President Orders 5,000 Troops to US Border

[ABikerSailor]

And, for you people who are cheering that the military is gonna stop and detain those who try to cross the border, you might wanna re-think your position. The military won't be able to do anything concerning the immigrants, they will be there in a support position only.

From the link.......................................

Because the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the U.S. military from performing law enforcement activities within the United States, these troops will be in support roles only. They will not have arresting power and won't interact with migrants.

Those deployed will include engineers, planners, military police, pilots, cooks and medical personnel. Among the work the troops will undertake is the building of camps to house CBP personnel along the Mexican border.


They are gonna build camps, and cook for the BP, but that is about it.

If some of you people had actually SERVED in the military, you would know what kind of a waste it is.

I served
they can protect the US anytime--anywhere --DUMBASS
you DUMBASS--it's NOT law enforcement!!!!!!!!!!! DUH

Guess you never heard of the Posse Comitatus Act eh? And, while there are exceptions, none of them apply here.

The Posse Comitatus Act > U.S. Northern Command > Article View


The PCA does not apply to the U.S. Coast Guard in peacetime or to the National Guard in Title 32 or State Active Duty status. The substantive prohibitions of the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) were extended to all the services with the enactment of Title 10 USC, Section 375. As required by Title 10 USC, Section 375 the secretary of defense issued Department of Defense Directive 5525.5, which precludes members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps from direct participation in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law.


The PCA generally prohibits U.S. military personnel from direct participation in law enforcement activities. Some of those law enforcement activities would include interdicting vehicles, vessels, and aircraft; conducting surveillance, searches, pursuit and seizures; or making arrests on behalf of civilian law enforcement authorities. Prohibiting direct military involvement in law enforcement is in keeping with long-standing U.S. law and policy limiting the military’s role in domestic affairs.


The United States Congress has enacted a number of exceptions to the PCA that allow the military, in certain situations, to assist civilian law enforcement agencies in enforcing the laws of the U.S. The most common example is counterdrug assistance (Title 10 USC, Sections 371-381). Other examples include:

• The Insurrection Act (Title 10 USC, Sections 331-335). This act allows the president to use U.S. military personnel at the request of a state legislature or governor to suppress insurrections. It also allows the president to use federal troops to enforce federal laws when rebellion against the authority of the U.S. makes it impracticable to enforce the laws of the U.S.
• Assistance in the case of crimes involving nuclear materials (Title 18 USC, Section 831). This statute permits DoD personnel to assist the Justice Department in enforcing prohibitions regarding nuclear materials, when the attorney general and the secretary of defense jointly determine that an “emergency situation” exists that poses a serious threat to U.S. interests and is beyond the capability of civilian law enforcement agencies.
• Emergency situations involving chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction (Title 10 USC, Section 382). When the attorney general and the secretary of defense jointly determine that an “emergency situation” exists that poses a serious threat to U.S. interests and is beyond the capability of civilian law enforcement agencies. DoD personnel may assist the Justice Department in enforcing prohibitions regarding biological or chemical weapons of mass destruction.

Military support to civilian law enforcement is carried out in strict compliance with the Constitution and U.S. laws and under the direction of the president and secretary of defense.


And, in order for the Insurrection Act to apply, it has to be requested by the states legislature or governor.

The other two involving nuclear, biological and chemical weapons doesn't apply here either.

Guess you never heard of Marshall Law eh?

I've never heard of Marshall Law, but I have heard of martial law.

Martial law is the imposition of direct military control of normal civilian functions of government, especially in response to a temporary emergency such as invasion or major disaster, or in an occupied territory. Martial law can be used by governments to enforce their rule over the public.


And, martial law is generally used by dictators.

LOL, grammar? You're a pansy son.

"Martial law is the imposition of direct military control of normal civilian functions of government, especially in response to a temporary emergency such as invasion or major disaster, or in an occupied territory."

Precisely. The "Latinos" will be stopped and sent home. Go with them. Sailors don't get to question the real service of others.

Nope, not correcting your grammar, was simply wondering if you had confused the Marshall Plan with martial law. People can use the click to expand function to see that you appeared to not know the difference.

 

[boedicca]

The WH needs to issue EOs that that temporarily gives the troops the power to stop the invasion at the southern border and immediately deport the invaders. Otherwise all we have is the border patrol, and they would be overwhelmed. So I like the troops there, but we need to allow them to "detain" illegals.

