Illegal Immigrants and the USMC

[AggieDave 6]

I wonder what it would truely take to lock down the border and have people enter the country legally?




http://www.ncpa.org/newdpd/dpdarticle.php?article_id=1538

Quote

NEW MILITARY THREAT: ILLEGALS

Daily Policy Digest

IMMIGRATION ISSUES /

Wednesday, April 13, 2005

Virtually every Marine squadron headed to Iraq or Afghanistan receives combat training at the Marine Corps Air Station in Yuma, which for nearly 40 miles touches the U.S.-Mexico border in the southwestern corner of Arizona. The Border Patrol's focus in recent years on tightening the border in the eastern part of the state, where volunteer citizens this month have established their own observation posts, has pushed more undocumented immigrants westward.

* Since July 2004, the training range has been shut down more than 500 times because of immigrants spotted on the range, causing a loss of more than 1,100 training hours; that's equivalent to almost 46 days of training
* Base personnel detain the immigrants and call in Border Patrol agents to pick them up; Marines intercepted more than 1,500 undocumented immigrants on the training range last year and, in the first three months of this year, more than 1,100.

Another big concern is the potential danger to undocumented immigrants:

* The Marines don't want them to come here, because they're firing lasers, shooting machine guns, shooting 209-millimeter cannons and dropping practice bombs.
* Last summer a Marine pilot dropped a practice bomb on a target and seconds later, a few feet away, a small group of illegal immigrants scrambled from underneath a bush and ran down the range; the near miss was caught on a training tape.

So far the Marines say there have been no deaths of immigrants in the training exercises, however, any moment taken away from a Marine's experience base could cost him his life in combat, says Colonel James J. Cooney, the base's commanding officer.

Source: Karen Schaler, "Border crossings hinder training at Ariz. bases Illegal immigrants found on test range," Boston Globe, April 7, 2005.

For text:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/04/07/border_crossings_hinder_training_at_ariz_bases/

For more on the Effects of Immigration:

http://www.ncpa.org/iss/imm/

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[mr2mk1g 10]

Quote

Last summer a Marine pilot dropped a practice bomb on a target and seconds later, a few feet away, a small group of illegal immigrants scrambled from underneath a bush and ran down the range;

[mexican]
"Hell no Pepe - I'm not trying to get into America again. Last time mi amigo's and me tried that those pinche Gringo's sent planes to bomb me.

I barely got home alive. No way cabron, those border patrols are getting too hot for me man."
[/mexican]

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

I wonder what it would truely take to lock down the border and have people enter the country legally?

About a 25% reduction in the GNP of the country. If the US is going to continue to be a member of the modern world, simplistic solutions like that are not viable.

[billvon 3,131]

>About a 25% reduction in the GNP of the country.

I'd believe 1-2%. Illegal immigration counts for about 5% of the illegal labor in the US, and given our current rate of unemployment, most of that could be rapidly replaced. The industries affected would suffer since they would not be as competitive (higher labor costs) but that would be partially offset by the reduction of unemployment (which tends to raise the GNP.)

>If the US is going to continue to be a member of the modern world,
>simplistic solutions like that are not viable.

The only reason it's not viable is that it's too hard to implement, not because crime is necessary for a modern country to exist.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

I'd believe 1-2%. Illegal immigration counts for about 5% of the illegal labor in the US, and given our current rate of unemployment, most of that could be rapidly replaced. The industries affected would suffer since they would not be as competitive (higher labor costs) but that would be partially offset by the reduction of unemployment (which tends to raise the GNP.)

I agree.

I love the fact that people want to come to my country, I want them here; however, I want them to go through the proper channels and come here legally.

So much money is spent each year due to illegal immigrants. Hell, there are states passing measures that pulls US citizen's tax dollars out of their pockets and does a lot of things like keep illegal's children in our public schools. What about our own citizen's children, etc.

You know, if I lost my mind and wanted to move to another country (not Oklahoma, though) or something happened that made it so I would rather live somewhere else I would take the steps to do so. Not simply go driving or running across the border.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Kennedy 0]

Well, the welfare system would seriously slow the replacement of the labor. Now, if we implemented a "workfare" system a la the TVA, there would be very little if any drop in work --> production --> GNP.

Quote

The only reason it's not viable is that it's too hard to implement, not because crime is necessary for a modern country to exist.

Absolutely. Due to the monetary cost, the political and block vote opposition, and manpower requirement it's not feasible without serious changes. However, it could be done without causing any doomsday repercussions.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

I'd believe 1-2%. Illegal immigration counts for about 5% of the illegal labor in the US, and given our current rate of unemployment, most of that could be rapidly replaced. The industries affected would suffer since they would not be as competitive (higher labor costs) but that would be partially offset by the reduction of unemployment (which tends to raise the GNP.)

doesn't take into account the severe slow down of cross border traffic of goods.

[billvon 3,131]

>doesn't take into account the severe slow down of cross border traffic of goods.

Looking at how much legal stuff crosses at Otay Mesa alone every day - you're not going to even dent the cross border traffic in goods if you stop only illegal immigrants.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

My point is that every time homeland security or whoever makes the border harder to cross, trade suffers. Free trade makes American goods duty free coming into Canada and going to the US. Border restrictions are threatening that advantage. The talk up here is increasingly about finding new markets to replace US customers because the border is getting harder and more expensive to cross. PD stopped shipping demos into Canada not long ago because of border hassles (I believe they have restored them since).
Vancouver is a border town. Crossing the line to get gas or to pop into Cosco for a case of Red Bull used to be normal; today less so. Soon I will have to bring a passport to visit Blaine Wa. Americans will not need a passport to visit us, but will need one to go home (same effect). As I'm sure you are aware, many Americans do not keep a passport.
When I hear people talking about locking down the border I shudder to think what will happen to the economy of the dozens of small towns along the border. These are the most noticeable effects, but the macro effects on business across the country are just as profound.
The economy of the modern world depends on a smooth transfer of goods and services worldwide. A commitment to this is one of the main reasons the first world is the first world.
Immigration issues are not the only ones to factor in here. Anti-terrorism measures are certainly larger, as well as the never ceasing protectionist manipulations of small minded congressmen. These costs all add up, however, as America retreats further and further from the world community. North Korea and Cuba have locked down their borders; how are their economies doing?

