Originally posted by Eddie
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
President Trump: Making America Great Again...
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Bo Diddley View PostActually, the troops being deployed are National Guard troops, so Posse Comitatus doesn't apply. I remember carrying a loaded M16 in New Orleans--never thought I'd see the day.
Border protection is an interesting function, and you certainly wouldn't expect our standing army to be prohibited from doing so. I hope America never sees full scale war on its soil ever again.
Comment
-
Originally posted by BlueK View PostIt would be a pretty extreme situation that would require someone to get shot.
But if she said there was no chance ever that anyone could be shot, and then someone was, how well would that go over? Better or worse than saying "that's silly - no one is going to get shot over this" and then they do?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Eddie View PostI don't disagree.
But if she said there was no chance ever that anyone could be shot, and then someone was, how well would that go over? Better or worse than saying "that's silly - no one is going to get shot over this" and then they do?
Comment
-
Not an important point but obviously they aren't walking the whole way from Honduras. Mostly by hired transport like bus."I'm anti, can't no government handle a commando / Your man don't want it, Trump's a bitch! I'll make his whole brand go under,"
Comment
-
Originally posted by BlueK View Post"right now" is pretty ominous sounding even if it wasn't meant that way. Maybe she's just a horrible spokesperson and that's it. I truly hope that's all it is. The problem is it's hard for some not to assume the least humanitarian interpretation of that from an administration that has already taken children away and secretly shipped them to other states without so much as keeping track of who their parents were.Last edited by Commando; 10-26-2018, 02:24 PM."I'm anti, can't no government handle a commando / Your man don't want it, Trump's a bitch! I'll make his whole brand go under,"
Comment
-
Originally posted by LVAllen View PostThe 800 people being assigned are active duty military, ordered from the Pentagon. Not National Guard.
I read that some law enforcement personnel on the border are saying the troops are making zero difference and it's a collosal waste of resources.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bo Diddley View Post
I read that some law enforcement personnel on the border are saying the troops are making zero difference and it's a collosal waste of resources."I'm anti, can't no government handle a commando / Your man don't want it, Trump's a bitch! I'll make his whole brand go under,"
Comment
-
I agree that more context may be needed for the Secretary's statement, but imagine a law enforcement officer saying the same thing just before a peaceful demonstration in D.C., a march in Selma, or even Burning Man. Is there any evidence that participants in the "caravan" are armed or a physical threat? Evidence other than Trump's typically baseless assurances that there are members of MS-13 and Middle Easterners hiding among the rest of the group?
Comment
-
Originally posted by PaloAltoCougar View PostI agree that more context may be needed for the Secretary's statement, but imagine a law enforcement officer saying the same thing just before a peaceful demonstration in D.C., a march in Selma, or even Burning Man. Is there any evidence that participants in the "caravan" are armed or a physical threat? Evidence other than Trump's typically baseless assurances that there are members of MS-13 and Middle Easterners hiding among the rest of the group?
There are 4-10k people, the leaders of whom are using rhetoric suggesting they plan to rush the border and get in. Is that a threat of violence? Do we have the right and even obligation to control the integrity of our national borders? I just don't get the excitement here. The military is being used to protect the border. If the aliens don't rush the military, don't attack the military, etc., then there will be no problem. If the military on the border is threatened by persons outside of the border seeking to violate the border's integrity, then I would expect them to be prepared to defend themselves. If, by contrast, there is no threat and these aliens simply wait to be processed, then the military should not shoot.
I actually just tracked down the interview Nielsen gave to Fox News. A couple of interesting things:
1. WHen asked if the military is armed, she said all rules of engagement for the military are set by Secretary Mattis. She expects these rules of engagement to be determined as they gain more information about the caravan and its destination and its conduct.
