# Trump we will guard our border with our military



## MindWars

Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military




President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.

“We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing 

Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

MindWars said:


> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!


  There should be a private/public force put upon the border.  Let all US citizens participate for We the People have so much to lose if this nation is conquered by invasion.


> The "Patriots" are a heavily armed group who patrol the U.S. border with Mexico, trying to deter immigrants from crossing the border illegally. The group, who portray themselves as defending the American way, use a strong display of force to intimidate anyone from making the crossing from Mexico into Texas.
> 
> *'Armed patriots': the private citizens out to secure the U ...*
> www.yahoo.com/news/armed-patriots-private-citizens-secure-u-border-100519616.html


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

I'd gladly do a stint on the border for free.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Trump: 'We're going to be guarding our border with the military'Trump: 'We're going to be guarding our border with the military' - CNNPolitics

Finally, something I can agree with Trump on, too bad he still wants his stupid wall


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## harmonica

I've been saying this for years
bring some of the overseas troops home
this is a triple win!
1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
etc etc


----------



## EvilCat Breath

The military needs to be able to shoot to kill.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Tipsycatlover said:


> The military needs to be able to shoot to kill.



  Yep....you drop a few of em and this shit will end pronto.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.

But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.

But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.


----------



## Golfing Gator

TemplarKormac said:


> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah.



Actually the military is the best thing, not the next best


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Golfing Gator

harmonica said:


> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc



I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## TemplarKormac

Golfing Gator said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually the military is the best thing, not the next best
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Click to expand...


I disagree. Just ask the ancient Chinese how well a wall worked with soldiers posted along its breadth. They go hand in hand.

What do you expect them to do? Just stand there in front of a metal see through fence with binoculars?


----------



## MindWars

This is QANON,   maybe it will make sense now ......
Qanon is more than the average person realizes. 





Q


----------



## TheOldSchool

Better than wasting time in the mideast (even though we will continue to and probably do it more soon)


----------



## MindWars

“We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing up for court.”

Media aggregator Matt Drudge sounded his iconic “Drudge Alarm” in reaction to Trump’s bold announcement.

The caravan is comprised mostly of Hondurans led by far-left political outreach group Pueblo sin Fronteras, or “Peoples Without Borders,” who vow “to provide shelter and safety to migrants and refugees in transit, accompany them in their journey, and together demand respect for our human rights.”

Trump Sending Military To Border To Stop Caravan


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

TemplarKormac said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually the military is the best thing, not the next best
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I disagree. Just ask the ancient Chinese how well a wall worked with soldiers posted along its breadth. They go hand in hand.
> 
> What do you expect them to do? Just stand there in front of a metal see through fence with binoculars?
Click to expand...




> Just stand there in front of a metal see through fence with binoculars?


 Not at all.  Just ask them this?


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

You know this is gonna really piss off the liberals.


----------



## TemplarKormac

TheOldSchool said:


> Better than wasting time in the mideast (even though we will continue to and probably do it more soon)



Interestingly enough you still insist on calling him a traitor. 

Noted.


----------



## harmonica

Golfing Gator said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Click to expand...

what's not legal??


----------



## Dschrute3

Most nations in the world employ their Military to secure their borders.


----------



## Montrovant

harmonica said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what's not legal??
Click to expand...


Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.


----------



## TheOldSchool

TemplarKormac said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> Better than wasting time in the mideast (even though we will continue to and probably do it more soon)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interestingly enough you still insist on calling him a traitor.
> 
> Noted.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.  The man sidles up to dictators and attacks our allies.  He wages war, personally at times, against Americans.  And he does so with Russian help, which he knows about and has never spoken against.

Putin does not want Trump leading the country because he has our interests at heart.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

Montrovant said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
Click to expand...




> *Posse Comitatus Act*
> The *Posse* *Comitatus* *Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes. The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using its military personnel to act as domestic law enforcement personnel.
> *Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia *




How is defending our borders from an invading horde of illegals be domestic law enforcement?  Only way to stop an invasion is to repel them with force.  After a few 1000 bodies left just south of the border, the illegals and liberals would get the message that We the People don't want criminals here anymore.


----------



## harmonica

Montrovant said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
Click to expand...

but it's not a domestic issue 
domestic
*2*.
existing or occurring *inside* a particular country; not foreign or international.
these are foreigners trying to cross our border


----------



## g5000

We need to shoot these starving kids who are fleeing gangs!  It's a moral obligation!


----------



## harmonica

andaronjim said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Posse Comitatus Act*
> The *Posse* *Comitatus* *Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes. The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using its military personnel to act as domestic law enforcement personnel.
> *Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is defending our borders from an invading horde of illegals be domestic law enforcement?  Only way to stop an invasion is to repel them with force.  After a few 1000 bodies left just south of the border, the illegals and liberals would get the message that We the People don't want criminals here anymore.
Click to expand...

agree--it's just like a home invasion
..I DON"T CARE if they are picking flowers or getting water --shoot to KILL
..I DON"T CARE if children get KILLED--their parents are to blame for invading--committing a crime...if a criminal gets shot committing a crime--that's GOOD!!


----------



## aaronleland

TemplarKormac said:


> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.



The Great Wall was built in stages over a period of over 2000 years, by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of workers.


----------



## TemplarKormac

aaronleland said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Great Wall was built in stages over a period of over 2000 years, by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of workers.
Click to expand...


Perhaps I should have been more precise, I'm only referring to the final product built during the Ming Dynasty. And today, we may not even need that many workers to build it. Remember, we have technology that is quantum leaps and bounds above what the ancient Chinese had.


----------



## aaronleland

TemplarKormac said:


> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Great Wall was built in stages over a period of over 2000 years, by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of workers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Perhaps I should have been more precise, I'm only referring to the final product built during the Ming Dynasty. And today, we may not even need that many workers to build it. Remember, we have technology that is quantum leaps and bounds above what the ancient Chinese had.
Click to expand...


Even the portion built by the Ming Dynasty took 200 years to build.


----------



## Soggy in NOLA

g5000 said:


> We need to shoot these starving kids who are fleeing gangs!  It's a moral obligation!



Nobody's advocating any such thing.


----------



## g5000

Soggy in NOLA said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We need to shoot these starving kids who are fleeing gangs!  It's a moral obligation!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody's advocating any such thing.
Click to expand...

*cough*



Tipsycatlover said:


> The military needs to be able to shoot to kill.








.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Montrovant said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
Click to expand...

Not even close.   The military is not being used in law enforcement activity.   It is being used to repel an invasion much like the coast guard does at sea.


----------



## rightwinger

He should have the military guard the border and make Mexico pay for it


----------



## Geaux4it

Hey yea

-Geaux

*Trump says he will put U.S. military on southern border*

*President Trump said Tuesday that he plans to deploy U.S. troops along the southern border to prevent illegal crossings "until we can have a wall."*

*“Until we can have a wall and proper security, we are going to be guarding our border with the military. That's a big step,” Trump told reporters at the White House.*

*Defense Secretary James Mattis was sitting next to Trump when he made his comments. *

*Trump says he will put U.S. military on southern border*


----------



## EvilCat Breath

g5000 said:


> We need to shoot these starving kids who are fleeing gangs!  It's a moral obligation!


They aren't starving.  Most are obese from the films of them and they ARE the gangs.  Shoot them where they stand and leave the bodies as a warning.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

rightwinger said:


> He should have the military guard the border and make Mexico pay for it


Tax remittances. Right out of Mexico's pocket.


----------



## TemplarKormac

aaronleland said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Great Wall was built in stages over a period of over 2000 years, by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of workers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Perhaps I should have been more precise, I'm only referring to the final product built during the Ming Dynasty. And today, we may not even need that many workers to build it. Remember, we have technology that is quantum leaps and bounds above what the ancient Chinese had.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even the portion built by the Ming Dynasty took 200 years to build.
Click to expand...


And you think it will take us 200 years to build this one? Come on Aaron.


----------



## Geaux4it

He is on TV now with Baltic leaders. Very Presidential. He also said he contacted Mexico about the caravan and said they were breaking it up

-Geaux


----------



## g5000

Tipsycatlover said:


> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We need to shoot these starving kids who are fleeing gangs!  It's a moral obligation!
> 
> 
> 
> They aren't starving.  Most are obese from the films of them and they ARE the gangs.  Shoot them where they stand and leave the bodies as a warning.
Click to expand...

Soggy in NOLA 

TA-DAAAAAAA!


----------



## aaronleland

TemplarKormac said:


> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Great Wall was built in stages over a period of over 2000 years, by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of workers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Perhaps I should have been more precise, I'm only referring to the final product built during the Ming Dynasty. And today, we may not even need that many workers to build it. Remember, we have technology that is quantum leaps and bounds above what the ancient Chinese had.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even the portion built by the Ming Dynasty took 200 years to build.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you think it will take us 200 years to build this one? Come on Aaron.
Click to expand...


At this rate we won't have enough funding approved in 200 years, let alone a 2000 mile wall built.


----------



## Rambunctious

Way to go Trump!!!! a real American instead of a Kenyan...what a difference! 

Why do Dems want open borders while at the same time want to take away our guns? Did they forget 9-11? What has happened to the democrat party to make them so anti anything American?


----------



## EvilCat Breath

aaronleland said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Great Wall was built in stages over a period of over 2000 years, by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of workers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Perhaps I should have been more precise, I'm only referring to the final product built during the Ming Dynasty. And today, we may not even need that many workers to build it. Remember, we have technology that is quantum leaps and bounds above what the ancient Chinese had.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even the portion built by the Ming Dynasty took 200 years to build.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you think it will take us 200 years to build this one? Come on Aaron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At this rate we won't have enough funding approved in 200 years, let alone a 2000 mile wall built.
Click to expand...

That's why we need to tax remittances to pay for the wall.


----------



## TemplarKormac

g5000 said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We need to shoot these starving kids who are fleeing gangs!  It's a moral obligation!
> 
> 
> 
> They aren't starving.  Most are obese from the films of them and they ARE the gangs.  Shoot them where they stand and leave the bodies as a warning.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Soggy in NOLA
> 
> TA-DAAAAAAA!
Click to expand...


Curious, what part of that mentions "starving kids"? We're talking about adults here, from gangs and drug cartels. 

Stop it, g5. Nobody is suggesting that we kill children. If we have to use deadly force to protect our borders from dangerous criminal elements, so be it.

Or, we can dispense with the entire notion of national sovereignty altogether.


----------



## TemplarKormac

aaronleland said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Great Wall was built in stages over a period of over 2000 years, by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of workers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Perhaps I should have been more precise, I'm only referring to the final product built during the Ming Dynasty. And today, we may not even need that many workers to build it. Remember, we have technology that is quantum leaps and bounds above what the ancient Chinese had.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even the portion built by the Ming Dynasty took 200 years to build.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you think it will take us 200 years to build this one? Come on Aaron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At this rate we won't have enough funding approved in 200 years, let alone a 2000 mile wall built.
Click to expand...


Hmm, if you only knew the power of American industry. How else do you think we managed to win World War II? By lending moral support?


----------



## depotoo

They are defending our borders from foreign invaders, not against US citizens.





Montrovant said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
Click to expand...


----------



## depotoo

Did they mention to shoot children in that post?  No.
You are making outlandish accusations. 




g5000 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We need to shoot these starving kids who are fleeing gangs!  It's a moral obligation!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody's advocating any such thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *cough*
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> The military needs to be able to shoot to kill.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
Click to expand...


----------



## Geaux4it

Shoot, ask questions later

-Geaux


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

aaronleland said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Great Wall was built in stages over a period of over 2000 years, by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of workers.
Click to expand...




> The Great Wall was built in stages over a period of over 2000 years, by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of workers





> Hoover Dam began operations in 1936. It impounds one of the largest reservoirs (by volume) in the United States. Originally called “Boulder Dam”, it was renamed Hoover Dam after congress voted to make the name official in 1947. Even today, *75 years* after it was built, it remains one of the largest, most reliable hydroelectric generators in the US.
> *How Long Will The Hoover Dam Last? - Zidbits*
> zidbits.com/2013/05/how-long-will-the-hoover-dam-last


 We have the technology to build the wall in a few years.  That is why the liberals are so afraid of it, no more future democrat voters...


----------



## TemplarKormac

Geaux4it said:


> Shoot, ask questions later
> 
> -Geaux



That's a bit much. We aren't communist East Germany.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

TemplarKormac said:


> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shoot, ask questions later
> 
> -Geaux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a bit much. We aren't communist East Germany.
Click to expand...

in East Germany they shot their own Citizens going over the wall to LEAVE their country.  We just want to shoot people who are trying to get in OUR country illegally...Only way to end this unwanted, everlasting invasion..


----------



## aaronleland

TemplarKormac said:


> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Great Wall was built in stages over a period of over 2000 years, by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of workers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps I should have been more precise, I'm only referring to the final product built during the Ming Dynasty. And today, we may not even need that many workers to build it. Remember, we have technology that is quantum leaps and bounds above what the ancient Chinese had.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even the portion built by the Ming Dynasty took 200 years to build.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you think it will take us 200 years to build this one? Come on Aaron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At this rate we won't have enough funding approved in 200 years, let alone a 2000 mile wall built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmm, if you only knew the power of American industry. How else do you think we managed to win World War II? By lending moral support?
Click to expand...


During World War 2 we were fighting an enemy on two fronts, and millions needed jobs due to the Great Depression. Today we have a decent economy and relatively low unemployment. Many American's aren't looking for "moral support". Despite what some Trump supporters may believe a lot of people really don't care about the wall one way or another. It's a band-aid. A very expensive band-aid.


----------



## TemplarKormac

andaronjim said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shoot, ask questions later
> 
> -Geaux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a bit much. We aren't communist East Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> in East Germany they shot their own Citizens going over the wall to LEAVE their country.  We just want to shoot people who are trying to get in OUR country illegally...Only way to end this unwanted, everlasting invasion..
Click to expand...


If we're going to use deadly force, restraint is necessary. It can't be indiscriminate. 

I will not stand for such barbarity.


----------



## Missouri_Mike

Looks like it may happen.

BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border

I like it. Whatever it takes.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Missouri_Mike said:


> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.



One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.

The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.


----------



## Rexx Taylor

i hope Godzilla and Rodan are on the way


----------



## harmonica

aaronleland said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps I should have been more precise, I'm only referring to the final product built during the Ming Dynasty. And today, we may not even need that many workers to build it. Remember, we have technology that is quantum leaps and bounds above what the ancient Chinese had.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even the portion built by the Ming Dynasty took 200 years to build.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you think it will take us 200 years to build this one? Come on Aaron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At this rate we won't have enough funding approved in 200 years, let alone a 2000 mile wall built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmm, if you only knew the power of American industry. How else do you think we managed to win World War II? By lending moral support?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> During World War 2 we were fighting an enemy on two fronts, and millions needed jobs due to the Great Depression. Today we have a decent economy and relatively low unemployment. Many American's aren't looking for "moral support". Despite what some Trump supporters may believe a lot of people really don't care about the wall one way or another. It's a band-aid. A very expensive band-aid.
Click to expand...

big difference between WW2 and today-----the HUGE debt!!!!


----------



## TemplarKormac

aaronleland said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps I should have been more precise, I'm only referring to the final product built during the Ming Dynasty. And today, we may not even need that many workers to build it. Remember, we have technology that is quantum leaps and bounds above what the ancient Chinese had.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even the portion built by the Ming Dynasty took 200 years to build.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And you think it will take us 200 years to build this one? Come on Aaron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At this rate we won't have enough funding approved in 200 years, let alone a 2000 mile wall built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmm, if you only knew the power of American industry. How else do you think we managed to win World War II? By lending moral support?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> During World War 2 we were fighting an enemy on two fronts, and millions needed jobs due to the Great Depression. Today we have a decent economy and relatively low unemployment. Many American's aren't looking for "moral support". Despite what some Trump supporters may believe a lot of people really don't care about the wall one way or another. It's a band-aid. A very expensive band-aid.
Click to expand...


I don't like the defeatism here. Like I told g5, if we can't take steps to enforce our borders, we should dispense with our national sovereignty and get it over with. We are clearly not interested in maintaining it.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

Golfing Gator said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
Click to expand...


What's not legal?


----------



## DJT for Life

theDoctorisIn said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
Click to expand...


Not if he used NG's on the border, backed up by regular troops.


----------



## Missouri_Mike

theDoctorisIn said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
Click to expand...

And that act supersedes National security how?


----------



## RetiredGySgt

theDoctorisIn said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
Click to expand...

It is not ILLEGAL to guard the border with troops since the mission of the MILITARY is to protect us from foreign invaders.


----------



## aaronleland

TemplarKormac said:


> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even the portion built by the Ming Dynasty took 200 years to build.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you think it will take us 200 years to build this one? Come on Aaron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At this rate we won't have enough funding approved in 200 years, let alone a 2000 mile wall built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmm, if you only knew the power of American industry. How else do you think we managed to win World War II? By lending moral support?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> During World War 2 we were fighting an enemy on two fronts, and millions needed jobs due to the Great Depression. Today we have a decent economy and relatively low unemployment. Many American's aren't looking for "moral support". Despite what some Trump supporters may believe a lot of people really don't care about the wall one way or another. It's a band-aid. A very expensive band-aid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't like the defeatism here. Like I told g5, if we can't take steps to enforce our borders, we should dispense with our national sovereignty and get it over with. We are clearly not interested in maintaining it.
Click to expand...


Where is the defeatism? There are a lot of ways to protect our borders other than a wall. Bringing troops back from overseas to protect our borders would not only cost less, but probably strengthen our economy.


----------



## depotoo

Rambunctious said:


> Way to go Trump!!!! a real American instead of a Kenyan...what a difference!
> 
> Why do Dems want open borders while at the same time want to take away our guns? Did they forget 9-11? What has happened to the democrat party to make them so anti anything American?


A foreign actor disguised as a citizen.


----------



## TNHarley

The PCA can easily be worked around.


----------



## Tijn Von Ingersleben

theDoctorisIn said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
Click to expand...

The PURPOSE of the military is national defense e.g. US borders. This has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.


----------



## TemplarKormac

aaronleland said:


> Where is the defeatism? There are a lot of ways to protect our borders other than a wall. Bringing troops back from overseas to protect our borders would not only cost less, but probably strengthen our economy.



What I am suggesting is that we supplement the military with a wall. We could use the economic benefits from bringing our troops home to build it. 

I do admit, making Mexico pay for it is a bit unrealistic.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Missouri_Mike said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And that act supersedes National security how?
Click to expand...


Because we are a nation of laws, not a nation of emotional hyperbole.

As mush as it must burn your ass, Trump isn't a dictator.


----------



## rightwinger

Tipsycatlover said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> He should have the military guard the border and make Mexico pay for it
> 
> 
> 
> Tax remittances. Right out of Mexico's pocket.
Click to expand...


What is he waiting for?
He has been president for a year


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Tijn Von Ingersleben said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The PURPOSE of the military is national defense e.g. US borders. This has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.
Click to expand...


Of course it does. Barring exceptional circumstances, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the deployment of US military on US soil.


----------



## Staidhup

About freaking time! If the boys and girls that you elected to represent you in Washington will not support a  wall, enforce federal immigration law, then by all means deploy troops, great training ground! good experience in patrolling, night time ops, surveillance, and tactical maneuvers. It will be interesting to see what they round up. They could even set up retention centers to  learn how to logistically process and deport those they capture.


----------



## fncceo

theDoctorisIn said:


> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.



Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...


----------



## theDoctorisIn

RetiredGySgt said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is not ILLEGAL to guard the border with troops since the mission of the MILITARY is to protect us from foreign invaders.
Click to expand...


Yes, it is.


----------



## rightwinger

harmonica said:


> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even the portion built by the Ming Dynasty took 200 years to build.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you think it will take us 200 years to build this one? Come on Aaron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At this rate we won't have enough funding approved in 200 years, let alone a 2000 mile wall built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmm, if you only knew the power of American industry. How else do you think we managed to win World War II? By lending moral support?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> During World War 2 we were fighting an enemy on two fronts, and millions needed jobs due to the Great Depression. Today we have a decent economy and relatively low unemployment. Many American's aren't looking for "moral support". Despite what some Trump supporters may believe a lot of people really don't care about the wall one way or another. It's a band-aid. A very expensive band-aid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> big difference between WW2 and today-----the HUGE debt!!!!
Click to expand...

In the history of the US, we have never carried as much debt as we did in WWII


----------



## theDoctorisIn

fncceo said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
Click to expand...


Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.

Border security is law enforcement.


----------



## bendog

He can call up NG troops, but ..... been there done that.  LOL


----------



## flewism

The Posse Comitatus Act (187 prohibited use of the U.S. Army to aid civil officials in enforcing the law or suppressing civil disorder unless expressly ordered to do so by the president. Southern Democratic members of the House who resented widespread use of federal troops during Reconstruction introduced the law.

https://science.howstuffworks.com/delta-force4.htm
http://www.billslinksandmore.com/20...r-13528-subverts-posse-comitatus-act-of-1878/

http://scholars.law.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1668&context=nlj


----------



## TNHarley

bendog said:


> He can call up NG troops, but ..... been there done that.  LOL


and the marines, i believe.
IDK why he would do that but apparently he could. lol


----------



## flewism

The *United States Army* serves as the land-based branch of the U.S. Armed Forces. Section 3062 of Title 10, U.S. Code defines the *purpose* of the *army* as: Preserving the peace and security and providing for the defense of the *United States*, the Commonwealths and possessions and any areas occupied by the *United States*.


----------



## bendog

Even aside from the posse commitatus

http://policy.defense.gov/portals/11/Documents/hdasa/references/10_USC_375.pdf

Congress would have to approve it, and it ain't happening.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Missouri_Mike said:


> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.



I have been suggesting it for my whole time on this board getting attacked by both sides for doing so.  

Now that Trump suggested it at least one side will agree with me!! 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

TemplarKormac said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shoot, ask questions later
> 
> -Geaux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a bit much. We aren't communist East Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> in East Germany they shot their own Citizens going over the wall to LEAVE their country.  We just want to shoot people who are trying to get in OUR country illegally...Only way to end this unwanted, everlasting invasion..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If we're going to use deadly force, restraint is necessary. It can't be indiscriminate.
> 
> I will not stand for such barbarity.
Click to expand...


Restraint, yes.  But it needs to be made crystal clear to them, and anyone else with such thoughts of busting in that it will no longer be tolerated, and also they will not be permitted to game the legal system here to their advantage.


----------



## Mac1958

Still wondering why we never see a discussion about why Mexico's "leadership" is so proud to help its own people escape its country.

Maybe they should spend that energy making their country less of a blatantly corrupt hell hole.


----------



## SassyIrishLass

Just use National Guard....nothing anyone can do about it


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

theDoctorisIn said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
Click to expand...


Hilarious.

This would not be a police action, but border defense falling under national security.  The PCA would not apply.


----------



## bendog

Golfing Gator said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have been suggesting it for my whole time on this board getting attacked by both sides for doing so.
> 
> Now that Trump suggested it at least one side will agree with me!!
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Click to expand...

Both W and Obama sent NG troops to the border.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Billy_Kinetta said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shoot, ask questions later
> 
> -Geaux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a bit much. We aren't communist East Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> in East Germany they shot their own Citizens going over the wall to LEAVE their country.  We just want to shoot people who are trying to get in OUR country illegally...Only way to end this unwanted, everlasting invasion..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If we're going to use deadly force, restraint is necessary. It can't be indiscriminate.
> 
> I will not stand for such barbarity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Restraint, yes.  But it needs to be made crystal clear to them, and anyone else with such thoughts of busting in that it will no longer be tolerated, and also they will not be permitted to game the legal system here to their advantage.
Click to expand...


I don't see why that can't be accomplished.


----------



## bendog

Why do Trumpbots fall for this crap time and time again.  Trump tweets out some bullshit notion that been floated and shot down repeatedly, and suddenly he's not just brilliant but has a totally new idea that nobody ever considered?  LOL


----------



## easyt65

theDoctorisIn said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
Click to expand...

He tweeted he was going to beat Hillary....


----------



## bodecea

DJT for Life said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not if he used NG's on the border, backed up by regular troops.
Click to expand...

That didn't work well last time they tried it....killed an American citizen out watching his family's sheep.


----------



## gipper

theDoctorisIn said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
Click to expand...

That act means nothing to the ruling class anymore.  Hell...nearly all our large police departments nationwide have become militarized and stocked with weapons from the US military.


----------



## Montrovant

Tipsycatlover said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not even close.   The military is not being used in law enforcement activity.   It is being used to repel an invasion much like the coast guard does at sea.
Click to expand...


As I understand it, the Coast Guard is not restricted by Posse Comitatus, neither is the National Guard.


----------



## bodecea

easyt65 said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> He tweeted he was going to beat Hillary....
Click to expand...

Occam's Razor.


----------



## easyt65

bodecea said:


> Occam's Razor.


No, Hillary's 2016 loss, making her a 2-Time Loser.


----------



## Montrovant

andaronjim said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Posse Comitatus Act*
> The *Posse* *Comitatus* *Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes. The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using its military personnel to act as domestic law enforcement personnel.
> *Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is defending our borders from an invading horde of illegals be domestic law enforcement?  Only way to stop an invasion is to repel them with force.  After a few 1000 bodies left just south of the border, the illegals and liberals would get the message that We the People don't want criminals here anymore.
Click to expand...


First of all, "invading horde" is a silly characterization.  Secondly, I am pretty sure ICE is a law enforcement agency.  Third, if this is an invasion, who is it an invasion by?  Fourth, why would the only bodies be south of the border?  Do you think no illegals enter the country through the Canadian border?  Fifth, I'd say there is no realistic chance that the federal government will authorize using lethal force on someone simply because they enter the country illegally (ignoring whether such an order would be deemed legal/Constitutional).  Finally, I did not say that Posse Comitatus was necessarily the argument being made, merely that is might be.


----------



## Camp

Trump is using a false flag situation. convoys of invaders headed towards the border, as the foundation for his scam designed to promote his wall. There is no military necessity needed to repel an invading force. Unarmed civilians are coming to established manned checkpoints seeking asylum. Current border guards and immigration officials are completely able to handle the situation. Applicants can be turned away or accepted and housed in already available facilities. 
This is nothing more than a Liar Trump con job.


----------



## easyt65

Camp said:


> Trump is using a false flag situation. convoys of invaders headed towards the border, as the foundation for his scam designed to promote his wall. There is no military necessity needed to repel an invading force. Unarmed civilians are coming to established manned checkpoints seeking asylum. Current border guards and immigration officials are completely able to handle the situation. Applicants can be turned away or accepted and housed in already available facilities.
> This is nothing more than a Liar Trump con job.


No wall needed, no military needed to repel the invaders.....and yet there are millions of them in our country illegally.  Good one.


----------



## SassyIrishLass

Camp said:


> Trump is using a false flag situation. convoys of invaders headed towards the border, as the foundation for his scam designed to promote his wall. There is no military necessity needed to repel an invading force. Unarmed civilians are coming to established manned checkpoints seeking asylum. Current border guards and immigration officials are completely able to handle the situation. Applicants can be turned away or accepted and housed in already available facilities.
> This is nothing more than a Liar Trump con job.



Literally millions of illegals already here betrays your ignorant comment


----------



## MindWars

TheOldSchool said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> Better than wasting time in the mideast (even though we will continue to and probably do it more soon)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interestingly enough you still insist on calling him a traitor.
> 
> Noted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Absolutely.  The man sidles up to dictators and attacks our allies.  He wages war, personally at times, against Americans.  And he does so with Russian help, which he knows about and has never spoken against.
> 
> Putin does not want Trump leading the country because he has our interests at heart.
Click to expand...



*The Communist Takeover Of 
America - 45 Declared Goals*

From Greg Swank
12-4-2

You are about to read a list of 45 goals that found their way down the halls of our great Capitol back in 1963. As you read this, 39 years later, you should be shocked by the events that have played themselves out. I first ran across this list 3 years ago but was unable to attain a copy and it has bothered me ever since. Recently, Jeff Rense posted it on his site and I would like to thank him for doing so. rense.com
Communist Goals (1963) Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963
Current Communist Goals EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 10, 1963 .
Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.
At Mrs. Nordman's request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following "Current Communist Goals," which she identifies as an excerpt from "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen:
[From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen]
1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.).....................


The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals


----------



## Camp

easyt65 said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump is using a false flag situation. convoys of invaders headed towards the border, as the foundation for his scam designed to promote his wall. There is no military necessity needed to repel an invading force. Unarmed civilians are coming to established manned checkpoints seeking asylum. Current border guards and immigration officials are completely able to handle the situation. Applicants can be turned away or accepted and housed in already available facilities.
> This is nothing more than a Liar Trump con job.
> 
> 
> 
> No wall needed, no military needed to repel the invaders.....and yet there are millions of them in our country illegally.  Good one.
Click to expand...

You guys are such dopes. A wall nor the military will have no effect on the undocumented immigrants already here.


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac

theDoctorisIn said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
Click to expand...

Bahahaha 

No


----------



## emilynghiem

Rexx Taylor said:


> i hope Godzilla and Rodan are on the way



I thought Clinton and Sanders lost.
Are they coming back again?


----------



## MindWars

UPDATE






*Not long after Trump announced he was bringing troops home from Syria, the president said he’ll keep the military deployed on the US border “until we can have a wall and proper security.”*
Update: Trump to Keep Troops on Border Until Wall Built


----------



## easyt65

Camp said:


> easyt65 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump is using a false flag situation. convoys of invaders headed towards the border, as the foundation for his scam designed to promote his wall. There is no military necessity needed to repel an invading force. Unarmed civilians are coming to established manned checkpoints seeking asylum. Current border guards and immigration officials are completely able to handle the situation. Applicants can be turned away or accepted and housed in already available facilities.
> This is nothing more than a Liar Trump con job.
> 
> 
> 
> No wall needed, no military needed to repel the invaders.....and yet there are millions of them in our country illegally.  Good one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You guys are such dopes. A wall nor the military will have no effect on the undocumented immigrants already here.
Click to expand...

Not NOW. As I pointed out, snowflakes and Dems have been claiming for DECADES that no wall or military was needed...and yet there are millions of illegals here today.

You are as wrong now as you have been for decades.


----------



## Death Angel

Golfing Gator said:


> Actually the military is the best thing, not the next best


Presidents come an go. A wall can be forever. BOTH!


----------



## Camp

SassyIrishLass said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump is using a false flag situation. convoys of invaders headed towards the border, as the foundation for his scam designed to promote his wall. There is no military necessity needed to repel an invading force. Unarmed civilians are coming to established manned checkpoints seeking asylum. Current border guards and immigration officials are completely able to handle the situation. Applicants can be turned away or accepted and housed in already available facilities.
> This is nothing more than a Liar Trump con job.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Literally millions of illegals already here betrays your ignorant comment
Click to expand...

You missed the word in my post "current" jackass. Undocumented immigrants have been coming to America for decades and decades. Crossings of illegals have been largely successfully dealt with for over 5 years now.


----------



## TNHarley

Since trump said he was using the military to stop them, can we expect they will all be given full citizenship this time next week?


----------



## easyt65

Camp said:


> Undocumented immigrants have been coming to America for decades and decades.




While Democrats promised for decades they would build the wall in exchange for concessions for illegals. Funny how they always got what they wanted and the wall never got built, the American people always got screwed.

Barry took it to a new, Un-Constitutional, openly illegal level. He publicly declared he would not enforce US Immigration Law, publicly  violated US Immigration Law, publicly protected violent illegals, protected criminals who aided and abetted in criminal Sanctuary cities. Obama protected Human traffickers and even engaged in human trafficking, dropping off illegals all over the US without notifying state and local agencies they were coming.


----------



## TheOldSchool

MindWars said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> Better than wasting time in the mideast (even though we will continue to and probably do it more soon)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interestingly enough you still insist on calling him a traitor.
> 
> Noted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Absolutely.  The man sidles up to dictators and attacks our allies.  He wages war, personally at times, against Americans.  And he does so with Russian help, which he knows about and has never spoken against.
> 
> Putin does not want Trump leading the country because he has our interests at heart.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> *The Communist Takeover Of
> America - 45 Declared Goals*
> 
> From Greg Swank
> 12-4-2
> 
> You are about to read a list of 45 goals that found their way down the halls of our great Capitol back in 1963. As you read this, 39 years later, you should be shocked by the events that have played themselves out. I first ran across this list 3 years ago but was unable to attain a copy and it has bothered me ever since. Recently, Jeff Rense posted it on his site and I would like to thank him for doing so. rense.com
> Communist Goals (1963) Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963
> Current Communist Goals EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 10, 1963 .
> Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.
> At Mrs. Nordman's request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following "Current Communist Goals," which she identifies as an excerpt from "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen:
> [From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen]
> 1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
> 2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
> 3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
> 4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
> 5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
> 6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
> 7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
> 8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
> 9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
> 10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
> 11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.).....................
> 
> 
> The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals
Click to expand...

So you want atomic war...


----------



## Camp

easyt65 said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> easyt65 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump is using a false flag situation. convoys of invaders headed towards the border, as the foundation for his scam designed to promote his wall. There is no military necessity needed to repel an invading force. Unarmed civilians are coming to established manned checkpoints seeking asylum. Current border guards and immigration officials are completely able to handle the situation. Applicants can be turned away or accepted and housed in already available facilities.
> This is nothing more than a Liar Trump con job.
> 
> 
> 
> No wall needed, no military needed to repel the invaders.....and yet there are millions of them in our country illegally.  Good one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You guys are such dopes. A wall nor the military will have no effect on the undocumented immigrants already here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not NOW. As I pointed out, snowflakes and Dems have been claiming for DECADES that no wall or military was needed...and yet there are millions of illegals here today.
> 
> You are as wrong now as you have been for decades.
Click to expand...

American business wanted those people to come here and the government let them come. Now you want to blame it on Dems. Like Reagan or the Bush's didn't let them in. Hell, Reagan let them in and gave them amnesty.


----------



## BluesLegend

easyt65 said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Undocumented immigrants have been coming to America for decades and decades.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While Democrats promised for decades they would build the wall in exchange for concessions for illegals. Funny how they always got what they wanted and the wall never got built, the American people always got screwed.
> 
> Barry took it to a new, Un-Constitutional, openly illegal level. He publicly declared he would not enforce US Immigration Law, publicly  violated US Immigration Law, publicly protected violent illegals, protected criminals who aided and abetted in criminal Sanctuary cities. Obama protected Human traffickers and even engaged in human trafficking, dropping off illegals all over the US without notifying state and local agencies they were coming.
Click to expand...


Many underage illegals were forced into prostitution and drug trafficking by gangs...while sitting in Obama's detention centers waiting to be processed.


----------



## easyt65

Camp said:


> American business wanted those people to come here and the government let them come. Now you want to blame it on Dems. Like Reagan or the Bush's didn't let them in. Hell, Reagan let them in and gave them amnesty.


Democrats are / were part of the US Government, right? And it has been the Democrats who have kissed the asses of and lied to Illegals to keep them voting for Democrats...until recently when illegals declared they are Democrats no more because they have seen the truth.


----------



## easyt65

BluesLegend said:


> Many underage illegals were forced into prostitution and drug trafficking by gangs...while sitting in Obama's detention centers waiting to be processed.


Many were raped, abused, and sold by their 'guides' parents entrusted them with to bring them to the US.


----------



## Camp

easyt65 said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> 
> Undocumented immigrants have been coming to America for decades and decades.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> While Democrats promised for decades they would build the wall in exchange for concessions for illegals. Funny how they always got what they wanted and the wall never got built, the American people always got screwed.
> 
> Barry took it to a new, Un-Constitutional, openly illegal level. He publicly declared he would not enforce US Immigration Law, publicly  violated US Immigration Law, publicly protected violent illegals, protected criminals who aided and abetted in criminal Sanctuary cities. Obama protected Human traffickers and even engaged in human trafficking, dropping off illegals all over the US without notifying state and local agencies they were coming.
Click to expand...

You are such a liar. Give us some background and a link to this proposed wall from decades ago. Nothing you say can be taken seriously or believed.


----------



## MindWars

Hmmm,  this might not be good.........   Those who can decode know exactly what it is saying..

Anonymous on Twitter

The last one mentioned is a tell all 






Anonymous on Twitter


----------



## easyt65

Mulvaney said that Obama, Schumer and Clinton voted for a border wall in 2006.

They did vote for the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which authorized building a fence along about 700 miles of the border between the United States and Mexico.

LOOK IT UP.


----------



## MindWars

TheOldSchool said:


> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> Better than wasting time in the mideast (even though we will continue to and probably do it more soon)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interestingly enough you still insist on calling him a traitor.
> 
> Noted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Absolutely.  The man sidles up to dictators and attacks our allies.  He wages war, personally at times, against Americans.  And he does so with Russian help, which he knows about and has never spoken against.
> 
> Putin does not want Trump leading the country because he has our interests at heart.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> *The Communist Takeover Of
> America - 45 Declared Goals*
> 
> From Greg Swank
> 12-4-2
> 
> You are about to read a list of 45 goals that found their way down the halls of our great Capitol back in 1963. As you read this, 39 years later, you should be shocked by the events that have played themselves out. I first ran across this list 3 years ago but was unable to attain a copy and it has bothered me ever since. Recently, Jeff Rense posted it on his site and I would like to thank him for doing so. rense.com
> Communist Goals (1963) Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963
> Current Communist Goals EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 10, 1963 .
> Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.
> At Mrs. Nordman's request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following "Current Communist Goals," which she identifies as an excerpt from "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen:
> [From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen]
> 1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
> 2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
> 3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
> 4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
> 5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
> 6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
> 7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
> 8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
> 9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
> 10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
> 11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.).....................
> 
> 
> The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you want atomic war...
Click to expand...


I couldn't get out of the post that I accident clicked on you,  ever since your really, really ignorant statement a few weeks ago  and when you acted like a HUGE BIG BABY when the MODS MERGED MY POST WITH YOURS...........

Hitting you for the reply was a mistake and I meant it for a general comment.  

but no thats' what you commie lovers want. I actually chose to ignore you since you took a fit when the mods moved my post over to yours , you acted like a big fkn baby........ and ignorant as fk to me as if I did it myself.


----------



## TheOldSchool

MindWars said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> Better than wasting time in the mideast (even though we will continue to and probably do it more soon)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interestingly enough you still insist on calling him a traitor.
> 
> Noted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Absolutely.  The man sidles up to dictators and attacks our allies.  He wages war, personally at times, against Americans.  And he does so with Russian help, which he knows about and has never spoken against.
> 
> Putin does not want Trump leading the country because he has our interests at heart.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> *The Communist Takeover Of
> America - 45 Declared Goals*
> 
> From Greg Swank
> 12-4-2
> 
> You are about to read a list of 45 goals that found their way down the halls of our great Capitol back in 1963. As you read this, 39 years later, you should be shocked by the events that have played themselves out. I first ran across this list 3 years ago but was unable to attain a copy and it has bothered me ever since. Recently, Jeff Rense posted it on his site and I would like to thank him for doing so. rense.com
> Communist Goals (1963) Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963
> Current Communist Goals EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 10, 1963 .
> Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.
> At Mrs. Nordman's request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following "Current Communist Goals," which she identifies as an excerpt from "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen:
> [From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen]
> 1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
> 2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
> 3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
> 4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
> 5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
> 6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
> 7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
> 8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
> 9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
> 10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
> 11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.).....................
> 
> 
> The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you want atomic war...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I couldn't get out of the post that I accident clicked on you,  ever since your really, really ignorant statement a few weeks ago  and when you acted like a HUGE BIG BABY when the MODS MERGED MY POST WITH YOURS...........
> 
> Hitting you for the reply was a mistake and I meant it for a general comment.
> 
> but no thats' what you commie lovers want. I actually chose to ignore you since you took a fit when the mods moved my post over to yours , you acted like a big fkn baby........ and ignorant as fk to me as if I did it myself.
Click to expand...

