I actually agree with Trump
(11-27-2018, 03:53 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 03:01 PM)Cuzz Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 02:14 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-26-2018, 10:24 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-26-2018, 10:17 PM)Valuesize Wrote: Pentagon spokeswoman Lt. Col. Michelle Baldanza confirmed to Business Insider that the Department of Defense received the memo, a "cabinet order" that reportedly permits "a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search."

Such activities could potentially be in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids active-duty military personnel from engaging in law enforcement activities on American soil, although the Department of Defense insists that it will not violate the law.

https://www.businessinsider.com/white-ho...el-2018-11
Oh, I don't think Trump would actually do something like that, but then, he never ceases to astonish me.

Do something like what? I see nothing wrong with this.........."a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search.""

Visions of the Berlin Wall come to mind. I would think if we can claim to be the "greatest country in the world" we could manage our boarder without killing poor people and their children. That would be horrific on the international evening news.

That's what I see wrong with it.
Well I guess you and the others missed the part that said "where necessary" .

Who said anything about killing poor people and their children? In my mind "where necessary" would mean if someone's life was in danger.

 


No, I didn't miss that. The trouble is you have no say in what "where necessary" means. Neither do I. Which makes me wonder who does.

Besides the scenario you describe has always been there for the boarder patrol, no military needed. No Presidential directives needed. It's all just more political theater, at our expense.
Reply
(11-27-2018, 04:07 PM)Cuzz Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 03:53 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 03:01 PM)Cuzz Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 02:14 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-26-2018, 10:24 PM)Juniper Wrote: Oh, I don't think Trump would actually do something like that, but then, he never ceases to astonish me.

Do something like what? I see nothing wrong with this.........."a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search.""

Visions of the Berlin Wall come to mind. I would think if we can claim to be the "greatest country in the world" we could manage our boarder without killing poor people and their children. That would be horrific on the international evening news.

That's what I see wrong with it.
Well I guess you and the others missed the part that said "where necessary" .

Who said anything about killing poor people and their children? In my mind "where necessary" would mean if someone's life was in danger.

 


No, I didn't miss that. The trouble is you have no say in what "where necessary" means. Neither do I. Which makes me wonder who does.

Besides the scenario you describe has always been there for the boarder patrol, no military needed. No Presidential directives needed. It's all just more political theater, at our expense.

There must be a million cops who know when "where necessary" means as well as tens of millions of gun owners like me will determine "where necessary" means.
So I don't know why I would not trust our military. And members of the military have always had the right to protect themselves anyway.
 Sure the military is partly for show but unnecessary? I would love to hear the Border patrol guys opinion on that.

the scenario you describe has always been there for the boarder patrol, no military needed.

 When was the last time there were 5 to 7 thousand people stacked up behind our border?
Reply
(11-27-2018, 04:43 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 04:07 PM)Cuzz Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 03:53 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 03:01 PM)Cuzz Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 02:14 PM)tvguy Wrote: Do something like what? I see nothing wrong with this.........."a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search.""

Visions of the Berlin Wall come to mind. I would think if we can claim to be the "greatest country in the world" we could manage our boarder without killing poor people and their children. That would be horrific on the international evening news.

That's what I see wrong with it.
Well I guess you and the others missed the part that said "where necessary" .

Who said anything about killing poor people and their children? In my mind "where necessary" would mean if someone's life was in danger.

 


No, I didn't miss that. The trouble is you have no say in what "where necessary" means. Neither do I. Which makes me wonder who does.

Besides the scenario you describe has always been there for the boarder patrol, no military needed. No Presidential directives needed. It's all just more political theater, at our expense.

There must be a million cops who know when "where necessary" means as well as tens of millions of gun owners like me will determine "where necessary" means.
So I don't know why I would not trust our military. And members of the military have always had the right to protect themselves anyway.
 Sure the military is partly for show but unnecessary? I would love to hear the Border patrol guys opinion on that.

the scenario you describe has always been there for the boarder patrol, no military needed.

 When was the last time there were 5 to 7 thousand people stacked up behind our border?

There are 16,600 Boarder Patrol agents in the southwest sector plus 4,000 National Guard troops sent to help. How many do you want?

As far as what "where necessary" means and who gets to decide... I don't care who you are I'm keeping my head down!   Surprised Big Grin
Reply
(11-27-2018, 06:18 PM)Cuzz Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 04:43 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 04:07 PM)Cuzz Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 03:53 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 03:01 PM)Cuzz Wrote: Visions of the Berlin Wall come to mind. I would think if we can claim to be the "greatest country in the world" we could manage our boarder without killing poor people and their children. That would be horrific on the international evening news.

That's what I see wrong with it.
Well I guess you and the others missed the part that said "where necessary" .

Who said anything about killing poor people and their children? In my mind "where necessary" would mean if someone's life was in danger.

 


No, I didn't miss that. The trouble is you have no say in what "where necessary" means. Neither do I. Which makes me wonder who does.

Besides the scenario you describe has always been there for the boarder patrol, no military needed. No Presidential directives needed. It's all just more political theater, at our expense.