No, we don't.

The military exists for a singular purpose - to kill people and break shit. End of story. They are not police and using the military as police NEVER works out well. It seems there are far to few that realize this anymore.

This is not a police action when people are storming our borders. This is a national defense issue.

The proper process for asylum is to apply at the closest available U.S. embassy. The caravan participants haven't done this because they do not qualify for asylum, so they have formed a mob to intimidate the U.S.

We should not let them in.

Not let them does not equate to the military enforcing that reality.

If you are fine with setting up a saw and mowing them down then sure - let the military do it as that is what they are for.

Of course, almost no one wants US troops mowing down illegal aliens. That is something I would expect from North Korea, not here.

You want better border enforcement then you have TO HIRE MORE BORDER AGENTS. Period. The military are not the answer - you don't hire a hitman to detain someone.

Who said that having troops on the border means we are going to mow down illegals with machine guns?

That is not what I am getting at. I said that the military functions by killing people. That is what they are good at, what they are trained to accomplish and how they operate. If you want to treat them as though they are an invading army and put the military there then this is the best force to place there in deadly capacity. If you want to actually enforce border laws then hire people that actually function to enforce the borders. Military will do a shit job and end up with far worse results.

Then why do we send our troops all over the world on peace-keeping and humanitarian missions if all they can do is kill?

 

[Windparadox]

`
When are these troops scheduled to be there?

 

[eagle7_31]

The build-up begins.

Pentagon: 5,000 Troops Will Be Deployed To U.S.-Mexico Border

Good for Trump. Keep up the good work.

 

[ABikerSailor]

This troop deployment not only is unnecessary, but it's gonna cost a whole bunch of money as well.

Here's How Much Previous Border Troop Deployments Cost Taxpayers

Bush sent troops to the border in 2006 and Obama in 2010. Both times, the moves came as the presidents urged Congress to pass big immigration-policy overhauls

Neither of those overhauls went anywhere, of course. And the soldiering didn't come cheap. According to a 2011 report from the Government Accounting Office, Bush spent $1.2 billion to send as many as 6,000 troops, while Obama doled out $145 million for as many as 1,200.

Trump last week said he wants to send up to 4,000 National Guard members on the border, which would put his deployment closer in size to Bush's. (That's the one with the $1.2 billion price tag, if you're keeping score at home.) According to Texas officials, 250 of the state's National Guard troops have already been mobilized to help out.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This troop deployment not only is unnecessary, but it's gonna cost a whole bunch of money as well.

Here's How Much Previous Border Troop Deployments Cost Taxpayers

Bush sent troops to the border in 2006 and Obama in 2010. Both times, the moves came as the presidents urged Congress to pass big immigration-policy overhauls

Neither of those overhauls went anywhere, of course. And the soldiering didn't come cheap. According to a 2011 report from the Government Accounting Office, Bush spent $1.2 billion to send as many as 6,000 troops, while Obama doled out $145 million for as many as 1,200.

Trump last week said he wants to send up to 4,000 National Guard members on the border, which would put his deployment closer in size to Bush's. (That's the one with the $1.2 billion price tag, if you're keeping score at home.) According to Texas officials, 250 of the state's National Guard troops have already been mobilized to help out.

So what does it cost to have those people keep coming here? You gotta process them, feed them, give them any medical care.

We need to provide a deterrent. If Trump does what he says he's going to do, I think that will save us money in the long run because nobody will want to come here like that any longer.

 

[Windparadox]

So what does it cost to have those people keep coming here? You gotta process them, feed them, give them any medical care. We need to provide a deterrent. If Trump does what he says he's going to do, I think that will save us money in the long run because nobody will want to come here like that any longer.

`
It's a couple weeks off until they arrive so hold your horses. I'll be surprised if a hundred of them actually make it and the US Border Patrol, without any National Guard help, takes care of the situation.

 

[harmonica]

if they bombed and killed those jackasses I would not shed a tear

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So what does it cost to have those people keep coming here? You gotta process them, feed them, give them any medical care. We need to provide a deterrent. If Trump does what he says he's going to do, I think that will save us money in the long run because nobody will want to come here like that any longer.

`
It's a couple weeks off until they arrive so hold your horses. I'll be surprised if a hundred of them actually make it and the US Border Patrol, without any National Guard help, takes care of the situation.