What, you crazy motherfucker?


----------



## AsherN

Montrovant said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Posse Comitatus Act*
> The *Posse* *Comitatus* *Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes. The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using its military personnel to act as domestic law enforcement personnel.
> *Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is defending our borders from an invading horde of illegals be domestic law enforcement?  Only way to stop an invasion is to repel them with force.  After a few 1000 bodies left just south of the border, the illegals and liberals would get the message that We the People don't want criminals here anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First of all, "invading horde" is a silly characterization.  Secondly, I am pretty sure ICE is a law enforcement agency.  Third, if this is an invasion, who is it an invasion by?  Fourth, why would the only bodies be south of the border?  Do you think no illegals enter the country through the Canadian border?  Fifth, I'd say there is no realistic chance that the federal government will authorize using lethal force on someone simply because they enter the country illegally (ignoring whether such an order would be deemed legal/Constitutional).  Finally, I did not say that Posse Comitatus was necessarily the argument being made, merely that is might be.
Click to expand...


On the use of lethal force, here's the dilemma, If you shoot at them BEFORE they cross the border, you are shooting Mexican citizens on Mexican soil, which can be deemed an act of war. If you wait until they cross the border, they are entitled to the full protection of the Constitution and American Law, therefore it becomes a LE mission and you can't shoot them.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

AsherN said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> 
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Posse Comitatus Act*
> The *Posse* *Comitatus* *Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes. The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using its military personnel to act as domestic law enforcement personnel.
> *Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is defending our borders from an invading horde of illegals be domestic law enforcement?  Only way to stop an invasion is to repel them with force.  After a few 1000 bodies left just south of the border, the illegals and liberals would get the message that We the People don't want criminals here anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First of all, "invading horde" is a silly characterization.  Secondly, I am pretty sure ICE is a law enforcement agency.  Third, if this is an invasion, who is it an invasion by?  Fourth, why would the only bodies be south of the border?  Do you think no illegals enter the country through the Canadian border?  Fifth, I'd say there is no realistic chance that the federal government will authorize using lethal force on someone simply because they enter the country illegally (ignoring whether such an order would be deemed legal/Constitutional).  Finally, I did not say that Posse Comitatus was necessarily the argument being made, merely that is might be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> On the use of lethal force, here's the dilemma, If you shoot at them BEFORE they cross the border, you are shooting Mexican citizens on Mexican soil, which can be deemed an act of war. If you wait until they cross the border, they are entitled to the full protection of the Constitution and American Law, therefore it becomes a LE mission and you can't shoot them.
Click to expand...

 They aren't Mexican citizens.  They are Honduran citizens.  Shoot them on the Mexican side and let mex bellyache over it.


----------



## BluesLegend

easyt65 said:


> BluesLegend said:
> 
> 
> 
> Many underage illegals were forced into prostitution and drug trafficking by gangs...while sitting in Obama's detention centers waiting to be processed.
> 
> 
> 
> Many were raped, abused, and sold by their 'guides' parents entrusted them with to bring them to the US.
Click to expand...


Thanks Obama thanks Dem's.


----------



## harmonica

AsherN said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> 
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Posse Comitatus Act*
> The *Posse* *Comitatus* *Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes. The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using its military personnel to act as domestic law enforcement personnel.
> *Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is defending our borders from an invading horde of illegals be domestic law enforcement?  Only way to stop an invasion is to repel them with force.  After a few 1000 bodies left just south of the border, the illegals and liberals would get the message that We the People don't want criminals here anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First of all, "invading horde" is a silly characterization.  Secondly, I am pretty sure ICE is a law enforcement agency.  Third, if this is an invasion, who is it an invasion by?  Fourth, why would the only bodies be south of the border?  Do you think no illegals enter the country through the Canadian border?  Fifth, I'd say there is no realistic chance that the federal government will authorize using lethal force on someone simply because they enter the country illegally (ignoring whether such an order would be deemed legal/Constitutional).  Finally, I did not say that Posse Comitatus was necessarily the argument being made, merely that is might be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> On the use of lethal force, here's the dilemma, If you shoot at them BEFORE they cross the border, you are shooting Mexican citizens on Mexican soil, which can be deemed an act of war. If you wait until they cross the border, they are entitled to the full protection of the Constitution and American Law, therefore it becomes a LE mission and you can't shoot them.
Click to expand...

..you are not familiar with the history of wars/etc
..countries have every right to protest their borders--it doesn't matter what nationality the invaders are
..if Mexico is letting invaders invade from their country--they we have every right to pound them
..Mexico would be in the wrong


----------



## ABikerSailor

Tipsycatlover said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not even close.   The military is not being used in law enforcement activity.   It is being used to repel an invasion much like the coast guard does at sea.
Click to expand...


Ummm...............you do know that the Coast Guard is actually attached to the Department of Transportation, which is why they can patrol our borders, right?

The only time the Coast Guard becomes part of the military is in times of a declared war.


----------



## ABikerSailor

Tipsycatlover said:


> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Posse Comitatus Act*
> The *Posse* *Comitatus* *Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes. The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using its military personnel to act as domestic law enforcement personnel.
> *Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is defending our borders from an invading horde of illegals be domestic law enforcement?  Only way to stop an invasion is to repel them with force.  After a few 1000 bodies left just south of the border, the illegals and liberals would get the message that We the People don't want criminals here anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First of all, "invading horde" is a silly characterization.  Secondly, I am pretty sure ICE is a law enforcement agency.  Third, if this is an invasion, who is it an invasion by?  Fourth, why would the only bodies be south of the border?  Do you think no illegals enter the country through the Canadian border?  Fifth, I'd say there is no realistic chance that the federal government will authorize using lethal force on someone simply because they enter the country illegally (ignoring whether such an order would be deemed legal/Constitutional).  Finally, I did not say that Posse Comitatus was necessarily the argument being made, merely that is might be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> On the use of lethal force, here's the dilemma, If you shoot at them BEFORE they cross the border, you are shooting Mexican citizens on Mexican soil, which can be deemed an act of war. If you wait until they cross the border, they are entitled to the full protection of the Constitution and American Law, therefore it becomes a LE mission and you can't shoot them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They aren't Mexican citizens.  They are Honduran citizens.  Shoot them on the Mexican side and let mex bellyache over it.
Click to expand...


If we kill people on the Mexican side of the border, it can be considered an act of war.  If they cross over the border, all the military will be able to do is point and say "there they are".  They don't have the authority to arrest, detain, or shoot anyone on US soil.  Only BP and LE can do that. 


Remember when Jr. tried to do it and it failed?  If Trump tries to do it, he's gonna fail as well.


----------



## rightwinger

Death Angel said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually the military is the best thing, not the next best
> 
> 
> 
> Presidents come an go. A wall can be forever. BOTH!
Click to expand...

The wall will be torn down as soon as Trump is gone


----------



## rightwinger

ABikerSailor said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Posse Comitatus Act*
> The *Posse* *Comitatus* *Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes. The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using its military personnel to act as domestic law enforcement personnel.
> *Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is defending our borders from an invading horde of illegals be domestic law enforcement?  Only way to stop an invasion is to repel them with force.  After a few 1000 bodies left just south of the border, the illegals and liberals would get the message that We the People don't want criminals here anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First of all, "invading horde" is a silly characterization.  Secondly, I am pretty sure ICE is a law enforcement agency.  Third, if this is an invasion, who is it an invasion by?  Fourth, why would the only bodies be south of the border?  Do you think no illegals enter the country through the Canadian border?  Fifth, I'd say there is no realistic chance that the federal government will authorize using lethal force on someone simply because they enter the country illegally (ignoring whether such an order would be deemed legal/Constitutional).  Finally, I did not say that Posse Comitatus was necessarily the argument being made, merely that is might be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> On the use of lethal force, here's the dilemma, If you shoot at them BEFORE they cross the border, you are shooting Mexican citizens on Mexican soil, which can be deemed an act of war. If you wait until they cross the border, they are entitled to the full protection of the Constitution and American Law, therefore it becomes a LE mission and you can't shoot them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They aren't Mexican citizens.  They are Honduran citizens.  Shoot them on the Mexican side and let mex bellyache over it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If we kill people on the Mexican side of the border, it can be considered an act of war.  If they cross over the border, all the military will be able to do is point and say "there they are".  They don't have the authority to arrest, detain, or shoot anyone on US soil.  Only BP and LE can do that.
> 
> 
> Remember when Jr. tried to do it and it failed?  If Trump tries to do it, he's gonna fail as well.
Click to expand...

I would guard the border but I have these damned heel spurs


----------



## ABikerSailor

rightwinger said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> How is defending our borders from an invading horde of illegals be domestic law enforcement?  Only way to stop an invasion is to repel them with force.  After a few 1000 bodies left just south of the border, the illegals and liberals would get the message that We the People don't want criminals here anymore.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, "invading horde" is a silly characterization.  Secondly, I am pretty sure ICE is a law enforcement agency.  Third, if this is an invasion, who is it an invasion by?  Fourth, why would the only bodies be south of the border?  Do you think no illegals enter the country through the Canadian border?  Fifth, I'd say there is no realistic chance that the federal government will authorize using lethal force on someone simply because they enter the country illegally (ignoring whether such an order would be deemed legal/Constitutional).  Finally, I did not say that Posse Comitatus was necessarily the argument being made, merely that is might be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> On the use of lethal force, here's the dilemma, If you shoot at them BEFORE they cross the border, you are shooting Mexican citizens on Mexican soil, which can be deemed an act of war. If you wait until they cross the border, they are entitled to the full protection of the Constitution and American Law, therefore it becomes a LE mission and you can't shoot them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They aren't Mexican citizens.  They are Honduran citizens.  Shoot them on the Mexican side and let mex bellyache over it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If we kill people on the Mexican side of the border, it can be considered an act of war.  If they cross over the border, all the military will be able to do is point and say "there they are".  They don't have the authority to arrest, detain, or shoot anyone on US soil.  Only BP and LE can do that.
> 
> 
> Remember when Jr. tried to do it and it failed?  If Trump tries to do it, he's gonna fail as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I would guard the border but I have these damned heel spurs
Click to expand...


I can't help.  I've already been transferred to the Fleet Reserve and can no longer be called back up.


----------



## Meathead

ABikerSailor said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, "invading horde" is a silly characterization.  Secondly, I am pretty sure ICE is a law enforcement agency.  Third, if this is an invasion, who is it an invasion by?  Fourth, why would the only bodies be south of the border?  Do you think no illegals enter the country through the Canadian border?  Fifth, I'd say there is no realistic chance that the federal government will authorize using lethal force on someone simply because they enter the country illegally (ignoring whether such an order would be deemed legal/Constitutional).  Finally, I did not say that Posse Comitatus was necessarily the argument being made, merely that is might be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the use of lethal force, here's the dilemma, If you shoot at them BEFORE they cross the border, you are shooting Mexican citizens on Mexican soil, which can be deemed an act of war. If you wait until they cross the border, they are entitled to the full protection of the Constitution and American Law, therefore it becomes a LE mission and you can't shoot them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They aren't Mexican citizens.  They are Honduran citizens.  Shoot them on the Mexican side and let mex bellyache over it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If we kill people on the Mexican side of the border, it can be considered an act of war.  If they cross over the border, all the military will be able to do is point and say "there they are".  They don't have the authority to arrest, detain, or shoot anyone on US soil.  Only BP and LE can do that.
> 
> 
> Remember when Jr. tried to do it and it failed?  If Trump tries to do it, he's gonna fail as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I would guard the border but I have these damned heel spurs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can't help.  I've already been transferred to the Fleet Reserve and can no longer be called back up.
Click to expand...

I really don't think they're going to call on someone who was too scared to go to a USO.


----------



## harmonica

ABikerSailor said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Posse Comitatus Act*
> The *Posse* *Comitatus* *Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes. The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using its military personnel to act as domestic law enforcement personnel.
> *Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is defending our borders from an invading horde of illegals be domestic law enforcement?  Only way to stop an invasion is to repel them with force.  After a few 1000 bodies left just south of the border, the illegals and liberals would get the message that We the People don't want criminals here anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First of all, "invading horde" is a silly characterization.  Secondly, I am pretty sure ICE is a law enforcement agency.  Third, if this is an invasion, who is it an invasion by?  Fourth, why would the only bodies be south of the border?  Do you think no illegals enter the country through the Canadian border?  Fifth, I'd say there is no realistic chance that the federal government will authorize using lethal force on someone simply because they enter the country illegally (ignoring whether such an order would be deemed legal/Constitutional).  Finally, I did not say that Posse Comitatus was necessarily the argument being made, merely that is might be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> On the use of lethal force, here's the dilemma, If you shoot at them BEFORE they cross the border, you are shooting Mexican citizens on Mexican soil, which can be deemed an act of war. If you wait until they cross the border, they are entitled to the full protection of the Constitution and American Law, therefore it becomes a LE mission and you can't shoot them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They aren't Mexican citizens.  They are Honduran citizens.  Shoot them on the Mexican side and let mex bellyache over it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If we kill people on the Mexican side of the border, it can be considered an act of war.  If they cross over the border, all the military will be able to do is point and say "there they are".  They don't have the authority to arrest, detain, or shoot anyone on US soil.  Only BP and LE can do that.
> 
> 
> Remember when Jr. tried to do it and it failed?  If Trump tries to do it, he's gonna fail as well.
Click to expand...

if Mexico is letting invaders in from Mexico--that is an act of war by MEXICO!!!! 
so the US would be defending herself--not committing an act of war


----------



## Timmy

Tijn Von Ingersleben said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The PURPOSE of the military is national defense e.g. US borders. This has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.
Click to expand...


No.  That’s the purpose of the border patrol .

Trump is playing with you rubes .   You eat this shit up .


----------



## Timmy

It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !


----------



## SassyIrishLass

Timmy said:


> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !



Did you bawl when Obama did it?


----------



## kaz

theDoctorisIn said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
Click to expand...


You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?

Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?


----------



## Timmy

SassyIrishLass said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
Click to expand...


Oh you mean the military excersies in Texas that were a front for an obama armed take over? 

Isn’t that what you rubes believed ?


----------



## SassyIrishLass

Timmy said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh you mean the military excersies in Texas that were a front for an obama armed take over?
> 
> Isn’t that what you rubes believed ?
Click to expand...


No I mean when he sent military to help with the drug war.

Now don't you feel foolish, fucking clown shoes


----------



## ABikerSailor

You know, this will never work.  If we put military on the border, and they kill people before they cross, that could be considered an act of war, or at the very least, murder, because they aren't breaking any of our laws when they are on the Mexican side of the border.

But, if the people do cross, then all the military can do is point at them and say "there they are".  They don't have the authority to arrest, detain, or shoot anyone on this side of the border.

If you say get around it by using the NG?  Well, now you have the problem of having to ask the governor of the state for them, because the NG is under the control of the state.  The governors could refuse to allow their NG troops to go to the border. 

Besides.........................Jr. tried that little stunt and it failed.  Trump is going to find out that he can't do it either.


----------



## Tijn Von Ingersleben

Timmy said:


> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The PURPOSE of the military is national defense e.g. US borders. This has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  That’s the purpose of the border patrol .
> 
> Trump is playing with you rubes .   You eat this shit up .
Click to expand...

Shut up fuckhead you dont know me from Adam.
The point I was attempting to make is the defense of the border and thus national defense being extra Posse Comitatus. For instance, if we have a foreign force converging on our border would this also be a violation of Posse Comitatus? Given then current environment of international terrorism and the porous nature of our border I think this argument could be logically made.


----------



## SassyIrishLass

ABikerSailor said:


> You know, this will never work.  If we put military on the border, and they kill people before they cross, that could be considered an act of war, or at the very least, murder, because they aren't breaking any of our laws when they are on the Mexican side of the border.
> 
> But, if the people do cross, then all the military can do is point at them and say "there they are".  They don't have the authority to arrest, detain, or shoot anyone on this side of the border.
> 
> If you say get around it by using the NG?  Well, now you have the problem of having to ask the governor of the state for them, because the NG is under the control of the state.  The governors could refuse to allow their NG troops to go to the border.
> 
> Besides.........................Jr. tried that little stunt and it failed.  Trump is going to find out that he can't do it either.



Abbot would in a heart beat....and you know it


----------



## Timmy

kaz said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
Click to expand...


We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?

What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?


----------



## ABikerSailor

SassyIrishLass said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
Click to expand...




SassyIrishLass said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh you mean the military excersies in Texas that were a front for an obama armed take over?
> 
> Isn’t that what you rubes believed ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I mean when he sent military to help with the drug war.
> 
> Now don't you feel foolish, fucking clown shoes
Click to expand...


Obama didn't send in the military.  He sent in the National Guard, which has different rules than the military does for deployment and who can send them.

Obama orders 1,200 Guard troops to border


----------



## Timmy

SassyIrishLass said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh you mean the military excersies in Texas that were a front for an obama armed take over?
> 
> Isn’t that what you rubes believed ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I mean when he sent military to help with the drug war.
> 
> Now don't you feel foolish, fucking clown shoes
Click to expand...


To do what ?  Fly drones around ?

You rubes feed off soundbites and don’t think things through .   You want some 18 year old soidier Sniping you because you are hiking out in the desert?

We have a professional border patrol !


----------



## SassyIrishLass

ABikerSailor said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh you mean the military excersies in Texas that were a front for an obama armed take over?
> 
> Isn’t that what you rubes believed ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I mean when he sent military to help with the drug war.
> 
> Now don't you feel foolish, fucking clown shoes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama didn't send in the military.  He sent in the National Guard, which has different rules than the military does for deployment and who can send them.
> 
> Obama orders 1,200 Guard troops to border
Click to expand...


So Trump sends the guard, still military ...sit down and shush I don't give two shits about your ramblings


----------



## SassyIrishLass

Timmy said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh you mean the military excersies in Texas that were a front for an obama armed take over?
> 
> Isn’t that what you rubes believed ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I mean when he sent military to help with the drug war.
> 
> Now don't you feel foolish, fucking clown shoes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To do what ?  Fly drones around ?
> 
> You rubes feed off soundbites and don’t think things through .   You want some 18 year old soidier Sniping you because you are hiking out in the desert?
> 
> We have a professional border patrol !
Click to expand...


I have no further use for your ramblings, know nothing. Buh bye


----------



## Timmy

ABikerSailor said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh you mean the military excersies in Texas that were a front for an obama armed take over?
> 
> Isn’t that what you rubes believed ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I mean when he sent military to help with the drug war.
> 
> Now don't you feel foolish, fucking clown shoes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama didn't send in the military.  He sent in the National Guard, which has different rules than the military does for deployment and who can send them.
> 
> Obama orders 1,200 Guard troops to border
Click to expand...


Which was a temporary plan until more border patrol were hired .


----------



## harmonica

Timmy said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
Click to expand...

these illegals are DESTROYING America


----------



## Timmy

SassyIrishLass said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh you mean the military excersies in Texas that were a front for an obama armed take over?
> 
> Isn’t that what you rubes believed ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I mean when he sent military to help with the drug war.
> 
> Now don't you feel foolish, fucking clown shoes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To do what ?  Fly drones around ?
> 
> You rubes feed off soundbites and don’t think things through .   You want some 18 year old soidier Sniping you because you are hiking out in the desert?
> 
> We have a professional border patrol !
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have no further use for your ramblings, know nothing. Buh bye
Click to expand...


Yeah run away after your lies are exposed .


----------



## harmonica

big DUHHHHHHH
we want the border strictly controlled---you don't want terrorists crossing the border at will--do you??????????????!!!!!


----------



## Timmy

harmonica said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
Click to expand...


 No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .


----------



## Timmy

harmonica said:


> big DUHHHHHHH
> we want the border strictly controlled---you don't want terrorists crossing the border at will--do you??????????????!!!!!



Well then you must want a wall with Canada .  Which is were a terrorist is far more likely to sneak in.


----------



## harmonica

Timmy said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
Click to expand...

illegals cost the US taxpayer BILLIONS$$$$
and they raise prices and lower wages
they dumb down the US
yes they are DESTROYING America
The Cost of Illegal Immigration to US Taxpayers | FAIR


----------



## kaz

Timmy said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
Click to expand...


I don't know what any of that means, but neither do you.

So answer the question.  If the military isn't supposed to defend our borders, what do you believe its purpose is?  I'm not aware of any other role they play


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Tijn Von Ingersleben said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The PURPOSE of the military is national defense e.g. US borders. This has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  That’s the purpose of the border patrol .
> 
> Trump is playing with you rubes .   You eat this shit up .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Shut up fuckhead you dont know me from Adam.
> The point I was attempting to make is the defense of the border and thus national defense being extra Posse Comitatus. For instance, if we have a foreign force converging on our border would this also be a violation of Posse Comitatus? Given then current environment of international terrorism and the porous nature of our border I think this argument could be logically made.
Click to expand...


Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?

If a hostile foreign force was gathering at our border, Posse Comitatus would not apply - because rebelling a hostile army is a function of the military, not law enforcement.

Border security, according to our legal system, is a function of domestic law enforcement - and therefore, PCA applies.


----------



## kaz

Timmy said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
Click to expand...


Harmonica is right, but that's irrelevant to the discussion that the role of our military is to defend our borders and you don't know that.  Unreal.  Read the Constitution


----------



## Golfing Gator

ABikerSailor said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not even close.   The military is not being used in law enforcement activity.   It is being used to repel an invasion much like the coast guard does at sea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ummm...............you do know that the Coast Guard is actually attached to the Department of Transportation, which is why they can patrol our borders, right?
> 
> The only time the Coast Guard becomes part of the military is in times of a declared war.
Click to expand...


Actually, the Coast Guard now falls under the DHS, except when used in a time of war to help the Navy


----------



## Timmy

harmonica said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> illegals cost the US taxpayer BILLIONS$$$$
> and they raise prices and lower wages
> they dumb down the US
> yes they are DESTROYING America
> The Cost of Illegal Immigration to US Taxpayers | FAIR
Click to expand...


Says the Bureau of Made Up Statistics . 

You also realize 40 % of illegals come in legally.   Wall does nothing about that .  Military on the border does nothing  about that .


----------



## ThunderKiss1965

Absolutely not. Active Duty Military should not be deployed on US soil unless we are being invaded by an armed force.  I don't have a problem with the National Guard being used to patrol the border in fact it should be a part of their training.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Meathead said:


> I really don't think they're going to call on someone who was too scared to go to a USO.



Which is why Trump will not have to worry about it.


----------



## kaz

Timmy said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> big DUHHHHHHH
> we want the border strictly controlled---you don't want terrorists crossing the border at will--do you??????????????!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well then you must want a wall with Canada .  Which is were a terrorist is far more likely to sneak in.
Click to expand...


Gotcha


----------



## Timmy

kaz said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Harmonica is right, but that's irrelevant to the discussion that the role of our military is to defend our borders and you don't know that.  Unreal.  Read the Constitution
Click to expand...


Oh yeah ?  What part of the constitution are your referring too?


----------



## theDoctorisIn

kaz said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
Click to expand...


This isn't about what I think, or what you think.

This is about what the law says. 

"Securing the border" in times of peace has _never_ been a mission of the US military.


----------



## Tom Horn

theDoctorisIn said:


> Of course it does. Barring exceptional circumstances, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the deployment of US military on US soil.



Really?  So how did Clinton and Reno get Cav helicopters from Ft. Hood to machine gun women and children fleeing the fire at the compound at Mount Carmel?...the compound set on fire by a Cav tank?  Or how did 82nd Airborne get deployed to the streets of Detroit during the race riot in the summer of '67 with orders to shoot to kill arsonists?


----------



## Timmy

theDoctorisIn said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This isn't about what I think, or what you think.
> 
> This is about what the law says.
> 
> "Securing the border" in times of peace has _never_ been a mission of the US military.
Click to expand...


It’s amazing .  The big gov hating Cons want martial law .


----------



## kaz

theDoctorisIn said:


> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The PURPOSE of the military is national defense e.g. US borders. This has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  That’s the purpose of the border patrol .
> 
> Trump is playing with you rubes .   You eat this shit up .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Shut up fuckhead you dont know me from Adam.
> The point I was attempting to make is the defense of the border and thus national defense being extra Posse Comitatus. For instance, if we have a foreign force converging on our border would this also be a violation of Posse Comitatus? Given then current environment of international terrorism and the porous nature of our border I think this argument could be logically made.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?
> 
> If a hostile foreign force was gathering at our border, Posse Comitatus would not apply - because rebelling a hostile army is a function of the military, not law enforcement.
> 
> Border security, according to our legal system, is a function of domestic law enforcement - and therefore, PCA applies.
Click to expand...


The Constitution puts the responsibility for securing our borders on the military.  Can you show the qualifications you're making up?  Where are they written that you want illegals to drown us so that part of securing our border is not a military responsibility?


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Tom Horn said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it does. Barring exceptional circumstances, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the deployment of US military on US soil.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  So how did Clinton and Reno get Cav helicopters from Ft. Hood to machine gun women and children fleeing the fire at compound at Mount Carmel?  Or how did 82nd Airborne get deployed to the streets of Detroit during the race riot in the summer of '67 with orders to shoot to kill arsonists?
Click to expand...


Through the Insurrection Act.

It doesn't apply here.


----------



## harmonica

Timmy said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
Click to expand...


----------



## kaz

Timmy said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> illegals cost the US taxpayer BILLIONS$$$$
> and they raise prices and lower wages
> they dumb down the US
> yes they are DESTROYING America
> The Cost of Illegal Immigration to US Taxpayers | FAIR
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Says the Bureau of Made Up Statistics .
> 
> You also realize 40 % of illegals come in legally.   Wall does nothing about that .  Military on the border does nothing  about that .
Click to expand...


You made me laugh out loud.

You can't do that, it only deals with 60% of the problem!!!


----------



## theDoctorisIn

kaz said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> The PURPOSE of the military is national defense e.g. US borders. This has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  That’s the purpose of the border patrol .
> 
> Trump is playing with you rubes .   You eat this shit up .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Shut up fuckhead you dont know me from Adam.
> The point I was attempting to make is the defense of the border and thus national defense being extra Posse Comitatus. For instance, if we have a foreign force converging on our border would this also be a violation of Posse Comitatus? Given then current environment of international terrorism and the porous nature of our border I think this argument could be logically made.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?
> 
> If a hostile foreign force was gathering at our border, Posse Comitatus would not apply - because rebelling a hostile army is a function of the military, not law enforcement.
> 
> Border security, according to our legal system, is a function of domestic law enforcement - and therefore, PCA applies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Constitution puts the responsibility for securing our borders on the military.  Can you show the qualifications you're making up?  Where are they written that you want illegals to drown us so that part of securing our border is not a military responsibility?
Click to expand...


The Constitution does no such thing.


----------



## jc456

Rexx Taylor said:


> i hope Godzilla and Rodan are on the way


they can't get out of Japan.


----------



## yiostheoy

Missouri_Mike said:


> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.


Sometimes by thinking like a CEO rather than like a politician, Donnie comes up with some really good ideas.

This one is one of them.  I like it too.


----------



## kaz

Timmy said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Harmonica is right, but that's irrelevant to the discussion that the role of our military is to defend our borders and you don't know that.  Unreal.  Read the Constitution
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah ?  What part of the constitution are your referring too?
Click to expand...


Article IV.  Section 4.  You know you're on the Internet too ...


----------



## kaz

theDoctorisIn said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This isn't about what I think, or what you think.
> 
> This is about what the law says.
> 
> "Securing the border" in times of peace has _never_ been a mission of the US military.
Click to expand...


What law says that?  And seriously, you actually believe we can be invaded by anyone as long as we haven't declared war?   Wow, that's stupid


----------



## Tom Horn

theDoctorisIn said:


> This isn't about what I think, or what you think.
> 
> This is about what the law says.
> 
> "Securing the border" in times of peace has _never_ been a mission of the US military.



You have no idea what you're talking about....check out what went on at the Tejas border when Pancho Villa was on the loose.  My great uncle was part of a group who chased one of Villa's generals back into Mexico.  Just admit you want every beaner who can run, walk, or crawl into the US to vote for your fellow travelers.


----------



## yiostheoy

theDoctorisIn said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This isn't about what I think, or what you think.
> 
> This is about what the law says.
> 
> "Securing the border" in times of peace has _never_ been a mission of the US military.
Click to expand...

However Mexicans have never before been overrunning our border either.

The Founding Freemasons did not think of this when they wrote the Constitution.

Same as abortion -- they weren't thinking of that either.

Nor automatic firearms.

Nor public school prayer.

Etc.


----------



## kaz

Timmy said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This isn't about what I think, or what you think.
> 
> This is about what the law says.
> 
> "Securing the border" in times of peace has _never_ been a mission of the US military.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  The big gov hating Cons want martial law .
Click to expand...


Strawman.  The military can't secure our borders unless we are at war (TheDoctorIsIn) or we declare Martial law( Timmy! ).  Damn, you two bozos don't have half a brain between you


----------



## harmonica

Timmy said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
Click to expand...

Honduras # 160 on literacy list
Countries Compared by Education > Literacy > Total population. International Statistics at NationMaster.com


----------



## harmonica

Timmy said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> illegals cost the US taxpayer BILLIONS$$$$
> and they raise prices and lower wages
> they dumb down the US
> yes they are DESTROYING America
> The Cost of Illegal Immigration to US Taxpayers | FAIR
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Says the Bureau of Made Up Statistics .
> 
> You also realize 40 % of illegals come in legally.   Wall does nothing about that .  Military on the border does nothing  about that .
Click to expand...

'''illegals come here legally''' ...hahahahahahhahahahaha


----------



## jc456

Tom Horn said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't about what I think, or what you think.
> 
> This is about what the law says.
> 
> "Securing the border" in times of peace has _never_ been a mission of the US military.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have no idea what you're talking about....check out what went on at the Tejas border when Pancho Villa was on the loose.  My great uncle was part of a group who chased one of Villa's generals back into Mexico.  Just admit you want every beaner who can run, walk, or crawl into the US to vote for your fellow travelers.
Click to expand...

I guess he's never heard of the Alamo eh?


----------



## kaz

theDoctorisIn said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> The PURPOSE of the military is national defense e.g. US borders. This has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.  That’s the purpose of the border patrol .
> 
> Trump is playing with you rubes .   You eat this shit up .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Shut up fuckhead you dont know me from Adam.
> The point I was attempting to make is the defense of the border and thus national defense being extra Posse Comitatus. For instance, if we have a foreign force converging on our border would this also be a violation of Posse Comitatus? Given then current environment of international terrorism and the porous nature of our border I think this argument could be logically made.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?
> 
> If a hostile foreign force was gathering at our border, Posse Comitatus would not apply - because rebelling a hostile army is a function of the military, not law enforcement.
> 
> Border security, according to our legal system, is a function of domestic law enforcement - and therefore, PCA applies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Constitution puts the responsibility for securing our borders on the military.  Can you show the qualifications you're making up?  Where are they written that you want illegals to drown us so that part of securing our border is not a military responsibility?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Constitution does no such thing.
Click to expand...


Article IV, Section 4.  You seriously don't think securing our borders is the job of the MILITARY?  Hello, you've succumbed to leftist stupidity and lies.  The MILITARY?  You don't grasp the relation between the military and securing our freaking borders?

You are S-T-U-P-I-D.  Not ignorant, stupid


----------



## theDoctorisIn

yiostheoy said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This isn't about what I think, or what you think.
> 
> This is about what the law says.
> 
> "Securing the border" in times of peace has _never_ been a mission of the US military.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> However Mexicans have never before been overrunning our border either.
> 
> The Founding Freemasons did not think of this when they wrote the Constitution.
> 
> Same as abortion -- they weren't thinking of that either.
> 
> Nor automatic firearms.
> 
> Nor public school prayer.
> 
> Etc.
Click to expand...




So, you're saying that you're a proponent of a "living" Constitution?


----------



## Meathead

Golfing Gator said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't think they're going to call on someone who was too scared to go to a USO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why Trump will not have to worry about it.
Click to expand...

Trump was never in the military and has likely never gone to a USO. Gaybiker on the other hand wouldn't get off his ship on shore leave even to go to a USO. A regular profile in courage. Meanwhile civilian employees like my mother worked there.

The wrong stuff I guess.


----------



## Tom Horn

theDoctorisIn said:


> Through the Insurrection Act.
> 
> It doesn't apply here.



Wrong again....LBJ told Romney to declare an insurrection for federal troops but that would have voided every insurance policy on the hundreds of burning buildings.  At that time Romney was thought to be the GOP candidate to run against Johnson.  Romney told him to go fuck himself....his exact words.  Who declared an insurrection at Waco?


----------



## Timmy

kaz said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> 
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Harmonica is right, but that's irrelevant to the discussion that the role of our military is to defend our borders and you don't know that.  Unreal.  Read the Constitution
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah ?  What part of the constitution are your referring too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV.  Section 4.  You know you're on the Internet too ...
Click to expand...


This is what you are hanging your hat on?

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.


Geez.  We are not being “invaded” .  We have commerce with Mexico .  Tourists and legal immigration by both countries every day .


----------



## jc456

Timmy said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Harmonica is right, but that's irrelevant to the discussion that the role of our military is to defend our borders and you don't know that.  Unreal.  Read the Constitution
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah ?  What part of the constitution are your referring too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV.  Section 4.  You know you're on the Internet too ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is what you are hanging your hat on?
> 
> The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
> 
> 
> Geez.  We are not being “invaded” .  We have commerce with Mexico .  Tourists and legal immigration by both countries every day .
Click to expand...

1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

kaz said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.  That’s the purpose of the border patrol .
> 
> Trump is playing with you rubes .   You eat this shit up .
> 
> 
> 
> Shut up fuckhead you dont know me from Adam.
> The point I was attempting to make is the defense of the border and thus national defense being extra Posse Comitatus. For instance, if we have a foreign force converging on our border would this also be a violation of Posse Comitatus? Given then current environment of international terrorism and the porous nature of our border I think this argument could be logically made.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?
> 
> If a hostile foreign force was gathering at our border, Posse Comitatus would not apply - because rebelling a hostile army is a function of the military, not law enforcement.
> 
> Border security, according to our legal system, is a function of domestic law enforcement - and therefore, PCA applies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Constitution puts the responsibility for securing our borders on the military.  Can you show the qualifications you're making up?  Where are they written that you want illegals to drown us so that part of securing our border is not a military responsibility?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Constitution does no such thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV, Section 4.  You seriously don't think securing our borders is the job of the MILITARY?  Hello, you've succumbed to leftist stupidity and lies.  The MILITARY?  You don't grasp the relation between the military and securing our freaking borders?
> 
> You are S-T-U-P-I-D.  Not ignorant, stupid
Click to expand...


Here's the text of Article IV, Section 4:

_The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence._

Now, I'm not sure what school of Constitutional interpretation you fit within, but what do you believe that the founding fathers meant, when they said "foreign invaders"?

Do you think they meant a military invasion, or do you think they meant immigrants?

Keep in mind, the founding fathers never expected any "controls" whatsoever on immigration.

To think they meant to apply that to immigrants takes quite a reach, for the sake of legal interpretation. I doubt you could even get Stevens to go that far from the text.


----------



## Timmy

harmonica said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> 
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> illegals cost the US taxpayer BILLIONS$$$$
> and they raise prices and lower wages
> they dumb down the US
> yes they are DESTROYING America
> The Cost of Illegal Immigration to US Taxpayers | FAIR
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Says the Bureau of Made Up Statistics .
> 
> You also realize 40 % of illegals come in legally.   Wall does nothing about that .  Military on the border does nothing  about that .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> '''illegals come here legally''' ...hahahahahahhahahahaha
Click to expand...


God you are a great example of a clueless rube .  

Say you are a foreign student .  You legally entered the us on a student visas .  But then you overstay.  You now an “illegal” as the term goes . 

Do you know nothing about immigration?


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Tom Horn said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Through the Insurrection Act.
> 
> It doesn't apply here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again....LBJ told Romney to declare an insurrection for federal troops but that would have voided every insurance policy on the hundreds of burning buildings.  At that time Romney was thought to be the GOP candidate to run against Johnson.  Romney told him to go fuck himself....his exact words.  Who declared an insurrection at Waco?
Click to expand...


PCA doesn't apply to the National Guard.


----------



## jc456

theDoctorisIn said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shut up fuckhead you dont know me from Adam.
> The point I was attempting to make is the defense of the border and thus national defense being extra Posse Comitatus. For instance, if we have a foreign force converging on our border would this also be a violation of Posse Comitatus? Given then current environment of international terrorism and the porous nature of our border I think this argument could be logically made.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?
> 
> If a hostile foreign force was gathering at our border, Posse Comitatus would not apply - because rebelling a hostile army is a function of the military, not law enforcement.
> 
> Border security, according to our legal system, is a function of domestic law enforcement - and therefore, PCA applies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Constitution puts the responsibility for securing our borders on the military.  Can you show the qualifications you're making up?  Where are they written that you want illegals to drown us so that part of securing our border is not a military responsibility?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Constitution does no such thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV, Section 4.  You seriously don't think securing our borders is the job of the MILITARY?  Hello, you've succumbed to leftist stupidity and lies.  The MILITARY?  You don't grasp the relation between the military and securing our freaking borders?
> 
> You are S-T-U-P-I-D.  Not ignorant, stupid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's the text of Article IV, Section 4:
> 
> _The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence._
> 
> Now, I'm not sure what school of Constitutional interpretation you fit within, but what do you believe that the founding fathers meant, when they said "foreign invaders"?
> 
> Do you think they meant a military invasion, or do you think they meant immigrants?
> 
> Keep in mind, the founding fathers never expected any "controls" whatsoever on immigration.
> 
> To think they meant to apply that to immigrants takes quite a reach, for the sake of legal interpretation. I doubt you could even get Stevens to go that far from the text.
Click to expand...

they have no authority to come here that makes them militants.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

jc456 said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?
> 
> If a hostile foreign force was gathering at our border, Posse Comitatus would not apply - because rebelling a hostile army is a function of the military, not law enforcement.
> 
> Border security, according to our legal system, is a function of domestic law enforcement - and therefore, PCA applies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution puts the responsibility for securing our borders on the military.  Can you show the qualifications you're making up?  Where are they written that you want illegals to drown us so that part of securing our border is not a military responsibility?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Constitution does no such thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV, Section 4.  You seriously don't think securing our borders is the job of the MILITARY?  Hello, you've succumbed to leftist stupidity and lies.  The MILITARY?  You don't grasp the relation between the military and securing our freaking borders?
> 
> You are S-T-U-P-I-D.  Not ignorant, stupid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's the text of Article IV, Section 4:
> 
> _The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence._
> 
> Now, I'm not sure what school of Constitutional interpretation you fit within, but what do you believe that the founding fathers meant, when they said "foreign invaders"?
> 
> Do you think they meant a military invasion, or do you think they meant immigrants?
> 
> Keep in mind, the founding fathers never expected any "controls" whatsoever on immigration.
> 
> To think they meant to apply that to immigrants takes quite a reach, for the sake of legal interpretation. I doubt you could even get Stevens to go that far from the text.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> they have no authority to come here that makes them militants.
Click to expand...




No, it doesn't.

Words have meanings.


----------



## Tijn Von Ingersleben

theDoctorisIn said:


> Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?