2. Rules of Engagement for Border Patrol services are the same as they have been; no change.
3. She was asked "if people cross the border will they be shot at?" in response to which she said "We do not have any intention right now to shoot at anyone but they will be apprehended." She then also points out that officers have the right to self defense. She was then asked the follow-up "So, if they (the military or border patrol agents) are shot at they will shoot back?" and she said "No, not necessarily, we would have to work through that."
Here is the link to the videotaped interview, these comments are at about the 2:00 minute mark.
http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/10/2...cannot-come-us
WTH is wrong with that position or those comments? In fact, after listening to the interview, it is very, very clear that the CNN characterization was very misleading and seems meant to stir up the precise reaction some of you have had here, as opposed to trying to accurately report what the secretary actually said.PLesa excuse the tpyos.
Comment
-
Originally posted by BlueK View PostYes. It's rational to walk away from a horrific situation in their home country of complete anarchy. is this even a serious question? Maybe if you were in the same situation you would make a different decision, but that doesn't mean either decision is irrational.
I don't think it is out of the question that a portion of these people, having been thus denied, would act maybe a bit irrationally, a bit angrily, and attack the armed border guards.Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.
"The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American
GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!
Comment
-
Originally posted by BlueK View PostIt would be a pretty extreme situation that would require someone to get shot.
Besides, if they army/national guard didn't have guns, how effective would they be at turning away a hoard of 7,000 people?Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.
"The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American
GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!
Comment
-
Originally posted by creekster View PostThere are 4-10k people, the leaders of whom are using rhetoric suggesting they plan to rush the border and get in. Is that a threat of violence? Do we have the right and even obligation to control the integrity of our national borders? I just don't get the excitement here. The military is being used to protect the border. If the aliens don't rush the military, don't attack the military, etc., then there will be no problem. If the military on the border is threatened by persons outside of the border seeking to violate the border's integrity, then I would expect them to be prepared to defend themselves. If, by contrast, there is no threat and these aliens simply wait to be processed, then the military should not shoot.
I actually just tracked down the interview Nielsen gave to Fox News. A couple of interesting things:
1. WHen asked if the military is armed, she said all rules of engagement for the military are set by Secretary Mattis. She expects these rules of engagement to be determined as they gain more information about the caravan and its destination and its conduct.
2. Rules of Engagement for Border Patrol services are the same as they have been; no change.
3. She was asked "if people cross the border will they be shot at?" in response to which she said "We do not have any intention right now to shoot at anyone but they will be apprehended." She then also points out that officers have the right to self defense. She was then asked the follow-up "So, if they (the military or border patrol agents) are shot at they will shoot back?" and she said "No, not necessarily, we would have to work through that."
Here is the link to the videotaped interview, these comments are at about the 2:00 minute mark.
http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/10/2...cannot-come-us
WTH is wrong with that position or those comments? In fact, after listening to the interview, it is very, very clear that the CNN characterization was very misleading and seems meant to stir up the precise reaction some of you have had here, as opposed to trying to accurately report what the secretary actually said.
The interview question, missing from the original report and quoted response, adds some context that I noted was missing. Still, while I am neither "excited" nor angered () by the quote, I don't like it--the "right now" qualifier is unnecessarily inflammatory for both sides of the issue (to those on the left, it's evidence of a potentially brutal response; to those on the far right, it feeds the macho "stop 'em at all costs" mentality). Unfortunately, Trump, and occasionally his underlings, use words like sledgehammers rather than scalpels.Last edited by PaloAltoCougar; 10-26-2018, 04:51 PM.
Comment
-
FTR, I have no plans to chop some of you to bits with an ax right now."There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
"It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
"Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View PostFTR, I have no plans to chop some of you to bits with an ax right now."Discipleship is not a spectator sport. We cannot expect to experience the blessing of faith by standing inactive on the sidelines any more than we can experience the benefits of health by sitting on a sofa watching sporting events on television and giving advice to the athletes. And yet for some, “spectator discipleship” is a preferred if not primary way of worshipping." -Pres. Uchtdorf
Comment
Comment