you remove it?

Open borders, amnesty, long term high immigration (legal & illegal) pick your poison, are not wise national policies. Allowing in more low-skilled workers (and their dependents) will cost much more than they will ever contribute in terms of payroll taxes and depress the wages of the working poor and working class. What Vertigo proposes (ostensibly a free market of labor which really is just a race to the bottom) can not ever be as Mexico or whatever labor exporting country you want to pick will not allow a reciprocal move to open it's economy or society, again the elites of the third world don't care a whit about their own poor and just expect the gringos to let them in, thereby solving their problem of a dissatisfied mass of poor. We are enabling some of the worst governance / inattention by turning a blind eye to this and allowing it to continue. Robert Rector’s Study: Open Borders + Welfare State = Disaster Build the fence(s) - Patrol the border - Arrest & Fine the illegal EMPLOYERS - Deport the illegals when they are arrested

Can't disagree with you, Vertigo's relevant link was an article about how legalized weed is hurting the illicit production & smuggling business from Mexican cartels, every little bit helps... weakening the Cartels helps the Mexican government defeat them and marijuana legalization with a strong secure border are good tactics in the strategy to build a stable, prosperous and modern Mexico... our ultimate southern border objective, long term for the US it is not optimal to live next door to a not third world exactly but not first world country either... the porous border and our lax immigration, employment and citizenship enforcement policies keep the elites of Mexico from having to deal with their problems, just encourage your poor to go North, send home money and demand citizenship; money goes home, can gets kicked down the road and political hegemony by demographic shift happens, seems tin foil hat and conspiratorial but it is happening... Good article: Is Illegal Immigration Good For Mexico?

An imaginary line on the ground? So if 10, 20, 30 million people just walked across the border, got here somehow or were sent from another country and just decided that wanted to live here that's ok? No say so on the part of the nation, its citizens or respect for its laws or sovereignty? The most basic definition of a nation is the ability to control its territory. If we don't enforce our borders and laws we are no longer a nation and ultimately a society in decline and disintegration. Acting in defense of your interests and your nation is not racism, bigotry, unfair or un-American. I don't believe in or advocate for shooting illegal border crossers on sight and people post shit on the internet out of the bravado of anonymity but that doesn't undermine the need for a physical barrier system, coupled with a border security and immigration enforcement and control strategy.

Yep - partial drug legalization (basically marijuana and a few others) is part of the solution. Drugs, like oil, sometimes gives money and power to some very unsavory nations, regimes, people, etc... Relevant also

True but light a candle or curse the darkness, keep trying to get thru their thick skulls and get the freedom to reform the military. Most of them beleive the military's primary function is to be a jobs program rather than an actual military. On Sprey, I agree as he is brilliant but just a bit opinionated and not open to the idea that any fighter technology past 1970 actually works...

Just my opinion and worth what you paid for it. Mass is important but it has to be combined with quality, balance the two but the AF doesn't seem to know that, where was the mass when we only bought 187 of the planned 500-700 F-22s? I hate to say it but the Navy seems to have a better procurement strategy, they got the SuperHornet and Growler on time and reasonably on budget, so they have sufficient quantity with great quality. Legacy systems just get that much harder to support as Diminishing Manufacturing and Vendor Scarcity come into the later stages of the MWS life-cycle. Exit that death spiral before it wraps up too tight. True, but the B-1 could be put back into the Triad. Difficult and short term expensive but long term cost savings could be realized. We have to decide (and by that Congress has to get its big fat snout out of the process) what do we want the AF to be? Very big but very old or SLIGHTLY smaller and much newer.

The Moose is loose... and right on point. The DoD is now like GM was, a company that used to build cars for profit but devolved into a benefits management entity. Our retirement, healthcare, pay and benefits are the long term problem. Legacy systems need to be replaced but compared to those benefits (which are hard earned and deserved but not long term sustainable to extend to NEW entrants to the military) they are peanuts, just like tax cuts for the rich compared to the 800 lb gorillas of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security. Like it or not, at some point the DoD is going to have to modernize its compensation, benefits and HR policies. All topics not related to the original point of this thread so a course correction from this rant... The B-1 or the A-10 is not a good choice as the two do completely different missions (primarily). Why isn't the choice between the B-52 or the B-1? Both legacy bombers, both with similar capabilities, but one with more life, more survivable. Retire the Buff, start retiring the oldest 135's, Hercs and bases with no runways...

Legalization of some drugs maybe, it certainly will take away most of the cartels' money but the border is still going to need a new strategy, It is the loss of sovereignty slowly that is the long term problem, possession is 9/10th of the law and having a large population that in your country that are not citizens and still strongly identify with their country which borders yours has the hallmarks of disaster. As TreeA10 said:

Pure genius... Film Crew Learns the Hard Way Why Not to Take an Inflatable Boat Out to Film Great White Sharks

Joe, let's keep a good discussion going. I'll agree with you to a point. instead of saying precedence I should have said, CONUS sovereignty & security is a mission of equal importance to our OCONUS missions. Precision in language is important. All the things you listed are vital to our national security but you just can't ignore the threat next door. It is a threat, a threat of neglect and weak governance, on both sides of the border as the current situation benefits powerful and influential people on both sides of the border, the passive collusion is criminal and I would say borderline treasonous for the continued neglect. Business interests in the US who want cheap, compliant and disposable labor coupled with ethnocentric advocacy organizations linked to a political party want a new working class that votes by and large a certain way and the elites of Mexico and Central America don't want to modernize their economies, provide for their poor and govern responsibly, they would rather off-load their "surplus" population, receive remittances into their economies and keep the status quo. This is the political, economic and I would say cultural problem, that will have to be solved at the ballot box, in the courts probably along with a vigorous debate. What we need to solve as security professionals from all the domains of military, law enforcement, intelligence and legal, is a new integrated construct to solve the law enforcement / sovereignty / security problem. Not just a fence or a Guard mission but a whole encompassing strategy, not just new tactics. During the Cold War, most of the organs of Federal government worked toward the overall strategy of containing, undermining, deterring and fighting when necessary communist aggression. We need that same holistic approach to our law enforcement / sovereignty / security problem. This will be by necessity involve a military mission, appropriately sized, equipped, tasked and deployed, but an actual force to apprehend and if required neutralize any unauthorized person crossing into the United States. The Heritage Foundation has a good idea for an encompassing strategy: 15 Steps to Better Border Security: Reducing America's Southern Exposure In this proposal the author advocates for State Defense Forces (volunteer forces that would be by law funded and accredited by DHS and DoD, I would argue for an enduring Guard mission for this under Title 32 status as a more appropriate solution.