I don't know. However if there is a force determined to be in an area bordering our nation that was a threat to the US interior could the argument then be made? 
Hypothetical: We know ISIS has cells in Mexico. They are running ops into our country and committing acts of terror. Would it then be against PoCom to place troops on the border? 
Now expand that out...other terrorist orgs or drug gangs who perform terrorist acts and are subsequently classed as such.
This is not out of the realm of possibility as many of the actions currently being perpetrated by the criminal gangs in Mexico could easily be reclassified as terrorism.

Do you think it would hold up in court then? 
My logic is that there seems to be a very fine line between criminal and terrorist a simple reclass. 
IDK just some thoughts.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Tijn Von Ingersleben said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know. However if there is a force determined to be in an area bordering our nation that was a threat to the US interior could the argument then be made?
> Hypothetical: We know ISIS has cells in Mexico. They are running ops into our country and committing acts of terror. Would it then be against PoCom to place troops on the border?
> Now expand that out...other terrorist orgs or drug gangs who perform terrorist acts and are subsequently classed as such.
> This is not out of the realm of possibility as many of the actions currently being perpetrated by the criminal gangs in Mexico could easily be reclassified as terrorism.
> 
> Do you think it would hold up in court then?
> My logic is that there seems to be a very fine line between criminal and terrorist a simple reclass.
> IDK just some thoughts.
Click to expand...


Reclassifying something as "terrorism" wouldn't get around the PCA. Prosecuting terrorists is also a function of law enforcement, not the military.

This is exactly the purpose of the PCA - to prevent the President from doing things like this.


----------



## Tom Horn

theDoctorisIn said:


> PCA doesn't apply to the National Guard.



You can't bluff your way through this, Doc.  After the Michigan National Guard did more harm than good, 82nd Airborne and a small number of 101st were stationed every 30 feet on the dowtown streets.  I would deploy to the RVN in October of '67 and remember it like it was yesterday.


----------



## jc456

theDoctorisIn said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution puts the responsibility for securing our borders on the military.  Can you show the qualifications you're making up?  Where are they written that you want illegals to drown us so that part of securing our border is not a military responsibility?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution does no such thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV, Section 4.  You seriously don't think securing our borders is the job of the MILITARY?  Hello, you've succumbed to leftist stupidity and lies.  The MILITARY?  You don't grasp the relation between the military and securing our freaking borders?
> 
> You are S-T-U-P-I-D.  Not ignorant, stupid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's the text of Article IV, Section 4:
> 
> _The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence._
> 
> Now, I'm not sure what school of Constitutional interpretation you fit within, but what do you believe that the founding fathers meant, when they said "foreign invaders"?
> 
> Do you think they meant a military invasion, or do you think they meant immigrants?
> 
> Keep in mind, the founding fathers never expected any "controls" whatsoever on immigration.
> 
> To think they meant to apply that to immigrants takes quite a reach, for the sake of legal interpretation. I doubt you could even get Stevens to go that far from the text.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> they have no authority to come here that makes them militants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it doesn't.
> 
> Words have meanings.
Click to expand...

sure it is, you have no idea their intentions. you know absolutely nothing about them.  they could all be rebels.


----------



## jc456

theDoctorisIn said:


> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know. However if there is a force determined to be in an area bordering our nation that was a threat to the US interior could the argument then be made?
> Hypothetical: We know ISIS has cells in Mexico. They are running ops into our country and committing acts of terror. Would it then be against PoCom to place troops on the border?
> Now expand that out...other terrorist orgs or drug gangs who perform terrorist acts and are subsequently classed as such.
> This is not out of the realm of possibility as many of the actions currently being perpetrated by the criminal gangs in Mexico could easily be reclassified as terrorism.
> 
> Do you think it would hold up in court then?
> My logic is that there seems to be a very fine line between criminal and terrorist a simple reclass.
> IDK just some thoughts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Reclassifying something as "terrorism" wouldn't get around the PCA. Prosecuting terrorists is also a function of law enforcement, not the military.
> 
> This is exactly the purpose of the PCA - to prevent the President from doing things like this.
Click to expand...

I agree whole heartily, against citizens, not illegal combatants of the country, then it is military time.


----------



## westwall

theDoctorisIn said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
Click to expand...








The Posse Comitatus Act has nothing to do with protecting the nations borders.  That IS what the Army's job IS.


----------



## ABikerSailor

Meathead said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't think they're going to call on someone who was too scared to go to a USO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why Trump will not have to worry about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trump was never in the military and has likely never gone to a USO. Gaybiker on the other hand wouldn't get off his ship on shore leave even to go to a USO. A regular profile in courage. Meanwhile civilian employees like my mother worked there.
> 
> The wrong stuff I guess.
Click to expand...


Actually, what I told you was that when Reagan was in office, we had to keep our heads on a swivel because USO's were being bombed.  Yeah, I think checking for things like that is just prudent.  Especially when there were bombings happening in all sorts of places US troops liked to frequent. 

How many years did you serve again Meathead?  I did a full 20 in 4 war zones. 

Oh wait....................forgot..................you just like to troll people.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

westwall said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act has nothing to do with protecting the nations borders.  That IS what the Army's job IS.
Click to expand...


No, it's not. 

At no point in during peacetime in American history, has the military been tasked with protecting our borders.

Patrolling the border has been a function of civilian law enforcement as long as our borders have ever been patrolled.


----------



## ABikerSailor

SassyIrishLass said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh you mean the military excersies in Texas that were a front for an obama armed take over?
> 
> Isn’t that what you rubes believed ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I mean when he sent military to help with the drug war.
> 
> Now don't you feel foolish, fucking clown shoes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama didn't send in the military.  He sent in the National Guard, which has different rules than the military does for deployment and who can send them.
> 
> Obama orders 1,200 Guard troops to border
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So Trump sends the guard, still military ...sit down and shush I don't give two shits about your ramblings
Click to expand...


Actually, the National Guard is more of a militia than it is a military.  They aren't full time, and they are governed by different rules.  But, if you knew anything about the military that wasn't bullshit, you would have known that and not looked so stupid.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

jc456 said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know. However if there is a force determined to be in an area bordering our nation that was a threat to the US interior could the argument then be made?
> Hypothetical: We know ISIS has cells in Mexico. They are running ops into our country and committing acts of terror. Would it then be against PoCom to place troops on the border?
> Now expand that out...other terrorist orgs or drug gangs who perform terrorist acts and are subsequently classed as such.
> This is not out of the realm of possibility as many of the actions currently being perpetrated by the criminal gangs in Mexico could easily be reclassified as terrorism.
> 
> Do you think it would hold up in court then?
> My logic is that there seems to be a very fine line between criminal and terrorist a simple reclass.
> IDK just some thoughts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Reclassifying something as "terrorism" wouldn't get around the PCA. Prosecuting terrorists is also a function of law enforcement, not the military.
> 
> This is exactly the purpose of the PCA - to prevent the President from doing things like this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree whole heartily, against citizens, not illegal combatants of the country, then it is military time.
Click to expand...


Refugees aren't "illegal combatants".

Again, words have meanings.


----------



## westwall

theDoctorisIn said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act has nothing to do with protecting the nations borders.  That IS what the Army's job IS.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, it's not.
> 
> At no point in during peacetime in American history, has the military been tasked with protecting our borders.
> 
> Patrolling the border has been a function of civilian law enforcement as long as our borders have ever been patrolled.
Click to expand...







Hmmm, their mission statement says otherwise.


Preserving the peace and security and providing for the defense of the United States, the Commonwealths and possessions and any areas occupied by the United States
Supporting the national policies
Implementing the national objectives
Overcoming any nations responsible for aggressive acts that imperil the peace and security of the United States


----------



## Tijn Von Ingersleben

theDoctorisIn said:


> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know. However if there is a force determined to be in an area bordering our nation that was a threat to the US interior could the argument then be made?
> Hypothetical: We know ISIS has cells in Mexico. They are running ops into our country and committing acts of terror. Would it then be against PoCom to place troops on the border?
> Now expand that out...other terrorist orgs or drug gangs who perform terrorist acts and are subsequently classed as such.
> This is not out of the realm of possibility as many of the actions currently being perpetrated by the criminal gangs in Mexico could easily be reclassified as terrorism.
> 
> Do you think it would hold up in court then?
> My logic is that there seems to be a very fine line between criminal and terrorist a simple reclass.
> IDK just some thoughts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Reclassifying something as "terrorism" wouldn't get around the PCA. Prosecuting terrorists is also a function of law enforcement, not the military.
> 
> This is exactly the purpose of the PCA - to prevent the President from doing things like this.
Click to expand...

But is fighting terrorists? That is my hypothetical, not the prosecution of them but the combating of them. I do see what you are saying and it makes sense within the realm of the normal. PCA prevents military from law enforcement activities. Defense of the border doesn't seem to fall under that category. Either way..thanks.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

westwall said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act has nothing to do with protecting the nations borders.  That IS what the Army's job IS.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, it's not.
> 
> At no point in during peacetime in American history, has the military been tasked with protecting our borders.
> 
> Patrolling the border has been a function of civilian law enforcement as long as our borders have ever been patrolled.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm, their mission statement says otherwise.
> 
> 
> Preserving the peace and security and providing for the defense of the United States, the Commonwealths and possessions and any areas occupied by the United States
> Supporting the national policies
> Implementing the national objectives
> Overcoming any nations responsible for aggressive acts that imperil the peace and security of the United States
Click to expand...


This isn't about "mission statements", this is about the Laws of the United States.


----------



## Tom Horn

theDoctorisIn said:


> Refugees aren't "illegal combatants".
> 
> Again, words have meanings.



Words sure do.....why are you calling them "refugees"?????  They are an invasion force who has stated their intention to cross our southern border illegally.   Guess what?  This group just got the WALL built...watch and see.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Tom Horn said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Refugees aren't "illegal combatants".
> 
> Again, words have meanings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Words sure do.....why are you calling them "refugees"?????  They are an invasion force who has stated their intention to cross our southern border illegally.   Guess what?  This group just got the WALL built...watch and see.
Click to expand...


They have stated their intention to cross our southern borders and apply for political asylum.


----------



## westwall

theDoctorisIn said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act has nothing to do with protecting the nations borders.  That IS what the Army's job IS.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, it's not.
> 
> At no point in during peacetime in American history, has the military been tasked with protecting our borders.
> 
> Patrolling the border has been a function of civilian law enforcement as long as our borders have ever been patrolled.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm, their mission statement says otherwise.
> 
> 
> Preserving the peace and security and providing for the defense of the United States, the Commonwealths and possessions and any areas occupied by the United States
> Supporting the national policies
> Implementing the national objectives
> Overcoming any nations responsible for aggressive acts that imperil the peace and security of the United States
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This isn't about "mission statements", this is about the Laws of the United States.
Click to expand...






Yes, and the Border Patrol is recent.  Before there was a Border Patrol there was the US Army, in peacetime guarding the border.  It was the Army that chased Villa back to Mexico in 1916, or were you not aware of that?


----------



## westwall

theDoctorisIn said:


> Tom Horn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Refugees aren't "illegal combatants".
> 
> Again, words have meanings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Words sure do.....why are you calling them "refugees"?????  They are an invasion force who has stated their intention to cross our southern border illegally.   Guess what?  This group just got the WALL built...watch and see.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They have stated their intention to cross our southern borders and apply for political asylum.
Click to expand...






Indeed, and the group helping them should be indicted for conspiracy to violate the immigration laws of this country.


----------



## AsianTrumpSupporter




----------



## ABikerSailor

I don't think that Trump is going to be able to accomplish this one.  At the most, he's going to get some NG troops sent, but that is going to be expensive.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

westwall said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act has nothing to do with protecting the nations borders.  That IS what the Army's job IS.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, it's not.
> 
> At no point in during peacetime in American history, has the military been tasked with protecting our borders.
> 
> Patrolling the border has been a function of civilian law enforcement as long as our borders have ever been patrolled.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm, their mission statement says otherwise.
> 
> 
> Preserving the peace and security and providing for the defense of the United States, the Commonwealths and possessions and any areas occupied by the United States
> Supporting the national policies
> Implementing the national objectives
> Overcoming any nations responsible for aggressive acts that imperil the peace and security of the United States
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This isn't about "mission statements", this is about the Laws of the United States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and the Border Patrol is recent.  Before there was a Border Patrol there was the US Army, in peacetime guarding the border.  It was the Army that chased Villa back to Mexico in 1916, or were you not aware of that?
Click to expand...


The Army wasn't "guarding the border" from refugees. There were no restrictions on immigration in 1916.


----------



## MindWars

Well at least not as many will get through lessens out chances of more disease ridden fks.  Lessens the demo. votes, anybody notice in the videos there were more " MALES" than females. Way more young males. Obama's army lol more of them .


----------



## theDoctorisIn

westwall said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tom Horn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Refugees aren't "illegal combatants".
> 
> Again, words have meanings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Words sure do.....why are you calling them "refugees"?????  They are an invasion force who has stated their intention to cross our southern border illegally.   Guess what?  This group just got the WALL built...watch and see.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They have stated their intention to cross our southern borders and apply for political asylum.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, and the group helping them should be indicted for conspiracy to violate the immigration laws of this country.
Click to expand...


Be sure to write your local US Attorney and let him know.


----------



## Montrovant

ABikerSailor said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't think they're going to call on someone who was too scared to go to a USO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why Trump will not have to worry about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trump was never in the military and has likely never gone to a USO. Gaybiker on the other hand wouldn't get off his ship on shore leave even to go to a USO. A regular profile in courage. Meanwhile civilian employees like my mother worked there.
> 
> The wrong stuff I guess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, what I told you was that when Reagan was in office, we had to keep our heads on a swivel because USO's were being bombed.  Yeah, I think checking for things like that is just prudent.  Especially when there were bombings happening in all sorts of places US troops liked to frequent.
> 
> How many years did you serve again Meathead?  I did a full 20 in 4 war zones.
> 
> Oh wait....................forgot..................you just like to troll people.
Click to expand...


Ouch.  I'm going to have to score this ABikerSailor 1, Meathead 0.


----------



## Tom Horn

Anybody think Trump and Mad Dog are going to let McConnell and Schumer pretend none of this is happening?  Trump just got Mattis over $1.4 TRILLION dollars over the next two years.....The Army Corps of Engineers will build that wall and there's not a damn thing anybody can do about it.


----------



## MrShangles

bendog said:


> Why do Trumpbots fall for this crap time and time again.  Trump tweets out some bullshit notion that been floated and shot down repeatedly, and suddenly he's not just brilliant but has a totally new idea that nobody ever considered?  LOL



Why do y’all non-American bots want to protect illegal immigrants over legal Americans, is it our responsibility to care for these illegals.
Why can’t we just let people adopt all the illegals they want, but you have to provide food, shelter, and medical care at your expense, no government handouts.
So you can go first, how many of these wonderful illegals are you going to let in your house?
And yes I’m racist, now that we got that out of the way, how many are you gonna take care of?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rightwinger

harmonica said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> How is defending our borders from an invading horde of illegals be domestic law enforcement?  Only way to stop an invasion is to repel them with force.  After a few 1000 bodies left just south of the border, the illegals and liberals would get the message that We the People don't want criminals here anymore.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, "invading horde" is a silly characterization.  Secondly, I am pretty sure ICE is a law enforcement agency.  Third, if this is an invasion, who is it an invasion by?  Fourth, why would the only bodies be south of the border?  Do you think no illegals enter the country through the Canadian border?  Fifth, I'd say there is no realistic chance that the federal government will authorize using lethal force on someone simply because they enter the country illegally (ignoring whether such an order would be deemed legal/Constitutional).  Finally, I did not say that Posse Comitatus was necessarily the argument being made, merely that is might be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> On the use of lethal force, here's the dilemma, If you shoot at them BEFORE they cross the border, you are shooting Mexican citizens on Mexican soil, which can be deemed an act of war. If you wait until they cross the border, they are entitled to the full protection of the Constitution and American Law, therefore it becomes a LE mission and you can't shoot them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They aren't Mexican citizens.  They are Honduran citizens.  Shoot them on the Mexican side and let mex bellyache over it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If we kill people on the Mexican side of the border, it can be considered an act of war.  If they cross over the border, all the military will be able to do is point and say "there they are".  They don't have the authority to arrest, detain, or shoot anyone on US soil.  Only BP and LE can do that.
> 
> 
> Remember when Jr. tried to do it and it failed?  If Trump tries to do it, he's gonna fail as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> if Mexico is letting invaders in from Mexico--that is an act of war by MEXICO!!!!
> so the US would be defending herself--not committing an act of war
Click to expand...

An invasion of gardeners, nannies and maids?

Where is the Army?


----------



## Tom Horn

theDoctorisIn said:


> The Army wasn't "guarding the border" from refugees. There were no restrictions on immigration in 1916.



So I take it you don't believe the border should be guarded.....about time you revealed what you think of this nation...why do you still live here?  Oh, because you enjoy the police and Armed Forces protection should any of your "refugees" decide they have a right to everything you own some night?


----------



## westwall

theDoctorisIn said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act has nothing to do with protecting the nations borders.  That IS what the Army's job IS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it's not.
> 
> At no point in during peacetime in American history, has the military been tasked with protecting our borders.
> 
> Patrolling the border has been a function of civilian law enforcement as long as our borders have ever been patrolled.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm, their mission statement says otherwise.
> 
> 
> Preserving the peace and security and providing for the defense of the United States, the Commonwealths and possessions and any areas occupied by the United States
> Supporting the national policies
> Implementing the national objectives
> Overcoming any nations responsible for aggressive acts that imperil the peace and security of the United States
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This isn't about "mission statements", this is about the Laws of the United States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and the Border Patrol is recent.  Before there was a Border Patrol there was the US Army, in peacetime guarding the border.  It was the Army that chased Villa back to Mexico in 1916, or were you not aware of that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Army wasn't "guarding the border" from refugees. There were no restrictions on immigration in 1916.
Click to expand...







In 1916 The US was operating under the immigration Act of 1907, and then in 1917 a new Immigration Act was signed into law which further restricted who could come here.


----------



## westwall

theDoctorisIn said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tom Horn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Refugees aren't "illegal combatants".
> 
> Again, words have meanings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Words sure do.....why are you calling them "refugees"?????  They are an invasion force who has stated their intention to cross our southern border illegally.   Guess what?  This group just got the WALL built...watch and see.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They have stated their intention to cross our southern borders and apply for political asylum.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, and the group helping them should be indicted for conspiracy to violate the immigration laws of this country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Be sure to write your local US Attorney and let him know.
Click to expand...








Nope.  They have no power.  But I have talked to AG Laxalt about the issue.  I doubt he does anything about it, but he at least has a modicum of power.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

westwall said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, it's not.
> 
> At no point in during peacetime in American history, has the military been tasked with protecting our borders.
> 
> Patrolling the border has been a function of civilian law enforcement as long as our borders have ever been patrolled.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm, their mission statement says otherwise.
> 
> 
> Preserving the peace and security and providing for the defense of the United States, the Commonwealths and possessions and any areas occupied by the United States
> Supporting the national policies
> Implementing the national objectives
> Overcoming any nations responsible for aggressive acts that imperil the peace and security of the United States
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This isn't about "mission statements", this is about the Laws of the United States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and the Border Patrol is recent.  Before there was a Border Patrol there was the US Army, in peacetime guarding the border.  It was the Army that chased Villa back to Mexico in 1916, or were you not aware of that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Army wasn't "guarding the border" from refugees. There were no restrictions on immigration in 1916.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 1916 The US was operating under the immigration Act of 1907, and then in 1917 a new Immigration Act was signed into law which further restricted who could come here.
Click to expand...


Ok, if you want to be pedantic, the Immigration Act of 1907 did restrict the immigration of the "feebleminded".

But that was never enforced by the military on the border.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

westwall said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tom Horn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Refugees aren't "illegal combatants".
> 
> Again, words have meanings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Words sure do.....why are you calling them "refugees"?????  They are an invasion force who has stated their intention to cross our southern border illegally.   Guess what?  This group just got the WALL built...watch and see.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They have stated their intention to cross our southern borders and apply for political asylum.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, and the group helping them should be indicted for conspiracy to violate the immigration laws of this country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Be sure to write your local US Attorney and let him know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope.  They have no power.  But I have talked to AG Laxalt about the issue.  I doubt he does anything about it, but he at least has a modicum of power.
Click to expand...


A state AG can't prosecute anyone under federal laws.


----------



## DJT for Life

theDoctorisIn said:


> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The PURPOSE of the military is national defense e.g. US borders. This has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course it does. Barring exceptional circumstances, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the deployment of US military on US soil.
Click to expand...


And again...It does not include the Army or Air National Guard.

It prohibits using combat troops for domestic situations.  Guarding the
American border from an invasion is NOT a domestic situation.

But it is all irrelevent if he uses the National Guard.  (Army and Air)

He can deploy the Guard and stop the "invaders" in their tracks.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

The Posse Comitatus Act states in plain english that the military cannot be used on US soil to enforce the law.

Immigration law is law. 

QED.

This isn't complicated.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

DJT for Life said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The PURPOSE of the military is national defense e.g. US borders. This has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course it does. Barring exceptional circumstances, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the deployment of US military on US soil.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And again...It does not include the Army or Air National Guard.
> 
> It prohibits using combat troops for domestic situations.  Guarding the
> American border from an invasion is NOT a domestic situation.
> 
> But it is all irrelevent if he uses the National Guard.  (Army and Air)
> 
> He can deploy the Guard and stop the "invaders" in their tracks.
Click to expand...


Only with the permission of the States he's borrowing the guard from, or by declaring a national emergency.


----------



## IsaacNewton

Orange turd has been dying to have the US military operate on US soil. He's got to show Putin he can do it. 

Yes the military to stop a fictitious 'caravan' of women and children in school clothes. Maybe he'll have the troops conduct a parade on the border and goosestep for him.


----------



## busybee01

DJT for Life said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not if he used NG's on the border, backed up by regular troops.
Click to expand...


If Trump orders out the NG then they would be subject to the same restrictions as the military would be. The states would have to pay for it to get around that.


----------



## Siete

theDoctorisIn said:


> The Posse Comitatus Act states in plain english that the military cannot be used on US soil to enforce the law.
> 
> Immigration law is law.
> 
> QED.
> 
> This isn't complicated.



tweet Trump and tell him - he's too dumb to know our laws and how they work.


----------



## Tom Horn

theDoctorisIn said:


> The Posse Comitatus Act states in plain english that the military cannot be used on US soil to enforce the law.
> 
> Immigration law is law.
> 
> QED.
> 
> This isn't complicated.



It's not complicated at all....Myself and others have proved you wrong several times so far....so are you now in the "chanting" phase with your eyes closed and ears plugged?


----------



## ABikerSailor

DJT for Life said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The PURPOSE of the military is national defense e.g. US borders. This has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course it does. Barring exceptional circumstances, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the deployment of US military on US soil.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And again...It does not include the Army or Air National Guard.
> 
> It prohibits using combat troops for domestic situations.  Guarding the
> American border from an invasion is NOT a domestic situation.
> 
> But it is all irrelevent if he uses the National Guard.  (Army and Air)
> 
> He can deploy the Guard and stop the "invaders" in their tracks.
Click to expand...


Guarding the border from an invading foreign army would be cause to use the military at the border.

Refugees fleeing their country because of violence and poverty isn't quite an invading army.  

I see that the scary speech you heard from Trump has motivated you to believe a bunch of refugees fleeing violence is an invading army.  What weapons are they going to use?  What country has sent them?


----------



## busybee01

Missouri_Mike said:


> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.



They can sit on the border and watch people cross the border. If they take any action they will be enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.


----------



## LordBrownTrout

theDoctorisIn said:


> The Posse Comitatus Act states in plain english that the military cannot be used on US soil to enforce the law.
> 
> Immigration law is law.
> 
> QED.
> 
> This isn't complicated.



Eisenhower and lincoln invoked it.  It does state that but cooper v. aaron rejected a contention advanced by critics of the legality of eisenhowers conduct.


----------



## ABikerSailor

IsaacNewton said:


> Orange turd has been dying to have the US military operate on US soil. He's got to show Putin he can do it.
> 
> Yes the military to stop a fictitious 'caravan' of women and children in school clothes. Maybe he'll have the troops conduct a parade on the border and goosestep for him.



Hey, if he can get people comfortable with military patrols in their towns, it will make it easier for him to become supreme dictator.


----------



## ABikerSailor

busybee01 said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They can sit on the border and watch people cross the border. If they take any action they will be enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
Click to expand...


I wonder if any of those on the right know how expensive it will be to have them do that?  Yes, he can use NG troops if he has the state's permission, or he can federalize them. 

But the thing nobody is talking about is their pay.  When they are activated, they immediately start drawing pay for whatever their rank is, and they continue to receive full pay until they are sent home.  That is money we wouldn't normally be spending.


----------



## bodecea

kaz said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't know what any of that means, but neither do you.
> 
> So answer the question.  If the military isn't supposed to defend our borders, what do you believe its purpose is?  I'm not aware of any other role they play
Click to expand...

Which one of our borders is in Iraq?  In S. Korea?  In Afghanistan?  In Germany?


----------



## theDoctorisIn

LordBrownTrout said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act states in plain english that the military cannot be used on US soil to enforce the law.
> 
> Immigration law is law.
> 
> QED.
> 
> This isn't complicated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eisenhower and lincoln invoked it.  It does state that but cooper v. aaron rejected a contention advanced by critics of the legality of eisenhowers conduct.
Click to expand...


Cooper v. Aaron had nothing to do with deploying the military, or executive power.


----------



## bodecea

ABikerSailor said:


> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They can sit on the border and watch people cross the border. If they take any action they will be enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder if any of those on the right know how expensive it will be to have them do that?  Yes, he can use NG troops if he has the state's permission, or he can federalize them.
> 
> But the thing nobody is talking about is their pay.  When they are activated, they immediately start drawing pay for whatever their rank is, and they continue to receive full pay until they are sent home.  That is money we wouldn't normally be spending.
Click to expand...

And let's not forget to ask what the ROE will be?  Shoot down women and children?   I know some here would enjoy that.


----------



## harmonica

rightwinger said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, "invading horde" is a silly characterization.  Secondly, I am pretty sure ICE is a law enforcement agency.  Third, if this is an invasion, who is it an invasion by?  Fourth, why would the only bodies be south of the border?  Do you think no illegals enter the country through the Canadian border?  Fifth, I'd say there is no realistic chance that the federal government will authorize using lethal force on someone simply because they enter the country illegally (ignoring whether such an order would be deemed legal/Constitutional).  Finally, I did not say that Posse Comitatus was necessarily the argument being made, merely that is might be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the use of lethal force, here's the dilemma, If you shoot at them BEFORE they cross the border, you are shooting Mexican citizens on Mexican soil, which can be deemed an act of war. If you wait until they cross the border, they are entitled to the full protection of the Constitution and American Law, therefore it becomes a LE mission and you can't shoot them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They aren't Mexican citizens.  They are Honduran citizens.  Shoot them on the Mexican side and let mex bellyache over it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If we kill people on the Mexican side of the border, it can be considered an act of war.  If they cross over the border, all the military will be able to do is point and say "there they are".  They don't have the authority to arrest, detain, or shoot anyone on US soil.  Only BP and LE can do that.
> 
> 
> Remember when Jr. tried to do it and it failed?  If Trump tries to do it, he's gonna fail as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> if Mexico is letting invaders in from Mexico--that is an act of war by MEXICO!!!!
> so the US would be defending herself--not committing an act of war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> An invasion of gardeners, nannies and maids?
> 
> Where is the Army?
Click to expand...

shoot them DEAD!!!


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Tom Horn said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act states in plain english that the military cannot be used on US soil to enforce the law.
> 
> Immigration law is law.
> 
> QED.
> 
> This isn't complicated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's not complicated at all....Myself and others have proved you wrong several times so far....so are you now in the "chanting" phase with your eyes closed and ears plugged?
Click to expand...


----------



## ABikerSailor

bodecea said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They can sit on the border and watch people cross the border. If they take any action they will be enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder if any of those on the right know how expensive it will be to have them do that?  Yes, he can use NG troops if he has the state's permission, or he can federalize them.
> 
> But the thing nobody is talking about is their pay.  When they are activated, they immediately start drawing pay for whatever their rank is, and they continue to receive full pay until they are sent home.  That is money we wouldn't normally be spending.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And let's not forget to ask what the ROE will be?  Shoot down women and children?   I know some here would enjoy that.
Click to expand...


Well, when Jr. did it, all the troops could do was point and say "there they are".  They had no authority to arrest, detain, or even shoot them.  The only thing they were allowed was to defend themselves if they were attacked first.


----------



## DJT for Life

theDoctorisIn said:


> DJT for Life said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The PURPOSE of the military is national defense e.g. US borders. This has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course it does. Barring exceptional circumstances, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the deployment of US military on US soil.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And again...It does not include the Army or Air National Guard.
> 
> It prohibits using combat troops for domestic situations.  Guarding the
> American border from an invasion is NOT a domestic situation.
> 
> But it is all irrelevent if he uses the National Guard.  (Army and Air)
> 
> He can deploy the Guard and stop the "invaders" in their tracks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only with the permission of the States he's borrowing the guard from, or by declaring a national emergency.
Click to expand...


So he calls Abbott in Austin and tells him to send in the Guard.  You
think Abbott would refuse?  I don't.

Declaring a National Emergency is the easy way to go.  He then puts the
Guard under Federal Control and away from the States.

During the riots of the 60's there were numerous times when Federal
Troops were ordered in by the President to return law and order.

Ike did it in Little Rock in the 50's when he sent in the 101st Airborne.
The riots by Vets was met by MacArthur and Federal Troops in Washington
DC in the 20's or 30's.

Trump, btw, is now saying he will put the Military on the border to guard it
until the wall is built.  He is not deploying combat troops on American soil
he is using troops to guard our International Borders, which are only controlled
by the Fed govt. not the States.

He is upping the ante to protect the border.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

DJT for Life said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DJT for Life said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> The PURPOSE of the military is national defense e.g. US borders. This has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course it does. Barring exceptional circumstances, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the deployment of US military on US soil.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And again...It does not include the Army or Air National Guard.
> 
> It prohibits using combat troops for domestic situations.  Guarding the
> American border from an invasion is NOT a domestic situation.
> 
> But it is all irrelevent if he uses the National Guard.  (Army and Air)
> 
> He can deploy the Guard and stop the "invaders" in their tracks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only with the permission of the States he's borrowing the guard from, or by declaring a national emergency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So he calls Abbott in Austin and tells him to send in the Guard.  You
> think Abbott would refuse?  I don't.
> 
> Declaring a National Emergency is the easy way to go.  He then puts the
> Guard under Federal Control and away from the States.
> 
> During the riots of the 60's there were numerous times when Federal
> Troops were ordered in by the President to return law and order.
> 
> Ike did it in Little Rock in the 50's when he sent in the 101st Airborne.
> The riots by Vets was met by MacArthur and Federal Troops in Washington
> DC in the 20's or 30's.
> 
> Trump, btw, is now saying he will put the Military on the border to guard it
> until the wall is built.  He is not deploying combat troops on American soil
> he is using troops to guard our International Borders, which are only controlled
> by the Fed govt. not the States.
> 
> He is upping the ante to protect the border.
Click to expand...


The Insurrection Act allows the President, with consent of Congress, to deploy US military to quell civil unrest.

It does not contain an exception for "border control".

As for whether Abbott will deploy the Guard to the border - do you think he'll want to pay for it?


----------



## Meathead

ABikerSailor said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't think they're going to call on someone who was too scared to go to a USO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why Trump will not have to worry about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trump was never in the military and has likely never gone to a USO. Gaybiker on the other hand wouldn't get off his ship on shore leave even to go to a USO. A regular profile in courage. Meanwhile civilian employees like my mother worked there.
> 
> The wrong stuff I guess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, what I told you was that when Reagan was in office, we had to keep our heads on a swivel because USO's were being bombed.  Yeah, I think checking for things like that is just prudent.  Especially when there were bombings happening in all sorts of places US troops liked to frequent.
> 
> How many years did you serve again Meathead?  I did a full 20 in 4 war zones.
> 
> Oh wait....................forgot..................you just like to troll people.
Click to expand...

Did I misquote you? You said you wouldn't leave your ship  to go to a USO in a foreign port because Reagan's policies were putting you in danger. Sorry, that's what you said, so take it easy on the blood-and-guts bit, eh?

Not the right stuff, surely.


----------



## ABikerSailor

Meathead said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't think they're going to call on someone who was too scared to go to a USO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why Trump will not have to worry about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trump was never in the military and has likely never gone to a USO. Gaybiker on the other hand wouldn't get off his ship on shore leave even to go to a USO. A regular profile in courage. Meanwhile civilian employees like my mother worked there.
> 
> The wrong stuff I guess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, what I told you was that when Reagan was in office, we had to keep our heads on a swivel because USO's were being bombed.  Yeah, I think checking for things like that is just prudent.  Especially when there were bombings happening in all sorts of places US troops liked to frequent.
> 
> How many years did you serve again Meathead?  I did a full 20 in 4 war zones.
> 
> Oh wait....................forgot..................you just like to troll people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did I misquote you? You said you wouldn't leave your ship  to go to a USO in a foreign port because Reagan's policies were putting you in danger. Sorry, that's what you said, so take it easy on the blood-and-guts bit, eh?
> 
> Not the right stuff, surely.
Click to expand...


Find the quote.  Never said I wouldn't leave the ship.


----------



## IsaacNewton

Where are all the fake double-chin 'militias' to volunteer to patrol the border? I'm sure there are 7/11's nearby so you can stay stocked up on Slim Jims and slushees.


----------



## Meathead

ABikerSailor said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't think they're going to call on someone who was too scared to go to a USO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why Trump will not have to worry about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trump was never in the military and has likely never gone to a USO. Gaybiker on the other hand wouldn't get off his ship on shore leave even to go to a USO. A regular profile in courage. Meanwhile civilian employees like my mother worked there.
> 
> The wrong stuff I guess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, what I told you was that when Reagan was in office, we had to keep our heads on a swivel because USO's were being bombed.  Yeah, I think checking for things like that is just prudent.  Especially when there were bombings happening in all sorts of places US troops liked to frequent.
> 
> How many years did you serve again Meathead?  I did a full 20 in 4 war zones.
> 
> Oh wait....................forgot..................you just like to troll people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did I misquote you? You said you wouldn't leave your ship  to go to a USO in a foreign port because Reagan's policies were putting you in danger. Sorry, that's what you said, so take it easy on the blood-and-guts bit, eh?
> 
> Not the right stuff, surely.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Find the quote.  Never said I wouldn't leave the ship.
Click to expand...

Of course you did. That you now you regret saying it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Just knock off the blood-and-guts shit, OK? There are others who can pull it off, but not you.


----------



## DJT for Life

ABikerSailor said:


> DJT for Life said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The PURPOSE of the military is national defense e.g. US borders. This has nothing to do with Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course it does. Barring exceptional circumstances, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the deployment of US military on US soil.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And again...It does not include the Army or Air National Guard.
> 
> It prohibits using combat troops for domestic situations.  Guarding the
> American border from an invasion is NOT a domestic situation.
> 
> But it is all irrelevent if he uses the National Guard.  (Army and Air)
> 
> He can deploy the Guard and stop the "invaders" in their tracks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Guarding the border from an invading foreign army would be cause to use the military at the border.
> 
> Refugees fleeing their country because of violence and poverty isn't quite an invading army.
> 
> I see that the scary speech you heard from Trump has motivated you to believe a bunch of refugees fleeing violence is an invading army.  What weapons are they going to use?  What country has sent them?
Click to expand...


Your hate for Trump and doing the right thing is fucking up your mind.

Once they fled to Mexico, there fleeing ended.  By international law...they can
only seek asylum in the first country they arrive in.  They don't get to pick
and choose.  They don't get to announce that they will march 1,000 miles to
America for safety and pass on Mexico and El Salvador.

When they arrive here...they are international law breakers not folks seeking
asylum.


----------



## Marion Morrison

Got to guard the north, too. That's exactly the proper use for the military.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

TheOldSchool said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> Better than wasting time in the mideast (even though we will continue to and probably do it more soon)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interestingly enough you still insist on calling him a traitor.
> 
> Noted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Absolutely.  The man sidles up to dictators and attacks our allies.  He wages war, personally at times, against Americans.  And he does so with Russian help, which he knows about and has never spoken against.
> 
> Putin does not want Trump leading the country because he has our interests at heart.
Click to expand...


   You crazy liberals...


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

g5000 said:


> We need to shoot these starving kids who are fleeing gangs!  It's a moral obligation!



  Your agenda is transparent...
Unlike the lefts.


----------



## Marion Morrison

ABikerSailor said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't think they're going to call on someone who was too scared to go to a USO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why Trump will not have to worry about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trump was never in the military and has likely never gone to a USO. Gaybiker on the other hand wouldn't get off his ship on shore leave even to go to a USO. A regular profile in courage. Meanwhile civilian employees like my mother worked there.
> 
> The wrong stuff I guess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, what I told you was that when Reagan was in office, we had to keep our heads on a swivel because USO's were being bombed.  Yeah, I think checking for things like that is just prudent.  Especially when there were bombings happening in all sorts of places US troops liked to frequent.
> 
> How many years did you serve again Meathead?  I did a full 20 in 4 war zones.
> 
> Oh wait....................forgot..................you just like to troll people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did I misquote you? You said you wouldn't leave your ship  to go to a USO in a foreign port because Reagan's policies were putting you in danger. Sorry, that's what you said, so take it easy on the blood-and-guts bit, eh?
> 
> Not the right stuff, surely.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Find the quote.  Never said I wouldn't leave the ship.
Click to expand...


I think you should be made to take the long walk off the short plank where sharks are, traitor.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

g5000 said:


> Soggy in NOLA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g5000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We need to shoot these starving kids who are fleeing gangs!  It's a moral obligation!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody's advocating any such thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *cough*
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> The military needs to be able to shoot to kill.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
Click to expand...


  I post what I mean dipshit.


----------



## westwall

theDoctorisIn said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westwall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tom Horn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Words sure do.....why are you calling them "refugees"?????  They are an invasion force who has stated their intention to cross our southern border illegally.   Guess what?  This group just got the WALL built...watch and see.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They have stated their intention to cross our southern borders and apply for political asylum.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, and the group helping them should be indicted for conspiracy to violate the immigration laws of this country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Be sure to write your local US Attorney and let him know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope.  They have no power.  But I have talked to AG Laxalt about the issue.  I doubt he does anything about it, but he at least has a modicum of power.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A state AG can't prosecute anyone under federal laws.
Click to expand...






No, they can't, but that can suggest that it happen.  Trust me, I know how these things work.  An AUSA has no power to do anything but what his boss tells him to do.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

rightwinger said:


> He should have the military guard the border and make Mexico pay for it



  Oh they'd pay alright.
Of course you're too stupid to understand why.


----------



## westwall

theDoctorisIn said:


> The Posse Comitatus Act states in plain english that the military cannot be used on US soil to enforce the law.
> 
> Immigration law is law.
> 
> QED.
> 
> This isn't complicated.







Oh?  What exactly does this mean?

* "providing for the defense of the United States, the Commonwealths and possessions and any areas occupied by the United States"*


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Rambunctious said:


> Way to go Trump!!!! a real American instead of a Kenyan...what a difference!
> 
> Why do Dems want open borders while at the same time want to take away our guns? Did they forget 9-11? What has happened to the democrat party to make them so anti anything American?



  Nah.....they're just following the euro model.
Disarm everyone and send in the refugees.


----------



## 007

Rambunctious said:


> Why do Dems want open borders...


Votes.


----------



## Baz Ares

MindWars said:


> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!


