Our southern border is under daily assault...

[Jewels7]

No, I did not say anything that would warrant the "we kill them" remark . The idea behind that stands alone.

[Running Gator]

1 minute ago, Jewels7 said:

No, I did not say anything that would warrant the "we kill them" remark . The idea behind that stands alone.

That is what the military does to our enemies.   When I was going through boot camp many, many moons ago we were told that the Corps had one job, to kill the enemy.   Our jobs were to either kill the enemy or provide support the ones that were killing the enemy.   

[OneLight]

6 minutes ago, Out of the Shadows said:

Just responding to the point made in the post I replied to.  I do not think that we will have the enemy swimming up on our shores like the South Koreans have to worry about. 

But I am 100% serious about the military defending our border, and I have been since my time in the military.   It is inconceivable to me that we would sacrifice our people in places like Vietnam and Iraq and now maybe Syria but we won't use them to actually defend the country.   If defending the borders is not the very textbook definition of "common defense" I do not know what would be. 

People are willing to waste 20 or more billion dollars plus upkeep to build a monstrosity but they all freak out at the idea of the military doing what they should be doing.  Just makes no sense

That is not the section of your statement I was referring to.  I agree that we can place the National Guard at the boarder if need be, but the statement in bold really concerns me.  My question is, if you don't believe it, why say it??

[Churchmouse]

8 hours ago, Out of the Shadows said:

If our country is under assault then the military needs to do it's job and provide for the common defense of our nation.    Is there any more of a common defense than the defense of the very borders that make up the nation?

Why do we have troops sitting in German and Italy and all over Europe instead of home protecting our own country?

 

The military and the border patrol has separate duties and are trained differently.  That and the logistics of such an endeavor would be mind boggling. That's why we have the coast guard protecting our shores instead of the Navy.  The military is in these other countries because of the agreements we made with those countries.

Edited March 1, 2017 by Churchmouse

[Running Gator]

9 minutes ago, OneLight said:

That is not the section of your statement I was referring to.  I agree that we can place the National Guard at the boarder if need be, but the statement in bold really concerns me.  My question is, if you don't believe it, why say it??

First, I am not talking about the National Guard, but the actual active duty military folks. 

Second, let me clarify.  I do not think that our enemies will be swimming up to our shores, it is a long swim from Syria to Florida.  But, if they were to do such a thing, I have no problem with our military doing what they are trained to do, kill the enemy. 

[OneLight]

2 minutes ago, Out of the Shadows said:

First, I am not talking about the National Guard, but the actual active duty military folks. 

Second, let me clarify.  I do not think that our enemies will be swimming up to our shores, it is a long swim from Syria to Florida.  But, if they were to do such a thing, I have no problem with our military doing what they are trained to do, kill the enemy. 

First, what is wrong with using the National Guard instead of the Military?  I don't understand your reasoning here. 

Second, you know as well as I do that they will never make such a swim, which is why I asked why even say something so ridiculous?  Then there is the comment of killing them. 

[MorningGlory]

8 minutes ago, Churchmouse said:

The military and the border patrol has separate duties and are trained differently. That's why we have the coast guard protecting our shores instead of the Navy.  The military is in these other countries because of the agreements we made with those countries.

I wouldn't be comfortable with the military taking on policing jobs and the border patrol and Coast Guard are exactly that; policing operations.  This isn't Cuba, after all.

[Churchmouse]

2 hours ago, Jewels7 said:

My upset is that I voted for him on his second run. Because Romney was just not acceptable. And I felt I had to give a voice even in a blue state. 

I'll get over it eventually. 

I saw a meme the other day that said: Once you realize Barack Obama hates America everything he's done will make sense. 

 

President Obama did what he said he was going to. He fundamentally changed America into as much of the vision he saw America as being and that is why he was hoping that secretary Clinton would get the countries nod. this is far far left's version of progressivism on steroids.  I think his primary target was capitalism and the status quo. He certainly has caused havoc on our economy and irritated race relations, but what do you expect from a community organizer, which is a more impressive word for activist.

I have nothing against him for what he did because he was given the presidency by President Bush who got us entangled in two separate wars that droned on all through his presidency. Then the right fielded Senator Mccain  against President Obama. Those two were about as far apart in every way. President Obama was energetic, creative and had a message of Hope and Change in a country that was dead tired of war. I can't for the life of me remember what McCain ran on. The man put me to sleep If you want to know the truth. Same as Romney. He was areal firecracker to be sure. His wife even had to come out and tell the public how energetic he was. Surprised me.

The truth of the matter, the right didn't have anyone to field on any of the times that President Obama ran for office and they never had a cohesive voice against him, even when they had both houses of congress. This is why President Trump came into office, because the public was tire of the same old, same old. The right and the left had their own favorites that the America public fully rejected because they were the same old, same old

Edited March 1, 2017 by Churchmouse

[Churchmouse]

23 minutes ago, MorningGlory said:

I wouldn't be comfortable with the military taking on policing jobs and the border patrol and Coast Guard are exactly that; policing operations.  This isn't Cuba, after all.

What the problem would be is to train the solders and in order to make them all law enforcement officers they would have to be deputized. That's the equivalent of a police state in my book.

Edited March 1, 2017 by Churchmouse

[Jewels7]

During Obama's first campaign it was notable that not one media personality that I watched interview him asked for specifics on the change we were to believe in. 

Even when Barack slipped while speaking to George Stephanopoulos and said, my Muslim faith, correcting after George spoke for him by replying, your Christian faith, people believed what they wanted to and even argued that a man that thought he could lead America didn't know what he was saying when he referred to his Muslim faith. 

He can run a country, but he didn't mean to call himself a Muslim. 

After attending Koran classes as a boy. Christians do that in Malaysia you know. 

I think the reason Obama got the office the first time was because voters liked the idea of him. And that overwhelmed the truth of him. 

And now that's over and we're paying for it. With lots of repairs needed for what we allowed to happen here. One day we'll all arrive at the realization the government was intended to work for us. Not us for the government. And if fear was to be at issue better to realize the ire of the many outnumbers the pride filled powers of the few. There are no masters if there are not first slaves.