Obama surrenders Arizona territory back to Mexico...

[GoldenRivet]

sort of

http://www.thefoxnation.com/gulf-coast-oil-spill/2010/06/15/obama-gives-back-major-strip-az-mexico

Arizona needs to secede and raise its own military and handle this.





yet there remains those who will blindly follow the beat of the buffoon's drum.

[Buddahaid]

Uh, remember the Alamo? The what?

I can't help thinking this whole AZ is ground zero business would be moot if it weren't for the drug/gang violence. This get the alien brown out thinking is not new to the U.S. either, it's just more visable in the current insta-info age.

[Blacklight]

FOX News just keeps getting more googlie-mooglie as each day passes. :nope:

[krashkart]

The article doesn't really convince me that the title is true. It just tells me that a region of Arizona has become too dangerous for civvies - which, frankly, if that's true then we really need some trained guns on patrol there.

I'd look deeper into this using a wider variety of news sources before settling on anything as being concrete fact. Fox News is only one of those sources, and I think they tend to be sensationalist. :)


I will admit that Fox News hires some really good looking redheads. :DL

[GoldenRivet]

FOX News just keeps getting more googlie-mooglie as each day passes. :nope:

Aside from the source...

i pose a question that some of you will either be unable or unwilling to answer...

ready?

here goes:

"do you feel that when a foreign criminal contingent's violence spills over into the United States, that the United States government should react to such an intrusion?"

yes or no?

Obama seems to think that simply making affected areas of America off limits to American's solves the problem.

I respectfully disagree with the sorry, no good, traitor, SOB.

[krashkart]

^^ Yes. There should be a very public mobilization to show that he's on the ball. :yep:

[GoldenRivet]

and he breaks one of the more basic of military rules

Never send a Battalion to do a Division's job

[Weiss Pinguin]

I thought GR was exaggerating, until I opened the link... :nope: I think this sums it up:
"... And, it’s shameful that we as the most powerful nation on earth can win wars and liberate countries throughout history yet we can’t even secure our own border."

[mookiemookie]

A fence is a stupid solution to the problem. That's probably the only thing that I have an issue with in that editorial. What do you expect? These drug runner and gangsters are going to say, "Well, we're armed to the teeth and obviously have no problem murdering anyone who gets in our way, but that 10 foot wooden fence....good lord, man, we've got to turn back!"

Other than that, I think we do need the National Guard on the border. This situation is getting completely out of control with regards to the drug violence. It's time for a military presence on our border as well as a comprehensive review of our drug policy from top to bottom - meaning a strong look at decriminalization/legalization. But I think it's got a lot to do with diplomatic pussyfooting around and not rocking the boat with Mexico. They need to be tougher since Mexico is obviously too corrupt or uninterested or incapable of solving the problem on their end.

[Tribesman]

Arizona needs to secede and raise its own military and handle this.

:har::har::har::har::har::har::har:

[tater]

:har::har::har::har::har::har::har:

Reality check on the cost of raising an army...

GDP Arizona: ~200 billion $

GDP Ireland: ~267 billion $

GDP Iran: ~287 B$

So AZ is a little poor compared to piss-ant countries, but they only need to defend a ~300 mile border.

[GoldenRivet]

Well they dont need to raise an army sufficient to repel say... Russia.

They just need to beat out an influx of criminals.

and hell


Unlce sam aint gonna do it. clearly;)

[tater]

Apparently the AZ Guard (Army) is ~8000 troops. They could likely get more volunteers if they had a force that could not be deployed abroad.

It's pretty bad when Phoenix, population 5 million is second to Mexico City, population 25+ million in kidnapping.

[Tribesman]

Reality check on the cost of raising an army...

Reality check on the cost of raising an army and losing all federal funding and employment and becoming entirly reliant on local taxesplus having to negociate all new deals all on your lonesome with both the US and Mexico while vainly trying to make them reasonably beneficial to yourself.

They just need to beat out an influx of criminals.

Really? How?
You havn't thought at all have you Rivet, rather like the legislature didn't when they passed that unworkable immigration bill.

[SteamWake]

FOX News just keeps getting more googlie-mooglie as each day passes. :nope:

Well maybe if the Lib's quit giving them so much material. :O:

[Tribesman]

Well maybe if the Lib's quit giving them so much material.
How dumb are Fox for complaining about the border fence construction being stopped while showing footage of illegals just climbing over a border fence that has already been built?