[billvon 3,131]

> My point is that every time homeland security or whoever makes the
> border harder to cross, trade suffers.

We're talking about stopping the _illegal_ crossings, not the legal ones. No one's talking about repealing NAFTA.

>As I'm sure you are aware, many Americans do not keep a passport.

If they need one they'll get one. I don't think that will be much of a factor. But in any case, again, we're talking about going after the illegal crossings, not the legal ones.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

> My point is that every time homeland security or whoever makes the
> border harder to cross, trade suffers.

We're talking about stopping the _illegal_ crossings, not the legal ones. No one's talking about repealing NAFTA.

>As I'm sure you are aware, many Americans do not keep a passport.

If they need one they'll get one. I don't think that will be much of a factor. But in any case, again, we're talking about going after the illegal crossings, not the legal ones.

If discerning the illegal from the legal traffic was not burdonsome to the economy as a whole, we would not be having this discussion; the problem would have been dealt with long ago.

[billvon 3,131]

>If discerning the illegal from the legal traffic was not burdonsome to the
> economy as a whole, we would not be having this discussion; the
>problem would have been dealt with long ago.

It is burdensome to the economy not because it is difficult to tell legal from illegal immigrants; that's pretty easy. It is burdensome because it is hard to stop the illegal immigrants. A 50 foot high concrete wall surrounding the US and monitored by cameras/lights/sensors would do the job and not restrict legal immigration/trade one bit. That's difficult and expensive to build, though.

The important point is the cost comes in the form of concrete and contractor bills, not in reduced trade.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

That's difficult and expensive to build, though.

And on a different level, kinda scary when you think about it.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

It is burdensome to the economy not because it is difficult to tell legal from illegal immigrants; that's pretty easy. It is burdensome because it is hard to stop the illegal immigrants. A 50 foot high concrete wall surrounding the US and monitored by cameras/lights/sensors would do the job and not restrict legal immigration/trade one bit. That's difficult and expensive to build, though.

Then how do you stop the guys hiding in trucks, or containers in harbours? Only one way, extensive searches of every container brought into the country. result: severe slowdown of traffic of goods. Somebody ends up paying for those delays.

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Quote

That's difficult and expensive to build, though.

And on a different level, kinda scary when you think about it.

Reminds me of that joke aboot a genie, a Newfoundlander, a Quebecer, and a guy from Montreal, eh...

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Guest]

Quote

>If discerning the illegal from the legal traffic was not burdonsome to the
> economy as a whole, we would not be having this discussion; the
>problem would have been dealt with long ago.

It is burdensome to the economy not because it is difficult to tell legal from illegal immigrants; that's pretty easy. It is burdensome because it is hard to stop the illegal immigrants. A 50 foot high concrete wall surrounding the US and monitored by cameras/lights/sensors would do the job and not restrict legal immigration/trade one bit. That's difficult and expensive to build, though.

The important point is the cost comes in the form of concrete and contractor bills, not in reduced trade.

The illegals and their shit culture are only one part of the problem.

You can thank the Clinton Adminstration for the flood we have now.

By cleverly shifting emphasis away from worksite enforcement and onto border patrol (there were some EOs on this while I was still in - I don't have the resources to look them up at the moment), the Clinton Adminstration KNEW it would be opening the floodgates, and counting on Political Correctness to make it a tsunami.

This has been exacerbated by the Bush Administration's being buddy-buddy with Vincente Fox, and the play to Big Business (tm) to keep wages pushed down by importing tons of cheap labor while at the same time exporting living-wage jobs.

If things keep going the way they are, in ten or twenty years there won't be a middle class left in America.

mh

.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[BIGUN 1,502]

Quote

I wonder what it would truely take to lock down the border

Man, I hope I don't have to find another lawn guy cause of this

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[kallend 2,175]

You are blaming the wrong people altogether. If greedy EMPLOYERS stopped hiring illegals, the flood would dry up right now.

The surest way to find the root of a problem is to follow the money.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[skinnyshrek 0]

I have a business, do you know how hard it is to find good help? Unbelievable... I pay god money yet all the american guys i have always call in. Either hung over or just want the day off.... mexicans on the other hand will work their asses off. Not saying its right, i was in their position. But sometimes you have to use them.

Post edited to remove some flaming and borderline personal attacks. Please tone it down a bit.

http://www.skydivethefarm.com

do you realize that when you critisize people you dont know over the internet, you become part of a growing society of twats? ARE YOU ONE OF THEM?

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Post edited to remove some flaming and borderline personal attacks. Please tone it down a bit.

That's ok, he called me to tell me what he said. All in all we had a couple of really good laughs and swore to have some good drinks together again at Skyfest.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[gkc1436 3]

>You can thank the Clinton Adminstration for the flood we have now.

he got a blow job.....he didnt open the borders....

actually, i think it was good ol ronny that had imigration quotas change from predominantly European to mostly third world.

and what quickly followed was a very relaxed border policy, kind of look the other way type of deal

g