Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's my understanding that deployment of US military for domestic purposes is illegal. That's the National Guard's job. Now if the Mexican military was threatening us at the border, that would be a different story.
Where did this "caravan" take place? I haven't been reading the news the last couple of days.
Some group from San Diego, in English "People Without Borders" organized about 1000 Hondurans to walk through Mexico to the border then demand asylum. The group has grown along the trek. A list of their so-called "demands" are on the Drudge Report.
Obama did it once in 2010 when he sent 1200 troops to the border. http://www.bbc.com/news/10159363
This was back when Obama thought illegal immigration was a bad thing.
We have word of a group (caravan) of illegal aliens heading our way, they should be called alien invaders. Their plan is to cross/ invade America.
Who are these people? Are they armed? Do they bring biological weapons in the form of diseases that have been pretty much wiped out in the USA but still thrives in third world countries?
Get security down there now.
This is odd to write but protecting our border can be the first deployment of new soldiers before they head off to protect the borders of other countries... Tell me again why we protect theirs but not ours??
Obama did it once in 2010 when he sent 1200 troops to the border.
We have word of a group (caravan) of illegal aliens heading our way, they should be called alien invaders. Their plan is to cross/ invade America.
Who are these people? Are they armed? Do they bring biological weapons in the form of diseases that have been pretty much wiped out in the USA but still thrives in third world countries?
Get security down there now.
This is odd to write but protecting our border can be the first deployment of new soldiers before they head off to protect the borders of other countries... Tell me again why we protect theirs but not ours??
It's my understanding that deployment of US military for domestic purposes is illegal. That's the National Guard's job. Now if the Mexican military was threatening us at the border, that would be a different story.
Obama and Bush deployed the National Guard. But, under the Posse Comiticus Act, they were limited to providing support to the Border Patrol. They could not detain, interrogate or arrest anyone. Congress would have to give special approval for them to do more than that.
I have no problem with the National Guard being used again, as they were during both the Obama and Bush administrations.
However, I would have a problem with the President ordering troops to the border to do things that would be in violation of established U.S. law without congressional approval. That would probably require the President to declare martial law, and I have a serious issue with that.
Martial law means that the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens, like the 2nd Amendment, the right to due process, and protection from illegal search could be suspended.
So, I wasn't able to respond to the poll. Fine with National Guard if they are acting within established law being deployed as Obama and Bush did; not fine with martial law being used to deploy the military to do things they are prohibited by law from doing at the border.
We have word of a group (caravan) of illegal aliens heading our way, they should be called alien invaders. Their plan is to cross/ invade America.
Who are these people? Are they armed? Do they bring biological weapons in the form of diseases that have been pretty much wiped out in the USA but still thrives in third world countries?
Get security down there now.
This is odd to write but protecting our border can be the first deployment of new soldiers before they head off to protect the borders of other countries... Tell me again why we protect theirs but not ours??
Obama and Bush deployed the National Guard. But, under the Posse Comiticus Act, they were limited to providing support to the Border Patrol. They could not detain, interrogate or arrest anyone. Congress would have to give special approval for them to do more than that.
I have no problem with the National Guard being used again, as they were during both the Obama and Bush administrations.
However, I would have a problem with the President ordering troops to the border to do things that would be in violation of established U.S. law without congressional approval. That would probably require the President to declare martial law, and I have a serious issue with that.
Martial law means that the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens, like the 2nd Amendment, the right to due process, and protection from illegal search could be suspended.
So, I wasn't able to respond to the poll. Fine with National Guard if they are acting within established law being deployed as Obama and Bush did; not fine with martial law being used to deploy the military to do things they are prohibited by law from doing at the border.
I'd answered 'no' for the same reasons outlawed here--National Guard, yes. Regular Army, no.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