Great. Put the loser American welfare long term Gobmint FREELOADERS to work.
Walking the northern and southern borders 24/7/365. Or get a real job. Taking a Mexicans job at least. Picking farm crops.


----------



## Timmy

Let’s go with this .

What happens to Americans living or crossing the border?  Drone strikes?  

What happens if you are at the border and confronted by a military person?  Do you no longer have constitutional rights in trumps martial law ?


----------



## Timmy

Baz Ares said:


> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!
> 
> 
> 
> Great. Put the loser American welfare long term Gobmint FREELOADERS to work.
> Walking the northern and southern borders 24/7/365. Or get a real job. Taking a Mexicans job at least.
Click to expand...


You mean all those fema fund welfare takers in Texas ?


----------



## Rambunctious

Timmy said:


> Let’s go with this .
> 
> What happens to Americans living or crossing the border? Drone strikes?
> 
> What happens if you are at the border and confronted by a military person? Do you no longer have constitutional rights in trumps martial law ?


They check your political affiliation and if you are a libtard we push you into Mexico and lock the gate....


----------



## 007

Timmy said:


> Let’s go with this .
> 
> What happens to Americans living or crossing the border?  Drone strikes?
> 
> What happens if you are at the border and confronted by a military person?  Do you no longer have constitutional rights in trumps martial law ?


Poor little Timmy... doesn't know that only legal Americans have constitutional rights, and illegal aliens have none.


----------



## Kondor3

There are ways around _Posse Comitatus_.

Not the least of which would be to declare Martial Law on the Southern Border, from the borderline itself, back 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 miles, at DOD-DHS field-command discretion, variably and locally, as indicated by conditions required to fulfill the mission, including broad authority to use deadly force against intruders from across the Southern Border.


----------



## Timmy

007 said:


> Rambunctious said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do Dems want open borders...
> 
> 
> 
> Votes.
Click to expand...


That makes no sense .  Illegals can’t vote . 

If anything , Cons love illegals because they make great scapegoats .


----------



## eagle1462010

The military has been used before.


----------



## eagle1462010




----------



## Baz Ares

Timmy said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!
> 
> 
> 
> Great. Put the loser American welfare long term Gobmint FREELOADERS to work.
> Walking the northern and southern borders 24/7/365. Or get a real job. Taking a Mexicans job at least.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean all those fema fund welfare takers in Texas ?
Click to expand...

Nope, just the American military losers of today.


----------



## bodecea

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> The military needs to be able to shoot to kill.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep....you drop a few of em and this shit will end pronto.
Click to expand...

teenaged....that's very popular with trumpanzees atm.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

bodecea said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> The military needs to be able to shoot to kill.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep....you drop a few of em and this shit will end pronto.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> teenaged....that's very popular with trumpanzees atm.
Click to expand...


  WTF are you even talking about?


----------



## jillian

MindWars said:


> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!



now THIS is what should concern you, conspiracy nut. Because THIS is actually dangerous.

idiot


----------



## Baz Ares

eagle1462010 said:


>


Only morons do border protections in other peoples lands.
Try standing the homeland border first, before you go off to other lands to murder peoples and children for sport.


----------



## eagle1462010

Baz Ares said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only morons do border protections in other peoples lands.
> Try standing the homeland border first, before you go off to other lands to murder peoples and children for sport.
Click to expand...

Tell ISIS and Radical Islam to stop chopping peoples heads off, burn them alive, crucify them on a cross, rape, place people's heads on spikes.......etc.......

and perhaps there would be no reason to kill their asses...................


----------



## busybee01

MindWars said:


> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!



The military is going to be watching people go across the border. If they try to stop it then they are enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.


----------



## Baz Ares

eagle1462010 said:


> The military has been used before.


Gee? We so good...

*Gnadenhutten Massacre, American Revolution*
*Andersonville Prison, Civil War
Abu Ghraib, the Iraq War
Wounded Knee Massacre
My Lai Massacre


*


----------



## eagle1462010

Behind the Scenes of Mexico's Sinaloa Cartel

In one scene, Beriain goes on night patrol with masked hitmen who are cruising around the streets of Culiacán, the capital of Sinaloa state, looking for enemy incursions. A police car pulls in front of them with flashing sirens and a cop gets out. The hitmen lock and load their assault rifles. The cop comes around to the window.

"Listen... " the cop says.

The hitman in the passenger seat interrupts him: "We're working here, mister."

The cop grasps the situation. "On your way then," he says, stepping back.

"We are the ones in control," the hitman explains to Beriain. "Police, politicians. Here, everyone is in deep."

Beriain later sits down with a corrupt officer who, like all the interviewees, has his face blurred and his voice disguised. "I'm just trying to survive," he says. Thirteen or 14 of his colleagues in law enforcement have been killed for refusing to do the cartel's dirty work, he says.


----------



## busybee01

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> The military needs to be able to shoot to kill.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep....you drop a few of em and this shit will end pronto.
Click to expand...


The murder trials will begin.


----------



## eagle1462010

Baz Ares said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The military has been used before.
> 
> 
> 
> Gee? We so good...
> 
> *Gnadenhutten Massacre, American Revolution*
> *Andersonville Prison, Civil War*
> *Abu Ghraib, the Iraq War*
> *Wounded Knee Massacre*
> *My Lai Massacre*
Click to expand...

Every Nation on earth's boundaries have been the result of War........Whether you like it or not.............the very nations we talk about in the Middle East didn't exist until after WWI and were created when the Ottaman Empire lost the War...........


----------



## busybee01

harmonica said:


> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc



It is a loser. It gives aid and comfort to terrorists and evil people like Putin.


----------



## busybee01

andaronjim said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Posse Comitatus Act*
> The *Posse* *Comitatus* *Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes. The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using its military personnel to act as domestic law enforcement personnel.
> *Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is defending our borders from an invading horde of illegals be domestic law enforcement?  Only way to stop an invasion is to repel them with force.  After a few 1000 bodies left just south of the border, the illegals and liberals would get the message that We the People don't want criminals here anymore.
Click to expand...


You are a real looney tune aren't you. The new dictatorship starts.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

busybee01 said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> The military needs to be able to shoot to kill.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep....you drop a few of em and this shit will end pronto.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The murder trials will begin.
Click to expand...


   Guess they should stay home.


----------



## busybee01

andaronjim said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shoot, ask questions later
> 
> -Geaux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a bit much. We aren't communist East Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> in East Germany they shot their own Citizens going over the wall to LEAVE their country.  We just want to shoot people who are trying to get in OUR country illegally...Only way to end this unwanted, everlasting invasion..
Click to expand...


We should shoot people like you and Trump if we were to shoot anyone.


----------



## Geaux4it

busybee01 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shoot, ask questions later
> 
> -Geaux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a bit much. We aren't communist East Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> in East Germany they shot their own Citizens going over the wall to LEAVE their country.  We just want to shoot people who are trying to get in OUR country illegally...Only way to end this unwanted, everlasting invasion..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We should shoot people like you and Trump if we were to shoot anyone.
Click to expand...


Careful. Leftist say we should report you. You seem unstable

-Geaux


----------



## MindWars

busybee01 said:


> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The military is going to be watching people go across the border. If they try to stop it then they are enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
Click to expand...


Most don't believe how illegal it is for US citizens to be asked by border patrol if they as far as 100 miles inland.......  either though
Bush implemented everything there is UN constitutional and 911 was used as an excuse to do it all.


----------



## bodecea

eagle1462010 said:


>


can you set that up along 2,000 some odd miles of border?


----------



## LuckyDuck

HereWeGoAgain said:


> I'd gladly do a stint on the border for free.


Unfortunately, not close to border, so unable to pitch in, unless he agrees to transport us military retirees down there and put us up for awhile, I'd bring one of my own weapons, for safety purposes, of course.


----------



## Baz Ares

eagle1462010 said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only morons do border protections in other peoples lands.
> Try standing the homeland border first, before you go off to other lands to murder peoples and children for sport.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tell ISIS and Radical Islam to stop chopping peoples heads off, burn them alive, crucify them on a cross, rape, place people's heads on spikes.......etc.......
> 
> and perhaps there would be no reason to kill their asses...................
Click to expand...

It's day 502 of the Great Douche rule. IT said it could kill isis in 30 days.
Trump has demanded a plan to defeat Isis within 30 days
at this slow rate the Great Douche will be out of office before isis is dead.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

LuckyDuck said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd gladly do a stint on the border for free.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, not close to border, so unable to pitch in, unless he agrees to transport us military retirees down there and put us up for awhile, I'd bring one of my own weapons, for safety purposes, of course.
Click to expand...


  Spent many a year near the border.
Anywhere from an hour to six hours.
     Hell,I'd pay for my own airfare from houston to the border and stay for six months for nothing!


----------



## LuckyDuck

HereWeGoAgain said:


> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd gladly do a stint on the border for free.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, not close to border, so unable to pitch in, unless he agrees to transport us military retirees down there and put us up for awhile, I'd bring one of my own weapons, for safety purposes, of course.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Spent many a year near the border.
> Anywhere from an hour to six hours.
> Hell,I'd pay for my own airfare from houston to the border and stay for six months for nothing!
Click to expand...

Well, he has to provide military transport. I like my BAR and wouldn't leave home without it.


----------



## Baz Ares

bodecea said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can you set that up along 2,000 some odd miles of border?
Click to expand...

Sure, most military jobs are done by contract workers. Not the loser in the armed force sucking off gobmint dimes doing nothang.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

busybee01 said:


> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The military is going to be watching people go across the border. If they try to stop it then they are enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
Click to expand...


 You need to read up on border law.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

busybee01 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shoot, ask questions later
> 
> -Geaux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a bit much. We aren't communist East Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> in East Germany they shot their own Citizens going over the wall to LEAVE their country.  We just want to shoot people who are trying to get in OUR country illegally...Only way to end this unwanted, everlasting invasion..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We should shoot people like you and Trump if we were to shoot anyone.
Click to expand...


  Fire away dickhead......
See where it gets ya.


----------



## eagle1462010

Baz Ares said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can you set that up along 2,000 some odd miles of border?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure, most military jobs are done by contract workers. Not the loser in the armed force sucking off gobmint dimes doing nothang.
Click to expand...

Your HATE of our military is duly noted and ignored/


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

LuckyDuck said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd gladly do a stint on the border for free.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, not close to border, so unable to pitch in, unless he agrees to transport us military retirees down there and put us up for awhile, I'd bring one of my own weapons, for safety purposes, of course.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Spent many a year near the border.
> Anywhere from an hour to six hours.
> Hell,I'd pay for my own airfare from houston to the border and stay for six months for nothing!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well, he has to provide military transport. I like my BAR and wouldn't leave home without it.
Click to expand...


  I have all the free time in the world at 53,and spare money.
Point me in the right direction....as long as you let me tell you where the weak points are.
   Because I already know em.


----------



## busybee01

jc456 said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harmonica is right, but that's irrelevant to the discussion that the role of our military is to defend our borders and you don't know that.  Unreal.  Read the Constitution
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah ?  What part of the constitution are your referring too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV.  Section 4.  You know you're on the Internet too ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is what you are hanging your hat on?
> 
> The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
> 
> 
> Geez.  We are not being “invaded” .  We have commerce with Mexico .  Tourists and legal immigration by both countries every day .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
Click to expand...


None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.


----------



## charwin95

MindWars said:


> [URL='http://dailycaller.com/2018/04/03/trump
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!



I hate to tell you this but..... What do you expect the soldiers should do when they get to the border? 
The same thing as the ICE will be doing for years. 
Perry tried that when he was governor. 

You cannot blame the democrats either because even if you remove the democrats to this equation these people will still come in.

Look at the influx of refugees entering Europe.


----------



## Baz Ares

eagle1462010 said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can you set that up along 2,000 some odd miles of border?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure, most military jobs are done by contract workers. Not the loser in the armed force sucking off gobmint dimes doing nothang.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your HATE of our military is duly noted and ignored/
Click to expand...

LOL..Nope. Just calling them out as hypocrites on gobmint welfare.

They all have a choice to say NO!


----------



## LuckyDuck

Baz Ares said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can you set that up along 2,000 some odd miles of border?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure, most military jobs are done by contract workers. Not the loser in the armed force sucking off gobmint dimes doing nothang.
Click to expand...

Clearly, by your lack of proper grammar, you are not from the US. The loser in our armed forces?  At last check, we didn't become the number one super power without our military.  
Revolutionary War:  Won.
War of 1812:  Won.
Barbary War:  Won.
Mexican-American War:  Won.
Spanish-American War:  Won.
Philippine Insurrection:  Won.
Boxer Rebellion:  Won (as part of a coalition of nations).
World War I:  Won (as part of a coalition of nations).
World War II:  Won (as part of a coalition of nations).
Korean War:  Armistice.
Vietnam War:  Officially, we didn't lose.  The Viet Cong were destroyed and the NVA was beaten back, however, due to public pressure, brought on by too free coverage by the media, we pulled out.  Had we stayed in, we would have won.
Iraq War:  Won (as part of a coalition of other nations).
Afghanistan War:  Ongoing (as part of a coalition of other nations).
Syria:  Currently in the process of withdrawing as ISIS has been beaten.
So, our military personnel aren't a group of losers.  They're professionally trained personnel that can beat you any day.


----------



## Timmy

007 said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let’s go with this .
> 
> What happens to Americans living or crossing the border?  Drone strikes?
> 
> What happens if you are at the border and confronted by a military person?  Do you no longer have constitutional rights in trumps martial law ?
> 
> 
> 
> Poor little Timmy... doesn't know that only legal Americans have constitutional rights, and illegal aliens have none.
Click to expand...


How do you know who’s legal or not ?  Bar codes on are necks ? 

Soldier comes up to you and says “show me your papers “.  You tell them to fuck off .  Then what ?


----------



## LuckyDuck

busybee01 said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Harmonica is right, but that's irrelevant to the discussion that the role of our military is to defend our borders and you don't know that.  Unreal.  Read the Constitution
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yeah ?  What part of the constitution are your referring too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV.  Section 4.  You know you're on the Internet too ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is what you are hanging your hat on?
> 
> The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
> 
> 
> Geez.  We are not being “invaded” .  We have commerce with Mexico .  Tourists and legal immigration by both countries every day .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
Click to expand...

A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.


----------



## Timmy

Kondor3 said:


> There are ways around _Posse Comitatus_.
> 
> Not the least of which would be to declare Martial Law on the Southern Border, from the borderline itself, back 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 miles, at DOD-DHS field-command discretion, variably and locally, as indicated by conditions required to fulfill the mission, including broad authority to use deadly force against intruders from across the Southern Border.



So you are for martial law against Americans.  You realize it’s a busy border wh Americans going back and forth .  Or land owners, farmers , ranchers .  We confiscating that property ?


----------



## Baz Ares

LuckyDuck said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can you set that up along 2,000 some odd miles of border?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure, most military jobs are done by contract workers. Not the loser in the armed force sucking off gobmint dimes doing nothang.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Clearly, by your lack of proper grammar, you are not from the US. The loser in our armed forces?  At last check, we didn't become the number one super power without our military.
> Revolutionary War:  Won.
> War of 1812:  Won.
> Barbary War:  Won.
> Mexican-American War:  Won.
> Spanish-American War:  Won.
> Philippine Insurrection:  Won.
> Boxer Rebellion:  Won (as part of a coalition of nations).
> World War I:  Won (as part of a coalition of nations).
> World War II:  Won (as part of a coalition of nations).
> Korean War:  Armistice.
> Vietnam War:  Officially, we didn't lose.  The Viet Cong were destroyed and the NVA was beaten back, however, due to public pressure, brought on by too free coverage by the media, we pulled out.  Had we stayed in, we would have won.
> Iraq War:  Won (as part of a coalition of other nations).
> Afghanistan War:  Ongoing (as part of a coalition of other nations).
> Syria:  Currently in the process of withdrawing as ISIS has been beaten.
> So, our military personnel aren't a group of losers.  They're professionally trained personnel that can beat you any day.
Click to expand...

16 years in the ME fighting, seems they can't win these wars. LOL! They should call back to duty our great WWII vets. They won their wars FULLY!


----------



## Likkmee

Golfing Gator said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually the military is the best thing, not the next best
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Click to expand...

That depends on their orders."Stand down" is highly likely The current band of unemployable idiots are "guarding" many bases with no ammo. Same as us at the DMZ in the seventies. Absurd flag waving shit but the drugs were damn near free !


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Timmy said:


> 007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let’s go with this .
> 
> What happens to Americans living or crossing the border?  Drone strikes?
> 
> What happens if you are at the border and confronted by a military person?  Do you no longer have constitutional rights in trumps martial law ?
> 
> 
> 
> Poor little Timmy... doesn't know that only legal Americans have constitutional rights, and illegal aliens have none.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do you know who’s legal or not ?  Bar codes on are necks ?
> 
> Soldier comes up to you and says “show me your papers “.  You tell them to fuck off .  Then what ?
Click to expand...


  You're such a fucken tard.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Timmy said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are ways around _Posse Comitatus_.
> 
> Not the least of which would be to declare Martial Law on the Southern Border, from the borderline itself, back 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 miles, at DOD-DHS field-command discretion, variably and locally, as indicated by conditions required to fulfill the mission, including broad authority to use deadly force against intruders from across the Southern Border.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you are for martial law against Americans.  You realize it’s a busy border wh Americans going back and forth .  Or land owners, farmers , ranchers .  We confiscating that property ?
Click to expand...


       A tard extraordinaire.....


----------



## Timmy

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let’s go with this .
> 
> What happens to Americans living or crossing the border?  Drone strikes?
> 
> What happens if you are at the border and confronted by a military person?  Do you no longer have constitutional rights in trumps martial law ?
> 
> 
> 
> Poor little Timmy... doesn't know that only legal Americans have constitutional rights, and illegal aliens have none.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do you know who’s legal or not ?  Bar codes on are necks ?
> 
> Soldier comes up to you and says “show me your papers “.  You tell them to fuck off .  Then what ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're such a fucken tard.
Click to expand...


Answer the question!   Oh wait , you rubes don’t think past any of Trumps dumb ass tweets .


----------



## Timmy

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are ways around _Posse Comitatus_.
> 
> Not the least of which would be to declare Martial Law on the Southern Border, from the borderline itself, back 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 miles, at DOD-DHS field-command discretion, variably and locally, as indicated by conditions required to fulfill the mission, including broad authority to use deadly force against intruders from across the Southern Border.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you are for martial law against Americans.  You realize it’s a busy border wh Americans going back and forth .  Or land owners, farmers , ranchers .  We confiscating that property ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A tard extraordinaire.....
Click to expand...


Another question you won’t answer .  Simple minded Trunp-tard.

Have you ever crossed the US border ?  You rubes act as if it’s some free for all.


----------



## Geaux4it

charwin95 said:


> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> [URL='http://dailycaller.com/2018/04/03/trump
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hate to tell you this but..... What do you expect the soldiers should do when they get to the border?
> The same thing as the ICE will be doing for years.
> Perry tried that when he was governor.
> 
> You cannot blame the democrats either because even if you remove the democrats to this equation these people will still come in.
> 
> Look at the influx of refugees entering Europe.
Click to expand...


They do what any good soldier does.

What they're told

Not your call what they do, or don't do

-Geaux


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Timmy said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are ways around _Posse Comitatus_.
> 
> Not the least of which would be to declare Martial Law on the Southern Border, from the borderline itself, back 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 miles, at DOD-DHS field-command discretion, variably and locally, as indicated by conditions required to fulfill the mission, including broad authority to use deadly force against intruders from across the Southern Border.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you are for martial law against Americans.  You realize it’s a busy border wh Americans going back and forth .  Or land owners, farmers , ranchers .  We confiscating that property ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A tard extraordinaire.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another question you won’t answer .  Simple minded Trunp-tard.
> 
> Have you ever crossed the US border ?  You rubes act as if it’s some free for all.
Click to expand...


  Ya stupid fuck....
I lived on the border and called ICE many a times.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Timmy said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let’s go with this .
> 
> What happens to Americans living or crossing the border?  Drone strikes?
> 
> What happens if you are at the border and confronted by a military person?  Do you no longer have constitutional rights in trumps martial law ?
> 
> 
> 
> Poor little Timmy... doesn't know that only legal Americans have constitutional rights, and illegal aliens have none.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do you know who’s legal or not ?  Bar codes on are necks ?
> 
> Soldier comes up to you and says “show me your papers “.  You tell them to fuck off .  Then what ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're such a fucken tard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Answer the question!   Oh wait , you rubes don’t think past any of Trumps dumb ass tweets .
Click to expand...


  Shut up timmy. You know nothing about our southern border.


----------



## Aba Incieni

I seem to recall Uncle Bill Clinton sending marines in and snatching a child from the family home and sending him back to Cuba. What's a few angry Honduran women.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

aaronleland said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Great Wall was built in stages over a period of over 2000 years, by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of workers.
Click to expand...


That's why we have construction equipment.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

Aba Incieni said:


> I seem to recall Uncle Bill Clinton sending marines in and snatching a child from the family home and sending him back to Cuba. What's a few angry Honduran women.



Sorry! You remember incorrectly.


----------



## Timmy

Aba Incieni said:


> I seem to recall Uncle Bill Clinton sending marines in and snatching a child from the family home and sending him back to Cuba. What's a few angry Honduran women.



I recall the righties wanting that dreamer kid to stay in America.


----------



## Timmy

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> 
> I seem to recall Uncle Bill Clinton sending marines in and snatching a child from the family home and sending him back to Cuba. What's a few angry Honduran women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry! You remember incorrectly.
Click to expand...


Right .  It was a fed agent . The kid wasn’t being deported . He was being sent back to his dad.

The days when the gop was pro dreamer !


----------



## Timmy

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let’s go with this .
> 
> What happens to Americans living or crossing the border?  Drone strikes?
> 
> What happens if you are at the border and confronted by a military person?  Do you no longer have constitutional rights in trumps martial law ?
> 
> 
> 
> Poor little Timmy... doesn't know that only legal Americans have constitutional rights, and illegal aliens have none.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do you know who’s legal or not ?  Bar codes on are necks ?
> 
> Soldier comes up to you and says “show me your papers “.  You tell them to fuck off .  Then what ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're such a fucken tard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Answer the question!   Oh wait , you rubes don’t think past any of Trumps dumb ass tweets .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Shut up timmy. You know nothing about our southern border.
Click to expand...


I’ve been there.  And Canada too.  How about you?


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

ABikerSailor said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They can sit on the border and watch people cross the border. If they take any action they will be enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder if any of those on the right know how expensive it will be to have them do that?  Yes, he can use NG troops if he has the state's permission, or he can federalize them.
> 
> But the thing nobody is talking about is their pay.  When they are activated, they immediately start drawing pay for whatever their rank is, and they continue to receive full pay until they are sent home.  That is money we wouldn't normally be spending.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And let's not forget to ask what the ROE will be?  Shoot down women and children?   I know some here would enjoy that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, when Jr. did it, all the troops could do was point and say "there they are".  They had no authority to arrest, detain, or even shoot them.  The only thing they were allowed was to defend themselves if they were attacked first.
Click to expand...


Under Bush and Obama, yes.  We don't yet know the terms of endearment that will be issued to the troops.

There are several non-lethal means at our disposal to disperse crowds.  Sonic weapons, microwave emitters, etc.  Believe me, they'll move.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

harmonica said:


> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even the portion built by the Ming Dynasty took 200 years to build.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you think it will take us 200 years to build this one? Come on Aaron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At this rate we won't have enough funding approved in 200 years, let alone a 2000 mile wall built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmm, if you only knew the power of American industry. How else do you think we managed to win World War II? By lending moral support?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> During World War 2 we were fighting an enemy on two fronts, and millions needed jobs due to the Great Depression. Today we have a decent economy and relatively low unemployment. Many American's aren't looking for "moral support". Despite what some Trump supporters may believe a lot of people really don't care about the wall one way or another. It's a band-aid. A very expensive band-aid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> big difference between WW2 and today-----the HUGE debt!!!!
Click to expand...


Do you have any idea what our debt was in WWII?


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

busybee01 said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They can sit on the border and watch people cross the border. If they take any action they will be enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
Click to expand...


Nonsense.  Border control is national security.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

Billy_Kinetta said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They can sit on the border and watch people cross the border. If they take any action they will be enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder if any of those on the right know how expensive it will be to have them do that?  Yes, he can use NG troops if he has the state's permission, or he can federalize them.
> 
> But the thing nobody is talking about is their pay.  When they are activated, they immediately start drawing pay for whatever their rank is, and they continue to receive full pay until they are sent home.  That is money we wouldn't normally be spending.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And let's not forget to ask what the ROE will be?  Shoot down women and children?   I know some here would enjoy that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, when Jr. did it, all the troops could do was point and say "there they are".  They had no authority to arrest, detain, or even shoot them.  The only thing they were allowed was to defend themselves if they were attacked first.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Under Bush and Obama, yes.  We don't yet know the terms of endearment that will be issued to the troops.
> 
> There are several non-lethal means at our disposal to disperse crowds.  Sonic weapons, microwave emitters, etc.  Believe me, they'll move.
Click to expand...


Endearment?  Now THAT's a funny autocorrect I'll bet!


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

aaronleland said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> And you think it will take us 200 years to build this one? Come on Aaron.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At this rate we won't have enough funding approved in 200 years, let alone a 2000 mile wall built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmm, if you only knew the power of American industry. How else do you think we managed to win World War II? By lending moral support?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> During World War 2 we were fighting an enemy on two fronts, and millions needed jobs due to the Great Depression. Today we have a decent economy and relatively low unemployment. Many American's aren't looking for "moral support". Despite what some Trump supporters may believe a lot of people really don't care about the wall one way or another. It's a band-aid. A very expensive band-aid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't like the defeatism here. Like I told g5, if we can't take steps to enforce our borders, we should dispense with our national sovereignty and get it over with. We are clearly not interested in maintaining it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where is the defeatism? There are a lot of ways to protect our borders other than a wall. Bringing troops back from overseas to protect our borders would not only cost less, but probably strengthen our economy.
Click to expand...


Let me ask you this!  Would you want to live on the border in August? 

What about our commitments overseas?


----------



## Big Black Dog

Best idea I’ve heard from any politician in the last 20 Year’s..


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They can sit on the border and watch people cross the border. If they take any action they will be enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder if any of those on the right know how expensive it will be to have them do that?  Yes, he can use NG troops if he has the state's permission, or he can federalize them.
> 
> But the thing nobody is talking about is their pay.  When they are activated, they immediately start drawing pay for whatever their rank is, and they continue to receive full pay until they are sent home.  That is money we wouldn't normally be spending.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And let's not forget to ask what the ROE will be?  Shoot down women and children?   I know some here would enjoy that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, when Jr. did it, all the troops could do was point and say "there they are".  They had no authority to arrest, detain, or even shoot them.  The only thing they were allowed was to defend themselves if they were attacked first.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Under Bush and Obama, yes.  We don't yet know the terms of endearment that will be issued to the troops.
> 
> There are several non-lethal means at our disposal to disperse crowds.  Sonic weapons, microwave emitters, etc.  Believe me, they'll move.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Endearment?  Now THAT's a funny autocorrect I'll bet!
Click to expand...


No!  I get in trouble with autocorrect.

"Rules of Engagement" = "Terms of Endearment".


----------



## Missouri_Mike

Billy_Kinetta said:


> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They can sit on the border and watch people cross the border. If they take any action they will be enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nonsense.  Border control is national security.
Click to expand...

These fucking idiots. Did you know defending our borders is simply civilian law? By this line of thinking Hawaii should have fought WWII all by itself. With it's police department.


----------



## jon_berzerk

MindWars said:


> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!




good about damn time


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

theDoctorisIn said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
Click to expand...


Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!

We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.

The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.

Dumbass!


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

bendog said:


> Even aside from the posse commitatus
> 
> http://policy.defense.gov/portals/11/Documents/hdasa/references/10_USC_375.pdf
> 
> Congress would have to approve it, and it ain't happening.



Could your link be any more vague? It looks like YOU typed that.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
Click to expand...


As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

bodecea said:


> DJT for Life said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not if he used NG's on the border, backed up by regular troops.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That didn't work well last time they tried it....killed an American citizen out watching his family's sheep.
Click to expand...


Link?


----------



## eagle1462010

theDoctorisIn said:


> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
Click to expand...

In the last decade in Mexico over 177 k have died in a drug War....................That is a War..............A War Mexico is LOSING.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DJT for Life said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not if he used NG's on the border, backed up by regular troops.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That didn't work well last time they tried it....killed an American citizen out watching his family's sheep.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?
Click to expand...


I think she might be talking about this:

After Marine on Patrol Kills a Teen-Ager, a Texas Border Village Wonders Why


----------



## theDoctorisIn

eagle1462010 said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In the last decade in Mexico over 177 k have died in a drug War....................That is a War..............A War Mexico is LOSING.
Click to expand...


"Wars" on drugs, or terrorism, or whatever aren't "wars".

Don't confuse rhetoric with reality.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

AsherN said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> 
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Posse Comitatus Act*
> The *Posse* *Comitatus* *Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes. The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using its military personnel to act as domestic law enforcement personnel.
> *Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is defending our borders from an invading horde of illegals be domestic law enforcement?  Only way to stop an invasion is to repel them with force.  After a few 1000 bodies left just south of the border, the illegals and liberals would get the message that We the People don't want criminals here anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First of all, "invading horde" is a silly characterization.  Secondly, I am pretty sure ICE is a law enforcement agency.  Third, if this is an invasion, who is it an invasion by?  Fourth, why would the only bodies be south of the border?  Do you think no illegals enter the country through the Canadian border?  Fifth, I'd say there is no realistic chance that the federal government will authorize using lethal force on someone simply because they enter the country illegally (ignoring whether such an order would be deemed legal/Constitutional).  Finally, I did not say that Posse Comitatus was necessarily the argument being made, merely that is might be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> On the use of lethal force, here's the dilemma, If you shoot at them BEFORE they cross the border, you are shooting Mexican citizens on Mexican soil, which can be deemed an act of war. If you wait until they cross the border, they are entitled to the full protection of the Constitution and American Law, therefore it becomes a LE mission and you can't shoot them.
Click to expand...


Newsflash!  They are Hondurans, not Mexicans!


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Timmy said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Poor little Timmy... doesn't know that only legal Americans have constitutional rights, and illegal aliens have none.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know who’s legal or not ?  Bar codes on are necks ?
> 
> Soldier comes up to you and says “show me your papers “.  You tell them to fuck off .  Then what ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're such a fucken tard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Answer the question!   Oh wait , you rubes don’t think past any of Trumps dumb ass tweets .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Shut up timmy. You know nothing about our southern border.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I’ve been there.  And Canada too.  How about you?
Click to expand...


  Ya limp wrist shit head!
I've lived most of my life in South Texas.
   On top of that I've been to Switzerland,Greece,Hollande,Canada,Mexico,Jamaica and a host of other countries.
    Oh....and I have family members who work in the healthcare industry in canada that say it totally sucks.


----------



## eagle1462010

theDoctorisIn said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In the last decade in Mexico over 177 k have died in a drug War....................That is a War..............A War Mexico is LOSING.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Wars" on drugs, or terrorism, or whatever aren't "wars".
> 
> Don't confuse rhetoric with reality.
Click to expand...

177, 000 Deaths aren't a reality...............LOL


----------



## Missouri_Mike

theDoctorisIn said:


> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
Click to expand...

353 Japs hit pearl harbor, 17 muslims hit the world trade center. What exactly is the number of attackers you would consider a war?


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

theDoctorisIn said:


> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DJT for Life said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not if he used NG's on the border, backed up by regular troops.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That didn't work well last time they tried it....killed an American citizen out watching his family's sheep.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think she might be talking about this:
> 
> After Marine on Patrol Kills a Teen-Ager, a Texas Border Village Wonders Why
Click to expand...


Yeah, over 20 years ago!  Who was President?  Oh, that would be Bubba Clinton!


----------



## Timmy

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do you know who’s legal or not ?  Bar codes on are necks ?
> 
> Soldier comes up to you and says “show me your papers “.  You tell them to fuck off .  Then what ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're such a fucken tard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Answer the question!   Oh wait , you rubes don’t think past any of Trumps dumb ass tweets .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Shut up timmy. You know nothing about our southern border.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I’ve been there.  And Canada too.  How about you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ya limp wrist shit head!
> I've lived most of my life in South Texas.
> On top of that I've been to Switzerland,Greece,Hollande,Canada,Mexico,Jamaica and a host of other countries.
> Oh....and I have family members who work in the healthcare industry in canada that say it totally sucks.
Click to expand...


Then you should realize the folly of a stupid giant wall.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Missouri_Mike said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 353 Japs hit pearl harbor, 17 muslims hit the world trade center. What exactly is the number of attackers you would consider a war?
Click to expand...


"War" is not defined by the number of "attackers", but if it was, there are 0 "attackers" in that caravan.


----------



## eagle1462010

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DJT for Life said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not if he used NG's on the border, backed up by regular troops.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That didn't work well last time they tried it....killed an American citizen out watching his family's sheep.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think she might be talking about this:
> 
> After Marine on Patrol Kills a Teen-Ager, a Texas Border Village Wonders Why
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, over 20 years ago!  Who was President?  Oh, that would be Bubba Clinton!
Click to expand...

Same guy who didn't support our forces in Somalia................Great Movie.............got out during that one's term.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DJT for Life said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not if he used NG's on the border, backed up by regular troops.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That didn't work well last time they tried it....killed an American citizen out watching his family's sheep.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think she might be talking about this:
> 
> After Marine on Patrol Kills a Teen-Ager, a Texas Border Village Wonders Why
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, over 20 years ago!  Who was President?  Oh, that would be Bubba Clinton!
Click to expand...


...so?


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

theDoctorisIn said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In the last decade in Mexico over 177 k have died in a drug War....................That is a War..............A War Mexico is LOSING.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Wars" on drugs, or terrorism, or whatever aren't "wars".
> 
> Don't confuse rhetoric with reality.
Click to expand...


Would you please contact a lawyer and sue your school district for educational malpractice?

No one deserves to go through life being as big a dumbass as you are!


----------



## Aba Incieni

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> 
> I seem to recall Uncle Bill Clinton sending marines in and snatching a child from the family home and sending him back to Cuba. What's a few angry Honduran women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry! You remember incorrectly.
Click to expand...

Apology accepted.


----------



## eagle1462010

theDoctorisIn said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 353 Japs hit pearl harbor, 17 muslims hit the world trade center. What exactly is the number of attackers you would consider a war?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "War" is not defined by the number of "attackers", but if it was, there are 0 "attackers" in that caravan.
Click to expand...

They are illegal in Mexico and illegal here except for the liberal laws passed for asylum.....................


----------



## sealybobo

MindWars said:


> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!


This is a fantastic idea. I’m curious to see if anyone objects.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In the last decade in Mexico over 177 k have died in a drug War....................That is a War..............A War Mexico is LOSING.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Wars" on drugs, or terrorism, or whatever aren't "wars".
> 
> Don't confuse rhetoric with reality.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Would you please contact a lawyer and sue your school district for educational malpractice?
> 
> No one deserves to go through life being as big a dumbass as you are!
Click to expand...




I'm sure that in your head, that sounded like a great comeback.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Timmy said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're such a fucken tard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Answer the question!   Oh wait , you rubes don’t think past any of Trumps dumb ass tweets .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Shut up timmy. You know nothing about our southern border.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I’ve been there.  And Canada too.  How about you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ya limp wrist shit head!
> I've lived most of my life in South Texas.
> On top of that I've been to Switzerland,Greece,Hollande,Canada,Mexico,Jamaica and a host of other countries.
> Oh....and I have family members who work in the healthcare industry in canada that say it totally sucks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then you should realize the folly of a stupid giant wall.
Click to expand...


 How your dumbass came to that conclusion i'll never know.


----------



## Aba Incieni

Timmy said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> 
> I seem to recall Uncle Bill Clinton sending marines in and snatching a child from the family home and sending him back to Cuba. What's a few angry Honduran women.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I recall the righties wanting that dreamer kid to stay in America.
Click to expand...

Like the marchers, it was not to be.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

theDoctorisIn said:


> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DJT for Life said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not if he used NG's on the border, backed up by regular troops.
> 
> 
> 
> That didn't work well last time they tried it....killed an American citizen out watching his family's sheep.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think she might be talking about this:
> 
> After Marine on Patrol Kills a Teen-Ager, a Texas Border Village Wonders Why
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, over 20 years ago!  Who was President?  Oh, that would be Bubba Clinton!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ...so?
Click to expand...


Dumbass!  You are absolutely worthless and provide nothing to this forum except trolling your idiocy to see who bites!


----------



## theDoctorisIn

eagle1462010 said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 353 Japs hit pearl harbor, 17 muslims hit the world trade center. What exactly is the number of attackers you would consider a war?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "War" is not defined by the number of "attackers", but if it was, there are 0 "attackers" in that caravan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are illegal in Mexico and illegal here except for the liberal laws passed for asylum.....................
Click to expand...


They haven't broken any US laws yet, and even if they did, that doesn't make them an enemy army.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> That didn't work well last time they tried it....killed an American citizen out watching his family's sheep.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think she might be talking about this:
> 
> After Marine on Patrol Kills a Teen-Ager, a Texas Border Village Wonders Why
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, over 20 years ago!  Who was President?  Oh, that would be Bubba Clinton!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ...so?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dumbass!  You are absolutely worthless and provide nothing to this forum except trolling your idiocy to see who bites!
Click to expand...


Boring.


----------



## eagle1462010

theDoctorisIn said:


> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In the last decade in Mexico over 177 k have died in a drug War....................That is a War..............A War Mexico is LOSING.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Wars" on drugs, or terrorism, or whatever aren't "wars".
> 
> Don't confuse rhetoric with reality.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Would you please contact a lawyer and sue your school district for educational malpractice?
> 
> No one deserves to go through life being as big a dumbass as you are!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure that in your head, that sounded like a great comeback.
Click to expand...

I'm sure your expert knowledge on what is a War might be accepted by people as dumb as you are ..........LOL

I guess that many deaths is nothing but a skirmish ...........Your an IDIOT.


----------



## Timmy

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Answer the question!   Oh wait , you rubes don’t think past any of Trumps dumb ass tweets .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shut up timmy. You know nothing about our southern border.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I’ve been there.  And Canada too.  How about you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ya limp wrist shit head!
> I've lived most of my life in South Texas.
> On top of that I've been to Switzerland,Greece,Hollande,Canada,Mexico,Jamaica and a host of other countries.
> Oh....and I have family members who work in the healthcare industry in canada that say it totally sucks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then you should realize the folly of a stupid giant wall.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How your dumbass came to that conclusion i'll never know.
Click to expand...


My bad.  I had faith in you for a 1/2 second .


----------



## sealybobo

HereWeGoAgain said:


> You know this is gonna really piss off the liberals.


What can we say? It’s a great idea


----------



## eagle1462010

theDoctorisIn said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 353 Japs hit pearl harbor, 17 muslims hit the world trade center. What exactly is the number of attackers you would consider a war?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "War" is not defined by the number of "attackers", but if it was, there are 0 "attackers" in that caravan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are illegal in Mexico and illegal here except for the liberal laws passed for asylum.....................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They haven't broken any US laws yet, and even if they did, that doesn't make them an enemy army.
Click to expand...

You changed the dang argument we were having....................You said the 177k deaths wasn't a War ...With your pompus reply...............

