Army Field Manual 3-19-15 Civil Disturbance Operations

[bruce]

Re: Politely disagree. I responded to the completely unwarranted use of the Army by a president to address a purely civil matter in a little out of the way Southern state. The same thing was not done in more politically sensitive areas up north, where the same exact problem was ongoing. It would seem his use of such force was a political investment calculated to pay off at the ballot box, else he'd have done exactly the same thing in the more politically sensitive areas.

At present, there is no need for the Army/NG to be deployed on the border to repeal invaders. There are no invaders. There are illegal aliens. That is the job for which the Border Patrol is trained and fully capable. Their results have demonstrated their effectiveness.

It may be that Trump is merely frustrated at not being able to get a wall built. Possibly. It may be that this is merely a means to pull attention away from Washington. Possibly. It may be any of a number of things. Likely. But, this is not a case of help being needed by local police who are being overwhelmed by some unusual influx of illegal aliens.

In the last year I have personally been involved in meeting with, talking to and helping a large number of people; some single and some families, most women with children. A few have not been legitimately in need. A couple it was hard to be sure whether or not the need was legitimate. The vast majority have been people who needed help. I have helped one and all, even the ones I was a little unsure of. Rule 25 has been my guide (Matthew 25:31-40). Sincerely. bruce.

[S.A. Boggs]

Bruce if someone comes into your home illegally is this not an invader?
Sam

[bruce]

Re: Home. They say it's where the heart is! My home is where my family lives. My home is not a border over 1,000 miles away down south. The problem on the border is no different than the problem on any other border in this nation, i.e., it is for the Border Patrol to handle. I hate very much to think it, much more even to say it, but given the current brouhaha in the popular media ... this concern with a bunch of women/children that are supposed to be moving en mass up through Mexico bent on entering the US bears all the marks of a effort to misdirect popular attention. As I have said repeatedly, if the good folks in Washington want to actually do anything meaningful on the border, they have only to gear up and go after the profiteers who make money off the illegal aliens, i.e., those who employ them, who rent to them, who use them to build their houses, clean their houses, wash their cars, serve/clean their tables, clean their bathrooms, etc., etc., etc. Let the fed. govt. point the barrel of its regulatory pen at the people who profit off the illegal aliens ... and the illegal aliens will go back to where they came from b/c there will be no jobs waiting for them... no apartments/houses to rent, no opportunities for them to make money, etc. Sincerely. bruce.

[togor]

Sam an apartment complex makes for a better analogy for the country than does your single family home, and anyways if someone enters who doesn't belong there, then as a rule people don't call in the army. So Bruce appears to be arguing from very firm ground with good elevation.

[S.A. Boggs]

Sam an apartment complex makes for a better analogy for the country than does your single family home, and anyways if someone enters who doesn't belong there, then as a rule people don't call in the army. So Bruce appears to be arguing from very firm ground with good elevation.

Have to agree with you, my main concern is that people are who do not belong here and must be stopped. I am for stopping illegals as needed regardless of cost. If it takes the military that is fine as their job it to protect the nation.
Sam

[togor]

I agree. We can't just let people walk in, no matter who invites them and how nice they are while they're here. But we have to keep our wits about us as we go about clamping down.

[bruce]

Re: Aliens, etc. One very big problem that the US will face, a problem that is already being confronted by many European nations as well as Japan is an aging work force and a less than replacement birthrate. Simply put, we do not have enough babies being born to keep our population stable. Absent immigration both legal and illegal, our birthrate would now be declining. This is not something that can be sustained. Regardless of how the illegal immigration problem is resolved, the issue of population sufficient to produce goods/services, etc., is a problem that will not go away. Absent an increase in the birthrate, immigration is one way for our nation to get the needed population to facilitate necessary businesses processes. It is understandable that many would be deeply suspicious of immigration. This is a concern of long standing. The plaque on the Statue of Liberty reflects tensions of the past century with legal immigration. It is true that democrats stand to most gain by immigration of any sort. But, absent immigration and given the extremely unlikely possibility that the birthrate will rise significantly, what is to be done? Sincerely. bruce.