They made it before, they'll make it again unless they understand Trump's plans. If that's the case, many will turn around and just go home if they can't enter the country.

 

[boedicca]

This troop deployment not only is unnecessary, but it's gonna cost a whole bunch of money as well.

Here's How Much Previous Border Troop Deployments Cost Taxpayers

Bush sent troops to the border in 2006 and Obama in 2010. Both times, the moves came as the presidents urged Congress to pass big immigration-policy overhauls

Neither of those overhauls went anywhere, of course. And the soldiering didn't come cheap. According to a 2011 report from the Government Accounting Office, Bush spent $1.2 billion to send as many as 6,000 troops, while Obama doled out $145 million for as many as 1,200.

Trump last week said he wants to send up to 4,000 National Guard members on the border, which would put his deployment closer in size to Bush's. (That's the one with the $1.2 billion price tag, if you're keeping score at home.) According to Texas officials, 250 of the state's National Guard troops have already been mobilized to help out.

How much will all of the free health care, education and welfare cost us if we keep letting people in illegally?

 

[Crixus]

The build-up begins.

Pentagon: 5,000 Troops Will Be Deployed To U.S.-Mexico Border

And all they will do is hand out sandwiches and sodas. I will be shocked if they do anything other then what they did the last time. They will let them in.

 

[ABikerSailor]

The build-up begins.

Pentagon: 5,000 Troops Will Be Deployed To U.S.-Mexico Border

And all they will do is hand out sandwiches and sodas. I will be shocked if they do anything other then what they did the last time. They will let them in.

Well, for some strange reason, Trump supporters think that this time it's gonna be different because Trump is going to have the military arrest and detain them.

Only trouble is, it's against the Posse Comitatus Act.

Nope, what is going to happen is the military will show up in a support role for a couple of weeks, maybe build a tent compound or two, and then go back to their commands.

But.....................when that happens, all the rabid Trump supporters are going to turn on Trump for being soft and not using the military to stop them.

 

[Crixus]

The build-up begins.

Pentagon: 5,000 Troops Will Be Deployed To U.S.-Mexico Border

And all they will do is hand out sandwiches and sodas. I will be shocked if they do anything other then what they did the last time. They will let them in.

Well, for some strange reason, Trump supporters think that this time it's gonna be different because Trump is going to have the military arrest and detain them.

Only trouble is, it's against the Posse Comitatus Act.

Nope, what is going to happen is the military will show up in a support role for a couple of weeks, maybe build a tent compound or two, and then go back to their commands.

But.....................when that happens, all the rabid Trump supporters are going to turn on Trump for being soft and not using the military to stop them.

Maybe it’s the part of the country you grew up in. The US military has acted all along the border since the border has been there. If the political will was there, it would be done. The will isn’t there. Polititions are cowards. Now, will it affect the trump base? Mm, think back to when Dubya tried to force amnesty on us. How did that work for him? This is a make or break for trump. He has tools, just a matter if he uses them or not.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The build-up begins.

Pentagon: 5,000 Troops Will Be Deployed To U.S.-Mexico Border

And all they will do is hand out sandwiches and sodas. I will be shocked if they do anything other then what they did the last time. They will let them in.

Well, for some strange reason, Trump supporters think that this time it's gonna be different because Trump is going to have the military arrest and detain them.

Only trouble is, it's against the Posse Comitatus Act.

Nope, what is going to happen is the military will show up in a support role for a couple of weeks, maybe build a tent compound or two, and then go back to their commands.

But.....................when that happens, all the rabid Trump supporters are going to turn on Trump for being soft and not using the military to stop them.

It's the Trump supporters that want a closed border. Why would we turn on Trump?

Trump is going to make those tent cities. He's going to stop them from entering the country unlike DumBama who set them free after a few days of detention.

 

[SaxxyBlues]

The US Military raised their hand and swore they would support and defend the constitution of the US from all enemies foreign and domestic. I'm praying that this mission for the military doesn't turn out like Beirut in 1983. There is a possibility that these caravans of migrants could be holding middle eastern terrorists. Bring the fighting to our soil.

 

[Crixus]

The build-up begins.

Pentagon: 5,000 Troops Will Be Deployed To U.S.-Mexico Border

And all they will do is hand out sandwiches and sodas. I will be shocked if they do anything other then what they did the last time. They will let them in.

Well, for some strange reason, Trump supporters think that this time it's gonna be different because Trump is going to have the military arrest and detain them.