It is a dang War to those who are dying down there.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

eagle1462010 said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> 
> 
> In the last decade in Mexico over 177 k have died in a drug War....................That is a War..............A War Mexico is LOSING.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Wars" on drugs, or terrorism, or whatever aren't "wars".
> 
> Don't confuse rhetoric with reality.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Would you please contact a lawyer and sue your school district for educational malpractice?
> 
> No one deserves to go through life being as big a dumbass as you are!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure that in your head, that sounded like a great comeback.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm sure your expert knowledge on what is a War might be accepted by people as dumb as you are ..........LOL
> 
> I guess that many deaths is nothing but a skirmish ...........Your an IDIOT.
Click to expand...


War isn't defined by a number of deaths.


----------



## Missouri_Mike

theDoctorisIn said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 353 Japs hit pearl harbor, 17 muslims hit the world trade center. What exactly is the number of attackers you would consider a war?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "War" is not defined by the number of "attackers", but if it was, there are 0 "attackers" in that caravan.
Click to expand...

Well shit, we could have saved how many lives during WWII if we just let the Japs come here illegally and demand welfare and voting rights?


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

ABikerSailor said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not even close.   The military is not being used in law enforcement activity.   It is being used to repel an invasion much like the coast guard does at sea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ummm...............you do know that the Coast Guard is actually attached to the Department of Transportation, which is why they can patrol our borders, right?
> 
> The only time the Coast Guard becomes part of the military is in times of a declared war.
Click to expand...


Wrong, dumbass!  The Coast Guard is part of Homeland Security.

The Coast Guard is a maritime, military, multi-mission service unique among the U.S. military branches for having a maritime law enforcement mission (with jurisdiction in both domestic and international waters) and a federal regulatory agency mission as part of its mission set. It operates under the *U.S. Department of Homeland Security* during peacetime, and can be transferred to the U.S. Department of the Navy by the U.S. President at any time, or by the U.S. Congress during times of war.

United States Coast Guard - Wikipedia


----------



## theDoctorisIn

eagle1462010 said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> 
> 
> 353 Japs hit pearl harbor, 17 muslims hit the world trade center. What exactly is the number of attackers you would consider a war?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "War" is not defined by the number of "attackers", but if it was, there are 0 "attackers" in that caravan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are illegal in Mexico and illegal here except for the liberal laws passed for asylum.....................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They haven't broken any US laws yet, and even if they did, that doesn't make them an enemy army.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You changed the dang argument we were having....................You said the 177k deaths wasn't a War ...With your pompus reply...............
> 
> It is a dang War to those who are dying down there.
Click to expand...


The word "war" has a definition, and cartel violence doesn't meet that definition, no matter how hard you try to parse it.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Missouri_Mike said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 353 Japs hit pearl harbor, 17 muslims hit the world trade center. What exactly is the number of attackers you would consider a war?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "War" is not defined by the number of "attackers", but if it was, there are 0 "attackers" in that caravan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well shit, we could have saved how many lives during WWII if we just let the Japs come here illegally and demand welfare and voting rights?
Click to expand...




I'm sure that made sense in your head before you typed it out, but...


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

ABikerSailor said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, "invading horde" is a silly characterization.  Secondly, I am pretty sure ICE is a law enforcement agency.  Third, if this is an invasion, who is it an invasion by?  Fourth, why would the only bodies be south of the border?  Do you think no illegals enter the country through the Canadian border?  Fifth, I'd say there is no realistic chance that the federal government will authorize using lethal force on someone simply because they enter the country illegally (ignoring whether such an order would be deemed legal/Constitutional).  Finally, I did not say that Posse Comitatus was necessarily the argument being made, merely that is might be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the use of lethal force, here's the dilemma, If you shoot at them BEFORE they cross the border, you are shooting Mexican citizens on Mexican soil, which can be deemed an act of war. If you wait until they cross the border, they are entitled to the full protection of the Constitution and American Law, therefore it becomes a LE mission and you can't shoot them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They aren't Mexican citizens.  They are Honduran citizens.  Shoot them on the Mexican side and let mex bellyache over it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If we kill people on the Mexican side of the border, it can be considered an act of war.  If they cross over the border, all the military will be able to do is point and say "there they are".  They don't have the authority to arrest, detain, or shoot anyone on US soil.  Only BP and LE can do that.
> 
> 
> Remember when Jr. tried to do it and it failed?  If Trump tries to do it, he's gonna fail as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I would guard the border but I have these damned heel spurs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can't help.  I've already been transferred to the Fleet Reserve and can no longer be called back up.
Click to expand...


Thank God!


----------



## Missouri_Mike

theDoctorisIn said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 353 Japs hit pearl harbor, 17 muslims hit the world trade center. What exactly is the number of attackers you would consider a war?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "War" is not defined by the number of "attackers", but if it was, there are 0 "attackers" in that caravan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are illegal in Mexico and illegal here except for the liberal laws passed for asylum.....................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They haven't broken any US laws yet, and even if they did, that doesn't make them an enemy army.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You changed the dang argument we were having....................You said the 177k deaths wasn't a War ...With your pompus reply...............
> 
> It is a dang War to those who are dying down there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The word "war" has a definition, and cartel violence doesn't meet that definition, no matter how hard you try to parse it.
Click to expand...

What would you consider a war? Or an invasion?


----------



## eagle1462010

theDoctorisIn said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 353 Japs hit pearl harbor, 17 muslims hit the world trade center. What exactly is the number of attackers you would consider a war?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "War" is not defined by the number of "attackers", but if it was, there are 0 "attackers" in that caravan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are illegal in Mexico and illegal here except for the liberal laws passed for asylum.....................
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They haven't broken any US laws yet, and even if they did, that doesn't make them an enemy army.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You changed the dang argument we were having....................You said the 177k deaths wasn't a War ...With your pompus reply...............
> 
> It is a dang War to those who are dying down there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The word "war" has a definition, and cartel violence doesn't meet that definition, no matter how hard you try to parse it.
Click to expand...

Tell that to the DEAD...................I'm sure they'd think your and idiot too............if they could talk from their graves.


----------



## busybee01

Geaux4it said:


> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shoot, ask questions later
> 
> -Geaux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a bit much. We aren't communist East Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> in East Germany they shot their own Citizens going over the wall to LEAVE their country.  We just want to shoot people who are trying to get in OUR country illegally...Only way to end this unwanted, everlasting invasion..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We should shoot people like you and Trump if we were to shoot anyone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Careful. Leftist say we should report you. You seem unstable
> 
> -Geaux
Click to expand...


You are the one who is unstable as well as Trump. Trump supporters are talking about shooting people.


----------



## Missouri_Mike

theDoctorisIn said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 353 Japs hit pearl harbor, 17 muslims hit the world trade center. What exactly is the number of attackers you would consider a war?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "War" is not defined by the number of "attackers", but if it was, there are 0 "attackers" in that caravan.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well shit, we could have saved how many lives during WWII if we just let the Japs come here illegally and demand welfare and voting rights?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure that made sense in your head before you typed it out, but...
Click to expand...

It made perfect sense if your head actually was functioning.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

ABikerSailor said:


> You know, this will never work.  If we put military on the border, and they kill people before they cross, that could be considered an act of war, or at the very least, murder, because they aren't breaking any of our laws when they are on the Mexican side of the border.
> 
> But, if the people do cross, then all the military can do is point at them and say "there they are".  They don't have the authority to arrest, detain, or shoot anyone on this side of the border.
> 
> If you say get around it by using the NG?  Well, now you have the problem of having to ask the governor of the state for them, because the NG is under the control of the state.  The governors could refuse to allow their NG troops to go to the border.
> 
> Besides.........................Jr. tried that little stunt and it failed.  Trump is going to find out that he can't do it either.



Why don't you just sit your dumb ass down on the sideline of this thread?  You can't get a damn thing right!

You must have been hitting the bong or bottle pretty hard!


----------



## Missouri_Mike

busybee01 said:


> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shoot, ask questions later
> 
> -Geaux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's a bit much. We aren't communist East Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> in East Germany they shot their own Citizens going over the wall to LEAVE their country.  We just want to shoot people who are trying to get in OUR country illegally...Only way to end this unwanted, everlasting invasion..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We should shoot people like you and Trump if we were to shoot anyone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Careful. Leftist say we should report you. You seem unstable
> 
> -Geaux
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are the one who is unstable as well as Trump. Trump supporters are talking about shooting people.
Click to expand...

Rushing into our country uninvited? What do you want? A welcome wagon?


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

ThunderKiss1965 said:


> Absolutely not. Active Duty Military should not be deployed on US soil unless we are being invaded by an armed force.  I don't have a problem with the National Guard being used to patrol the border in fact it should be a part of their training.



Why not just build the fucking wall?  Then this discussion is moot!


----------



## Montrovant

eagle1462010 said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> 
> 
> In the last decade in Mexico over 177 k have died in a drug War....................That is a War..............A War Mexico is LOSING.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Wars" on drugs, or terrorism, or whatever aren't "wars".
> 
> Don't confuse rhetoric with reality.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Would you please contact a lawyer and sue your school district for educational malpractice?
> 
> No one deserves to go through life being as big a dumbass as you are!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure that in your head, that sounded like a great comeback.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm sure your expert knowledge on what is a War might be accepted by people as dumb as you are ..........LOL
> 
> I guess that many deaths is nothing but a skirmish ...........Your an IDIOT.
Click to expand...


I never get tired of pointing and laughing when someone types "your an idiot" or a similar phrase.  

It doesn't matter if it's a typo, it's still funny.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

jc456 said:


> Rexx Taylor said:
> 
> 
> 
> i hope Godzilla and Rodan are on the way
> 
> 
> 
> they can't get out of Japan.
Click to expand...


Their passports take years to print!


----------



## Golfing Gator

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> 
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not even close.   The military is not being used in law enforcement activity.   It is being used to repel an invasion much like the coast guard does at sea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ummm...............you do know that the Coast Guard is actually attached to the Department of Transportation, which is why they can patrol our borders, right?
> 
> The only time the Coast Guard becomes part of the military is in times of a declared war.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong, dumbass!  The Coast Guard is part of Homeland Security.
> 
> The Coast Guard is a maritime, military, multi-mission service unique among the U.S. military branches for having a maritime law enforcement mission (with jurisdiction in both domestic and international waters) and a federal regulatory agency mission as part of its mission set. It operates under the *U.S. Department of Homeland Security* during peacetime, and can be transferred to the U.S. Department of the Navy by the U.S. President at any time, or by the U.S. Congress during times of war.
> 
> United States Coast Guard - Wikipedia
Click to expand...


Well, in his defense they were part of the DOT prior to the creation of the DHS


----------



## busybee01

HereWeGoAgain said:


> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The military is going to be watching people go across the border. If they try to stop it then they are enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You need to read up on border law.
Click to expand...


Border law as written by civilians. Tell me where military law even mentions border kaws.


----------



## MindWars

Baz Ares said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can you set that up along 2,000 some odd miles of border?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure, most military jobs are done by contract workers. Not the loser in the armed force sucking off gobmint dimes doing nothang.
Click to expand...


Hopefully you will get ripped a new asshole for that statement cowardly fkn ............,  I bet your p ass never even served before huh little wuss lol

Most in Border Patrol were former military you asshole.  Just like cops, just like many areas of positions you sure in the hell couldn't fill.  AND MOST CONTRACTORS ARE FKN MILITARY GAWD U ARE FKN BIGGER ASSHOLE THAN THE AVERAGE LIBERAL


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

jc456 said:


> Tom Horn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> This isn't about what I think, or what you think.
> 
> This is about what the law says.
> 
> "Securing the border" in times of peace has _never_ been a mission of the US military.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have no idea what you're talking about....check out what went on at the Tejas border when Pancho Villa was on the loose.  My great uncle was part of a group who chased one of Villa's generals back into Mexico.  Just admit you want every beaner who can run, walk, or crawl into the US to vote for your fellow travelers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I guess he's never heard of the Alamo eh?
Click to expand...


The Alamo doesn't count because that was not the United States.  Sorry!


----------



## sealybobo

g5000 said:


> We need to shoot these starving kids who are fleeing gangs!  It's a moral obligation!


Those governments need to deal with those gangs. The USA doesn’t do this stuff anymore. 

It’s like Muslims in Europe. They go thru turkey into Greece. Why doesn’t Turkey deal with them? Same with Mexico. Deal with South America and your own screwed up system.


----------



## busybee01

LuckyDuck said:


> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yeah ?  What part of the constitution are your referring too?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Article IV.  Section 4.  You know you're on the Internet too ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is what you are hanging your hat on?
> 
> The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
> 
> 
> Geez.  We are not being “invaded” .  We have commerce with Mexico .  Tourists and legal immigration by both countries every day .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
Click to expand...


You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.


----------



## MindWars

busybee01 said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The military is going to be watching people go across the border. If they try to stop it then they are enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You need to read up on border law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Border law as written by civilians. Tell me where military law even mentions border kaws.
Click to expand...






*The Problem*

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects Americans from random and arbitrary stops and searches.
According to the government, however, these basic constitutional principles do not apply fully at our borders. For example, at border crossings (also called "ports of entry"), federal authorities do not need a warrant or even suspicion of wrongdoing to justify conducting what courts have called a "routine search," such as searching luggage or a vehicle.
Even in places far removed from the border, deep into the interior of the .................

The Constitution in the 100-Mile Border Zone


----------



## sealybobo

aaronleland said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Great Wall was built in stages over a period of over 2000 years, by hundreds of thousands, if not millions of workers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Perhaps I should have been more precise, I'm only referring to the final product built during the Ming Dynasty. And today, we may not even need that many workers to build it. Remember, we have technology that is quantum leaps and bounds above what the ancient Chinese had.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even the portion built by the Ming Dynasty took 200 years to build.
Click to expand...

Stop with the wall. We just move our base to the southern border. Problem solved.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

ABikerSailor said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't think they're going to call on someone who was too scared to go to a USO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why Trump will not have to worry about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trump was never in the military and has likely never gone to a USO. Gaybiker on the other hand wouldn't get off his ship on shore leave even to go to a USO. A regular profile in courage. Meanwhile civilian employees like my mother worked there.
> 
> The wrong stuff I guess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, what I told you was that when Reagan was in office, we had to keep our heads on a swivel because USO's were being bombed.  Yeah, I think checking for things like that is just prudent.  Especially when there were bombings happening in all sorts of places US troops liked to frequent.
> 
> How many years did you serve again Meathead?  I did a full 20 in 4 war zones.
> 
> Oh wait....................forgot..................you just like to troll people.
Click to expand...


You forgot the word "hiding" after the "20".  I was in during the same time titless.  Stop bullshitting you coward.


----------



## busybee01

Billy_Kinetta said:


> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They can sit on the border and watch people cross the border. If they take any action they will be enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nonsense.  Border control is national security.
Click to expand...


Who determines who is legal and illegal. It is civilians. That means we are talking about civilian law which the military is forbidden to enforce.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

ABikerSailor said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh you mean the military excersies in Texas that were a front for an obama armed take over?
> 
> Isn’t that what you rubes believed ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I mean when he sent military to help with the drug war.
> 
> Now don't you feel foolish, fucking clown shoes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama didn't send in the military.  He sent in the National Guard, which has different rules than the military does for deployment and who can send them.
> 
> Obama orders 1,200 Guard troops to border
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So Trump sends the guard, still military ...sit down and shush I don't give two shits about your ramblings
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, the National Guard is more of a militia than it is a military.  They aren't full time, and they are governed by different rules.  *But, if you knew anything about the military that wasn't bullshit, you would have known that and not looked so stupid*.
Click to expand...


This from the guy who didn't know the Coast Guard is not in the Department of Transportation!


----------



## eagle1462010

busybee01 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They can sit on the border and watch people cross the border. If they take any action they will be enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nonsense.  Border control is national security.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who determines who is legal and illegal. It is civilians. That means we are talking about civilian law which the military is forbidden to enforce.
Click to expand...


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

theDoctorisIn said:


> Tom Horn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Refugees aren't "illegal combatants".
> 
> Again, words have meanings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Words sure do.....why are you calling them "refugees"?????  They are an invasion force who has stated their intention to cross our southern border illegally.   Guess what?  This group just got the WALL built...watch and see.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They have stated their intention to cross our southern borders and apply for political asylum.
Click to expand...


We can say "no."


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

busybee01 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They can sit on the border and watch people cross the border. If they take any action they will be enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nonsense.  Border control is national security.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who determines who is legal and illegal. It is civilians. That means we are talking about civilian law which the military is forbidden to enforce.
Click to expand...


Idiotic.  Press on.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tom Horn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Refugees aren't "illegal combatants".
> 
> Again, words have meanings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Words sure do.....why are you calling them "refugees"?????  They are an invasion force who has stated their intention to cross our southern border illegally.   Guess what?  This group just got the WALL built...watch and see.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They have stated their intention to cross our southern borders and apply for political asylum.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We can say "no."
Click to expand...


Indeed.  We have no obligation to say anything else.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

theDoctorisIn said:


> The Posse Comitatus Act states in plain english that the military cannot be used on US soil to enforce the law.
> 
> Immigration law is law.
> 
> QED.
> 
> This isn't complicated.



This is not immigration, dumbass!


----------



## GreenBean

andaronjim said:


> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!
> 
> 
> 
> There should be a private/public force put upon the border.  Let all US citizens participate for We the People have so much to lose if this nation is conquered by invasion.
> 
> 
> 
> The "Patriots" are a heavily armed group who patrol the U.S. border with Mexico, trying to deter immigrants from crossing the border illegally. The group, who portray themselves as defending the American way, use a strong display of force to intimidate anyone from making the crossing from Mexico into Texas.
> 
> *'Armed patriots': the private citizens out to secure the U ...*
> www.yahoo.com/news/armed-patriots-private-citizens-secure-u-border-100519616.html
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


I like the idea, but an untrained  nonprofessional militia and you coukld have boat loads of Mexican Trayvon Martins ....


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

ABikerSailor said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't think they're going to call on someone who was too scared to go to a USO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why Trump will not have to worry about it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Trump was never in the military and has likely never gone to a USO. Gaybiker on the other hand wouldn't get off his ship on shore leave even to go to a USO. A regular profile in courage. Meanwhile civilian employees like my mother worked there.
> 
> The wrong stuff I guess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, what I told you was that when Reagan was in office, we had to keep our heads on a swivel because USO's were being bombed.  Yeah, I think checking for things like that is just prudent.  Especially when there were bombings happening in all sorts of places US troops liked to frequent.
> 
> How many years did you serve again Meathead?  I did a full 20 in 4 war zones.
> 
> Oh wait....................forgot..................you just like to troll people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did I misquote you? You said you wouldn't leave your ship  to go to a USO in a foreign port because Reagan's policies were putting you in danger. Sorry, that's what you said, so take it easy on the blood-and-guts bit, eh?
> 
> Not the right stuff, surely.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Find the quote.  Never said I wouldn't leave the ship.
Click to expand...


I was in the Naples USO about two weeks after the bombing.  Where were you?


----------



## sealybobo

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh you mean the military excersies in Texas that were a front for an obama armed take over?
> 
> Isn’t that what you rubes believed ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I mean when he sent military to help with the drug war.
> 
> Now don't you feel foolish, fucking clown shoes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama didn't send in the military.  He sent in the National Guard, which has different rules than the military does for deployment and who can send them.
> 
> Obama orders 1,200 Guard troops to border
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So Trump sends the guard, still military ...sit down and shush I don't give two shits about your ramblings
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, the National Guard is more of a militia than it is a military.  They aren't full time, and they are governed by different rules.  *But, if you knew anything about the military that wasn't bullshit, you would have known that and not looked so stupid*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This from the guy who didn't know the Coast Guard is not in the Department of Transportation!
Click to expand...

You could say that about trump, rick perry, Ben Carson or Betsy devos


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

theDoctorisIn said:


> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
Click to expand...


Far fewer than that attacked Pearl Harbor!  Dumbass!


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

theDoctorisIn said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 353 Japs hit pearl harbor, 17 muslims hit the world trade center. What exactly is the number of attackers you would consider a war?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "War" is not defined by the number of "attackers", but if it was, there are 0 "attackers" in that caravan.
Click to expand...


How would you know what constitutes a war?  You keep telling us with every post that you are a cowardly libtard!


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

theDoctorisIn said:


> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In the last decade in Mexico over 177 k have died in a drug War....................That is a War..............A War Mexico is LOSING.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Wars" on drugs, or terrorism, or whatever aren't "wars".
> 
> Don't confuse rhetoric with reality.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Would you please contact a lawyer and sue your school district for educational malpractice?
> 
> No one deserves to go through life being as big a dumbass as you are!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure that in your head, that sounded like a great comeback.
Click to expand...


I'm sorry!  Facts are facts!  You have to be the worst educated dumbass on this forum.  Your command of the language and culture of the US is below that of someone who flew into the US from Tajikistan 15 minutes ago.  I read every one of your posts to see if you can out dumbass the last one!  Rarely am I disappointed.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

theDoctorisIn said:


> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think she might be talking about this:
> 
> After Marine on Patrol Kills a Teen-Ager, a Texas Border Village Wonders Why
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, over 20 years ago!  Who was President?  Oh, that would be Bubba Clinton!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ...so?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dumbass!  You are absolutely worthless and provide nothing to this forum except trolling your idiocy to see who bites!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Boring.
Click to expand...


Boring you with facts, while you do nothing but prove your own limitations of intellect.


----------



## Baz Ares

MindWars said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can you set that up along 2,000 some odd miles of border?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure, most military jobs are done by contract workers. Not the loser in the armed force sucking off gobmint dimes doing nothang.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hopefully you will get ripped a new asshole for that statement cowardly fkn ............,  I bet your p ass never even served before huh little wuss lol
> 
> Most in Border Patrol were former military you asshole.  Just like cops, just like many areas of positions you sure in the hell couldn't fill.  AND MOST CONTRACTORS ARE FKN MILITARY GAWD U ARE FKN BIGGER ASSHOLE THAN THE AVERAGE LIBERAL
Click to expand...

The losers in the U.S. military cannot by law, arrest illegals crossing the border.
All they can do is call the border patrol.

FYI.. DOPer!
Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia
The *Posse Comitatus Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes.* The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807– is to limit the powers of the federal government in using federal military personnel to enforce domestic policies within the United States*. It was passed as an amendment to an army appropriation bill following the end of Reconstruction, and was subsequently updated in 1956 and 1981.


----------



## Witchit

If nobody already said so, The Posse Comitatus Act forbids using the military in civilian law enforcement.


----------



## Baz Ares

Witchit said:


> If nobody already said so, The Posse Comitatus Act forbids using the military in civilian law enforcement.


*The DOPers don't care about Federal LAWS!*
And the Governors of states don't have to send their state national guard
troops to the southern border area.
OR Anywhere to do illegal arrests etc..


----------



## TemplarKormac

theDoctorisIn said:


> They haven't broken any US laws yet



But as soon as they step one foot on American soil without permission from the Federal Government, they will. It won't matter if they are angels from there on out,  they will have already broken the law. You cannot call anyone who comes here illegally who obeys every other law we have "law abiding", because they have already broken that one single law.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

TemplarKormac said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> They haven't broken any US laws yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But as soon as they step one foot on American soil without permission from the Federal Government, they will. It won't matter if they are angels from there on out,  they will have already broken the law. You cannot call anyone who comes here illegally who obeys every other law we have "law abiding", because they have already broken that one single law.
Click to expand...


Of course. And as soon as they do, they are within the province of domestic law enforcement, and the military can't touch them.


----------



## kaz

Timmy said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Harmonica is right, but that's irrelevant to the discussion that the role of our military is to defend our borders and you don't know that.  Unreal.  Read the Constitution
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah ?  What part of the constitution are your referring too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV.  Section 4.  You know you're on the Internet too ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is what you are hanging your hat on?
> 
> The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
> 
> 
> Geez.  We are not being “invaded” .  We have commerce with Mexico .  Tourists and legal immigration by both countries every day .
Click to expand...


Yes, protecting each State against invasion, that means exactly protecting our borders.  Stop being a moron


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think she might be talking about this:
> 
> After Marine on Patrol Kills a Teen-Ager, a Texas Border Village Wonders Why
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, over 20 years ago!  Who was President?  Oh, that would be Bubba Clinton!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ...so?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dumbass!  You are absolutely worthless and provide nothing to this forum except trolling your idiocy to see who bites!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Boring.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Boring you with facts, while you do nothing but prove your own limitations of intellect.
Click to expand...


No, you're boring me with hysterical appeals to emotion and personal insults.

Get back to me when you've grown up enough to have a civilized conversation, if that's what you're looking for.

Otherwise, blather on.


----------



## TemplarKormac

Witchit said:


> If nobody already said so, The Posse Comitatus Act forbids using the military in civilian law enforcement.



True, but nobody ever said that we would use the military for that purpose. They can act irrespective of the civilian law enforcement if need be. No need to turn them into the Gestapo.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

TemplarKormac said:


> Witchit said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nobody already said so, The Posse Comitatus Act forbids using the military in civilian law enforcement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True, but nobody ever said that we would use the military for that purpose. They can act irrespective of the civilian law enforcement if need be. No need to turn them into the Gestapo.
Click to expand...


What do you think "guarding our border" is, if not acting as civilian law enforcement?


----------



## kaz

jc456 said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Harmonica is right, but that's irrelevant to the discussion that the role of our military is to defend our borders and you don't know that.  Unreal.  Read the Constitution
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah ?  What part of the constitution are your referring too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV.  Section 4.  You know you're on the Internet too ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is what you are hanging your hat on?
> 
> The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
> 
> 
> Geez.  We are not being “invaded” .  We have commerce with Mexico .  Tourists and legal immigration by both countries every day .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
Click to expand...


1 person illegally entering our borders without following our laws is an unacceptable risk


----------



## MindWars

Baz Ares said:


> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can you set that up along 2,000 some odd miles of border?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure, most military jobs are done by contract workers. Not the loser in the armed force sucking off gobmint dimes doing nothang.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hopefully you will get ripped a new asshole for that statement cowardly fkn ............,  I bet your p ass never even served before huh little wuss lol
> 
> Most in Border Patrol were former military you asshole.  Just like cops, just like many areas of positions you sure in the hell couldn't fill.  AND MOST CONTRACTORS ARE FKN MILITARY GAWD U ARE FKN BIGGER ASSHOLE THAN THE AVERAGE LIBERAL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The losers in the U.S. military cannot by law, arrest illegals crossing the border.
> All they can do is call the border patrol.
> 
> FYI.. DOPer!
> Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia
> The *Posse Comitatus Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes.* The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807– is to limit the powers of the federal government in using federal military personnel to enforce domestic policies within the United States*. It was passed as an amendment to an army appropriation bill following the end of Reconstruction, and was subsequently updated in 1956 and 1981.
Click to expand...


I SAID most CONTRACTORS,  BORDER PATROL, POLICE . are  often FORMER Military dumbass   Dip shit............   so as you INSULT the military  your stupid ass doesn't even realize how most of those guys were in the military gutless.


----------



## kaz

theDoctorisIn said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tijn Von Ingersleben said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shut up fuckhead you dont know me from Adam.
> The point I was attempting to make is the defense of the border and thus national defense being extra Posse Comitatus. For instance, if we have a foreign force converging on our border would this also be a violation of Posse Comitatus? Given then current environment of international terrorism and the porous nature of our border I think this argument could be logically made.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?
> 
> If a hostile foreign force was gathering at our border, Posse Comitatus would not apply - because rebelling a hostile army is a function of the military, not law enforcement.
> 
> Border security, according to our legal system, is a function of domestic law enforcement - and therefore, PCA applies.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Constitution puts the responsibility for securing our borders on the military.  Can you show the qualifications you're making up?  Where are they written that you want illegals to drown us so that part of securing our border is not a military responsibility?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Constitution does no such thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV, Section 4.  You seriously don't think securing our borders is the job of the MILITARY?  Hello, you've succumbed to leftist stupidity and lies.  The MILITARY?  You don't grasp the relation between the military and securing our freaking borders?
> 
> You are S-T-U-P-I-D.  Not ignorant, stupid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's the text of Article IV, Section 4:
> 
> _The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence._
> 
> Now, I'm not sure what school of Constitutional interpretation you fit within, but what do you believe that the founding fathers meant, when they said "foreign invaders"?
> 
> Do you think they meant a military invasion, or do you think they meant immigrants?
> 
> Keep in mind, the founding fathers never expected any "controls" whatsoever on immigration.
> 
> To think they meant to apply that to immigrants takes quite a reach, for the sake of legal interpretation. I doubt you could even get Stevens to go that far from the text.
Click to expand...


We're talking about illegal aliens, not "immigrants," idiot


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

Witchit said:


> If nobody already said so, The Posse Comitatus Act forbids using the military in civilian law enforcement.



Read the thread or don't comment!  Etiquette!


----------



## kaz

theDoctorisIn said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution puts the responsibility for securing our borders on the military.  Can you show the qualifications you're making up?  Where are they written that you want illegals to drown us so that part of securing our border is not a military responsibility?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution does no such thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV, Section 4.  You seriously don't think securing our borders is the job of the MILITARY?  Hello, you've succumbed to leftist stupidity and lies.  The MILITARY?  You don't grasp the relation between the military and securing our freaking borders?
> 
> You are S-T-U-P-I-D.  Not ignorant, stupid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's the text of Article IV, Section 4:
> 
> _The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence._
> 
> Now, I'm not sure what school of Constitutional interpretation you fit within, but what do you believe that the founding fathers meant, when they said "foreign invaders"?
> 
> Do you think they meant a military invasion, or do you think they meant immigrants?
> 
> Keep in mind, the founding fathers never expected any "controls" whatsoever on immigration.
> 
> To think they meant to apply that to immigrants takes quite a reach, for the sake of legal interpretation. I doubt you could even get Stevens to go that far from the text.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> they have no authority to come here that makes them militants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it doesn't.
> 
> Words have meanings.
Click to expand...


Not to you.  You look at protecting the States from outside invaders and you read organized army.  That isn't what it says.  Their job is to protect us from any threat.  People entering our country without our being able to check them out are a threat


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

theDoctorisIn said:


> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, over 20 years ago!  Who was President?  Oh, that would be Bubba Clinton!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...so?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dumbass!  You are absolutely worthless and provide nothing to this forum except trolling your idiocy to see who bites!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Boring.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Boring you with facts, while you do nothing but prove your own limitations of intellect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, you're boring me with hysterical appeals to emotion and personal insults.
> 
> Get back to me when you've grown up enough to have a civilized conversation, if that's what you're looking for.
> 
> Otherwise, blather on.
Click to expand...


You don't qualify by your own pathetic standards.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

kaz said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?
> 
> If a hostile foreign force was gathering at our border, Posse Comitatus would not apply - because rebelling a hostile army is a function of the military, not law enforcement.
> 
> Border security, according to our legal system, is a function of domestic law enforcement - and therefore, PCA applies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution puts the responsibility for securing our borders on the military.  Can you show the qualifications you're making up?  Where are they written that you want illegals to drown us so that part of securing our border is not a military responsibility?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Constitution does no such thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV, Section 4.  You seriously don't think securing our borders is the job of the MILITARY?  Hello, you've succumbed to leftist stupidity and lies.  The MILITARY?  You don't grasp the relation between the military and securing our freaking borders?
> 
> You are S-T-U-P-I-D.  Not ignorant, stupid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's the text of Article IV, Section 4:
> 
> _The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence._
> 
> Now, I'm not sure what school of Constitutional interpretation you fit within, but what do you believe that the founding fathers meant, when they said "foreign invaders"?
> 
> Do you think they meant a military invasion, or do you think they meant immigrants?
> 
> Keep in mind, the founding fathers never expected any "controls" whatsoever on immigration.
> 
> To think they meant to apply that to immigrants takes quite a reach, for the sake of legal interpretation. I doubt you could even get Stevens to go that far from the text.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We're talking about illegal aliens, not "immigrants," idiot
Click to expand...


"Illegal" immigrants are a sub class of immigrants.

Were you aware that at the time of the drafting of the Constitution, there was no such thing as "illegal immigration"?

That term didn't exist until the early 1900s.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...so?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dumbass!  You are absolutely worthless and provide nothing to this forum except trolling your idiocy to see who bites!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Boring.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Boring you with facts, while you do nothing but prove your own limitations of intellect.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, you're boring me with hysterical appeals to emotion and personal insults.
> 
> Get back to me when you've grown up enough to have a civilized conversation, if that's what you're looking for.
> 
> Otherwise, blather on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't qualify by your own pathetic standards.
Click to expand...


Blah blah blah.

Still boring.


----------



## kaz

bodecea said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think defending our borders is civil law enforcement?  WTF?  Can you dress yourself?
> 
> Just curious since you don't think the role of the military is to secure our borders what you think the military is for since normal people know that's their primary mission.  In fact what else do they do?  Pick up pizzas and deliver them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't know what any of that means, but neither do you.
> 
> So answer the question.  If the military isn't supposed to defend our borders, what do you believe its purpose is?  I'm not aware of any other role they play
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which one of our borders is in Iraq?  In S. Korea?  In Afghanistan?  In Germany?
Click to expand...


All of those since Mexico has little immigration control.  But mostly poor Mexicans if you believe data.  Let me guess, data is racist.  Facts are racists.  People who want to be secure from criminals, drugs, murderers, rapists and criminals are racists.  You're a racist.  Tomato juice is racist ...


----------



## jc456

MindWars said:


> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can you set that up along 2,000 some odd miles of border?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure, most military jobs are done by contract workers. Not the loser in the armed force sucking off gobmint dimes doing nothang.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hopefully you will get ripped a new asshole for that statement cowardly fkn ............,  I bet your p ass never even served before huh little wuss lol
> 
> Most in Border Patrol were former military you asshole.  Just like cops, just like many areas of positions you sure in the hell couldn't fill.  AND MOST CONTRACTORS ARE FKN MILITARY GAWD U ARE FKN BIGGER ASSHOLE THAN THE AVERAGE LIBERAL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The losers in the U.S. military cannot by law, arrest illegals crossing the border.
> All they can do is call the border patrol.
> 
> FYI.. DOPer!
> Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia
> The *Posse Comitatus Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes.* The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807– is to limit the powers of the federal government in using federal military personnel to enforce domestic policies within the United States*. It was passed as an amendment to an army appropriation bill following the end of Reconstruction, and was subsequently updated in 1956 and 1981.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I SAID most CONTRACTORS,  BORDER PATROL, POLICE . are  often FORMER Military dumbass   Dip shit............   so as you INSULT the military  your stupid ass doesn't even realize how most of those guys were in the military gutless.
Click to expand...

Hey, respect the shit out of that 17 year old punk from school but call the veteran protecting our borders an asshole. Don’t you get it do as they say!  Ewwwew they’re so tough!


----------



## theDoctorisIn

kaz said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution does no such thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Article IV, Section 4.  You seriously don't think securing our borders is the job of the MILITARY?  Hello, you've succumbed to leftist stupidity and lies.  The MILITARY?  You don't grasp the relation between the military and securing our freaking borders?
> 
> You are S-T-U-P-I-D.  Not ignorant, stupid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's the text of Article IV, Section 4:
> 
> _The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence._
> 
> Now, I'm not sure what school of Constitutional interpretation you fit within, but what do you believe that the founding fathers meant, when they said "foreign invaders"?
> 
> Do you think they meant a military invasion, or do you think they meant immigrants?
> 
> Keep in mind, the founding fathers never expected any "controls" whatsoever on immigration.
> 
> To think they meant to apply that to immigrants takes quite a reach, for the sake of legal interpretation. I doubt you could even get Stevens to go that far from the text.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> they have no authority to come here that makes them militants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it doesn't.
> 
> Words have meanings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not to you.  You look at protecting the States from outside invaders and you read organized army.  That isn't what it says.  Their job is to protect us from any threat.  People entering our country without our being able to check them out are a threat
Click to expand...


I read that to mean an organized army, because that's what the founders meant when they wrote it. You could call it "strict originalism", if you like.


----------



## TemplarKormac

theDoctorisIn said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> They haven't broken any US laws yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But as soon as they step one foot on American soil without permission from the Federal Government, they will. It won't matter if they are angels from there on out,  they will have already broken the law. You cannot call anyone who comes here illegally who obeys every other law we have "law abiding", because they have already broken that one single law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course. And as soon as they do, they are within the province of domestic law enforcement, and the military can't touch them.
Click to expand...

Legally speaking, they are trespassers. Some of them are violent, that makes them akin to enemy combatants. If you think state and local law enforcement are sufficient to handle that, you have been purposefully misled. That is what our military is for, to handle threats that are beyond the scope and capabilities of domestic law enforcement.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

TemplarKormac said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> They haven't broken any US laws yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But as soon as they step one foot on American soil without permission from the Federal Government, they will. It won't matter if they are angels from there on out,  they will have already broken the law. You cannot call anyone who comes here illegally who obeys every other law we have "law abiding", because they have already broken that one single law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course. And as soon as they do, they are within the province of domestic law enforcement, and the military can't touch them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Legally speaking, they are trespassers. Some of them are violent, that makes them akin to enemy combatants. If you think state and local law enforcement are sufficient to handle that, you have been purposefully misled. That is what our military is for, to handle threats that are beyond the scope and capabilities of domestic law enforcement.
Click to expand...


"Trespassing" is a matter for law enforcement. And no, the fact that some of them may be "violent" does not make them "akin" to enemy combatants. It just doesn't.

And further - no, that's not what the military is for. They do not exist to "handle threats beyond law enforcement". They exist to fight enemy soldiers - full stop.


----------



## kaz

busybee01 said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Harmonica is right, but that's irrelevant to the discussion that the role of our military is to defend our borders and you don't know that.  Unreal.  Read the Constitution
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yeah ?  What part of the constitution are your referring too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV.  Section 4.  You know you're on the Internet too ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is what you are hanging your hat on?
> 
> The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
> 
> 
> Geez.  We are not being “invaded” .  We have commerce with Mexico .  Tourists and legal immigration by both countries every day .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
Click to expand...


That's a lie.  Armed people enter the country all the time.  And ISIS could fly to Mexico and walk across our border.  And border security is the job of the military.  That they need to read an illegal alien their rights and query whether it's their job to stop them is moronic.  It's their job to stop them, and by any means necessary


----------



## kaz

LuckyDuck said:


> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yeah ?  What part of the constitution are your referring too?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Article IV.  Section 4.  You know you're on the Internet too ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is what you are hanging your hat on?
> 
> The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
> 
> 
> Geez.  We are not being “invaded” .  We have commerce with Mexico .  Tourists and legal immigration by both countries every day .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
Click to expand...


Whatever it takes.  We clearly are being invaded


----------



## jc456

ABikerSailor said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> It’s amazing .  Cons always fear big government, but now you want to activate the military act WITHIN our borders ? !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did you bawl when Obama did it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh you mean the military excersies in Texas that were a front for an obama armed take over?
> 
> Isn’t that what you rubes believed ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No I mean when he sent military to help with the drug war.
> 
> Now don't you feel foolish, fucking clown shoes
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama didn't send in the military.  He sent in the National Guard, which has different rules than the military does for deployment and who can send them.
> 
> Obama orders 1,200 Guard troops to border
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So Trump sends the guard, still military ...sit down and shush I don't give two shits about your ramblings
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, the National Guard is more of a militia than it is a military.  They aren't full time, and they are governed by different rules.  But, if you knew anything about the military that wasn't bullshit, you would have known that and not looked so stupid.
Click to expand...

They serve with the military right? I think you’re wrong. I don’t care how long you served. Insulting someone risking their lives isn’t very  commradary of you


----------



## kaz

busybee01 said:


> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Article IV.  Section 4.  You know you're on the Internet too ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is what you are hanging your hat on?
> 
> The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
> 
> 
> Geez.  We are not being “invaded” .  We have commerce with Mexico .  Tourists and legal immigration by both countries every day .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
Click to expand...


Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off


----------



## jc456

kaz said:


> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Article IV.  Section 4.  You know you're on the Internet too ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is what you are hanging your hat on?
> 
> The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
> 
> 
> Geez.  We are not being “invaded” .  We have commerce with Mexico .  Tourists and legal immigration by both countries every day .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatever it takes.  We clearly are being invaded
Click to expand...

We’ve been invaded


----------



## kaz

theDoctorisIn said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution puts the responsibility for securing our borders on the military.  Can you show the qualifications you're making up?  Where are they written that you want illegals to drown us so that part of securing our border is not a military responsibility?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution does no such thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV, Section 4.  You seriously don't think securing our borders is the job of the MILITARY?  Hello, you've succumbed to leftist stupidity and lies.  The MILITARY?  You don't grasp the relation between the military and securing our freaking borders?
> 
> You are S-T-U-P-I-D.  Not ignorant, stupid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's the text of Article IV, Section 4:
> 
> _The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence._
> 
> Now, I'm not sure what school of Constitutional interpretation you fit within, but what do you believe that the founding fathers meant, when they said "foreign invaders"?
> 
> Do you think they meant a military invasion, or do you think they meant immigrants?
> 
> Keep in mind, the founding fathers never expected any "controls" whatsoever on immigration.
> 
> To think they meant to apply that to immigrants takes quite a reach, for the sake of legal interpretation. I doubt you could even get Stevens to go that far from the text.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We're talking about illegal aliens, not "immigrants," idiot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Illegal" immigrants are a sub class of immigrants.
> 
> Were you aware that at the time of the drafting of the Constitution, there was no such thing as "illegal immigration"?
> 
> That term didn't exist until the early 1900s.
Click to expand...


The term "democracy" wasn't used until the early 1900s either.  So?

And you didn't use the term illegal anything.  You conflated illegal aliens with all immigrants.   Which is why it's clear how disingenuous you are


----------



## jc456

theDoctorisIn said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Article IV, Section 4.  You seriously don't think securing our borders is the job of the MILITARY?  Hello, you've succumbed to leftist stupidity and lies.  The MILITARY?  You don't grasp the relation between the military and securing our freaking borders?
> 
> You are S-T-U-P-I-D.  Not ignorant, stupid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the text of Article IV, Section 4:
> 
> _The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence._
> 
> Now, I'm not sure what school of Constitutional interpretation you fit within, but what do you believe that the founding fathers meant, when they said "foreign invaders"?
> 
> Do you think they meant a military invasion, or do you think they meant immigrants?
> 
> Keep in mind, the founding fathers never expected any "controls" whatsoever on immigration.
> 
> To think they meant to apply that to immigrants takes quite a reach, for the sake of legal interpretation. I doubt you could even get Stevens to go that far from the text.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> they have no authority to come here that makes them militants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it doesn't.
> 
> Words have meanings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not to you.  You look at protecting the States from outside invaders and you read organized army.  That isn't what it says.  Their job is to protect us from any threat.  People entering our country without our being able to check them out are a threat
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read that to mean an organized army, because that's what the founders meant when they wrote it. You could call it "strict originalism", if you like.
Click to expand...

How do you know what they meant? You there? LOL the stuff you all say is fking great


----------



## kaz

jc456 said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the text of Article IV, Section 4:
> 
> _The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence._
> 
> Now, I'm not sure what school of Constitutional interpretation you fit within, but what do you believe that the founding fathers meant, when they said "foreign invaders"?
> 
> Do you think they meant a military invasion, or do you think they meant immigrants?
> 
> Keep in mind, the founding fathers never expected any "controls" whatsoever on immigration.
> 
> To think they meant to apply that to immigrants takes quite a reach, for the sake of legal interpretation. I doubt you could even get Stevens to go that far from the text.
> 
> 
> 
> they have no authority to come here that makes them militants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it doesn't.
> 
> Words have meanings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not to you.  You look at protecting the States from outside invaders and you read organized army.  That isn't what it says.  Their job is to protect us from any threat.  People entering our country without our being able to check them out are a threat
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read that to mean an organized army, because that's what the founders meant when they wrote it. You could call it "strict originalism", if you like.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do you know what they meant? You there? LOL the stuff you all say is fking great
Click to expand...


Doc knows that without a steady inflow of criminals the Democrat party is screwed.  He's just protecting his government handouts


----------



## Missouri_Mike

busybee01 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They can sit on the border and watch people cross the border. If they take any action they will be enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nonsense.  Border control is national security.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who determines who is legal and illegal. It is civilians. That means we are talking about civilian law which the military is forbidden to enforce.
Click to expand...

The fuck?


----------



## Rexx Taylor

jc456 said:


> Rexx Taylor said:
> 
> 
> 
> i hope Godzilla and Rodan are on the way
> 
> 
> 
> they can't get out of Japan.
Click to expand...

then they can swim to Mexico and get here the illegal way!!!


----------



## Missouri_Mike

theDoctorisIn said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> They haven't broken any US laws yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But as soon as they step one foot on American soil without permission from the Federal Government, they will. It won't matter if they are angels from there on out,  they will have already broken the law. You cannot call anyone who comes here illegally who obeys every other law we have "law abiding", because they have already broken that one single law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course. And as soon as they do, they are within the province of domestic law enforcement, and the military can't touch them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Legally speaking, they are trespassers. Some of them are violent, that makes them akin to enemy combatants. If you think state and local law enforcement are sufficient to handle that, you have been purposefully misled. That is what our military is for, to handle threats that are beyond the scope and capabilities of domestic law enforcement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Trespassing" is a matter for law enforcement. And no, the fact that some of them may be "violent" does not make them "akin" to enemy combatants. It just doesn't.
> 
> And further - no, that's not what the military is for. They do not exist to "handle threats beyond law enforcement". They exist to fight enemy soldiers - full stop.
Click to expand...

Like people charging over our borders illegally?


----------



## bodecea

There will be military on the Northern border too, right?  And can we believe this will also be used to keep people in?


----------



## TemplarKormac

theDoctorisIn said:


> And further - no, that's not what the military is for. They do not exist to "handle threats beyond law enforcement". They exist to fight enemy soldiers - full stop.



Doc, that made me chuckle a bit. You mean to tell me that our military can't be utilized for other useful purposes rather than fighting and blowing up things?

Perhaps you should read the oath of enlistment. Our soldiers are sworn to protect and defend the US and the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. Take note of the word "domestic." If you are a foreign national who willfully breaks federal law to get here, you not only broke the federal law (written in compliance with our Constitution), but you have violated the constitutional rights of every legal and natural born citizen already living here. If you are willing to break our laws to get here, there may be no telling what other laws you would break to get your way.

So, in a nutshell, that makes you a threat. A threat when so much as the first toe is put forward onto our soil. Protecting our borders and sovereignty from those selfsame threats falls within the oath our soldiers swore. You don't have to like it, but that's just the way it is.


----------



## Missouri_Mike

theDoctorisIn said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> They haven't broken any US laws yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But as soon as they step one foot on American soil without permission from the Federal Government, they will. It won't matter if they are angels from there on out,  they will have already broken the law. You cannot call anyone who comes here illegally who obeys every other law we have "law abiding", because they have already broken that one single law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course. And as soon as they do, they are within the province of domestic law enforcement, and the military can't touch them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Legally speaking, they are trespassers. Some of them are violent, that makes them akin to enemy combatants. If you think state and local law enforcement are sufficient to handle that, you have been purposefully misled. That is what our military is for, to handle threats that are beyond the scope and capabilities of domestic law enforcement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Trespassing" is a matter for law enforcement. And no, the fact that some of them may be "violent" does not make them "akin" to enemy combatants. It just doesn't.
> 
> And further - no, that's not what the military is for. They do not exist to "handle threats beyond law enforcement". They exist to fight enemy soldiers - full stop.
Click to expand...

LMAO! You idiot.

I'm going to come to your country illegally, take a job from one of your people, hopefully squeez out a kid who you have to give citizenship to, collect some welfare with that kid, you pay for it's education and healthcare, and if you deport me you're racist.

The new liberal definition of trespassing ladies and gentlemen.


----------



## TemplarKormac

bodecea said:


> There will be military on the Northern border too, right?  And can we believe this will also be used to keep people in?



Actually, the Canadians respect our national sovereignty; whereas you, and Mexico, do not. Apparently.


----------



## kaz

bodecea said:


> There will be military on the Northern border too, right?  And can we believe this will also be used to keep people in?



That's so stupid.  We aren't being invaded from Canada.  But of course the military should be ready in case we are.

Remember how you used to pretend you were in the military?  In your imaginary life, did you go where the bad guys were or go everywhere equally so we didn't commit a microaggression against ISIS?


----------



## Rexx Taylor

jc456 said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is what you are hanging your hat on?
> 
> The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
> 
> 
> Geez.  We are not being “invaded” .  We have commerce with Mexico .  Tourists and legal immigration by both countries every day .
> 
> 
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatever it takes.  We clearly are being invaded
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We’ve been invaded
Click to expand...

i still like my proposal to line the border with giant speakers and play Yoko Ono's greatest hits at 500 decibles 24/7


----------



## kaz

Rexx Taylor said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whatever it takes.  We clearly are being invaded
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We’ve been invaded
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i still like my proposal to line the border with giant speakers and play Yoko Ono's greatest hits at 500 decibles 24/7
Click to expand...


----------



## Witchit

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> Witchit said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nobody already said so, The Posse Comitatus Act forbids using the military in civilian law enforcement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read the thread or don't comment!  Etiquette!
Click to expand...


Nope. Not going to read 400+ posts. Feel free to ignore me.


----------



## bodecea

kaz said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> There will be military on the Northern border too, right?  And can we believe this will also be used to keep people in?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's so stupid.  We aren't being invaded from Canada.  But of course the military should be ready in case we are.
> 
> Remember how you used to pretend you were in the military?  In your imaginary life, did you go where the bad guys were or go everywhere equally so we didn't commit a microaggression against ISIS?
Click to expand...

We most certainly are...it's very easy to cross the border at Canada and many do......and always have....


----------



## kaz

bodecea said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> There will be military on the Northern border too, right?  And can we believe this will also be used to keep people in?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's so stupid.  We aren't being invaded from Canada.  But of course the military should be ready in case we are.
> 
> Remember how you used to pretend you were in the military?  In your imaginary life, did you go where the bad guys were or go everywhere equally so we didn't commit a microaggression against ISIS?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We most certainly are...it's very easy to cross the border at Canada and many do......and always have....
Click to expand...


That doesn't support that we are being invaded from Canada.  You weren't exactly a start student in middle school, were you?


----------



## Rexx Taylor

why not just take the 4 or 5 trillion tons of human feces in California, and just dump it on the 2000 mile border?


----------



## theDoctorisIn

TemplarKormac said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> And further - no, that's not what the military is for. They do not exist to "handle threats beyond law enforcement". They exist to fight enemy soldiers - full stop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doc, that made me chuckle a bit. You mean to tell me that our military can't be utilized for other useful purposes rather than fighting and blowing up things?
> 
> Perhaps you should read the oath of enlistment. Our soldiers are sworn to protect and defend the US and the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. Take note of the word "domestic." If you are a foreign national who willfully breaks federal law to get here, you not only broke the federal law (written in compliance with our Constitution), but you have violated the constitutional rights of every legal and natural born citizen already living here. If you are willing to break our laws to get here, there may be no telling what other laws you would break to get your way.
> 
> So, in a nutshell, that makes them a threat. A threat when so much as the first toe is put forward onto our soil. Protecting our borders and sovereignty from those selfsame threats falls within the oath our soldiers swore. You don't have to like it, but that's just the way it is.
Click to expand...


Well, no. That's not "the way it is". This is a nation of laws.

You can parse the Oath of Enlistment as much as you want, it doesn't matter. It's not the law. 

The Posse Comitatus Act is the law. 

This is a settled issue. It's been to the Court, it's not open to question.


----------



## jc456

kaz said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> they have no authority to come here that makes them militants.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it doesn't.
> 
> Words have meanings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not to you.  You look at protecting the States from outside invaders and you read organized army.  That isn't what it says.  Their job is to protect us from any threat.  People entering our country without our being able to check them out are a threat
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I read that to mean an organized army, because that's what the founders meant when they wrote it. You could call it "strict originalism", if you like.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do you know what they meant? You there? LOL the stuff you all say is fking great
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Doc knows that without a steady inflow of criminals the Democrat party is screwed.  He's just protecting his government handouts
Click to expand...

 He must be one of those team mates that allows his team to lose. Drop fly balls to throw a game


----------



## jc456

theDoctorisIn said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> And further - no, that's not what the military is for. They do not exist to "handle threats beyond law enforcement". They exist to fight enemy soldiers - full stop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doc, that made me chuckle a bit. You mean to tell me that our military can't be utilized for other useful purposes rather than fighting and blowing up things?
> 
> Perhaps you should read the oath of enlistment. Our soldiers are sworn to protect and defend the US and the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. Take note of the word "domestic." If you are a foreign national who willfully breaks federal law to get here, you not only broke the federal law (written in compliance with our Constitution), but you have violated the constitutional rights of every legal and natural born citizen already living here. If you are willing to break our laws to get here, there may be no telling what other laws you would break to get your way.
> 
> So, in a nutshell, that makes them a threat. A threat when so much as the first toe is put forward onto our soil. Protecting our borders and sovereignty from those selfsame threats falls within the oath our soldiers swore. You don't have to like it, but that's just the way it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, no. That's not "the way it is". This is a nation of laws.
> 
> You can parse the Oath of Enlistment as much as you want, it doesn't matter. It's not the law.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act is the law.
> 
> This is a settled issue. It's been to the Court, it's not open to question.
Click to expand...

Well you’re wrong. Not unnormal


----------



## TemplarKormac

theDoctorisIn said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> And further - no, that's not what the military is for. They do not exist to "handle threats beyond law enforcement". They exist to fight enemy soldiers - full stop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doc, that made me chuckle a bit. You mean to tell me that our military can't be utilized for other useful purposes rather than fighting and blowing up things?
> 
> Perhaps you should read the oath of enlistment. Our soldiers are sworn to protect and defend the US and the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. Take note of the word "domestic." If you are a foreign national who willfully breaks federal law to get here, you not only broke the federal law (written in compliance with our Constitution), but you have violated the constitutional rights of every legal and natural born citizen already living here. If you are willing to break our laws to get here, there may be no telling what other laws you would break to get your way.
> 
> So, in a nutshell, that makes them a threat. A threat when so much as the first toe is put forward onto our soil. Protecting our borders and sovereignty from those selfsame threats falls within the oath our soldiers swore. You don't have to like it, but that's just the way it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, no. That's not "the way it is". This is a nation of laws.
> 
> You can parse the Oath of Enlistment as much as you want, it doesn't matter. It's not the law.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act is the law.
> 
> This is a settled issue. It's been to the Court, it's not open to question.
Click to expand...


Interestingly enough, I never said anything about using our military to subvert state and local law enforcement.

The Posse Comitatus Act is irrelevant.

Additionally, if we are a "nation of laws" then why aren't we enforcing the ones pertaining to illegal immigration? Why aren't we doing everything we can to ensure those laws are being obeyed?

No, we currently are not a "nation of laws" we are currently a nation who likes to selectively apply the law to suit political agendas. To say we are "a nation of laws" is not true. Not currently.


----------



## Rexx Taylor

>>>> looking for Godzillas number on google


----------



## Witchit

TemplarKormac said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> And further - no, that's not what the military is for. They do not exist to "handle threats beyond law enforcement". They exist to fight enemy soldiers - full stop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doc, that made me chuckle a bit. You mean to tell me that our military can't be utilized for other useful purposes rather than fighting and blowing up things?
> 
> Perhaps you should read the oath of enlistment. Our soldiers are sworn to protect and defend the US and the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. Take note of the word "domestic." If you are a foreign national who willfully breaks federal law to get here, you not only broke the federal law (written in compliance with our Constitution), but you have violated the constitutional rights of every legal and natural born citizen already living here. If you are willing to break our laws to get here, there may be no telling what other laws you would break to get your way.
> 
> So, in a nutshell, that makes them a threat. A threat when so much as the first toe is put forward onto our soil. Protecting our borders and sovereignty from those selfsame threats falls within the oath our soldiers swore. You don't have to like it, but that's just the way it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, no. That's not "the way it is". This is a nation of laws.
> 
> You can parse the Oath of Enlistment as much as you want, it doesn't matter. It's not the law.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act is the law.
> 
> This is a settled issue. It's been to the Court, it's not open to question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interestingly enough, I never said anything about using our military to subvert state and local law enforcement.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act is irrelevant.
> 
> Additionally, if we are a "nation of laws" then why aren't we enforcing the ones pertaining to illegal immigration? Why aren't we doing everything we can to ensure those laws are being obeyed?
> 
> No, we currently are not a "nation of laws" we are currently a nation who likes to selectively apply the law to suit political agendas. To say we are "a nation of laws" is not true. Not currently.
Click to expand...


No, it is not irrelevant. You don't feel it applies, whatever. That doesn't make it irrelevant.


----------



## Admiral Rockwell Tory

Witchit said:


> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Witchit said:
> 
> 
> 
> If nobody already said so, The Posse Comitatus Act forbids using the military in civilian law enforcement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Read the thread or don't comment!  Etiquette!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nope. Not going to read 400+ posts. Feel free to ignore me.
Click to expand...


Stay stupid!  It fits you perfectly!


----------



## TemplarKormac

Witchit said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> And further - no, that's not what the military is for. They do not exist to "handle threats beyond law enforcement". They exist to fight enemy soldiers - full stop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doc, that made me chuckle a bit. You mean to tell me that our military can't be utilized for other useful purposes rather than fighting and blowing up things?
> 
> Perhaps you should read the oath of enlistment. Our soldiers are sworn to protect and defend the US and the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. Take note of the word "domestic." If you are a foreign national who willfully breaks federal law to get here, you not only broke the federal law (written in compliance with our Constitution), but you have violated the constitutional rights of every legal and natural born citizen already living here. If you are willing to break our laws to get here, there may be no telling what other laws you would break to get your way.
> 
> So, in a nutshell, that makes them a threat. A threat when so much as the first toe is put forward onto our soil. Protecting our borders and sovereignty from those selfsame threats falls within the oath our soldiers swore. You don't have to like it, but that's just the way it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, no. That's not "the way it is". This is a nation of laws.
> 
> You can parse the Oath of Enlistment as much as you want, it doesn't matter. It's not the law.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act is the law.
> 
> This is a settled issue. It's been to the Court, it's not open to question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interestingly enough, I never said anything about using our military to subvert state and local law enforcement.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act is irrelevant.
> 
> Additionally, if we are a "nation of laws" then why aren't we enforcing the ones pertaining to illegal immigration? Why aren't we doing everything we can to ensure those laws are being obeyed?
> 
> No, we currently are not a "nation of laws" we are currently a nation who likes to selectively apply the law to suit political agendas. To say we are "a nation of laws" is not true. Not currently.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, it is not irrelevant. You don't feel it applies, whatever. That doesn't make it irrelevant.
Click to expand...


It is irrelevant to my position. You don't get to dictate what is or isn't relevant to my position. Now move along.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

TemplarKormac said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> And further - no, that's not what the military is for. They do not exist to "handle threats beyond law enforcement". They exist to fight enemy soldiers - full stop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doc, that made me chuckle a bit. You mean to tell me that our military can't be utilized for other useful purposes rather than fighting and blowing up things?
> 
> Perhaps you should read the oath of enlistment. Our soldiers are sworn to protect and defend the US and the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. Take note of the word "domestic." If you are a foreign national who willfully breaks federal law to get here, you not only broke the federal law (written in compliance with our Constitution), but you have violated the constitutional rights of every legal and natural born citizen already living here. If you are willing to break our laws to get here, there may be no telling what other laws you would break to get your way.
> 
> So, in a nutshell, that makes them a threat. A threat when so much as the first toe is put forward onto our soil. Protecting our borders and sovereignty from those selfsame threats falls within the oath our soldiers swore. You don't have to like it, but that's just the way it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, no. That's not "the way it is". This is a nation of laws.
> 
> You can parse the Oath of Enlistment as much as you want, it doesn't matter. It's not the law.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act is the law.
> 
> This is a settled issue. It's been to the Court, it's not open to question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interestingly enough, I never said anything about using our military to subvert state and local law enforcement.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act is irrelevant.
> 
> Additionally, if we are a "nation of laws" then why aren't we enforcing the ones pertaining to illegal immigration? Why aren't we doing everything we can to ensure those laws are being obeyed?
> 
> No, we currently are not a "nation of laws" we are currently a nation who likes to selectively apply the law to suit political agendas. To say we are "a nation of laws" is not true. Not currently.
Click to expand...


The PCA isn't "irrelevant".

If Trump deploys the military to the border, it'll be in the same context that Bush and Obama did - as "advisers" and "support".

No rhetorical device will change the law.


----------



## Ame®icano

harmonica said:


> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aaronleland said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even the portion built by the Ming Dynasty took 200 years to build.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you think it will take us 200 years to build this one? Come on Aaron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At this rate we won't have enough funding approved in 200 years, let alone a 2000 mile wall built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmm, if you only knew the power of American industry. How else do you think we managed to win World War II? By lending moral support?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> During World War 2 we were fighting an enemy on two fronts, and millions needed jobs due to the Great Depression. Today we have a decent economy and relatively low unemployment. Many American's aren't looking for "moral support". Despite what some Trump supporters may believe a lot of people really don't care about the wall one way or another. It's a band-aid. A very expensive band-aid.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> big difference between WW2 and today-----the HUGE debt!!!!
Click to expand...


It was huge debt back than too. 

Today's difference? Half of it accumulated by one asshole.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

TemplarKormac said:


> Witchit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> And further - no, that's not what the military is for. They do not exist to "handle threats beyond law enforcement". They exist to fight enemy soldiers - full stop.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doc, that made me chuckle a bit. You mean to tell me that our military can't be utilized for other useful purposes rather than fighting and blowing up things?
> 
> Perhaps you should read the oath of enlistment. Our soldiers are sworn to protect and defend the US and the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. Take note of the word "domestic." If you are a foreign national who willfully breaks federal law to get here, you not only broke the federal law (written in compliance with our Constitution), but you have violated the constitutional rights of every legal and natural born citizen already living here. If you are willing to break our laws to get here, there may be no telling what other laws you would break to get your way.
> 
> So, in a nutshell, that makes them a threat. A threat when so much as the first toe is put forward onto our soil. Protecting our borders and sovereignty from those selfsame threats falls within the oath our soldiers swore. You don't have to like it, but that's just the way it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, no. That's not "the way it is". This is a nation of laws.
> 
> You can parse the Oath of Enlistment as much as you want, it doesn't matter. It's not the law.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act is the law.
> 
> This is a settled issue. It's been to the Court, it's not open to question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interestingly enough, I never said anything about using our military to subvert state and local law enforcement.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act is irrelevant.
> 
> Additionally, if we are a "nation of laws" then why aren't we enforcing the ones pertaining to illegal immigration? Why aren't we doing everything we can to ensure those laws are being obeyed?
> 
> No, we currently are not a "nation of laws" we are currently a nation who likes to selectively apply the law to suit political agendas. To say we are "a nation of laws" is not true. Not currently.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, it is not irrelevant. You don't feel it applies, whatever. That doesn't make it irrelevant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is irrelevant to my position. You don't get to dictate what is or isn't relevant to my position. Now move along.
Click to expand...


It most certainly is relevant to your position - in fact, it is more relevant _than_ your position.


----------



## BrokeLoser

Well, well, well...Weren’t some of the resident fools claiming that Trump couldn't deploy The Guard to the border? busybee01 
Take notice, Trump has turned things way back up on the immigration issue...back to hiding the illegal cockroaches go.
Trump says the military will secure the southern border until wall can be built


----------



## TemplarKormac

But if we are going to discuss the Posse Comitatus Act, let's provide a little context. 

One of the things that act does not pertain to is, as per the Wikipedia page on the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878: 

Enforcement of federal law at the discretion of the President of the United States, such as with the 101st Airborne Division by President Dwight D. Eisenhower to integrate Little Rock Central High School in 1957.

Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia

As far as I can tell, we have federal laws against illegal immigration. And that puts the President well within his right to enforce those laws, even if the need arises for military intervention.


----------



## Pete7469

Makes me want to re-enlist.


----------



## TemplarKormac

theDoctorisIn said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Witchit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doc, that made me chuckle a bit. You mean to tell me that our military can't be utilized for other useful purposes rather than fighting and blowing up things?
> 
> Perhaps you should read the oath of enlistment. Our soldiers are sworn to protect and defend the US and the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. Take note of the word "domestic." If you are a foreign national who willfully breaks federal law to get here, you not only broke the federal law (written in compliance with our Constitution), but you have violated the constitutional rights of every legal and natural born citizen already living here. If you are willing to break our laws to get here, there may be no telling what other laws you would break to get your way.
> 
> So, in a nutshell, that makes them a threat. A threat when so much as the first toe is put forward onto our soil. Protecting our borders and sovereignty from those selfsame threats falls within the oath our soldiers swore. You don't have to like it, but that's just the way it is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, no. That's not "the way it is". This is a nation of laws.
> 
> You can parse the Oath of Enlistment as much as you want, it doesn't matter. It's not the law.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act is the law.
> 
> This is a settled issue. It's been to the Court, it's not open to question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interestingly enough, I never said anything about using our military to subvert state and local law enforcement.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act is irrelevant.
> 
> Additionally, if we are a "nation of laws" then why aren't we enforcing the ones pertaining to illegal immigration? Why aren't we doing everything we can to ensure those laws are being obeyed?
> 
> No, we currently are not a "nation of laws" we are currently a nation who likes to selectively apply the law to suit political agendas. To say we are "a nation of laws" is not true. Not currently.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, it is not irrelevant. You don't feel it applies, whatever. That doesn't make it irrelevant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is irrelevant to my position. You don't get to dictate what is or isn't relevant to my position. Now move along.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It most certainly is relevant to your position - in fact, it is more relevant _than_ your position.
Click to expand...


There's no need to insult me. If you've run out of points to make, just say so. Or you can explain how it is relevant to my position. Your choice.

I never once said we should use the military to subvert the power of state or local law enforcement.

But as I pointed out in my previous post, the Posse Comitatus Act does not apply to the President using the military to enforce federal law. As long as the military doesn't interfere with state and local law enforcement, then the Posse Comitatus Act is irrelevant to this topic and to my position.


----------



## bodecea

Pete7469 said:


> Makes me want to re-enlist.


One would have to enlist first, correct?


----------



## TemplarKormac

Witchit said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Witchit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doc, that made me chuckle a bit. You mean to tell me that our military can't be utilized for other useful purposes rather than fighting and blowing up things?
> 
> Perhaps you should read the oath of enlistment. Our soldiers are sworn to protect and defend the US and the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. Take note of the word "domestic." If you are a foreign national who willfully breaks federal law to get here, you not only broke the federal law (written in compliance with our Constitution), but you have violated the constitutional rights of every legal and natural born citizen already living here. If you are willing to break our laws to get here, there may be no telling what other laws you would break to get your way.
> 
> So, in a nutshell, that makes them a threat. A threat when so much as the first toe is put forward onto our soil. Protecting our borders and sovereignty from those selfsame threats falls within the oath our soldiers swore. You don't have to like it, but that's just the way it is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, no. That's not "the way it is". This is a nation of laws.
> 
> You can parse the Oath of Enlistment as much as you want, it doesn't matter. It's not the law.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act is the law.
> 
> This is a settled issue. It's been to the Court, it's not open to question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interestingly enough, I never said anything about using our military to subvert state and local law enforcement.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act is irrelevant.
> 
> Additionally, if we are a "nation of laws" then why aren't we enforcing the ones pertaining to illegal immigration? Why aren't we doing everything we can to ensure those laws are being obeyed?
> 
> No, we currently are not a "nation of laws" we are currently a nation who likes to selectively apply the law to suit political agendas. To say we are "a nation of laws" is not true. Not currently.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, it is not irrelevant. You don't feel it applies, whatever. That doesn't make it irrelevant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is irrelevant to my position. You don't get to dictate what is or isn't relevant to my position. Now move along.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Kids are so cute when they try to act authoritative.
> 
> Your position is irrelevant to the subject at hand. Shall I then order you to move along?
> 
> No. Try to stay on topic without being condescending.
Click to expand...


Sure, and calling me "kid" will earn you a ton of credibility. No. Please do move along, you are not the thought police.


----------



## Ame®icano

MindWars said:


> UPDATE
> 
> View attachment 186130
> 
> *Not long after Trump announced he was bringing troops home from Syria, the president said he’ll keep the military deployed on the US border “until we can have a wall and proper security.”*
> Update: Trump to Keep Troops on Border Until Wall Built



*Trump Plans to Send National Guard to the Mexican Border - NYT*

It couldn't get better than this...and there it is, NYT explodes with leftist rage over mention of troops at border.


----------



## TemplarKormac

I like it when people try to quote the law out of context. Trump is nowhere close to violating the Posse Comitatus Act.


----------



## Ame®icano

theDoctorisIn said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
Click to expand...


How come, this is not a "domestic issue", so it doesn't violate the act. 

Leftists are delusional. Trump can use the full weight of the military. The country being invaded (and even openly and aided by a foreign government) is grounds to protect national security. 

The only problem arises with the loophole of the US having to process asylum seekers from non-contiguous countries but that won't be a problem either, orderly and expedited. Trump has a full war chest of information and legal counsel at his disposal vs. low-information leftists.


----------



## Montrovant

Admiral Rockwell Tory said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Admiral Rockwell Tory said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Applies to using American Forces to police US citizens.  Doesn't apply to stopping a foreign invasion ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again, we are a nation of laws, not emotions.
> 
> Border security is law enforcement.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, we sent the local police to repel the British in the War of 1812!
> 
> We sent the local police to repel the Mexicans in the Mexican-American War.
> 
> The Hawaiian police departments did a bang-up job against the Japanese attack on Pearl harbor.
> 
> Dumbass!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As much as you'd like to conflate the two, a caravan of a thousand refugees is not a "war".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Far fewer than that attacked Pearl Harbor!  Dumbass!
Click to expand...


Is the number of people involved the criteria for what constitutes a war?  Does the fact that the Japanese attacked with bombers flown from aircraft carriers, while the refugees may be showing up without weapons and most likely will not be attacking anyone make any difference?


----------



## theDoctorisIn

TemplarKormac said:


> I like it when people try to quote the law out of context. Trump is nowhere close to violating the Posse Comitatus Act.



As I said before - if Trump does the same thing that Bush and Obama did, then he won't be violating the PCA.

If he tries to do more, then he will be - and the Court will rule so faster than you'd think possible.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Ame®icano said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would think that you guys would understand by now that Trump tweeting about something is not to be taken as an implication that anything will actually happen.
> 
> The Posse Comitatus Act would be a difficult hurdle to overcome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How come, this is not a "domestic issue", so it doesn't violate the act.
> 
> Leftists are delusional. Trump can use the full weight of the military. The country being invaded (and even openly and aided by a foreign government) is grounds to protect national security.
> 
> The only problem arises with the loophole of the US having to process asylum seekers from non-contiguous countries but that won't be a problem either, orderly and expedited. Trump has a full war chest of information and legal counsel at his disposal vs. low-information leftists.
Click to expand...


Enforcing immigration law is most certainly a "domestic" issue.


----------



## TemplarKormac

theDoctorisIn said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> I like it when people try to quote the law out of context. Trump is nowhere close to violating the Posse Comitatus Act.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As I said before - if Trump does the same thing that Bush and Obama did, then he won't be violating the PCA.
> 
> If he tries to do more, then he will be - and the Court will rule so faster than you'd think possible.
Click to expand...


Wait, didn't Bush try to circumvent the PCA after 9/11? I'm confused. Did they or didn't they violate the PCA?


----------



## Ame®icano

rightwinger said:


> An invasion of gardeners, nannies and maids?
> 
> Where is the Army?



You lefties are their army. The fifth column.


----------



## TemplarKormac

theDoctorisIn said:


> If he tries to do more, then he will be - and the Court will rule so faster than you'd think possible.



Aren't we speculating, Doc?


----------



## Ame®icano

Kondor3 said:


> There are ways around _Posse Comitatus_.
> 
> Not the least of which would be to declare Martial Law on the Southern Border, from the borderline itself, back 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 miles, at DOD-DHS field-command discretion, variably and locally, as indicated by conditions required to fulfill the mission, including broad authority to use deadly force against intruders from across the Southern Border.



Why back 1 to 5 miles? Once they step in US we have to process them.

The perimeter should be set 5 miles inside of Mexico. Like we did back in 1910 and later during "border war".

This time we can just say, we're fighting cartels who want immigrants to smuggle drugs.


----------



## Ame®icano

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let’s go with this .
> 
> What happens to Americans living or crossing the border?  Drone strikes?
> 
> What happens if you are at the border and confronted by a military person?  Do you no longer have constitutional rights in trumps martial law ?
> 
> 
> 
> Poor little Timmy... doesn't know that only legal Americans have constitutional rights, and illegal aliens have none.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do you know who’s legal or not ?  Bar codes on are necks ?
> 
> Soldier comes up to you and says “show me your papers “.  You tell them to fuck off .  Then what ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're such a fucken tard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Answer the question!   Oh wait , you rubes don’t think past any of Trumps dumb ass tweets .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Shut up timmy. You know nothing about our southern border.
Click to expand...


He knows nothing. Period.


----------



## Ame®icano

theDoctorisIn said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution puts the responsibility for securing our borders on the military.  Can you show the qualifications you're making up?  Where are they written that you want illegals to drown us so that part of securing our border is not a military responsibility?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution does no such thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV, Section 4.  You seriously don't think securing our borders is the job of the MILITARY?  Hello, you've succumbed to leftist stupidity and lies.  The MILITARY?  You don't grasp the relation between the military and securing our freaking borders?
> 
> You are S-T-U-P-I-D.  Not ignorant, stupid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's the text of Article IV, Section 4:
> 
> _The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence._
> 
> Now, I'm not sure what school of Constitutional interpretation you fit within, but what do you believe that the founding fathers meant, when they said "foreign invaders"?
> 
> Do you think they meant a military invasion, or do you think they meant immigrants?
> 
> Keep in mind, the founding fathers never expected any "controls" whatsoever on immigration.
> 
> To think they meant to apply that to immigrants takes quite a reach, for the sake of legal interpretation. I doubt you could even get Stevens to go that far from the text.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We're talking about illegal aliens, not "immigrants," idiot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Illegal" immigrants are a sub class of immigrants.
> 
> Were you aware that at the time of the drafting of the Constitution, there was no such thing as "illegal immigration"?
> 
> That term didn't exist until the early 1900s.
Click to expand...


Nope.

Immigrants have legal status. Illegals don't have it, they're just illegal aliens.


----------



## Ame®icano

kaz said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> We are not at war with Canada or Mexico !  Do you realize the commerce that happens at our border on a daily basis ?
> 
> What next ?  Have the Air Force run our airports ?
> 
> 
> 
> these illegals are DESTROYING America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No they are not .  Another rube falling for age old scapegoating .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Harmonica is right, but that's irrelevant to the discussion that the role of our military is to defend our borders and you don't know that.  Unreal.  Read the Constitution
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh yeah ?  What part of the constitution are your referring too?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Article IV.  Section 4.  You know you're on the Internet too ...
Click to expand...


Also, Article I Section 9.2

"The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public safety may require it."

We got rebellion, called deep state truing to overthrow the sitting president.
And we have invasion in form of "caravan of illegals".


----------



## Ame®icano

bodecea said:


> There will be military on the Northern border too, right?  And can we believe this will also be used to keep people in?



Sure, if that will make you happy, we could put few soldiers on northern border. That way we wont offend Canadians.


----------



## theDoctorisIn

TemplarKormac said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> I like it when people try to quote the law out of context. Trump is nowhere close to violating the Posse Comitatus Act.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As I said before - if Trump does the same thing that Bush and Obama did, then he won't be violating the PCA.
> 
> If he tries to do more, then he will be - and the Court will rule so faster than you'd think possible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wait, didn't Bush try to circumvent the PCA after 9/11? I'm confused. Did they or didn't they violate the PCA?
Click to expand...


Who said that Bush violated the PCS after 9/11?


----------



## theDoctorisIn

TemplarKormac said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> If he tries to do more, then he will be - and the Court will rule so faster than you'd think possible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aren't we speculating, Doc?
Click to expand...


Only in the sense that I'm "speculating" when I say that the sun will rise tomorrow morning.


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Timmy said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shut up timmy. You know nothing about our southern border.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’ve been there.  And Canada too.  How about you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ya limp wrist shit head!
> I've lived most of my life in South Texas.
> On top of that I've been to Switzerland,Greece,Hollande,Canada,Mexico,Jamaica and a host of other countries.
> Oh....and I have family members who work in the healthcare industry in canada that say it totally sucks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then you should realize the folly of a stupid giant wall.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How your dumbass came to that conclusion i'll never know.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My bad.  I had faith in you for a 1/2 second .
Click to expand...


  Dont spread it around. The idea that we had close to the same thought nauseates me even though it was only for half a second.


----------



## The VOR

BrokeLoser said:


> Well, well, well...Weren’t some of the resident fools claiming that Trump couldn't deploy The Guard to the border? busybee01
> Take notice, Trump has turned things way back up on the immigration issue...back to hiding the illegal cockroaches go.
> Trump says the military will secure the southern border until wall can be built


Will this be before or after he has his military parade.  Wait!!!  Maybe he can have his parade at the border!!!


----------



## BULLDOG

TemplarKormac said:


> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.



The wall barely slowed down the Mongolian people. They easily climbed over it. It stopped their horses and wagons full of supplies such. How many Mexicans do you think are bringing their horses or wagons full of provisions with them?


----------



## OKTexas

Golfing Gator said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Click to expand...



Using the military to enforce the law internally isn't legal, using the military to protect our borders is perfectly legal.


.


----------



## TemplarKormac

theDoctorisIn said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> I like it when people try to quote the law out of context. Trump is nowhere close to violating the Posse Comitatus Act.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As I said before - if Trump does the same thing that Bush and Obama did, then he won't be violating the PCA.
> 
> If he tries to do more, then he will be - and the Court will rule so faster than you'd think possible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wait, didn't Bush try to circumvent the PCA after 9/11? I'm confused. Did they or didn't they violate the PCA?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who said that Bush violated the PCS after 9/11?
Click to expand...

Not violated, more like tried to repeal it. 

Ugh, migraines suck.


----------



## TemplarKormac

BULLDOG said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wall barely slowed down the Mongolian people. They easily climbed over it. It stopped their horses and wagons full of supplies such. How many Mexicans do you think are bringing their horses or wagons full of provisions with them?
Click to expand...

Sigh, the Chinese manned the wall, built it in strategic locations, such as mountainous terrain. They didn't just build the wall and leave, they used it to their advantage.


----------



## TemplarKormac

theDoctorisIn said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> If he tries to do more, then he will be - and the Court will rule so faster than you'd think possible.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aren't we speculating, Doc?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only in the sense that I'm "speculating" when I say that the sun will rise tomorrow morning.
Click to expand...

Why the sarcasm, doc? You're the one predicting and speculating that Trump wants to violate the PCA.


----------



## BULLDOG

TemplarKormac said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wall barely slowed down the Mongolian people. They easily climbed over it. It stopped their horses and wagons full of supplies such. How many Mexicans do you think are bringing their horses or wagons full of provisions with them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sigh, the Chinese manned the wall, built it in strategic locations, such as mountainous terrain. They didn't just build the wall and leave, they used it to their advantage.
Click to expand...