There must be a million cops who know when "where necessary" means as well as tens of millions of gun owners like me will determine "where necessary" means.
So I don't know why I would not trust our military. And members of the military have always had the right to protect themselves anyway.
 Sure the military is partly for show but unnecessary? I would love to hear the Border patrol guys opinion on that.

the scenario you describe has always been there for the boarder patrol, no military needed.

 When was the last time there were 5 to 7 thousand people stacked up behind our border?

There are 16,600 Boarder Patrol agents in the southwest sector plus 4,000 National Guard troops sent to help. How many do you want?

As far as what "where necessary" means and who gets to decide... I don't care who you are I'm keeping my head down!   Surprised Big Grin
There are 16,600 Boarder Patrol agents in the southwest sector plus 4,000 National Guard troops sent to help. How many do you want?

I actually have no idea how many are needed. I don't know how many are at each location. I know they are dispersed over a lot of miles.  Most are in Texas and not even at the place where the Caravan went.. Tijuana. Also most of the troops are unarmed and are used only to but up razor wire and transporting border agents.




16,600 Boarder Patrol agents  well they don't work 24 hours a day and neither does the NG. And we have 2000 miles of border.
Reply
(11-27-2018, 02:10 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-26-2018, 10:51 PM)Juniper Wrote: What is more astonishing to me is that SD doesn't see it.

Oh come on now. There's a picture of a woman and two children and you guys are think SD has to agree trump would be happy killing them?

See, now, TV, that's putting a face on it. I don't think he would, face to face, but I think he would easily order OTHERS to do it if it was considered an acceptable deterrent.
Reply
(11-27-2018, 02:14 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-26-2018, 10:24 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-26-2018, 10:17 PM)Valuesize Wrote: Pentagon spokeswoman Lt. Col. Michelle Baldanza confirmed to Business Insider that the Department of Defense received the memo, a "cabinet order" that reportedly permits "a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search."

Such activities could potentially be in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids active-duty military personnel from engaging in law enforcement activities on American soil, although the Department of Defense insists that it will not violate the law.

https://www.businessinsider.com/white-ho...el-2018-11
Oh, I don't think Trump would actually do something like that, but then, he never ceases to astonish me.

Do something like what? I see nothing wrong with this.........."a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search.""

Order illegal migrants shot.
Reply
(11-27-2018, 03:53 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 03:01 PM)Cuzz Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 02:14 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-26-2018, 10:24 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-26-2018, 10:17 PM)Valuesize Wrote: Pentagon spokeswoman Lt. Col. Michelle Baldanza confirmed to Business Insider that the Department of Defense received the memo, a "cabinet order" that reportedly permits "a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search."

Such activities could potentially be in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids active-duty military personnel from engaging in law enforcement activities on American soil, although the Department of Defense insists that it will not violate the law.

https://www.businessinsider.com/white-ho...el-2018-11
Oh, I don't think Trump would actually do something like that, but then, he never ceases to astonish me.

Do something like what? I see nothing wrong with this.........."a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search.""

Visions of the Berlin Wall come to mind. I would think if we can claim to be the "greatest country in the world" we could manage our boarder without killing poor people and their children. That would be horrific on the international evening news.

That's what I see wrong with it.
Well I guess you and the others missed the part that said "where necessary" .

Who said anything about killing poor people and their children? In my mind "where necessary" would mean if someone's life was in danger.

 


I didn't miss it.  I wasn't talking about that particular cabinet "order". I was giving my sole opinion of Trump as I see him based on my observations of him.
Reply
(11-27-2018, 07:46 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 02:10 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-26-2018, 10:51 PM)Juniper Wrote: What is more astonishing to me is that SD doesn't see it.

Oh come on now. There's a picture of a woman and two children and you guys are think SD has to agree trump would be happy killing them?

See, now, TV, that's putting a face on it. I don't think he would, face to face, but I think he would easily order OTHERS to do it if it was considered an acceptable deterrent.
I have no clue. I know for sure he is a moron I don't know he's that evil.
Reply
(11-27-2018, 07:47 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 02:14 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-26-2018, 10:24 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-26-2018, 10:17 PM)Valuesize Wrote: Pentagon spokeswoman Lt. Col. Michelle Baldanza confirmed to Business Insider that the Department of Defense received the memo, a "cabinet order" that reportedly permits "a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search."

Such activities could potentially be in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids active-duty military personnel from engaging in law enforcement activities on American soil, although the Department of Defense insists that it will not violate the law.

https://www.businessinsider.com/white-ho...el-2018-11
Oh, I don't think Trump would actually do something like that, but then, he never ceases to astonish me.

Do something like what? I see nothing wrong with this.........."a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search.""

Order illegal migrants shot.
No one said that. You made an assumption. All I have heard him say is yes they can use lethal force if necessary.

Turning anything he has said and turning it to "Order illegal migrants shot" is a HUGE stretch.
Reply
(11-27-2018, 08:46 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 07:47 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 02:14 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-26-2018, 10:24 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-26-2018, 10:17 PM)Valuesize Wrote: Pentagon spokeswoman Lt. Col. Michelle Baldanza confirmed to Business Insider that the Department of Defense received the memo, a "cabinet order" that reportedly permits "a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search."