Only trouble is, it's against the Posse Comitatus Act.

Nope, what is going to happen is the military will show up in a support role for a couple of weeks, maybe build a tent compound or two, and then go back to their commands.

But.....................when that happens, all the rabid Trump supporters are going to turn on Trump for being soft and not using the military to stop them.

It's the Trump supporters that want a closed border. Why would we turn on Trump?

Trump is going to make those tent cities. He's going to stop them from entering the country unlike DumBama who set them free after a few days of detention.

Tent cities in Mexico? Anything other then that is Trump crawfishing on his promise. Can’t see that going good for him if he lets them in to live in tents while they wait for bus tickets to points unknown. They can’t come in in any way shape or form.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The build-up begins.

Pentagon: 5,000 Troops Will Be Deployed To U.S.-Mexico Border

And all they will do is hand out sandwiches and sodas. I will be shocked if they do anything other then what they did the last time. They will let them in.

Well, for some strange reason, Trump supporters think that this time it's gonna be different because Trump is going to have the military arrest and detain them.

Only trouble is, it's against the Posse Comitatus Act.

Nope, what is going to happen is the military will show up in a support role for a couple of weeks, maybe build a tent compound or two, and then go back to their commands.

But.....................when that happens, all the rabid Trump supporters are going to turn on Trump for being soft and not using the military to stop them.

It's the Trump supporters that want a closed border. Why would we turn on Trump?

Trump is going to make those tent cities. He's going to stop them from entering the country unlike DumBama who set them free after a few days of detention.

Tent cities in Mexico? Anything other then that is Trump crawfishing on his promise. Can’t see that going good for him if he lets them in to live in tents while they wait for bus tickets to points unknown. They can’t come in in any way shape or form.

It's their option. If they want to wait three to four years for their court date, they are welcome to do so. If not, they can turn around and go home. As for the people from their countries making similar plans, they will think twice if the trip is worth it given they won't have a free pass in the US for that time.

A deterrent. Something we really never had before.

 

[kyzr]

The WH needs to issue EOs that that temporarily gives the troops the power to stop the invasion at the southern border and immediately deport the invaders. Otherwise all we have is the border patrol, and they would be overwhelmed. So I like the troops there, but we need to allow them to "detain" illegals.

No, we don't.

The military exists for a singular purpose - to kill people and break shit. End of story. They are not police and using the military as police NEVER works out well. It seems there are far to few that realize this anymore.

We are guarding the Korean border, we are in 150 countries with 7 of those with 4,000 or more. So if we put 5,000 on our southern border to stop an invasion its about fucking time.

The Korean border is a warzone. In those 150 countries (including Korea) can you name a SINGLE law or law enforcement capacity that the military fills?

I reject the "Law enforcement" argument for guarding the US border from "invaders and terrorists", or the Korean border for that matter. The military will be protecting US sovereignty, not hunting down and arresting criminals. Protecting the US borders is a Federal responsibility, its not a "law enforcement" function, otherwise the illegals would be arrested and sent to jails instead of caught and released or caught and deported.

 

[JBvM]

OMG! A caravan containing men women and children. They might take over America. LOL


what a little snowflakey, scaredy cat, girlyman whine

repeat

 

[JBvM]

The WH needs to issue EOs that that temporarily gives the troops the power to stop the invasion at the southern border and immediately deport the invaders. Otherwise all we have is the border patrol, and they would be overwhelmed. So I like the troops there, but we need to allow them to "detain" illegals.

No, we don't.

The military exists for a singular purpose - to kill people and break shit. End of story. They are not police and using the military as police NEVER works out well. It seems there are far to few that realize this anymore.

We are guarding the Korean border, we are in 150 countries with 7 of those with 4,000 or more. So if we put 5,000 on our southern border to stop an invasion its about fucking time.

The Korean border is a warzone. In those 150 countries (including Korea) can you name a SINGLE law or law enforcement capacity that the military fills?

I reject the "Law enforcement" argument for guarding the US border from "invaders and terrorists", or the Korean border for that matter. The military will be protecting US sovereignty, not hunting down and arresting criminals. Protecting the US borders is a Federal responsibility, its not a "law enforcement" function, otherwise the illegals would be arrested and sent to jails instead of caught and released or caught and deported.

protecting the border from harmless civilians. We don't need a strong military, made up of trained warriors for that. We can do that with a bunch of losers in uniforms