Yes. I studied all about it in Junior  High School. Don't worry, your teacher will tell you all about it in a couple of years when you get to Junior High.


----------



## TemplarKormac

BULLDOG said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wall barely slowed down the Mongolian people. They easily climbed over it. It stopped their horses and wagons full of supplies such. How many Mexicans do you think are bringing their horses or wagons full of provisions with them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sigh, the Chinese manned the wall, built it in strategic locations, such as mountainous terrain. They didn't just build the wall and leave, they used it to their advantage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. I studied all about it in Junior  High School. Don't worry, your teacher will tell you all about it in a couple of years when you get to Junior High.
Click to expand...


Hmm, you must be stuck there. Only Junior High kids would hurl such insults.

Do you have anything intelligent to add? Or are you willing to admit you lost that exchange? 

Either way, I'm not replying to you further.


----------



## Siete

Trump cant call the NG to guard the border, it's that states Governor's  responsibility .. so which states Governor will tax the people in the state to pay for that ?

Trump knows about as much about running the country as a chicken does.


----------



## BULLDOG

TemplarKormac said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wall barely slowed down the Mongolian people. They easily climbed over it. It stopped their horses and wagons full of supplies such. How many Mexicans do you think are bringing their horses or wagons full of provisions with them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sigh, the Chinese manned the wall, built it in strategic locations, such as mountainous terrain. They didn't just build the wall and leave, they used it to their advantage.
Click to expand...


You really need to study up on things before you try to discuss them. Yes, they manned the wall, and it was effective for fighting off armies, and all the materials, supplies, and other things that an army needs to move forward. Those armies were large, and easily spotted so a large contingent could be sent to the part of the wall under attack. Individuals, who weren't seen as a threat, could easily cross the wall with little or no concern for being stopped. Again, I don't see a lot of Mexicans headed this way with horses and wagons the way an army would in between 11BC and the 1600s when it was built.


----------



## BULLDOG

TemplarKormac said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wall barely slowed down the Mongolian people. They easily climbed over it. It stopped their horses and wagons full of supplies such. How many Mexicans do you think are bringing their horses or wagons full of provisions with them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sigh, the Chinese manned the wall, built it in strategic locations, such as mountainous terrain. They didn't just build the wall and leave, they used it to their advantage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. I studied all about it in Junior  High School. Don't worry, your teacher will tell you all about it in a couple of years when you get to Junior High.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmm, you must be stuck there. Only Junior High kids would hurl such insults.
> 
> Do you have anything intelligent to add? Or are you willing to admit you lost that exchange?
> 
> Either way, I'm not replying to you further.
Click to expand...


Imagine my disappointment.


----------



## xband

Yesterday, Trump deployed the United States Army to defend and protect the Mexican border. Canada better watch out or they will see the Green Berets in combat mode.


----------



## Siete

xband said:


> Yesterday, Trump deployed the United States Army to defend and protect the Mexican border. Canada better watch out or they will see the Green Berets in combat mode.



he ran his lying mouth yesterday - END OF STORY


----------



## xband

Siete said:


> xband said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday, Trump deployed the United States Army to defend and protect the Mexican border. Canada better watch out or they will see the Green Berets in combat mode.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> he ran his lying mouth yesterday - END OF STORY
Click to expand...


You are so behind the Times, Trump did it.


----------



## busybee01

kaz said:


> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is what you are hanging your hat on?
> 
> The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
> 
> 
> Geez.  We are not being “invaded” .  We have commerce with Mexico .  Tourists and legal immigration by both countries every day .
> 
> 
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
Click to expand...


You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.


----------



## busybee01

Missouri_Mike said:


> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like it may happen.
> 
> BREAKING: Trump Says Military Will Be Used To Protect Border
> 
> I like it. Whatever it takes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They can sit on the border and watch people cross the border. If they take any action they will be enforcing civilian law. That is illegal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nonsense.  Border control is national security.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who determines who is legal and illegal. It is civilians. That means we are talking about civilian law which the military is forbidden to enforce.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The fuck?
Click to expand...


The fuck your limited intelligence.


----------



## busybee01

BrokeLoser said:


> Well, well, well...Weren’t some of the resident fools claiming that Trump couldn't deploy The Guard to the border? busybee01
> Take notice, Trump has turned things way back up on the immigration issue...back to hiding the illegal cockroaches go.
> Trump says the military will secure the southern border until wall can be built



Saying is not doing cockroach.


----------



## xband

Siete said:


> xband said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday, Trump deployed the United States Army to defend and protect the Mexican border. Canada better watch out or they will see the Green Berets in combat mode.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> he ran his lying mouth yesterday - END OF STORY
Click to expand...


Brazen remark in the least. Open borders flood the work pool with slackers.


----------



## xband

busybee01 said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let's flash back if you dare. I need a pound of relative bearing grease.
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
Click to expand...


----------



## xband

xband said:


> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> 
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let's flash back if you dare. I need a pound of relative bearing grease.
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Flash back if you dare but you never been there.


----------



## Kondor3

Timmy said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are ways around _Posse Comitatus_.
> 
> Not the least of which would be to declare Martial Law on the Southern Border, from the borderline itself, back 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 miles, at DOD-DHS field-command discretion, variably and locally, as indicated by conditions required to fulfill the mission, including broad authority to use deadly force against intruders from across the Southern Border.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you are for martial law against Americans...
Click to expand...

Nope. I am for martial law against Illegal Aliens penetrating our otherwise porous Southern Border with Mexico.



> ...You realize it’s a busy border wh Americans going back and forth...


Yep. Americans will have American IDs. Show a soldier your ID and you're allowed in. Problem solved.



> ...Or land owners, farmers , ranchers .  We confiscating that property ?


Land is not confiscated when Martial Law is imposed.. it's merely policed differently.

Next slide, please.


----------



## Kondor3

Ame®icano said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are ways around _Posse Comitatus_.
> 
> Not the least of which would be to declare Martial Law on the Southern Border, from the borderline itself, back 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 miles, at DOD-DHS field-command discretion, variably and locally, as indicated by conditions required to fulfill the mission, including broad authority to use deadly force against intruders from across the Southern Border.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why back 1 to 5 miles? Once they step in US we have to process them...
Click to expand...

Back 1-5 miles as a Hot Zone in which troops may maneuver and operate aggressively in fulfillment of their mission.



> ...The perimeter should be set 5 miles inside of Mexico. Like we did back in 1910 and later during "border war"...


This is not 1910. We have the military power to do so. We lack the legal authority to do so. Best if we lead-by-example in this hemisphere.



> ...This time we can just say, we're fighting cartels who want immigrants to smuggle drugs.


No need... we just speak the truth... namely, we're doing this to keep foreign nationals from crossing our border without our express prior consent.


----------



## skookerasbil

You just got to love the balls that President Trump has.... heard this yesterday and I'm still laughing. 

Offuckingcourse you send in the troops when you getting invaded


----------



## skookerasbil

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> The military needs to be able to shoot to kill.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep....you drop a few of em and this shit will end pronto.
Click to expand...


I agree wholeheartedly.... think of the deterrent value of getting a video of a group of these m************ taking a howitzer round. End of the invasion.... you'd be able to guard the border with five border patrol agents after that.


----------



## xband

Kondor3 said:


> Timmy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are ways around _Posse Comitatus_.
> 
> Not the least of which would be to declare Martial Law on the Southern Border, from the borderline itself, back 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 miles, at DOD-DHS field-command discretion, variably and locally, as indicated by conditions required to fulfill the mission, including broad authority to use deadly force against intruders from across the Southern Border.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you are for martial law against Americans...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope. I am for martial law against Illegal Aliens penetrating our otherwise porous Southern Border with Mexico.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...You realize it’s a busy border wh Americans going back and forth...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yep. Americans will have American IDs. Show a soldier your ID and you're allowed in. Problem solved.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...Or land owners, farmers , ranchers .  We confiscating that property ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Land is not confiscated when Martial Law is imposed.. it's merely policed differently.
> ,
> Next slide, please.
Click to expand...


Marcos imposed martial law and I was there to see it. Martial Law brought peace to the Philippines. His wife had a shoe fetish and Imelda was a beautiful movie star.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

busybee01 said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have as well, and been told by people from both sides that it is not legal
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> what's not legal??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Depending on what part of the military is used, those people might be talking about Posse Comitatus.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Posse Comitatus Act*
> The *Posse* *Comitatus* *Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes. The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using its military personnel to act as domestic law enforcement personnel.
> *Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia *
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is defending our borders from an invading horde of illegals be domestic law enforcement?  Only way to stop an invasion is to repel them with force.  After a few 1000 bodies left just south of the border, the illegals and liberals would get the message that We the People don't want criminals here anymore.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a real looney tune aren't you. The new dictatorship starts.
Click to expand...

Oh I don't know, maybe I don't want my country to look like Venezuela.  Idiots like you don't realize that if the United States gets Fundamentally Transformed into a shithole country like the ones those illegals are leaving, there wont be a United States that you can go to.  Fucking stupid dumbass liberals(redundant statement).


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

Baz Ares said:


> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can you set that up along 2,000 some odd miles of border?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure, most military jobs are done by contract workers. Not the loser in the armed force sucking off gobmint dimes doing nothang.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hopefully you will get ripped a new asshole for that statement cowardly fkn ............,  I bet your p ass never even served before huh little wuss lol
> 
> Most in Border Patrol were former military you asshole.  Just like cops, just like many areas of positions you sure in the hell couldn't fill.  AND MOST CONTRACTORS ARE FKN MILITARY GAWD U ARE FKN BIGGER ASSHOLE THAN THE AVERAGE LIBERAL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The losers in the U.S. military cannot by law, arrest illegals crossing the border.
> All they can do is call the border patrol.
> 
> FYI.. DOPer!
> Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia
> The *Posse Comitatus Act* is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878 by President Rutherford B. Hayes.* The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807– is to limit the powers of the federal government in using federal military personnel to enforce domestic policies within the United States*. It was passed as an amendment to an army appropriation bill following the end of Reconstruction, and was subsequently updated in 1956 and 1981.
Click to expand...

Never said they would collect the illegals.  We are being invaded, we repel invaders with force.  Call up the militia to help.   I would be right there on the border giving those who want to break out laws and take our lands, the 50 cent solution.


----------



## Crixus

MindWars said:


> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!




Not for the Militarey. He is putting those soldiers, sailers and airmen in jeopardy legally. All for border security, just don’t throw soldiers in jail for doing what they are payed to do.


Marine to Be Charged In Border Shooting


As Congress moved toward using more soldiers along the Mexico border, Texas authorities said they would seek a murder charge against a marine suspected of killing a teen-ager in a border confrontation.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous

Crixus said:


> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not for the Militarey. He is putting those soldiers, sailers and airmen in jeopardy legally. All for border security, just don’t throw soldiers in jail for doing what they are payed to do.
> 
> 
> Marine to Be Charged In Border Shooting
> 
> 
> As Congress moved toward using more soldiers along the Mexico border, Texas authorities said they would seek a murder charge against a marine suspected of killing a teen-ager in a border confrontation.
Click to expand...

Obama pardoned a traitor by allowing Bradley Manning to walk.  President Trump can do the same for the patriot who was protecting our country.


----------



## Crixus

andaronjim said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not for the Militarey. He is putting those soldiers, sailers and airmen in jeopardy legally. All for border security, just don’t throw soldiers in jail for doing what they are payed to do.
> 
> 
> Marine to Be Charged In Border Shooting
> 
> 
> As Congress moved toward using more soldiers along the Mexico border, Texas authorities said they would seek a murder charge against a marine suspected of killing a teen-ager in a border confrontation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Obama pardoned a traitor by allowing Bradley Manning to walk.  President Trump can do the same for the patriot who was protecting our country.
Click to expand...




Trump will be gone at some point and if it were my son or daughter, I wouldent have faith in a politition doing shit for them unless they were protected in writing up front. Pardon means shit as they typically come years after the fact, and they don’t refund any of the money and lost time of the person who is pardoned. Going to send them? Fine, but don’t prosecute them for doing what they do.


----------



## Kondor3

xband said:


> ...Marcos imposed martial law and I was there to see it. Martial Law brought peace to the Philippines. His wife had a shoe fetish and Imelda was a beautiful movie star.


Not overall martial law... merely an imposition of martial law along our Southern Border opposite Mexico... a Zone varying 1-5 miles deep.

Starting with those Sanctuary phukkers in the _People's Democratik Socialist Republik of Kalipornia_... it'll be great fun to watch 'em howl.


----------



## harmonica

busybee01 said:


> harmonica said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a loser. It gives aid and comfort to terrorists and evil people like Putin.
Click to expand...

ok...sure.????.....ducks flying on the moon is more sane than your post


----------



## Ame®icano

BULLDOG said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wall barely slowed down the Mongolian people. They easily climbed over it. It stopped their horses and wagons full of supplies such. How many Mexicans do you think are bringing their horses or wagons full of provisions with them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sigh, the Chinese manned the wall, built it in strategic locations, such as mountainous terrain. They didn't just build the wall and leave, they used it to their advantage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. I studied all about it in Junior  High School. Don't worry, your teacher will tell you all about it in a couple of years when you get to Junior High.
Click to expand...


So much insight... sheeshhh

Here is one for you: I had stuffed peppers for dinner last night.


----------



## Ame®icano

busybee01 said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
Click to expand...


Who's talking about killing? How do you know they're innocent?


----------



## BULLDOG

busybee01 said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
Click to expand...


It's being tolerated all the time. That's what caused the formation of Black Lives Matter, and so many other protests.


----------



## jc456

busybee01 said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
Click to expand...

what the fk are you talking about?


----------



## jc456

xband said:


> Yesterday, Trump deployed the United States Army to defend and protect the Mexican border. Canada better watch out or they will see the Green Berets in combat mode.


don't we have armed guards at the customs areas of every airport?  what the fk is the difference exactly?


----------



## jc456

BULLDOG said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wall barely slowed down the Mongolian people. They easily climbed over it. It stopped their horses and wagons full of supplies such. How many Mexicans do you think are bringing their horses or wagons full of provisions with them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sigh, the Chinese manned the wall, built it in strategic locations, such as mountainous terrain. They didn't just build the wall and leave, they used it to their advantage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. I studied all about it in Junior  High School. Don't worry, your teacher will tell you all about it in a couple of years when you get to Junior High.
Click to expand...

so what's your problem with Trump's wall since you studied China's?  I bet you found it worked right?


----------



## jc456

Kondor3 said:


> Ame®icano said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are ways around _Posse Comitatus_.
> 
> Not the least of which would be to declare Martial Law on the Southern Border, from the borderline itself, back 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 miles, at DOD-DHS field-command discretion, variably and locally, as indicated by conditions required to fulfill the mission, including broad authority to use deadly force against intruders from across the Southern Border.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why back 1 to 5 miles? Once they step in US we have to process them...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Back 1-5 miles as a Hot Zone in which troops may maneuver and operate aggressively in fulfillment of their mission.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...The perimeter should be set 5 miles inside of Mexico. Like we did back in 1910 and later during "border war"...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is not 1910. We have the military power to do so. We lack the legal authority to do so. Best if we lead-by-example in this hemisphere.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...This time we can just say, we're fighting cartels who want immigrants to smuggle drugs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No need... we just speak the truth... namely, we're doing this to keep foreign nationals from crossing our border without our express prior consent.
Click to expand...

we do it at every airport that has a customs area for international flights.


----------



## jc456

BULLDOG said:


> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wall barely slowed down the Mongolian people. They easily climbed over it. It stopped their horses and wagons full of supplies such. How many Mexicans do you think are bringing their horses or wagons full of provisions with them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sigh, the Chinese manned the wall, built it in strategic locations, such as mountainous terrain. They didn't just build the wall and leave, they used it to their advantage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You really need to study up on things before you try to discuss them. Yes, they manned the wall, and it was effective for fighting off armies, and all the materials, supplies, and other things that an army needs to move forward. Those armies were large, and easily spotted so a large contingent could be sent to the part of the wall under attack. Individuals, who weren't seen as a threat, could easily cross the wall with little or no concern for being stopped. Again, I don't see a lot of Mexicans headed this way with horses and wagons the way an army would in between 11BC and the 1600s when it was built.
Click to expand...

so you think 1500 people isn't large influx at a crossing?  really?  dude, you can't be that naive right?  They will do what every armed security guard does at an airport.  passport and visa please, ain't got one, no admittance.  why is that so difficult for you?

BTW, try to walk into mexico or Canada without a passport.  go for it brave little one.


----------



## harmonica

Trump does it AGAIN!!  what should've been done years ago--send troops to the border


----------



## bodecea

Anyone yet explain what they want the ROE to be for these border troops?


----------



## DrLove

Not gonna happen MW - But feel free to dream

The Military Shouldn't Pay for Trump's Wall. No One Should


----------



## dannyboys

harmonica said:


> I've been saying this for years
> bring some of the overseas troops home
> this is a triple win!
> 1. no overseas transportation/logistics/ housing/etc cost
> ..a. save to-and-from transportation costs  = double cost
> 2. use #1 $$$$ in the US, not overseas
> 3. those troops will spend their $$$ in the US, not overseas
> etc etc


Just the troops the US has in Germany would build the wall and guard the S. border until the wall is complete.
Give the boys and girls something to do and keep them fit too.


----------



## BULLDOG

jc456 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wall barely slowed down the Mongolian people. They easily climbed over it. It stopped their horses and wagons full of supplies such. How many Mexicans do you think are bringing their horses or wagons full of provisions with them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sigh, the Chinese manned the wall, built it in strategic locations, such as mountainous terrain. They didn't just build the wall and leave, they used it to their advantage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You really need to study up on things before you try to discuss them. Yes, they manned the wall, and it was effective for fighting off armies, and all the materials, supplies, and other things that an army needs to move forward. Those armies were large, and easily spotted so a large contingent could be sent to the part of the wall under attack. Individuals, who weren't seen as a threat, could easily cross the wall with little or no concern for being stopped. Again, I don't see a lot of Mexicans headed this way with horses and wagons the way an army would in between 11BC and the 1600s when it was built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> so you think 1500 people isn't large influx at a crossing?  really?  dude, you can't be that naive right?  They will do what every armed security guard does at an airport.  passport and visa please, ain't got one, no admittance.  why is that so difficult for you?
> 
> BTW, try to walk into mexico or Canada without a passport.  go for it brave little one.
Click to expand...


So you think that wall will be built before that bunch gets to the border, or are you expecting a group that size in the same place every day?


----------



## MindWars

andaronjim said:


> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not for the Militarey. He is putting those soldiers, sailers and airmen in jeopardy legally. All for border security, just don’t throw soldiers in jail for doing what they are payed to do.
> 
> 
> Marine to Be Charged In Border Shooting
> 
> 
> As Congress moved toward using more soldiers along the Mexico border, Texas authorities said they would seek a murder charge against a marine suspected of killing a teen-ager in a border confrontation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Obama pardoned a traitor by allowing Bradley Manning to walk.  President Trump can do the same for the patriot who was protecting our country.
Click to expand...


Obama also traded Bradly Manning for 5,  5 mind you terrorist.  you just can't make this shit up and they have their nerve to TRY AND PIN BE LIES ONTO TRUMP.  doesn't it kill you to watch these loons pin lies onto Trump when Obama is either the one who did it or implemented it.  Kind of like when that asshole Obama got in and the cowardly little bitch would say " BUSH DID IT" .  that was part of the sheeps indoctrination and they're to stupid to pick up on that just like they were when Obama and Clinton made it a point to mention who and what " Fake news was" .  Ever notice after those two morons made their statements Social media, and all the shit storm started after that....   now everything true is their fake, and everything fake is their truth lmfao.


----------



## MindWars

IF IT WAS ILLEGAL TO SEND TROOPS TO THE BORDER TRUMP SURE IN THE HELL WOULDN'T DO IT HE HAS LEGAL ADVISORS DUUUUH....
2ND.  IF IT TAKES THAT TO PROTECT OUR COUNTRY HE  CAN DO WHATEVER HE NEEDS TOO.


----------



## BULLDOG

MindWars said:


> andaronjim said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Crixus said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military
> View attachment 186107
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not for the Militarey. He is putting those soldiers, sailers and airmen in jeopardy legally. All for border security, just don’t throw soldiers in jail for doing what they are payed to do.
> 
> 
> Marine to Be Charged In Border Shooting
> 
> 
> As Congress moved toward using more soldiers along the Mexico border, Texas authorities said they would seek a murder charge against a marine suspected of killing a teen-ager in a border confrontation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Obama pardoned a traitor by allowing Bradley Manning to walk.  President Trump can do the same for the patriot who was protecting our country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama also traded Bradly Manning for 5,  5 mind you terrorist.  you just can't make this shit up and they have their nerve to TRY AND PIN BE LIES ONTO TRUMP.  doesn't it kill you to watch these loons pin lies onto Trump when Obama is either the one who did it or implemented it.  Kind of like when that asshole Obama got in and the cowardly little bitch would say " BUSH DID IT" .  that was part of the sheeps indoctrination and they're to stupid to pick up on that just like they were when Obama and Clinton made it a point to mention who and what " Fake news was" .  Ever notice after those two morons made their statements Social media, and all the shit storm started after that....   now everything true is their fake, and everything fake is their truth lmfao.
Click to expand...


Your credibility is well known from all your Alex Jones stories..


----------



## MindWars




----------



## AsherN

jc456 said:


> xband said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday, Trump deployed the United States Army to defend and protect the Mexican border. Canada better watch out or they will see the Green Berets in combat mode.
> 
> 
> 
> don't we have armed guards at the customs areas of every airport?  what the fk is the difference exactly?
Click to expand...


CBP are LE. The military is not. That's the difference.


----------



## eagle1462010

Ike is laughing at this conversation


----------



## EvilCat Breath

American volunteers would be able to do more than the military.   Groups of armed men and women patrolling in the desert would be able to stop these people from entering and never have to harm one of them.

Simply scatter the groups.   Chase them down.  Let them go.  Drive them off the coyote paths.   Let nature take its course.


----------



## jc456

BULLDOG said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good. If Trump can't have his wall, the Military is the next best thing.
> 
> But let's just be clear, if the Chinese could build a 5,500 mile border wall 2,300 years ago to defend itself from Mongolian nomadic armies, then we can build one that's 3,500 miles shorter, with vastly superior technology and ethics.
> 
> But yeah. Let's keep snorting condoms and scarfing down Tide pods.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wall barely slowed down the Mongolian people. They easily climbed over it. It stopped their horses and wagons full of supplies such. How many Mexicans do you think are bringing their horses or wagons full of provisions with them?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sigh, the Chinese manned the wall, built it in strategic locations, such as mountainous terrain. They didn't just build the wall and leave, they used it to their advantage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You really need to study up on things before you try to discuss them. Yes, they manned the wall, and it was effective for fighting off armies, and all the materials, supplies, and other things that an army needs to move forward. Those armies were large, and easily spotted so a large contingent could be sent to the part of the wall under attack. Individuals, who weren't seen as a threat, could easily cross the wall with little or no concern for being stopped. Again, I don't see a lot of Mexicans headed this way with horses and wagons the way an army would in between 11BC and the 1600s when it was built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> so you think 1500 people isn't large influx at a crossing?  really?  dude, you can't be that naive right?  They will do what every armed security guard does at an airport.  passport and visa please, ain't got one, no admittance.  why is that so difficult for you?
> 
> BTW, try to walk into mexico or Canada without a passport.  go for it brave little one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you think that wall will be built before that bunch gets to the border, or are you expecting a group that size in the same place every day?
Click to expand...

I don't care about the wall at the moment, let's discuss the 1500 coming at our border. if they came across, you think that would set a precedent?  I do.  dude, if you want open borders go to mexico and see if you can get in.


----------



## jc456

Tipsycatlover said:


> American volunteers would be able to do more than the military.   Groups of armed men and women patrolling in the desert would be able to stop these people from entering and never have to harm one of them.
> 
> Simply scatter the groups.   Chase them down.  Let them go.  Drive them off the coyote paths.   Let nature take its course.


the president can't ask that.


----------



## BULLDOG

Tipsycatlover said:


> American volunteers would be able to do more than the military.   Groups of armed men and women patrolling in the desert would be able to stop these people from entering and never have to harm one of them.
> 
> Simply scatter the groups.   Chase them down.  Let them go.  Drive them off the coyote paths.   Let nature take its course.



Sounds like a great idea. I'm sure nothing could go wrong with that.


----------



## jc456

AsherN said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xband said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday, Trump deployed the United States Army to defend and protect the Mexican border. Canada better watch out or they will see the Green Berets in combat mode.
> 
> 
> 
> don't we have armed guards at the customs areas of every airport?  what the fk is the difference exactly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> CBP are LE. The military is not. That's the difference.
Click to expand...

that wasn't my question.  Do we have armed guards at our international airports in the Customs area?  yes or no?  why can't you answer it?


----------



## BULLDOG

jc456 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> The wall barely slowed down the Mongolian people. They easily climbed over it. It stopped their horses and wagons full of supplies such. How many Mexicans do you think are bringing their horses or wagons full of provisions with them?
> 
> 
> 
> Sigh, the Chinese manned the wall, built it in strategic locations, such as mountainous terrain. They didn't just build the wall and leave, they used it to their advantage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You really need to study up on things before you try to discuss them. Yes, they manned the wall, and it was effective for fighting off armies, and all the materials, supplies, and other things that an army needs to move forward. Those armies were large, and easily spotted so a large contingent could be sent to the part of the wall under attack. Individuals, who weren't seen as a threat, could easily cross the wall with little or no concern for being stopped. Again, I don't see a lot of Mexicans headed this way with horses and wagons the way an army would in between 11BC and the 1600s when it was built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> so you think 1500 people isn't large influx at a crossing?  really?  dude, you can't be that naive right?  They will do what every armed security guard does at an airport.  passport and visa please, ain't got one, no admittance.  why is that so difficult for you?
> 
> BTW, try to walk into mexico or Canada without a passport.  go for it brave little one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you think that wall will be built before that bunch gets to the border, or are you expecting a group that size in the same place every day?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't care about the wall at the moment, let's discuss the 1500 coming at our border. if they came across, you think that would set a precedent?  I do.  dude, if you want open borders go to mexico and see if you can get in.
Click to expand...


When did this yearly exodus first occur? Is this the first time you ever heard about it?


----------



## EvilCat Breath

jc456 said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> American volunteers would be able to do more than the military.   Groups of armed men and women patrolling in the desert would be able to stop these people from entering and never have to harm one of them.
> 
> Simply scatter the groups.   Chase them down.  Let them go.  Drive them off the coyote paths.   Let nature take its course.
> 
> 
> 
> the president can't ask that.
Click to expand...

Of course he can't.   That doesn't mean it can't be done, or shouldn't be done.


----------



## BULLDOG

jc456 said:


> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xband said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday, Trump deployed the United States Army to defend and protect the Mexican border. Canada better watch out or they will see the Green Berets in combat mode.
> 
> 
> 
> don't we have armed guards at the customs areas of every airport?  what the fk is the difference exactly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> CBP are LE. The military is not. That's the difference.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> that wasn't my question.  Do we have armed guards at our international airports in the Customs area?  yes or no?  why can't you answer it?
Click to expand...


The military is not allowed to serve police functions in our country. It would have to be the National guard, called out by the governor of each state, not the regular military, and each state would have to pay for the troops on their border. Trump's plan just isn't possible.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

BULLDOG said:


> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> American volunteers would be able to do more than the military.   Groups of armed men and women patrolling in the desert would be able to stop these people from entering and never have to harm one of them.
> 
> Simply scatter the groups.   Chase them down.  Let them go.  Drive them off the coyote paths.   Let nature take its course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like a great idea. I'm sure nothing could go wrong with that.
Click to expand...


Of course nothing would go wrong.  The groups would be split apart and chased into the desert.  There, the desert would take care of itself.  No one gets shot or even threatened.  Just chased down, off the paths, away from marked highways.


----------



## jc456

BULLDOG said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TemplarKormac said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sigh, the Chinese manned the wall, built it in strategic locations, such as mountainous terrain. They didn't just build the wall and leave, they used it to their advantage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You really need to study up on things before you try to discuss them. Yes, they manned the wall, and it was effective for fighting off armies, and all the materials, supplies, and other things that an army needs to move forward. Those armies were large, and easily spotted so a large contingent could be sent to the part of the wall under attack. Individuals, who weren't seen as a threat, could easily cross the wall with little or no concern for being stopped. Again, I don't see a lot of Mexicans headed this way with horses and wagons the way an army would in between 11BC and the 1600s when it was built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> so you think 1500 people isn't large influx at a crossing?  really?  dude, you can't be that naive right?  They will do what every armed security guard does at an airport.  passport and visa please, ain't got one, no admittance.  why is that so difficult for you?
> 
> BTW, try to walk into mexico or Canada without a passport.  go for it brave little one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you think that wall will be built before that bunch gets to the border, or are you expecting a group that size in the same place every day?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't care about the wall at the moment, let's discuss the 1500 coming at our border. if they came across, you think that would set a precedent?  I do.  dude, if you want open borders go to mexico and see if you can get in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When did this yearly exodus first occur? Is this the first time you ever heard about it?
Click to expand...

are there stats for that?  post em?  why are you asking me?  I asked you if you thought that if they came over would it be seen as us weak and set precedent?  but you can't answer.  until you do that, don't ask me any deflection question.


----------



## BULLDOG

Tipsycatlover said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> American volunteers would be able to do more than the military.   Groups of armed men and women patrolling in the desert would be able to stop these people from entering and never have to harm one of them.
> 
> Simply scatter the groups.   Chase them down.  Let them go.  Drive them off the coyote paths.   Let nature take its course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like a great idea. I'm sure nothing could go wrong with that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Of course nothing would go wrong.  The groups would be split apart and chased into the desert.  There, the desert would take care of itself.  No one gets shot or even threatened.  Just chased down, off the paths, away from marked highways.
Click to expand...


At least you are consistent in your stupidity.


----------



## jc456

Tipsycatlover said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tipsycatlover said:
> 
> 
> 
> American volunteers would be able to do more than the military.   Groups of armed men and women patrolling in the desert would be able to stop these people from entering and never have to harm one of them.
> 
> Simply scatter the groups.   Chase them down.  Let them go.  Drive them off the coyote paths.   Let nature take its course.
> 
> 
> 
> the president can't ask that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course he can't.   That doesn't mean it can't be done, or shouldn't be done.
Click to expand...

well then he has no control over it.  he wants that in my mind.


----------



## BULLDOG

jc456 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> You really need to study up on things before you try to discuss them. Yes, they manned the wall, and it was effective for fighting off armies, and all the materials, supplies, and other things that an army needs to move forward. Those armies were large, and easily spotted so a large contingent could be sent to the part of the wall under attack. Individuals, who weren't seen as a threat, could easily cross the wall with little or no concern for being stopped. Again, I don't see a lot of Mexicans headed this way with horses and wagons the way an army would in between 11BC and the 1600s when it was built.
> 
> 
> 
> so you think 1500 people isn't large influx at a crossing?  really?  dude, you can't be that naive right?  They will do what every armed security guard does at an airport.  passport and visa please, ain't got one, no admittance.  why is that so difficult for you?
> 
> BTW, try to walk into mexico or Canada without a passport.  go for it brave little one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you think that wall will be built before that bunch gets to the border, or are you expecting a group that size in the same place every day?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't care about the wall at the moment, let's discuss the 1500 coming at our border. if they came across, you think that would set a precedent?  I do.  dude, if you want open borders go to mexico and see if you can get in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When did this yearly exodus first occur? Is this the first time you ever heard about it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> are there stats for that?  post em?  why are you asking me?  I asked you if you thought that if they came over would it be seen as us weak and set precedent?  but you can't answer.  until you do that, don't ask me any deflection question.
Click to expand...


They aren't just the average Mexicans wanting to come to the US. They are fleeing a very dangerous place. If they have valid refugee requests for asylum, they should be processed accordingly.


----------



## jc456

BULLDOG said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> so you think 1500 people isn't large influx at a crossing?  really?  dude, you can't be that naive right?  They will do what every armed security guard does at an airport.  passport and visa please, ain't got one, no admittance.  why is that so difficult for you?
> 
> BTW, try to walk into mexico or Canada without a passport.  go for it brave little one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you think that wall will be built before that bunch gets to the border, or are you expecting a group that size in the same place every day?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't care about the wall at the moment, let's discuss the 1500 coming at our border. if they came across, you think that would set a precedent?  I do.  dude, if you want open borders go to mexico and see if you can get in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When did this yearly exodus first occur? Is this the first time you ever heard about it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> are there stats for that?  post em?  why are you asking me?  I asked you if you thought that if they came over would it be seen as us weak and set precedent?  but you can't answer.  until you do that, don't ask me any deflection question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They aren't just the average Mexicans wanting to come to the US. They are fleeing a very dangerous place. If they have valid refugee requests for asylum, they should be processed accordingly.
Click to expand...

no, they first contact the US and get approval, not show up at the border.  sorry fella. You have no idea what their status is btw.and you still haven't answered my question.  go fking figure that. typical leftist.


----------



## BULLDOG

jc456 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you think that wall will be built before that bunch gets to the border, or are you expecting a group that size in the same place every day?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care about the wall at the moment, let's discuss the 1500 coming at our border. if they came across, you think that would set a precedent?  I do.  dude, if you want open borders go to mexico and see if you can get in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When did this yearly exodus first occur? Is this the first time you ever heard about it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> are there stats for that?  post em?  why are you asking me?  I asked you if you thought that if they came over would it be seen as us weak and set precedent?  but you can't answer.  until you do that, don't ask me any deflection question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They aren't just the average Mexicans wanting to come to the US. They are fleeing a very dangerous place. If they have valid refugee requests for asylum, they should be processed accordingly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no, they first contact the US and get approval, not show up at the border.  sorry fella. You have no idea what their status is btw.and you still haven't answered my question.  go fking figure that. typical leftist.
Click to expand...


I see you aren't real clear on what is required, and what isn't required.


----------



## jc456

BULLDOG said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care about the wall at the moment, let's discuss the 1500 coming at our border. if they came across, you think that would set a precedent?  I do.  dude, if you want open borders go to mexico and see if you can get in.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When did this yearly exodus first occur? Is this the first time you ever heard about it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> are there stats for that?  post em?  why are you asking me?  I asked you if you thought that if they came over would it be seen as us weak and set precedent?  but you can't answer.  until you do that, don't ask me any deflection question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They aren't just the average Mexicans wanting to come to the US. They are fleeing a very dangerous place. If they have valid refugee requests for asylum, they should be processed accordingly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no, they first contact the US and get approval, not show up at the border.  sorry fella. You have no idea what their status is btw.and you still haven't answered my question.  go fking figure that. typical leftist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I see you aren't real clear on what is required, and what isn't required.
Click to expand...

and still no answer.  hmmmmm ignorance is bliss.


----------



## BULLDOG

jc456 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> When did this yearly exodus first occur? Is this the first time you ever heard about it?
> 
> 
> 
> are there stats for that?  post em?  why are you asking me?  I asked you if you thought that if they came over would it be seen as us weak and set precedent?  but you can't answer.  until you do that, don't ask me any deflection question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They aren't just the average Mexicans wanting to come to the US. They are fleeing a very dangerous place. If they have valid refugee requests for asylum, they should be processed accordingly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no, they first contact the US and get approval, not show up at the border.  sorry fella. You have no idea what their status is btw.and you still haven't answered my question.  go fking figure that. typical leftist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I see you aren't real clear on what is required, and what isn't required.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> and still no answer.  hmmmmm ignorance is bliss.
Click to expand...


No. We wouldn't be seen as week. Turning qualified refugees away would make us seem heartless, and un-American. Our country was built on stronger stuff than the hateful selfish crap being shown lately. I miss the strong honorable country we used to be.


----------



## AsherN

jc456 said:


> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xband said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday, Trump deployed the United States Army to defend and protect the Mexican border. Canada better watch out or they will see the Green Berets in combat mode.
> 
> 
> 
> don't we have armed guards at the customs areas of every airport?  what the fk is the difference exactly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> CBP are LE. The military is not. That's the difference.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> that wasn't my question.  Do we have armed guards at our international airports in the Customs area?  yes or no?  why can't you answer it?
Click to expand...


Yes. Armed LE. Not armed military. There is a big difference.


----------



## Aba Incieni

BULLDOG said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> so you think 1500 people isn't large influx at a crossing?  really?  dude, you can't be that naive right?  They will do what every armed security guard does at an airport.  passport and visa please, ain't got one, no admittance.  why is that so difficult for you?
> 
> BTW, try to walk into mexico or Canada without a passport.  go for it brave little one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you think that wall will be built before that bunch gets to the border, or are you expecting a group that size in the same place every day?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't care about the wall at the moment, let's discuss the 1500 coming at our border. if they came across, you think that would set a precedent?  I do.  dude, if you want open borders go to mexico and see if you can get in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When did this yearly exodus first occur? Is this the first time you ever heard about it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> are there stats for that?  post em?  why are you asking me?  I asked you if you thought that if they came over would it be seen as us weak and set precedent?  but you can't answer.  until you do that, don't ask me any deflection question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They aren't just the average Mexicans wanting to come to the US. They are fleeing a very dangerous place. If they have valid refugee requests for asylum, they should be processed accordingly.
Click to expand...

If they are fleeing their home countries for safety, why don't they work to make their countries better? Why don't you move to Honduras and protest, that's what they're doing to you.


----------



## Wry Catcher

Consider the Posse Comitatus Act and Abuse of Power:

1.  Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia

2.  *Abuse of power*, in the form of "malfeasance in office" or "official misconduct," is the commission of an unlawful act, done in an official capacity, which affects the performance of official duties. Malfeasance in office is often grounds for a for cause removal of an elected official by statute or recall election. Abuse of power can also mean a person using the power they have for their own personal gain.

Trump really ought to listen to his attorneys.


----------



## kaz

Ame®icano said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution does no such thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Article IV, Section 4.  You seriously don't think securing our borders is the job of the MILITARY?  Hello, you've succumbed to leftist stupidity and lies.  The MILITARY?  You don't grasp the relation between the military and securing our freaking borders?
> 
> You are S-T-U-P-I-D.  Not ignorant, stupid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here's the text of Article IV, Section 4:
> 
> _The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence._
> 
> Now, I'm not sure what school of Constitutional interpretation you fit within, but what do you believe that the founding fathers meant, when they said "foreign invaders"?
> 
> Do you think they meant a military invasion, or do you think they meant immigrants?
> 
> Keep in mind, the founding fathers never expected any "controls" whatsoever on immigration.
> 
> To think they meant to apply that to immigrants takes quite a reach, for the sake of legal interpretation. I doubt you could even get Stevens to go that far from the text.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We're talking about illegal aliens, not "immigrants," idiot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "Illegal" immigrants are a sub class of immigrants.
> 
> Were you aware that at the time of the drafting of the Constitution, there was no such thing as "illegal immigration"?
> 
> That term didn't exist until the early 1900s.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nope.
> 
> Immigrants have legal status. Illegals don't have it, they're just illegal aliens.
Click to expand...


Doctor is in.  Duh, dar, shoplifters are just another type of customer ...

Someone who breaks into your house is just another family member ...

A carjacker is like anyone else who borrows your car ...


----------



## kaz

busybee01 said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1500 people illegally trying to enter at once is an invasion. i don't see what else you would call it.  I'm open, give me an idea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
Click to expand...


No idea what you're talking about.  Be honest, you don't know what you're talking about either, do you?


