Article

2005-11-13 Home Front: WoT

Border Sheriff fears terrorist infiltration

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Jackal 2005-11-13 10:41|| || Front Page|| [11129 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I keep saying that the illegal problem needs to be subdivided into hispanics and others. Different problems need different solutions. If you want the border sealed airtight, and quickly, to "others", it is possible: offer bounties to Mexicans for non-Mexicans!

With a $500-$15,000 bounty, no non-Mexican could get within 50 miles of *anywhere* on the border without a dozen phone calls coming in. South of the border, that modest sum is a fortune. We should even pay in cash, so the local police don't steal the money from the tipster.

This could be done NOW with a tiny investment, and even with private money.

The only snag in it is the "catch-and-release" program for foreigners. Unless the federals agree to KEEP any non-Mexican they catch, anything anybody does is meaningless.

As far as stopping Mexicans goes, we have been working on that problem since the 1920s, and I doubt that it will be solved any time soon.

So the best bet is to focus on the non-Mexicans. The bounty program could be up and running with $2M and two weeks, to get the word out.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-11-13 15:16|| 2005-11-13 15:16|| Front Page Top

#2 If you close the border with fencing, Moose, you've effectively stopped the flood the OTM's hide in. I'm sick of all the apologists and their reasons why this can't be done. It will be done. I'd prefer it before a lot of dead Americans happen.

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-11-13 15:55|| 2005-11-13 15:55|| Front Page Top

#3 Frank G: The complete fence is a ruse used by those who want *no* border controls. They couch it in terms of an "all or nothing" solution. Even if forced to build the fence, they will turn it into a boondoggle to rival the Big Dig--and showing less results. That being said, the best bet is to go for the "most bang for your buck" arguments.

I've written before how you might be able to shut down 80% or more of the illegals by just putting fencing on 15% of the border area--the major corridors. Beyond that, you get into some serious "law of diminishing returns" with your fencing. My guess is that fencing peaks out at about 20% of the border area (and 90% of the illegals). Beyond that is a waste of money.

Remember that much of the border is impassable because it is nothing but rocky desert on both sides, no roads even. Very, very few are going to hike 50 miles across the Sonora even in winter. Putting fence up there might stop literally a half dozen a year. The pro-illegal immigration types would *start* by building the fence there, rather than on the corridors, wasting years and billions of dollars while allowing most illegals to still cross.

At the same time, the US will have to do some major restructuring of our economy to make up for those hundreds of thousands of labor intensive jobs for which there will no longer be workers. Everything from produce and meat to housing costs will about double in price.

There will almost have to be a guest worker program to keep parts of our economy from serious inflation.

On top of everything else, Fox in Mexico has come up with the most amazing development plans for his country that you can imagine. Called the PPP, he plans to turn southern Mexico into an immense transshipment region for the Americas, with two superhighways going up the coasts like larger versions of the Pan-Am Highway from Canada to Chile, seaports, airports, railroads, etc.

The trouble is, that the land is currently occupied. So he is running the peasants off their land, and telling them to head North to either work in the border factories, or better yet go to the US and make their dreams come true.

This explains much of the recent surge in illegals coming here. Ironically, though Fox will soon leave office, he has spent much effort convincing the ruling parties to keep his plan going. And, if he's right, it should be a major lasting boost to the Mexican economy, which will reduce the number of illegals.

This is the reason that Fox is the #1 advocate of the FTAA. Even if it is only involves most of the Americas, Mexico will still make a ton of money.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-11-13 17:29|| 2005-11-13 17:29|| Front Page Top

#4 a fense of rocky impassable mountains is still a fence. I agree that there are priority areas where th emost bang for teh buck works. The message to Mexico's gov't has to be "get your house in order - the pressure relief valve's closing". Plenty of places to make income. For instance, Mexico's baja coasts would be a riviera if tehy allowed Americans to buy without games where some ejido claims the land after you build your retirement home on it....

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-11-13 17:48|| 2005-11-13 17:48|| Front Page Top

#5 A fence and scatterable mines would be a good place to start. Lots and lots of mine signage, in English and Spanish also. Maybe a CD's or leaflet drops, get the word out.

Posted by Besoeker 2005-11-13 18:48|| 2005-11-13 18:48|| Front Page Top

#6 As much as I would like to see the border closed, and believe me I do;
I cringe with the thought of using mines. Let's try to find another solution here.
Maybe have the illegals on the work detail building the fences? Catch, work then ~~release~~ return to Mexico.

Posted by Jan 2005-11-13 19:16|| 2005-11-13 19:16|| Front Page Top

#7 Frank G: What you suggest makes great sense, except in Mexican politics. Foreigners owning coastal property is as sensitive an issue there as Social Security is up here.

The biggest, most important, make or break issue in the presidential elections is, and has been for years: keeping the price of tortillas and beans low. Crazy. Second is the preservation of PEMEX as a national monopoly.

Talk about bizarre priorities, but that is as they are. Credit where credit is due, Fox is treading very dangerous ground as it is. Only Porfirio Diaz and Carlos Salinas tried to modernize the country, and both of them were punished for it.

Otherwise, Mexico is stuck in low gear when trying to get ahead. Their worst enemy is demographics, but it's not their only one.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-11-13 19:48|| 2005-11-13 19:48|| Front Page Top

#8 then quit treating them as equals. It's a kleptocracy, full of xenophobics and pseudo-socialists, promising crap they never intend to deliver. The last time I was in Mexico City, I was warned not to leave th eAirport, due to robbery and kidnapping prevalence. Call it like it is: a 3rd world shithole that refuses to change - albeit with nice people (off the border region) and beautiful lands. To do less is to accept their infection, or hide your head til the revolution hits. Make them CHANGE!

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-11-13 21:56|| 2005-11-13 21:56|| Front Page Top

#9 At the point of a bayonet?

CIA factbook Mexico: 106 Million people.

You wanna ask them nicely, first?

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-11-13 22:33|| 2005-11-13 22:33|| Front Page Top

#10 I expect only 0.1% doesn't want change - the gov't/elites who run the place. The country has so many natural resources, available labor coming out the ears, yet they refuse to educate the populace, for reasons of cheap labor - hell, they know those who come north will be cash cows

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-11-13 22:44|| 2005-11-13 22:44|| Front Page Top

23:58 2b
23:37 RG
23:30 Redneck Jim
23:22 Redneck Jim
23:12 Alaska Paul
23:06 Eric Jablow
22:55 CrazyFool
22:46 Frank G
22:44 Frank G
22:38 Redneck Jim
22:33 Anonymoose
22:31 Bobby
22:29 Anonymoose
22:28 KBK
22:16 Phil
22:14 Phil
22:14 2b
22:07 Phil
22:05 Frank G
22:03 Frank G
22:01 suppositoryoftruth
22:00 Phil
22:00 Anonymoose
21:56 Frank G