The following might be worth a look:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-study/immigrants-will-drive-u-s-population-growth-in-next-five-decades-pew-idUSKCN0RS08V20150928

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/us-population-growth-is-lower-than-at-any-time-since-the-great-depression/2016/12/21/5267e480-c7ae-11e6-85b5-76616a33048d_story.html?utm_term=.9967d506dafb

https://bipartisanpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/BPC-Immigration-Americas-Demographic-Challenge.pdf

http://fortune.com/2014/03/05/without-immigration-the-u-s-economy-looks-like-sclerotic-old-europe/

[clintonhater]

Simply put, we do not have enough babies being born to keep our population stable.

Stable? Turd-worlders bring with them their deeply-ingrained culture of breeding irresponsibility--which by no means fades away after they've squatted here a while; for all intents & purposes, it's part of their DNA. It's precisely BECAUSE of that irresponsibility that South America can supply an INFINITE horde of fresh invaders--no matter how many get in, there's always an equal or greater number right behind them.

Whatever the hypothetical problems posed by a decreasing birth rate, it's FAR preferable to becoming the kind of rat's warren these invaders are trying to escape from!

[S.A. Boggs]

Re: Aliens, etc. One very big problem that the US will face, a problem that is already being confronted by many European nations as well as Japan is an aging work force and a less than replacement birthrate. Simply put, we do not have enough babies being born to keep our population stable. Absent immigration both legal and illegal, our birthrate would now be declining. This is not something that can be sustained. Regardless of how the illegal immigration problem is resolved, the issue of population sufficient to produce goods/services, etc., is a problem that will not go away. Absent an increase in the birthrate, immigration is one way for our nation to get the needed population to facilitate necessary businesses processes. It is understandable that many would be deeply suspicious of immigration. This is a concern of long standing. The plaque on the Statue of Liberty reflects tensions of the past century with legal immigration. It is true that democrats stand to most gain by immigration of any sort. But, absent immigration and given the extremely unlikely possibility that the birthrate will rise significantly, what is to be done? Sincerely. bruce.

The following might be worth a look:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-study/immigrants-will-drive-u-s-population-growth-in-next-five-decades-pew-idUSKCN0RS08V20150928

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/us-population-growth-is-lower-than-at-any-time-since-the-great-depression/2016/12/21/5267e480-c7ae-11e6-85b5-76616a33048d_story.html?utm_term=.9967d506dafb

https://bipartisanpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/BPC-Immigration-Americas-Demographic-Challenge.pdf

http://fortune.com/2014/03/05/withou...ic-old-europe/

This is where mechanization comes into ply in the work force.
Sam

[fjruple]

In most situations, the local National Guard is mobilized under Title 32 which is controlled by the state government. There has been situations where the National Guard has been federalized which is under Title 10. The one time I can remember is when governor George Wallace mobilized the National Guard to prevent black students from attending formerly all white schools. The President federalized the National Guard to take them from under the local governor control. In the riots in Detriot back in the 60's. The President had to send Federal troops after the local NG, local police and state could not control the situation. I believe Federal Troops can arrest and detain in times of civil insurrection when all local and state governments breaks down (civil war).

[bruce]

Re: Mechanization. Have heard all my life about how we're all going to have a high old time with machines doing everything for us. Go figure that for running IV's, and the multiple various procedures normal to dealing with an aging population. Go figure that for doing a brake job, etc. Go figure that for laying wire for a house under construction, etc., etc., etc. Simple and undeniable fact of life is that nations with plateaued or declining population bases face the problem of an overall aging population and a shrinking younger population to meet production/consumption needs. Currently Japan is a very good example of just exactly what that means for a first world economy. China's one child policy combined with an ancient prejudice against female children is now working out so hot for them. JMHO. Sincerely. bruce.