----------



## kaz

Ame®icano said:


> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> 
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who's talking about killing? How do you know they're innocent?
Click to expand...


They're Democrat voters, that's good enough for her.  Clinton was a sexual predator and rapist and that was good enough for him to be innocent to her as well


----------



## kaz

BULLDOG said:


> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> 
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's being tolerated all the time. That's what caused the formation of Black Lives Matter, and so many other protests.
Click to expand...


BLM is a terrorist group just like antifa.  You're a wacko.  What's funny is how bad you hate Trump and how sexually obsessed you are with his daughter.  You're like the women who write to prisons to marry murderers


----------



## irosie91

kaz said:


> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> None of these people are armed nor are they under the direction of a foreign power. If you say they are illegal then they are breaking civilian laws.
> 
> 
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No idea what you're talking about.  Be honest, you don't know what you're talking about either, do you?
Click to expand...


be patient------he is assuming that our military will shoot to kill babies climbing over the fence


----------



## jc456

irosie91 said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No idea what you're talking about.  Be honest, you don't know what you're talking about either, do you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> be patient------he is assuming that our military will shoot to kill babies climbing over the fence
Click to expand...

you are truly a sad human being with that statement.


----------



## jc456

AsherN said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xband said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday, Trump deployed the United States Army to defend and protect the Mexican border. Canada better watch out or they will see the Green Berets in combat mode.
> 
> 
> 
> don't we have armed guards at the customs areas of every airport?  what the fk is the difference exactly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> CBP are LE. The military is not. That's the difference.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> that wasn't my question.  Do we have armed guards at our international airports in the Customs area?  yes or no?  why can't you answer it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. Armed LE. Not armed military. There is a big difference.
Click to expand...

but there armed guards there right?  I give to shits who they report to, they're there right?


----------



## BULLDOG

Aba Incieni said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you think that wall will be built before that bunch gets to the border, or are you expecting a group that size in the same place every day?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care about the wall at the moment, let's discuss the 1500 coming at our border. if they came across, you think that would set a precedent?  I do.  dude, if you want open borders go to mexico and see if you can get in.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When did this yearly exodus first occur? Is this the first time you ever heard about it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> are there stats for that?  post em?  why are you asking me?  I asked you if you thought that if they came over would it be seen as us weak and set precedent?  but you can't answer.  until you do that, don't ask me any deflection question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They aren't just the average Mexicans wanting to come to the US. They are fleeing a very dangerous place. If they have valid refugee requests for asylum, they should be processed accordingly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If they are fleeing their home countries for safety, why don't they work to make their countries better? Why don't you move to Honduras and protest, that's what they're doing to you.
Click to expand...


That's just goofy.


----------



## irosie91

I see no reason why people in the military cannot act
as border guards.


----------



## BULLDOG

kaz said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> A technicality.  If they lose a few due to hostile fire, it'll discourage them.  Personally, I'm in favor of land mines.  After a few blow up, the rest will crawl back, minus legs, to their own nations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's being tolerated all the time. That's what caused the formation of Black Lives Matter, and so many other protests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> BLM is a terrorist group just like antifa.  You're a wacko.  What's funny is how bad you hate Trump and how sexually obsessed you are with his daughter.  You're like the women who write to prisons to marry murderers
Click to expand...


Thank you for your opinion. As always, I will give it all the consideration it deserves.


----------



## kaz

jc456 said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No idea what you're talking about.  Be honest, you don't know what you're talking about either, do you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> be patient------he is assuming that our military will shoot to kill babies climbing over the fence
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you are truly a sad human being with that statement.
Click to expand...


She's being sarcastic, you missed that


----------



## kaz

BULLDOG said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You remind me of a mad dog. Mad dogs have to be put down. Try it and the Republicans will lose everything.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's being tolerated all the time. That's what caused the formation of Black Lives Matter, and so many other protests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> BLM is a terrorist group just like antifa.  You're a wacko.  What's funny is how bad you hate Trump and how sexually obsessed you are with his daughter.  You're like the women who write to prisons to marry murderers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thank you for your opinion. As always, I will give it all the consideration it deserves.
Click to expand...


You'll just give it all the consideration of which you are capable.  You're not capable of giving it all the consideration it deserves.  

Speaking of which, how's your quest to find a line of Ivanka rubber dolls going?


----------



## Aba Incieni

BULLDOG said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't care about the wall at the moment, let's discuss the 1500 coming at our border. if they came across, you think that would set a precedent?  I do.  dude, if you want open borders go to mexico and see if you can get in.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When did this yearly exodus first occur? Is this the first time you ever heard about it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> are there stats for that?  post em?  why are you asking me?  I asked you if you thought that if they came over would it be seen as us weak and set precedent?  but you can't answer.  until you do that, don't ask me any deflection question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They aren't just the average Mexicans wanting to come to the US. They are fleeing a very dangerous place. If they have valid refugee requests for asylum, they should be processed accordingly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If they are fleeing their home countries for safety, why don't they work to make their countries better? Why don't you move to Honduras and protest, that's what they're doing to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's just goofy.
Click to expand...

It's downright insane. Why would you do what you condone others doing.


----------



## BULLDOG

Aba Incieni said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> When did this yearly exodus first occur? Is this the first time you ever heard about it?
> 
> 
> 
> are there stats for that?  post em?  why are you asking me?  I asked you if you thought that if they came over would it be seen as us weak and set precedent?  but you can't answer.  until you do that, don't ask me any deflection question.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They aren't just the average Mexicans wanting to come to the US. They are fleeing a very dangerous place. If they have valid refugee requests for asylum, they should be processed accordingly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If they are fleeing their home countries for safety, why don't they work to make their countries better? Why don't you move to Honduras and protest, that's what they're doing to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's just goofy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's downright insane. Why would you do what you condone others doing.
Click to expand...


Think about what you want to say, and then try again. Your question don't make no sense.


----------



## ABikerSailor

irosie91 said:


> I see no reason why people in the military cannot act
> as border guards.



Because it's not part of their job, and for them to perform law enforcement activities on US soil is against the law.

But, then again, you conservatives believed that Obama was gonna use the military to round up dissenters.  That was just a rumor put out by conservative talking heads.  Trump is actually gonna try to do it for real.


----------



## Aba Incieni

BULLDOG said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> are there stats for that?  post em?  why are you asking me?  I asked you if you thought that if they came over would it be seen as us weak and set precedent?  but you can't answer.  until you do that, don't ask me any deflection question.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They aren't just the average Mexicans wanting to come to the US. They are fleeing a very dangerous place. If they have valid refugee requests for asylum, they should be processed accordingly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If they are fleeing their home countries for safety, why don't they work to make their countries better? Why don't you move to Honduras and protest, that's what they're doing to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's just goofy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's downright insane. Why would you do what you condone others doing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Think about what you want to say, and then try again. Your question don't make no sense.
Click to expand...

That's just goofy.


----------



## BULLDOG

Aba Incieni said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> They aren't just the average Mexicans wanting to come to the US. They are fleeing a very dangerous place. If they have valid refugee requests for asylum, they should be processed accordingly.
> 
> 
> 
> If they are fleeing their home countries for safety, why don't they work to make their countries better? Why don't you move to Honduras and protest, that's what they're doing to you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's just goofy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's downright insane. Why would you do what you condone others doing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Think about what you want to say, and then try again. Your question don't make no sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's just goofy.
Click to expand...


Yes, That's why I encouraged you to try again.


----------



## jc456

kaz said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now that Democrats are alienating white blue collar who want jobs not handouts, it's actually you who will lose everything if your voter pipeline is cut off
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's being tolerated all the time. That's what caused the formation of Black Lives Matter, and so many other protests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> BLM is a terrorist group just like antifa.  You're a wacko.  What's funny is how bad you hate Trump and how sexually obsessed you are with his daughter.  You're like the women who write to prisons to marry murderers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thank you for your opinion. As always, I will give it all the consideration it deserves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You'll just give it all the consideration of which you are capable.  You're not capable of giving it all the consideration it deserves.
> 
> Speaking of which, how's your quest to find a line of Ivanka rubber dolls going?
Click to expand...

he wants them with holes in them blow up dolls.


----------



## jc456

ABikerSailor said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see no reason why people in the military cannot act
> as border guards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because it's not part of their job, and for them to perform law enforcement activities on US soil is against the law.
> 
> But, then again, you conservatives believed that Obama was gonna use the military to round up dissenters.  That was just a rumor put out by conservative talking heads.  Trump is actually gonna try to do it for real.
Click to expand...

their job is any job the commander in chief says it is.


----------



## EverCurious

From Wiki:

There are a number of situations in which the PCA does not apply. These include:

[...]
*
Enforcement of federal law at the discretion of the President of the United States*, such as with the 101st Airborne Division by President Dwight D. Eisenhower to integrate Little Rock Central High School in 1957.


We'll have to see how it all plays out in court it seems.


----------



## kaz

jc456 said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> busybee01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You think any American except the a right will approve of the killing of innocent and UNARMED people will be tolerated. You are a sick puppy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's being tolerated all the time. That's what caused the formation of Black Lives Matter, and so many other protests.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> BLM is a terrorist group just like antifa.  You're a wacko.  What's funny is how bad you hate Trump and how sexually obsessed you are with his daughter.  You're like the women who write to prisons to marry murderers
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thank you for your opinion. As always, I will give it all the consideration it deserves.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You'll just give it all the consideration of which you are capable.  You're not capable of giving it all the consideration it deserves.
> 
> Speaking of which, how's your quest to find a line of Ivanka rubber dolls going?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> he wants them with holes in them blow up dolls.
Click to expand...


Yes, and he's way past finding one doll.  With his obsession with Trump's cutsie daughter, he knows he'll wear out that hole in no time.  Then he's back where he started


----------



## jc456

EverCurious said:


> From Wiki:
> 
> There are a number of situations in which the PCA does not apply. These include:
> 
> [...]
> *
> Enforcement of federal law at the discretion of the President of the United States*, such as with the 101st Airborne Division by President Dwight D. Eisenhower to integrate Little Rock Central High School in 1957.
> 
> 
> We'll have to see how it all plays out in court it seems.


I guess the next step would be to take out the judicial branch.


----------



## AsherN

jc456 said:


> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xband said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday, Trump deployed the United States Army to defend and protect the Mexican border. Canada better watch out or they will see the Green Berets in combat mode.
> 
> 
> 
> don't we have armed guards at the customs areas of every airport?  what the fk is the difference exactly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> CBP are LE. The military is not. That's the difference.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> that wasn't my question.  Do we have armed guards at our international airports in the Customs area?  yes or no?  why can't you answer it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. Armed LE. Not armed military. There is a big difference.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> but there armed guards there right?  I give to shits who they report to, they're there right?
Click to expand...


The Law gives a few shits about who they report to. PCA says they can be there, they can be armed. They can provide support. But they can't stop, detain, question, arrest., etc. You known the stuff that LE does.


----------



## EverCurious

jc456 said:


> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> From Wiki:
> 
> There are a number of situations in which the PCA does not apply. These include:
> 
> [...]
> *
> Enforcement of federal law at the discretion of the President of the United States*, such as with the 101st Airborne Division by President Dwight D. Eisenhower to integrate Little Rock Central High School in 1957.
> 
> 
> We'll have to see how it all plays out in court it seems.
> 
> 
> 
> I guess the next step would be to take out the judicial branch.
Click to expand...


Probably the same as always these days.  The 9th will say it's unconstitutional or some bullshit and some months later the SCOTUS will say it's fine and the media will barely, if never, report on it.


----------



## jc456

AsherN said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AsherN said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> don't we have armed guards at the customs areas of every airport?  what the fk is the difference exactly?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CBP are LE. The military is not. That's the difference.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> that wasn't my question.  Do we have armed guards at our international airports in the Customs area?  yes or no?  why can't you answer it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. Armed LE. Not armed military. There is a big difference.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> but there armed guards there right?  I give to shits who they report to, they're there right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Law gives a few shits about who they report to. PCA says they can be there, they can be armed. They can provide support. But they can't stop, detain, question, arrest., etc. You known the stuff that LE does.
Click to expand...

that wasn't the point, you know that wasn't the point, but the good asshole you are you can't answer a question. got it.


----------



## jc456

EverCurious said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> From Wiki:
> 
> There are a number of situations in which the PCA does not apply. These include:
> 
> [...]
> *
> Enforcement of federal law at the discretion of the President of the United States*, such as with the 101st Airborne Division by President Dwight D. Eisenhower to integrate Little Rock Central High School in 1957.
> 
> 
> We'll have to see how it all plays out in court it seems.
> 
> 
> 
> I guess the next step would be to take out the judicial branch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Probably the same as always these days.  The 9th will say it's unconstitutional or some bullshit and some months later the SCOTUS will say it's fine and the media will barely, if never, report on it.
Click to expand...

I can see it, the court says no, trump says fk you, puts the military on the border, the local cops then try to take out our military.  that's how fking stupid the left is.


----------



## jillian

jc456 said:


> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> From Wiki:
> 
> There are a number of situations in which the PCA does not apply. These include:
> 
> [...]
> *
> Enforcement of federal law at the discretion of the President of the United States*, such as with the 101st Airborne Division by President Dwight D. Eisenhower to integrate Little Rock Central High School in 1957.
> 
> 
> We'll have to see how it all plays out in court it seems.
> 
> 
> 
> I guess the next step would be to take out the judicial branch.
Click to expand...


nothing totalitarian about that, huh trumptard?


----------



## EverCurious

jc456 said:


> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> From Wiki:
> 
> There are a number of situations in which the PCA does not apply. These include:
> 
> [...]
> *
> Enforcement of federal law at the discretion of the President of the United States*, such as with the 101st Airborne Division by President Dwight D. Eisenhower to integrate Little Rock Central High School in 1957.
> 
> 
> We'll have to see how it all plays out in court it seems.
> 
> 
> 
> I guess the next step would be to take out the judicial branch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Probably the same as always these days.  The 9th will say it's unconstitutional or some bullshit and some months later the SCOTUS will say it's fine and the media will barely, if never, report on it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can see it, the court says no, trump says fk you, puts the military on the border, the local cops then try to take out our military.  that's how fking stupid the left is.
Click to expand...


hmmm I don't think the local cops would have any interest.  Maybe CA would try it, but aren't they in the process of disarming their police atm?


----------



## jc456

jillian said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> From Wiki:
> 
> There are a number of situations in which the PCA does not apply. These include:
> 
> [...]
> *
> Enforcement of federal law at the discretion of the President of the United States*, such as with the 101st Airborne Division by President Dwight D. Eisenhower to integrate Little Rock Central High School in 1957.
> 
> 
> We'll have to see how it all plays out in court it seems.
> 
> 
> 
> I guess the next step would be to take out the judicial branch.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> nothing totalitarian about that, huh trumptard?
Click to expand...

it's what one does during a coup.


----------



## regent

It seems that Trump is putting the military on the border to prevent someone from stealing his wall.


----------



## EverCurious

Well more along the lines of Trump is putting military on the boarder because the states are refusing to follow federal law so he's going around them.


----------



## Aba Incieni

BULLDOG said:


> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aba Incieni said:
> 
> 
> 
> If they are fleeing their home countries for safety, why don't they work to make their countries better? Why don't you move to Honduras and protest, that's what they're doing to you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's just goofy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's downright insane. Why would you do what you condone others doing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Think about what you want to say, and then try again. Your question don't make no sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's just goofy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, That's why I encouraged you to try again.
Click to expand...

How about something like this:

If they are fleeing their home countries for safety, why don't they work to make their countries safer? Why don't you move to Honduras and protest, that's what they're doing to you?


----------



## LuckyDuck

Baz Ares said:


> LuckyDuck said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Baz Ares said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can you set that up along 2,000 some odd miles of border?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure, most military jobs are done by contract workers. Not the loser in the armed force sucking off gobmint dimes doing nothang.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Clearly, by your lack of proper grammar, you are not from the US. The loser in our armed forces?  At last check, we didn't become the number one super power without our military.
> Revolutionary War:  Won.
> War of 1812:  Won.
> Barbary War:  Won.
> Mexican-American War:  Won.
> Spanish-American War:  Won.
> Philippine Insurrection:  Won.
> Boxer Rebellion:  Won (as part of a coalition of nations).
> World War I:  Won (as part of a coalition of nations).
> World War II:  Won (as part of a coalition of nations).
> Korean War:  Armistice.
> Vietnam War:  Officially, we didn't lose.  The Viet Cong were destroyed and the NVA was beaten back, however, due to public pressure, brought on by too free coverage by the media, we pulled out.  Had we stayed in, we would have won.
> Iraq War:  Won (as part of a coalition of other nations).
> Afghanistan War:  Ongoing (as part of a coalition of other nations).
> Syria:  Currently in the process of withdrawing as ISIS has been beaten.
> So, our military personnel aren't a group of losers.  They're professionally trained personnel that can beat you any day.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 16 years in the ME fighting, seems they can't win these wars. LOL! They should call back to duty our great WWII vets. They won their wars FULLY!
Click to expand...

They're not dealing with a standard military that wears uniforms; they're fighting people that wear typical civilian attire for that region and blend in with the non-combatants after a strike.  Such tactics make it extremely difficult to weed them out.


----------



## ABikerSailor

jc456 said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see no reason why people in the military cannot act
> as border guards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because it's not part of their job, and for them to perform law enforcement activities on US soil is against the law.
> 
> But, then again, you conservatives believed that Obama was gonna use the military to round up dissenters.  That was just a rumor put out by conservative talking heads.  Trump is actually gonna try to do it for real.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> their job is any job the commander in chief says it is.
Click to expand...


Wrong.  You obviously have never been in the military.  If a superior officer gives you an order that you KNOW to be unlawful and against the Constitution or the UCMJ, you have a duty to not follow any orders that are unlawful.

Patrolling the border as law enforcement would be unlawful use of the military.


----------



## EverCurious

Patrolling the border as enforcement of /federal law/ by order of the President is legal, so they'd prob. get CM for disobeying lawful orders.


----------



## ABikerSailor

EverCurious said:


> Well more along the lines of Trump is putting military on the boarder because the states are refusing to follow federal law so he's going around them.



He's not gonna be able to turn the military into BP agents.  Yet another thing Trump has promised you that he will never be able to deliver, and you believe him.


----------



## ABikerSailor

EverCurious said:


> Patrolling the border as enforcement of /federal law/ by order of the President is legal, so they'd prob. get CM for disobeying lawful orders.



Wrong.  The military cannot be used as law enforcement.  If they were put on the border, the only thing they would be able to do is point, say "there they are", and that is about it.  If attacked, they can defend themselves, but they have to be attacked first.   Both Jr. and Obama tried it and it didn't work.  Only thing that happened was it wasted a lot of money.


----------



## EverCurious

Think what you want, I posted the related portion of the law that permits it - and it's not a new thing, been around, and been used by other presidents.


----------



## ABikerSailor

EverCurious said:


> Think what you want, I posted the related portion of the law that permits it - and it's not a new thing, been around, and been used by other presidents.



You can use the NG, but not the military for law enforcement.  

Can the USA military be used as a police force domestically?

The use of the active duty military in a law enforcement role is not unconstitutional but it is prohibited by the posse comitatus act. 18 U.S.C. § 1385 (adopted 1878).

The text of the relevant legislation is as follows:

18 U.S.C. § 1385. Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

Also notable is the following provision within Title 10 of the United States Code (which concerns generally the organization and regulation of the armed forces and Department of Defense):

10 U.S.C. § 375. Restriction on direct participation by military personnel The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that any activity (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.

The act does not apply to the National Guard mobilized at the request of a state governor. In practice, 10 U.S.C. § 375 has more bite because a federal prosecutor can and usually would refrain from prosecuting a crime ordered by his ultimate boss, the President, and there is not legal duty to prosecute every possible crime, but 10 U.S.C. § 375 creates an affirmative duty on the party of the Secretary of Defense that might be enforceable in a civil action.


----------



## EverCurious

ABikerSailor said:


> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> Think what you want, I posted the related portion of the law that permits it - and it's not a new thing, been around, and been used by other presidents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can use the NG, but not the military for law enforcement.
> 
> Can the USA military be used as a police force domestically?
> 
> The use of the active duty military in a law enforcement role is not unconstitutional but it is prohibited by the posse comitatus act. 18 U.S.C. § 1385 (adopted 1878).
> 
> The text of the relevant legislation is as follows:
> 
> 18 U.S.C. § 1385. Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
> 
> Also notable is the following provision within Title 10 of the United States Code (which concerns generally the organization and regulation of the armed forces and Department of Defense):
> 
> 10 U.S.C. § 375. Restriction on direct participation by military personnel The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that any activity (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.
> 
> The act does not apply to the National Guard mobilized at the request of a state governor. In practice, 10 U.S.C. § 375 has more bite because a federal prosecutor can and usually would refrain from prosecuting a crime ordered by his ultimate boss, the President, and there is not legal duty to prosecute every possible crime, but 10 U.S.C. § 375 creates an affirmative duty on the party of the Secretary of Defense that might be enforceable in a civil action.
Click to expand...


Dude, from your own fucking link - the part I posted before:

*Exclusions and limitations[edit]*
There are a number of situations in which the Act does not apply. These include:


Army and Air National Guard units and state defense forces while under the authority of the governor of a state;
Federal military personnel used in accordance to the Insurrection Act, as was the case during the 1992 Los Angeles riots.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 831, the Attorney General may request that the Secretary of Defense provide emergency assistance if domestic law enforcement is inadequate to address certain types of threats involving the release of nuclear materials, such as potential use of a nuclear or radiological weapon. Such assistance may be by any personnel under the authority of the Department of Defense, provided such assistance does not adversely affect U.S. military preparedness. The only exemption is nuclear materials.
Support roles under the Joint Special Operations Command
*Enforcement of federal law at the discretion of the President of the United States*, such as with the 101st Airborne Division by President Dwight D. Eisenhower to integrate Little Rock Central High School in 1957.


----------



## Geaux4it

Can't wait to see images of all the beaners being 'rounded up'

It'll make for good TV

-Geaux


----------



## regent

Of course the military can be used to enforce the laws and used for border patrol.


----------



## kaz

regent said:


> It seems that Trump is putting the military on the border to prevent someone from stealing his wall.


----------



## kaz

ABikerSailor said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see no reason why people in the military cannot act
> as border guards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because it's not part of their job, and for them to perform law enforcement activities on US soil is against the law.
> 
> But, then again, you conservatives believed that Obama was gonna use the military to round up dissenters.  That was just a rumor put out by conservative talking heads.  Trump is actually gonna try to do it for real.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> their job is any job the commander in chief says it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong.  You obviously have never been in the military.  If a superior officer gives you an order that you KNOW to be unlawful and against the Constitution or the UCMJ, you have a duty to not follow any orders that are unlawful.
> 
> Patrolling the border as law enforcement would be unlawful use of the military.
Click to expand...


Riiiggghhhhtttttt.  You were in the military and you don't know that THE purpose of the military is to secure our borders.

Another fake military leftist gives yourself up with your extreme ignorance about the military.

Jesus, you think you were in the military and you don't believe your role was to defend our borders?  Did you think the military was to serve hobos in soup kitchens?

How can you not even know what the military is as an American much less as you're pretending you were in the military?


----------



## kaz

ABikerSailor said:


> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> Think what you want, I posted the related portion of the law that permits it - and it's not a new thing, been around, and been used by other presidents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can use the NG, but not the military for law enforcement.
> 
> Can the USA military be used as a police force domestically?
> 
> The use of the active duty military in a law enforcement role is not unconstitutional but it is prohibited by the posse comitatus act. 18 U.S.C. § 1385 (adopted 1878).
> 
> The text of the relevant legislation is as follows:
> 
> 18 U.S.C. § 1385. Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
> 
> Also notable is the following provision within Title 10 of the United States Code (which concerns generally the organization and regulation of the armed forces and Department of Defense):
> 
> 10 U.S.C. § 375. Restriction on direct participation by military personnel The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that any activity (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.
> 
> The act does not apply to the National Guard mobilized at the request of a state governor. In practice, 10 U.S.C. § 375 has more bite because a federal prosecutor can and usually would refrain from prosecuting a crime ordered by his ultimate boss, the President, and there is not legal duty to prosecute every possible crime, but 10 U.S.C. § 375 creates an affirmative duty on the party of the Secretary of Defense that might be enforceable in a civil action.
Click to expand...


The police don't defend our borders, dumb ass.  The military does that.  You know, the organization you pretend that you were in?

Unreal.  I was in the military, and defending our borders is the job of the police, not the military!

derp, derp, derp ...


----------



## irosie91

ABikerSailor said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see no reason why people in the military cannot act
> as border guards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because it's not part of their job, and for them to perform law enforcement activities on US soil is against the law.
> 
> But, then again, you conservatives believed that Obama was gonna use the military to round up dissenters.  That was just a rumor put out by conservative talking heads.  Trump is actually gonna try to do it for real.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> their job is any job the commander in chief says it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong.  You obviously have never been in the military.  If a superior officer gives you an order that you KNOW to be unlawful and against the Constitution or the UCMJ, you have a duty to not follow any orders that are unlawful.
> 
> Patrolling the border as law enforcement would be unlawful use of the military.
Click to expand...


   ^^^^^   bullshit


----------



## jc456

ABikerSailor said:


> jc456 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see no reason why people in the military cannot act
> as border guards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because it's not part of their job, and for them to perform law enforcement activities on US soil is against the law.
> 
> But, then again, you conservatives believed that Obama was gonna use the military to round up dissenters.  That was just a rumor put out by conservative talking heads.  Trump is actually gonna try to do it for real.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> their job is any job the commander in chief says it is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wrong.  You obviously have never been in the military.  If a superior officer gives you an order that you KNOW to be unlawful and against the Constitution or the UCMJ, you have a duty to not follow any orders that are unlawful.
> 
> Patrolling the border as law enforcement would be unlawful use of the military.
Click to expand...

Hahahaha


----------



## jc456

ABikerSailor said:


> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> Patrolling the border as enforcement of /federal law/ by order of the President is legal, so they'd prob. get CM for disobeying lawful orders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong.  The military cannot be used as law enforcement.  If they were put on the border, the only thing they would be able to do is point, say "there they are", and that is about it.  If attacked, they can defend themselves, but they have to be attacked first.   Both Jr. and Obama tried it and it didn't work.  Only thing that happened was it wasted a lot of money.
Click to expand...

They can’t be used against citizens not illegal aliens they aren’t citizens


----------



## charwin95

Geaux4it said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MindWars said:
> 
> 
> 
> [URL='http://dailycaller.com/2018/04/03/trump
> President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the US military will be used to guard the US-Mexico border.
> 
> “We are going to be guarding our border with our military. That’s a big step,” Trump told reporters gathered at the White House. “We cannot have people flowing into our country illegally, disappearing, and by the way never showing
> 
> Thank God he won't let the UN PLAN go through!!  YES!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hate to tell you this but..... What do you expect the soldiers should do when they get to the border?
> The same thing as the ICE will be doing for years.
> Perry tried that when he was governor.
> 
> You cannot blame the democrats either because even if you remove the democrats to this equation these people will still come in.
> 
> Look at the influx of refugees entering Europe.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They do what any good soldier does.
> 
> What they're told
> 
> Not your call what they do, or don't do
> 
> -Geaux
Click to expand...


We have national guards at the border right now. They are not allowed to have arms. Bush and Obama did and that proves worthless.


----------



## Montrovant

Looks like Trump is sending the guard: Trump signs proclamation sending National Guard to Mexico border immediately


----------



## charwin95

EverCurious said:


> Well more along the lines of Trump is putting military on the boarder because the states are refusing to follow federal law so he's going around them.



This is nothing new. We did these before and nothing happened. Even Perry did that when he was a governor in Texas. 

These caravan of people will not enter the borders the old (wrong) way by the desert. They just going to walk by the port of entry gates. Port of entry are inside US territories. That is where they are being pick up. 
The soldiers are just going to help them process faster. 

NOTHING MORE.


----------



## Moonglow

HereWeGoAgain said:


> I'd gladly do a stint on the border for free.


You'll have to bring yer own terlit...


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Moonglow said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd gladly do a stint on the border for free.
> 
> 
> 
> You'll have to bring yer own terlit...
Click to expand...


   I'll crap on the still warm bodies and wipe my ass with their shirts.


----------



## Moonglow

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd gladly do a stint on the border for free.
> 
> 
> 
> You'll have to bring yer own terlit...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'll crap on the still warm bodies and wipe my ass with their shirts.
Click to expand...

Looking for an ass disease are you?


----------



## HereWeGoAgain

Moonglow said:


> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd gladly do a stint on the border for free.
> 
> 
> 
> You'll have to bring yer own terlit...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'll crap on the still warm bodies and wipe my ass with their shirts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Looking for an ass disease are you?
Click to expand...


  So I'll wipe my ass with a prickly pear....


----------



## Moonglow

HereWeGoAgain said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HereWeGoAgain said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd gladly do a stint on the border for free.
> 
> 
> 
> You'll have to bring yer own terlit...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'll crap on the still warm bodies and wipe my ass with their shirts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Looking for an ass disease are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So I'll wipe my ass with a prickly pear....
Click to expand...

It would be better..


----------



## Geaux4it

charwin95 said:


> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well more along the lines of Trump is putting military on the boarder because the states are refusing to follow federal law so he's going around them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is nothing new. We did these before and nothing happened. Even Perry did that when he was a governor in Texas.
> 
> These caravan of people will not enter the borders the old (wrong) way by the desert. They just going to walk by the port of entry gates. Port of entry are inside US territories. That is where they are being pick up.
> The soldiers are just going to help them process faster.
> 
> NOTHING MORE.
Click to expand...


Is there room at your house for some of these beaners?

-Geaux


----------



## charwin95

EverCurious said:


> Think what you want, I posted the related portion of the law that permits it - and it's not a new thing, been around, and been used by other presidents.



These soldiers are not even allowed to arrest. But they can arrest if they want to help the process.

When they get arrested where do you think they will process these people? 
Guess...... Inside the US Immigration processing centers. WALA  they are in......  this is just laughable. That’s the reality. 

If this is effective don’t you think we could have done that permanently?


----------



## charwin95

Geaux4it said:


> Can't wait to see images of all the beaners being 'rounded up'
> 
> It'll make for good TV
> 
> -Geaux



That is exactly what they want Geaux. 
Rounded them up is the best theses people can ask. 

Where/what do you think they will do after they rounded them up Geaux?


----------



## bodecea

kaz said:


> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> Think what you want, I posted the related portion of the law that permits it - and it's not a new thing, been around, and been used by other presidents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can use the NG, but not the military for law enforcement.
> 
> Can the USA military be used as a police force domestically?
> 
> The use of the active duty military in a law enforcement role is not unconstitutional but it is prohibited by the posse comitatus act. 18 U.S.C. § 1385 (adopted 1878).
> 
> The text of the relevant legislation is as follows:
> 
> 18 U.S.C. § 1385. Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
> 
> Also notable is the following provision within Title 10 of the United States Code (which concerns generally the organization and regulation of the armed forces and Department of Defense):
> 
> 10 U.S.C. § 375. Restriction on direct participation by military personnel The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that any activity (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.
> 
> The act does not apply to the National Guard mobilized at the request of a state governor. In practice, 10 U.S.C. § 375 has more bite because a federal prosecutor can and usually would refrain from prosecuting a crime ordered by his ultimate boss, the President, and there is not legal duty to prosecute every possible crime, but 10 U.S.C. § 375 creates an affirmative duty on the party of the Secretary of Defense that might be enforceable in a civil action.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The police don't defend our borders, dumb ass.  The military does that.  You know, the organization you pretend that you were in?
> 
> Unreal.  I was in the military, and defending our borders is the job of the police, not the military!
> 
> derp, derp, derp ...
Click to expand...

Oh really?   The border patrol and ICE are the military now?


----------



## kaz

bodecea said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ABikerSailor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> Think what you want, I posted the related portion of the law that permits it - and it's not a new thing, been around, and been used by other presidents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can use the NG, but not the military for law enforcement.
> 
> Can the USA military be used as a police force domestically?
> 
> The use of the active duty military in a law enforcement role is not unconstitutional but it is prohibited by the posse comitatus act. 18 U.S.C. § 1385 (adopted 1878).
> 
> The text of the relevant legislation is as follows:
> 
> 18 U.S.C. § 1385. Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
> 
> Also notable is the following provision within Title 10 of the United States Code (which concerns generally the organization and regulation of the armed forces and Department of Defense):
> 
> 10 U.S.C. § 375. Restriction on direct participation by military personnel The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that any activity (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.
> 
> The act does not apply to the National Guard mobilized at the request of a state governor. In practice, 10 U.S.C. § 375 has more bite because a federal prosecutor can and usually would refrain from prosecuting a crime ordered by his ultimate boss, the President, and there is not legal duty to prosecute every possible crime, but 10 U.S.C. § 375 creates an affirmative duty on the party of the Secretary of Defense that might be enforceable in a civil action.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The police don't defend our borders, dumb ass.  The military does that.  You know, the organization you pretend that you were in?
> 
> Unreal.  I was in the military, and defending our borders is the job of the police, not the military!
> 
> derp, derp, derp ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh really?   The border patrol and ICE are the military now?
Click to expand...


ICE defends the borders?  I thought they pursue illegals once they have already criminally entered the country. I'm going to need a link that ICE defends our borders



As for border patrol.  You're going to need to show where because the military is responsible for the borders, that means no one else can be involved in assisting them securing our borders.  I'm not familiar with that passage in the Constitution.  Again,


----------



## charwin95

Geaux4it said:


> charwin95 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EverCurious said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well more along the lines of Trump is putting military on the boarder because the states are refusing to follow federal law so he's going around them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is nothing new. We did these before and nothing happened. Even Perry did that when he was a governor in Texas.
> 
> These caravan of people will not enter the borders the old (wrong) way by the desert. They just going to walk by the port of entry gates. Port of entry are inside US territories. That is where they are being pick up.
> The soldiers are just going to help them process faster.
> 
> NOTHING MORE.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is there room at your house for some of these beaners?
> 
> -Geaux
Click to expand...


I understand this is not what Trump supporters wants to hear but it’s the reality. 

No I do not have rooms for these people.

But  I like to offer Dalia to stay in my house at Palm Springs if she comes to US for a visit.


----------



## Ridgerunner

charwin95 said:


> I understand this is not what Trump supporters wants to hear but it’s the reality.
> 
> No I do not have rooms for these people.



charwin95 that is very charitable of you...  I believe the illegals decided to stay in Mexico...

Migrant caravan scraps plan to travel to US border


----------



## Geaux4it

charwin95 said:


> Geaux4it said:
> 
> 
> 
> Can't wait to see images of all the beaners being 'rounded up'
> 
> It'll make for good TV
> 
> -Geaux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is exactly what they want Geaux.
> Rounded them up is the best theses people can ask.
> 
> Where/what do you think they will do after they rounded them up Geaux?
Click to expand...


Oh, I see. You need someone to tend your rock garden and clean your pool. Modern day slaves

-Geaux


----------



## EverCurious

U.S. Customs and Border Protection are the ones who do the detaining and arresting.  I'm betting that we're smart enough to pair the additional soldiers up with an CBP officer to assist in detaining them (for as long as CBP wants to do so - until ICE gets there a few days, months, years, or decades later even. Obama authorized indefinite detainment FYI,) or they can indeed arrest them on a federal felony (for things like refusing to answer questions, lying to them, smuggling illegal goods, carrying false documentation, or attacking them.  I'm betting there are a shit ton of other reasons they can arrest them as well.)  However, the reality is that we don't want to arrest them though, if we do that then some bleeding heart idiots will take up their case. 

What we really want is to keep them out, to scare them into not trying to cross the border, and I highly suspect that's the real goal with the military.  I bet they'll be walking around bristling with weapons looking like they're going to blow these would be illegals away.  I'd like to see some armored transport vehicles deployed (those are the ones that scare the piss out of lefties when the police buy em off the military.)  I'd like to see actual tanks down there, call it a training exercise and let our soldiers get real familiar with their tools in a more laid back situation.

Psychological warfare - we can use their fear to keep them out.  See, where they come from, they can be gunned down for no reason at all by those in power.


----------



## Tilly

Tijn Von Ingersleben said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think that "logical" argument would hold up in front of SCOTUS?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know. However if there is a force determined to be in an area bordering our nation that was a threat to the US interior could the argument then be made?
> Hypothetical: We know ISIS has cells in Mexico. They are running ops into our country and committing acts of terror. Would it then be against PoCom to place troops on the border?
> Now expand that out...other terrorist orgs or drug gangs who perform terrorist acts and are subsequently classed as such.
> This is not out of the realm of possibility as many of the actions currently being perpetrated by the criminal gangs in Mexico could easily be reclassified as terrorism.
> 
> Do you think it would hold up in court then?
> My logic is that there seems to be a very fine line between criminal and terrorist a simple reclass.
> IDK just some thoughts.
Click to expand...


Somebody posted this earlier:

The Posse Comitatus Act (187 prohibited use of the U.S. Army to aid civil officials in enforcing the law or suppressing civil disorder *unless expressly ordered to do so by the president.*


----------



## Tilly

Tom Horn said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Refugees aren't "illegal combatants".
> 
> Again, words have meanings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Words sure do.....why are you calling them "refugees"?????  They are an invasion force who has stated their intention to cross our southern border illegally.   Guess what?  This group just got the WALL built...watch and see.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Economic migrants at best - certainly not refugees - another word that used to have a specific meaning.


----------



## sparky

~S~


----------



## eagle1462010

sparky said:


> ~S~


No Wall will hold without manpower behind it...........To me........manpower is more important........the barrier.....aka wall needs to be better in high traffic areas where cities and towns are next to each other.


----------



## Tilly

Witchit said:


> If nobody already said so, The Posse Comitatus Act forbids using the military in civilian law enforcement.


The Posse Comitatus Act (187 prohibited use of the U.S. Army to aid civil officials in enforcing the law or suppressing civil disorder *unless expressly ordered to do so by the president.*


----------



## sparky

eagle1462010 said:


> sparky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ~S~
> 
> 
> 
> No Wall will hold without manpower behind it...........To me........manpower is more important........the barrier.....aka wall needs to be better in high traffic areas where cities and towns are next to each other.
Click to expand...



I think the stats _prove it_ eagle

and i'm all about protecting our borders vs. _sh*tholistan_ , let them fend for themselves , get out boys back in country, give 'em border duty , line up the machine gun nests, throw a few hispanic corpses out, fire a few rounds day. done deal

~S~


----------



## eagle1462010

sparky said:


> eagle1462010 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sparky said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ~S~
> 
> 
> 
> No Wall will hold without manpower behind it...........To me........manpower is more important........the barrier.....aka wall needs to be better in high traffic areas where cities and towns are next to each other.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think the stats _prove it_ eagle
> 
> and i'm all about protecting our borders vs. _sh*tholistan_ , let them fend for themselves , get out boys back in country, give 'em border duty , line up the machine gun nests, throw a few hispanic corpses out, fire a few rounds day. done deal
> 
> ~S~
Click to expand...

In regards to the fight in the Middle East we are in a quagmire..........yes..........as have all who have been there in the past............

ISIS will soon die.............only to be replaced by a new group with another name............History will repeat itself again.............

Our tactics and strategy must change...............when we find them..........take them out and leave before the dust settles..............give them nothing to shoot back at..............and do no Nation building in the middle east................let them do it themselves......................When we fight ..............fight it as a War.......

In regards to Mexico I don't want Machine gun nests........but I do want our border secure and the best method is manpower...........

The problem with Mexico and Central America is the drug cartels who run the countries...........not the Mexicans themselves and THEY need to take their countries back.


----------

