Apparently the US has no right to enforce it's borders.

[Flip McWho]

There a bit of difference between being a tourist to a country and being born and bred there.

[Ted Striker]

There's also a big difference between downtown Manhattan and Kansas

[Ted Striker]

It looks like the Guard troops are being put on the border under the authority of the State Governors. However they are being coordinated under Federal "guidance." Loophole? Yes.

One of the exact concerns about them being "temporary" is being played out as we speak.

1) The memo mentions them being deployed already for 2 years. 6000 in year 1 and 3000 in year 2+

2) There is no end date for their deployment

Nice, looks like we have a new permanent force deployment on the Mexican border.

SACRAMENTO, California (AP) -- President Bush's planned deployment of National Guard troops to the Mexican border would last at least two years with no clear end date, according to a Pentagon memo obtained Friday by The Associated Press.

Although the military document makes clear the troops would remain under the command of their governors, it also indicates a high degree of federal control over operations. It states that the National Guard Bureau's Army and Air Directories "will serve as the states' focal points for force-planning, training, organizing and equipping their forces."

I especially like the subjective, ambiguous requirement for removing them from the border. I mean good lawd this is common sense management 101, set a quantifiable goal and then stick to it.

The document described an "end date" for the mission when the U.S. Border Patrol operation "gains independent operational control of the (southwest border) and National Guard forces are no longer required for this mission."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/19/immigration.border.ap/index.html

Does that sound familiar?

ITS GONNA BE ANOTHER VIETNAM GRACIAS POR FAVOR!!!

[Ned]

Originally posted by dannubis


Nice spin but utter BS. I just said that you show an obvious tendency to carefully choose the situations where you want to be a good Christian.

And I don't give a rat's arse about political conviction. Where did i comment on that?

Well, I guess there a lot of us Agnostic Christians around. Are you one too?

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Originally posted by Caligastia
Check out the beautiful Sudan. Boy that sure is a fantastic country.

Mexico isn't a third world country. Far from it, its one of the richest countries in the world (granted, thats one of the criticisms anti-immigrants have).

[Dis]

Does that sound familiar?

ITS GONNA BE ANOTHER VIETNAM GRACIAS POR FAVOR!!!

Vietnam? southern Arizona is not vietnam. .

We should be able to bomb the territory without worrying about foliage covering the hiding spots. I support bombing southern California, Arizona, and New Mexico.


In any case, we left Vietnam a few years after it was apparant that we couldn't win that war, and the hippies wouldn't stop protesting it.

[Ted Striker]

.

[dannubis]

Originally posted by Ned


Well, I guess there a lot of us Agnostic Christians around. Are you one too?

Since I don't believe there is a God, no. But I do try to live as Christ showed us because I think it is a good ideal.

[Ted Striker]

.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by JimmyCracksCorn
Mexico isn't a third world country.

Actually, it is, by definition, a third world country.

1st Word = the developed/imperialist countries, plus a handful of Pacific countries.

2nd World = The Soviet Bloc

3rd World = everything else

The 2nd World doesn't exist anymore. Everything that was in it is now 3rd World.

[DaShi]

3rd world countries can be imperialist. It's not restricted to developed or first world countries.

[loinburger]

"its" as a possessive does not have an apostrophe. When "it's" is used as a contraction of "it is" then you use an apostrophe. And it doesn't make much sense to say "the US has no right to enforce it is borders." Unless you're (your) from Alabama. Or Texas.

[chequita guevara]

That's a vulgar definition of imperialist, DaShi. Imperialism, as a term from political economy means something different that trying to put your flag on someone else's land.

[DaShi]

Grrr, for making me have to look it up to verify.

im·pe·ri·al·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (m-pîr--lzm)
n.
The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations.
The system, policies, or practices of such a government.


It's not impossible for third world countries to do this to even worse off countries. Look at China today. Look at Japan before the end of WWII. Even the 2nd world wasn't innocent of this behavior.

[Ned]

Originally posted by dannubis


Since I don't believe there is a God, no. But I do try to live as Christ showed us because I think it is a good ideal.

I think you and I agree in principle here.