[krashkart]

How dumb are Fox for complaining about the border fence construction being stopped while showing footage of illegals just climbing over a border fence that has already been built?

Excellent point. :har:

[Task Force]

Wow, think of how confused the aliens we meet there will be when they say.

"Hola Senor! Welcome to Mexico!"

[Snestorm]

They need to be tougher since Mexico is obviously too corrupt or uninterested or incapable of solving the problem on their end.

As far as governments go, this seems to be the problem on USA's side of the border as well.
And the problem is "bi-partisan". There's realy only one party in an oligarchy.

The same problem exists over much of Europe, and The World.
Same banksters, crooks, traitors, and puppets.

[gimpy117]

FOX News just keeps getting more googlie-mooglie as each day passes. :nope:


^^+1

Having a part of Arizona be too dangerous for US. Citizens is completely different that giving it back to mexico. Shame on you FOX have you no decency? You'll say anything on a headline to pander to your viewer base and get ratings :nope:

[krashkart]

Well, on one hand, if the government keeps putting the problem off then that part of Arizona may well become Mexican cartel territory. It's not like the US is handing the land over to Mexico and saying "Here you go. We didn't have any use for it, may as well be yours now.", they are just not expressing a whole lot of concern over the increasing threats from cartel violence. Let alone doing much about it.

[GoldenRivet]

^^+1

Having a part of Arizona be too dangerous for US. Citizens is completely different that giving it back to mexico. Shame on you FOX have you no decency? You'll say anything on a headline to pander to your viewer base and get ratings :nope:

I'll have to disagree to a certain extent.

When the president - tasked with protecting America from aggressive invasion - says to the American people:

"Just dont go into this part of America anymore and things will be fine."

no...


no, they wont Mr. President

because that area will just grow larger and larger until the problem is uncontainable and uncontrollable.

In essence he is ceding that territory to the aggressors.

Unless of course he sends several thousand troops into the area to secure it, and defend the sovereignty and security of the area, returning it to American hands.


if i were a citizen of Arizona right now... i would be outraged that a portion of my state - a public parkland no less - has been abandoned due to foreign criminal action (and lack of federal action). And i would feel like the Federal Government had turned its back on me.

FOX shouldnt be ashamed... any more than any other "news" outlet - they are ALL out to get ratings - they ALL play the ratings game... you should know that unless you have been hiding under the rock of naivety for decades.

It is the President of the United States of America who should be ashamed of himself!



EDIT:

Ill, add this: Never in the history of this nation except for perhaps the revolutionary war or the civil war - has a portion of this country - however large or small - been deemed "too dangerous for civilian occupation"... except now it has... and it has taken place on HIS watch.

[TLAM Strike]

Serous question here...

Lots of people want the army to go in and secure the border in AZ. Normally that is the job of the US Border Patrol, a law enforcement organization. Does US law (Specifically Pose Comitatus) allow the military to act as a LEOs against foreigners on US soil?

[GoldenRivet]

That is a good question.

Two things need to happen here.

1. The US Border patrol needs to receive the funding and man power it needs and it should be allowed to enter this fight without having one hand tied behind it's back.

2. The US Congress needs to recognize these drug cartels and these criminals flooding across the border as aggressive, and name them a clear and present danger to the national security (because they are, we have already caught Al Quida sympathizers among them). Once that takes place, the military should intervene.

a fence is not going to work.

machine gun nests every X miles wont work.

you have to have a dedicated force to patrol the border (and i dont mean one man per every 20 miles of border land... i mean more like 20 men per every mile of borderland (exaggeration but not by much)



When your trying to protect your home from intrusion it does NO GOOD to lock the front door and all the windows... but open the back door wide open and ignore whoever enters it, and thats exactly what America is doing here.

do we think the terrorist organizations that seek to do harm to this nation DONT watch the news?

they know our weakness for human trafficking is right across the Arizona and Texas borders and they also know whe have an administration in power in the white house who is more inclined to sit back and do nothing.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Serous question here...

Lots of people want the army to go in and secure the border in AZ. Normally that is the job of the US Border Patrol, a law enforcement organization. Does US law (Specifically Pose Comitatus) allow the military to act as a LEOs against foreigners on US soil?


Yes and no. It would take a congressional act to authorize such a thing, and there is not one forthcoming, so I'm inclined to say no, but it is possible.

Not that we'd ever want such a thing. The US military is a very large sword and it is not meant for such tasks. A considerable amount of retraining would be required and there would have to be very specific Rules of Engamenet and it would all be very expensive.......I don't think using kids with guns to secure the border would be a good idea.