Such activities could potentially be in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids active-duty military personnel from engaging in law enforcement activities on American soil, although the Department of Defense insists that it will not violate the law.

https://www.businessinsider.com/white-ho...el-2018-11
Oh, I don't think Trump would actually do something like that, but then, he never ceases to astonish me.

Do something like what? I see nothing wrong with this.........."a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search.""

Order illegal migrants shot.
No one said that. You made an assumption. All I have heard him say is yes they can use lethal force if necessary.

Turning anything he has said and turning it to "Order illegal migrants shot" is a HUGE stretch.

No, TV, I didn't make an assumption about this "order" I made assumption about Trump based on his character. All by my bitty little self.
Reply
(11-27-2018, 09:39 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 08:46 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 07:47 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 02:14 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-26-2018, 10:24 PM)Juniper Wrote: Oh, I don't think Trump would actually do something like that, but then, he never ceases to astonish me.

Do something like what? I see nothing wrong with this.........."a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search.""

Order illegal migrants shot.
No one said that. You made an assumption. All I have heard him say is yes they can use lethal force if necessary.

Turning anything he has said and turning it to "Order illegal migrants shot" is a HUGE stretch.

No, TV, I didn't make an assumption about this "order" I made assumption about Trump based on his character. All by my bitty little self.

Aieet
Reply
(11-27-2018, 09:49 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 09:39 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 08:46 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 07:47 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 02:14 PM)tvguy Wrote: Do something like what? I see nothing wrong with this.........."a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search.""

Order illegal migrants shot.
No one said that. You made an assumption. All I have heard him say is yes they can use lethal force if necessary.

Turning anything he has said and turning it to "Order illegal migrants shot" is a HUGE stretch.

No, TV, I didn't make an assumption about this "order" I made assumption about Trump based on his character. All by my bitty little self.

Aieet

Triggered!!
Reply
(11-27-2018, 09:53 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 09:49 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 09:39 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 08:46 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-27-2018, 07:47 PM)Juniper Wrote: Order illegal migrants shot.
No one said that. You made an assumption. All I have heard him say is yes they can use lethal force if necessary.

Turning anything he has said and turning it to "Order illegal migrants shot" is a HUGE stretch.

No, TV, I didn't make an assumption about this "order" I made assumption about Trump based on his character. All by my bitty little self.

Aieet

Triggered!!
Laughing Laughing
Reply
I thought they were legal immigrants. Trying to enter through the 'port of entry' to ask for asylum.
Reply
(11-28-2018, 01:42 PM)chuck white Wrote: I thought they were legal immigrants.  Trying to enter through the 'port of entry' to ask for asylum.

  They aren't illegal until they break through or try to break through to our border. We can't have so many go through the asylum seeking process fast enough for some which is why they bum rushed the border.

The also broke past the Mexican police so they are breaking Mexico's laws also.
Reply
(11-28-2018, 02:36 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-28-2018, 01:42 PM)chuck white Wrote: I thought they were legal immigrants.  Trying to enter through the 'port of entry' to ask for asylum.

  They aren't illegal until they break through or try to break through to our border. We can't have so many go through the asylum seeking process fast enough for some which is why they bum rushed the border.

The also broke past the Mexican police so they are breaking Mexico's laws also.

Technically they have to cross the boarder to present themselves at our port of entry since it has to be in our country not Mexico.
Reply
(11-28-2018, 03:15 PM)Cuzz Wrote:
(11-28-2018, 02:36 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(11-28-2018, 01:42 PM)chuck white Wrote: I thought they were legal immigrants.  Trying to enter through the 'port of entry' to ask for asylum.

  They aren't illegal until they break through or try to break through to our border. We can't have so many go through the asylum seeking process fast enough for some which is why they bum rushed the border.

The also broke past the Mexican police so they are breaking Mexico's laws also.

Technically they have to cross the boarder to present themselves at our port of entry since it has to be in our country not Mexico.
Right and we are letting as many as we can handle do exactly that.
Reply
Pop quiz: What is the Federal Governments #1 role and mandate? (Hint: It's not healthcare)
Reply
(12-17-2018, 05:53 PM)Someones Dad Wrote: Pop quiz: What is the Federal Governments #1 role and mandate?  (Hint:  It's not healthcare)

Defense of the nation.
A nation that is sick is not well defended.
So for a strong nation, we need healthy people. What good is a nation, if the people are not prosperous and healthy.
Reply
(12-17-2018, 05:53 PM)Someones Dad Wrote: Pop quiz: What is the Federal Governments #1 role and mandate?  (Hint:  It's not healthcare)

I've never seen or heard of a prioritized list of Federal Government responsibilities. Picking which of multiple roles is first among many would be difficult and would probably change based on time and circumstance.

For arguments sake and assuming we are focusing on our government my pick will be establishing rule of law and enforcing it equally. OK, that might be two.

Until there is something to protect, protection couldn't be the priority.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)