On May 15, 2:12=A0pm, ScottW <Scott...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On May 15, 11:22=A0am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> <artygu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > On May 15, 12:12=A0pm, ScottW <Scott...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > On May 15, 8:27=A0am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > > <artygu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > On May 14, 2:39=A0pm, ScottW <Scott...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > > >http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/ImmigrationFactSheet.pdf
>
> > > > > Note the complete lack of detail on border security
>
> > > > Obama:
> > > > "He sup****ts additional personnel, infrastructure and technology
on
> > > > the border and at our ****ts of entry. Obama believes we need
> > > > additional Customs and Border Protection agents equipped with
better=
> > > > technology and real-time intelligence."
>
> > > No mention of a fence?
>
> > Fences are stupid ideas, 2pid. I'd rather see more boots on the ground
> > and more high-tech solutions.
>
> =A02 guys with ATVs can effectively police lots of fence. =A0 Then can
do
> **** on an open border.
No, two guys can look at lots of fence. If they see something two guys
can't do ****.
I'm sure that's what you meant.
> > Fences, like ladders and shovels, are low-tech.
>
> =A0and effective. =A0 They do need to be manned, but the manpower
required=
> to police an open border is orders of magnitude greater.
Nobody said "open border".
> > Obstacles have to be
> > reinforced with things like minefields to be even slightly successful.
>
> =A0Obstacles have to be patrolled. =A0Every institution I know of that
> tries to keep people in or out employs obstacles.
In small, defined areas like prisons, sure. You're talking a couple of
thousand miles here.
> > Fences are feel-good solutions for morons.
>
> > > McCain has repeatedly said he will complete the fence, secure the
> > > border, and have border states governors certify the result.
> > > Sadly, that means idiot Arnold will have to ask his wife what she
> > > thinks.
>
> > As I said, feel-good solutions.
>
> =A0You don't put a fence out there and walk away.
> =A0It in combination with patrols are required.
> =A0Failure to do both will be ineffective.
Douglas Massey, a professor of sociology at Princeton University who
studies the border and illegal immigration, said the government should
spend its money differently.
"It's a waste of money," he said. "If you want to increase security,
better to use some of that money for ****ts and trans****tation systems.
If you want to lower the rate of Mexican immigration to the U.S., I
would spend it on development assistance for Mexico."
A guest worker program would reduce the illegal traffic at the border,
he also said, and free up the Border Patrol to focus on keeping out
drug smugglers and potential terrorists.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=3D/c/a/2007/01/08/BAG6RNEJJG1.DT=
L
> > > But I agree, this is pathetic policy definition upon which the
> > > American people must base their decision.
> > > Bring back Tancredo!
>
> > So let's not rip on one candidate without at least mentioning the
> > other.
> > =A0Obama's position outlined on his site is *far* more detailed
> > than McCain's.
>
> =A0 =A0If Obama doesn't build the fence he'll have to put an army on the
> border.
> =A0 Even Armies put up obstacles when they want to secure a position.
No, armies put up obstacles when they want to delay an opponent to
gain time to react.
Military obstacles are covered by field artillery, armed aircraft,
defensive firing positions, a large amount of observers and
minefields, which was my point. Obstacles slow things down, they do
not deny access or "secure" anything. Do you know what a "sapper" is?
Look it up. Oh, here. You wouldn't find the right defintion anyway:
sapper
n. A military engineer who does sapping (digging trenches or
undermining fortifications)
http://dictionary.die.net/sapper
They specialize in defeating obstacles. The point is, any obstacle can
be, and will be, defeated if there's a motivation to do so.
There is no need for an expensive fence. I was not implying NO fence,
just that is it not a very effective first-line defense. It's a feel-
good solution. Nothing more.
A few bands of concertina wire and a chain-link fence would work just
as well.
> > > BTW, we no have about a boat a week showing up abondoned on San
Diego
> > > shores.
>
> > The coast is a natural fence.
>
> =A0 Boats don't over fences.
The point is obstacles will always be overcome if there's a motivation
to do so.
> > > > > He also claims he wants to crack down on employers but also
wants =
to
> > > > > discontinue raids.
>
> > > > I don't see that on the website you've cited. Where does it say
that=
?
>
> > >http://www.barackobama.com/issues/immigration/#remove-incentives
>
> > I see nothing on "He also claims he wants to crack down on employers
> > but also wants to discontinue raids."
>
> =A0http://www.barackobama.com/issues/immigration/
>
> Immigration raids are ineffective: Despite a sevenfold increase in
> recent years, immigration raids only netted 3,600 arrests in 2006 and
> have placed all the burdens of a broken system onto immigrant
> families.
But you said Obama said that "he wants to crack down on employers but
also wants to discontinue raids." I don't see where.
> > > Can you reconcile these obviously conflicted statements?
>
> > What conflict?
>
> =A0How do you crack down on employers AND bring people out of the
> shadows
> at the same time?
By offering a path to citizen****p, which is the only thing that makes
sense.
|