Posse Comitatus is a particularly sensitive subject anyway, especially in Southern states, so again I see it as being possible but not politically plausible.


1. The US Border patrol needs to receive the funding and man power it needs and it should be allowed to enter this fight without having one hand tied behind it's back.

2. The US Congress needs to recognize these drug cartels and these criminals flooding across the border as aggressive, and name them a clear and present danger to the national security (because they are, we have already caught Al Quida sympathizers among them). Once that takes place, the military should intervene.


I'd be careful with that kind of thinking, John. You really, really have to make sure that you know what you're doing before you propose such ideas. I understand that you're concerned about the border situation, and I can certainly understand the concern about it being vulnerable to terrorists, but let's step back and look at it for a moment.

1) Why is terrorism a problem? That's a question I simply don't have the answer to. There are theories, but none of them give us a be-all end-all solution, so that's out.

2) Why is illegal immigration a problem? That's a question that I know the answer to, but it is also an area of concern where logic applies only infrequently. Like most issues of scale, it is purely about politics. Liberals want the votes and Republicans want votes from promising people that there jobs will be preserved. It is, for lack of a better word, a clusterfrack.

None of that will ultimately matter, of course. Nothing is going to stem the tide of illegal immigrants and the drug trade and whatnot. There is a very powerful, even primal source that is behind this stuff. People want to make a better life for themselves and for their families, and no amount of half-hearted dictation from Washington is ever going to change that. Even if you put one man on every single square foot of the US border, you would not fix the problem. Mexican immigrants may not be as smart as you, but they are smart enough to get around you. The same is doubly true for drug cartels. Trying to regulate such things is like trying to crush water. It is futility, in it's purest sense.

Instead of wasting our time and resources on this politically-motivated garbage, we should be concentrating our efforts on liifting the lamp beside the golden door. We're the best nation in the word for a reason. Let them in. Let them all in. This is place where you have a chance to prove yourself or at least make a decent living by trying.

We are the greatest nation in the world, and it is high time we started acting like it.

[GoldenRivet]

I can see your side of the argument clearly.

And im all for lifting the lamp by the golden door etc,


Problem is a lot of these Mexican's dont want to be Americans.

They dont want to embrace American traditions, customs, or even in some cases Laws.

Right here in Texas, near your neck of the woods actually, i saw a Whataburger with a bunch of cars in the lot all with massive mexican flags in the rear window... the place was packed with hispanics (legal or not who knows) to top it off, the American AND Texas Flags on the flag poles outside the whataburger were both hanging upside down.

these "immigrants" are unlike your Irish immigrants of the late 1800s and early 1900s... these "immigrants" are a whole new issue.

they simply want to live here and receive all of the benefits of living here without any of the commitment to becoming "Americans" - label them whatever you want, this is an aggressive invasion any way you slice it.

I really hate that it will have to come down to a Nuclear weapon exploding in Phoenix to win over some hearts and minds... and though thats an extreme example... you have to admit In August of 2001 the world trade center attack was pretty unthinkable too.

[MH]

I really hate that it will have to come down to a Nuclear weapon exploding in Phoenix to win over some hearts and minds... and though thats an extreme example... you have to admit In August of 2001 the world trade center attack was pretty unthinkable too.


This is passe method....

New method:
Build a mosque and let UN declare surrounding territory as autonomy.:D

[Freiwillige]

I don't understand why they need federal troops at all. The Arizona national guard is big enough to do the job. are they controlled at the federal level or by the Local government? If federal then why have a state national guard in the first place?

I mean the National guard base has blackhawks, Apache's older M1 Abrams.

Put the military on the border, Let them make arrests and work in conjunction with border patrol, And lastly let the armed squads engage armed gangs with lethal force.

What that story says is true. Those park closings do exist. But I believe they were closed by those counties themselves because they don't have enough enforcement to stop them from coming through.

[Zachstar]

Ah more right wing grandstanding.

Tell you what you crap of a state AZ if you give us every scrap of mining land you have and every bit of whatever economy you somehow possess. You can take that dirt state and secede in my view. I wonder how long before the UN would have to declare that "country" in desperate need of aid. But what that is SOCIALISM!!! Guess the people there would rather starve.


I could care less as long as the US keeps the copper and other minerals.

[Platapus]

I don't understand why they need federal troops at all. The Arizona national guard is big enough to do the job. are they controlled at the federal level or by the Local government? If federal then why have a state national guard in the first place?



The National Guard is under the control of the Governor of the state (Title 31 U.S.C) unless called to national service under Title 10 U.S.C. by the US Congress (Article I, Section 8; para 15 of the Constitution). When the Congress calls them up for National Service, only then does the President of the United States become their commander (Article II Section 2).

Pub.L. 109-364 passed in 2007 gives the POTUS the authority to take control of a States national guard without the permission of the Governor.

This was, in my opinion a "Bad Thing" and clearly I was not the only one who thought so

However, In 2008, this was modified by Pub.L. 110-181 so that now the POTUS can only take command of the State's national guard during "Congressionally sanctioned national emergency or war."

That's better :)

[GoldenRivet]

I could care less as long as the US keeps the copper and other minerals.


sooo... your a republican now? :haha:

[tater]

BTW, on topic, there is no reason the US should be forced to tell Americans they should stay away from American soil because of problems with violence that originates on foreign soil.

That is the point. We are ceding the initiative, if you will on our own soil. The Mexican criminals are in effect able to operate at will in some areas to the detriment of US citizens.

As a citizen of a border State I find that unacceptable. If I wish to go backpacking someplace near the border I should not have to fear FOREIGN violence. That's what the Army is for, to protect the US from foreign violence.

When it's Maria sneaking across to be a housekeeper, that's a law enforcement issue. When Juan and his 10 partners come across armed (often with real assault weapons, not weapons that look like assault weapons but are only semi-auto) to smuggle drugs, and kill anyone who gets in the way, it's a military issue.

Remember that THOUSANDS have been murdered along the border this year alone by these bastards.

[Snestorm]

Looks like New Mexico is realy expanding.

[Tchocky]

Remember that THOUSANDS have been murdered along the border this year alone by these bastards.
Thousands?

[Tribesman]

When it's Maria sneaking across to be a housekeeper, that's a law enforcement issue. When Juan and his 10 partners come across armed (often with real assault weapons, not weapons that look like assault weapons but are only semi-auto) to smuggle drugs, and kill anyone who gets in the way, it's a military issue.

They are both law enforcement issues. Send in the military to do law enforcement or recruit a hell of a lot more police and border patrol, either way its gonna cost you a fortune.

Thousands?


Yes, Mexicos side of the border has this years drug wars running at about 700 murders a month so far.

[Weiss Pinguin]

They are both law enforcement issues. Send in the military to do law enforcement or recruit a hell of a lot more police and border patrol, either way its gonna cost you a fortune.
But which one is faster? Training new border patrol officers or training soldiers in law enforcement?

And what about the intimidation aspect? We've had law enforcement and border patrol down there intercepting drug runners for ages, but how would they react to professional soldiers manning the border, in numbers?

[Tribesman]

But which one is faster? Training new border patrol officers or training soldiers in law enforcement?

surely both would take about the same training time as they would have to learn the same things, but the military are already there so they wouldn't have the recruiting employees issues the border agency would.

how would they react to professional soldiers manning the border, in numbers?
They would react in the same way as they do to any change affecting their business, they simply adapt to circumvent new measures.

[Weiss Pinguin]

They would react in the same way as they do to any change affecting their business, they simply adapt to circumvent new measures.
I suppose. But it might at least slow down some of them as they work out how to keep things running :hmmm:

[Zachstar]

Military on the border means absolutely nothing if they don't have recon support.

But I doubt UAVs are not the topic as much is the usual attempt to smear Obama.

[tater]

Actually, look at what US troops are doing abroad. Military patrols, and what is in effect "community policing."

Law enforcement use is becoming very much part of what US troops do given an enemy that intentionally blurs the distinction between his cowardly self and the local civilians.

Armed men invading the US from Mexico are invaders, not criminals. As far as I'm concerned, the ROE can be that if elements of US law enforcement or army verify weapons (FLIR recordings would be fine), the ROE should allow them to get a release to shoot. Let the perps know this ahead of time—open carry=death if they cross into the US.

To protect citizens, make the engagement zone narrow, and suspend open carry in those regions (NM has open carry, for example).

[CaptainHaplo]

While this is a failure by the federal government, it cannot be laid at the feet of Obama. Sure I don't like the guy, but the facts are that these counties have been "danger zones" since 2006 - and nothing has been done. Sure, one could argue he hasn't done anything about it, but its not like he was on watch when it turned this direction.

He is still responsible for maintaining sovereignty, or in this case - reasserting it - but to claim he is the one that ceded the de facto control over is false.

[Tribesman]

To protect citizens, make the engagement zone narrow, and suspend open carry in those regions
The NRA is going to kick your ass for that statement, its an infringement:yeah:
If you are going to infringe on citizens gun rights to tackle possible armed crime in one place then how long till you infringe on citizens rights everywhere? after all a pile of murders in Mexico related to drugs is not all that different to a pile of murders in Michigan related to drugs.

the ROE can be that if elements of US law enforcement or army verify weapons (FLIR recordings would be fine), the ROE should allow them to get a release to shoot.
Yeah, after all its not like there are hundreds of cases where people screw up very badly on those points.
Which is just as well as if the really completely unprecedented mistake did happen it could work out very very very expensive.

[warbird]

if you ask me Mr. Obama is all kinda wrong, this is yet again another instance where he has proven to america that it was really one big freaking mistake to vote him into office. this whole Arizona thing just burns me smooth up, i cant believe THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA would give some of Americas land to the freaking illegal aliens because he doesn't want to deal with it being dangerous. instead he wants to hide in his office and not do a dang thing. He needs to get up off his butt grow him a pair and do something about this. Its insane!!!

[Task Force]

Welcome... well thats Obama, and just about every other country now days. Trying to deal with everything nice and sweet... Things could be used to stop/help out, but we dont want to offend anyone.

[krashkart]

God forbid we actually hurt somebody's precious feelings, particularly those who would do us harm anyway. Where's John Wayne when you need him. :shifty:

Welcome aboard, warbird. :arrgh!:

[Tribesman]

if you ask me Mr. Obama is all kinda wrong, this is yet again another instance where he has proven to america that it was really one big freaking mistake to vote him into office.
Was Bush the wrong kinda president too then, as warning signs have been in existance for years?
So as two of Arizonas national monuments, a wildlife refuge and a national forest all have had these kind of warning signs for ages and as this story is only a matter of a couple more signs being added at one of those locations after a policeman was murdered doesn't it make the sensationalist angle of the news story which people are getting upset about pretty bogus.

[Spoon 11th]

they simply want to live here and receive all of the benefits of living here without any of the commitment to becoming "Americans" - label them whatever you want, this is an aggressive invasion any way you slice it.

To put it in picture:
http://www.saunalahti.fi/slinnavu/vault/natives_vs_immigration.gif

[krashkart]

^^ Oh snap! :har:

[Zachstar]

PWNED!!!!

Also walls don't work. Had they had UAVs back then there would be no "colonies"

[warbird]

Was Bush the wrong kinda president too then, as warning signs have been in existance for years?
So as two of Arizonas national monuments, a wildlife refuge and a national forest all have had these kind of warning signs for ages and as this story is only a matter of a couple more signs being added at one of those locations after a policeman was murdered doesn't it make the sensationalist angle of the news story which people are getting upset about pretty bogus.

yes i suppose you are right!!! i was just making a point on how Obama promised us all of this great stuff and we have not seen none of it. he is a habitual liar, there are two kinds of people i cant stand in this world and those are liars and thief's and there aint much difference in the two and to me Mr. Obama is both.

[krashkart]

Let's elect Kim Jong Il next time. He is so much better at treating people right. :yeah:

[Tribesman]

he is a habitual liar
He is a politician, its part of the job description.

[NeonSamurai]

He is a politician, its part of the job description.

One of the truest statements yet about politicians :DL

They all lie through their teeth, doesn't matter what side of spectrum they come from.

[Jimbuna]

One of the truest statements yet about politicians :DL

They all lie through their teeth, doesn't matter what side of spectrum they come from.

Or country :DL

[Sailor Steve]

It's like salesmen. The only question is: Do you have to be that way to get the job, or does it come with on-the-job-training?

[CaptainHaplo]

To put it in picture:
http://www.saunalahti.fi/slinnavu/vault/natives_vs_immigration.gif

Nicely done, except that it negates the historical reality that the "Indians" were not one group - as "Americans" are SUPPOSED to be. There was no central government at all, it was tribal and there was no common culture or language between the tribes nationally. The differences - historically speaking - are vast. But truth rarely gets in the way of emotionalist sensationalism now does it?

However, it is true that Europe in essence invaded both North and South America. While it was not intended to be an invasion, the end result turned into one.