Thread: Bush to send troops to the border

I HOPE THEY ARE NOT SENDING THE TROOPS TO GET RID OF THE CIVILIANS AT THE BORDE!!!!!!!!!!!

Bush Weighs Deploying Guard to U.S. Border
By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Writer
2 hours ago


WASHINGTON - President Bush, trying to build momentum for an overhaul of the nation's immigration laws, is considering plans to shore up the Mexican border with National Guard troops paid for by the federal government, according to senior administration officials.

One defense official said military leaders believe the number of troops required could range from 3,500 to 10,000, depending on the final plan. Another administration official cautioned that the 10,000 figure was too high.

The officials insisted on anonymity since no decision has been announced.

The president was expected to reveal his plans in an address Monday at 8 p.m. EDT. It will be the first time he has used the Oval Office for a domestic policy speech _ a gesture intended to underscore the importance he places on the divisive immigration issue.

The key questions Friday were exactly how many National Guard troops might be deployed, for how long and at what cost to taxpayers _ as well as the problem of possible disruption of upcoming deployments to Iraq and elsewhere overseas.

Border state governors were split.

Using those troops for border security is "maybe not the right way to go," said California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Republican former movie star, though he agreed the federal government is obliged to secure the borders. He noted that many of the Guard troops are returning from long duty in Iraq, and "I think that we should let them go ... back to work again."

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson also opposed the plan, saying National Guard troops could be needed for emergencies such as wildfires or hurricanes. Richardson, chairman of the Democratic Governors Association, said in a statement the Bush administration has not consulted directly with the governors who deal with border issues. "This would dramatically impact our states and we should be included in the discussion and planning," he said.

The governors of Texas and Arizona favor positioning National Guard troops on the border.

But Texas Democratic Reps. Silvestre Reyes and Solomon Ortiz _ both senior members of the Armed Services Committee _ sent a letter to Bush urging him to consider a number of issues before deploying the troops, including whether another mission is in the best interest of "our over-stretched military."

As discussions among the White House, the Pentagon and the states continued on how the military could be used to secure the southern border, defense officials said states want the federal government to pick up what will be a significant tab for the increased security. Officials had no estimates on that cost.

Bush's speech Monday night is intended to build support for broad immigration overhaul by taking substantive steps to secure the border.

"We need to beef up those (border) operations and the cost will be substantial," Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said in an interview. "People are just not going to accept comprehensive immigration reform unless they are assured the government is going to secure the border. People have lost confidence in the federal government because they simply haven't addressed this in a dramatic and effective way."

Paul McHale, assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense, asked officials earlier this week to offer options for the use of military resources and troops _ particularly the National Guard _ along the border with Mexico, according to defense officials familiar with the discussions.

Cornyn said state officials are also looking for more unmanned aircraft, ground sensors, surveillance cameras and military training to help with border patrols.

Defense officials said the National Guard may be used only until significant additions to the existing civilian border patrols can be fully funded and completed.

Currently there are about 100 National Guard troops involved in counter-drug operations, including some along the border, said Guard Bureau spokesman Jack Harrison. He said there are also between 10-15 Guard members _ mostly engineers _ helping border patrol agents with vehicle and heavy equipment support.

The discussions this week underscored the importance of the border and immigrations issues, yet were tentative enough to reflect worries about drawing the nation's armed forces into a politically sensitive domestic role.

Southern lawmakers met with White House strategist Karl Rove earlier in the week for a discussion that included making greater use of National Guard troops to shore up border control. And on Capitol Hill, the Senate is poised to pass legislation this month that would call for additional border security, a new guest worker program and provisions opening the way to eventual citizenship for many of the estimated 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants in the country.

Currently, the military plays a very limited role along the borders, but some active duty forces have been used in the past to help battle drug traffickers.

The National Guard is generally under the control of the state governors, but Guard units can be federalized by the president, such as those sent to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Active duty military may not be used for law enforcement unless the president authorizes it.

In addition, under federal law, in certain circumstances the states can maintain control of their Guard units but arrange to have the costs picked up by the federal government. That allows the Guard to continue to perform law enforcement activities.

Officials wrangled over the use of the active military during Hurricane Katrina, with some suggesting that troops be used for law enforcement to quell violence and looters in New Orleans. There were also suggestions that Bush federalize the National Guard there, but state officials opposed that proposal. In the end, neither move was made.

___

AP White House correspondent Terence Hunt contributed to this report.

___

On the Net:

Defense Department: http://www.defenselink.mil

[/img]

I do not understand why anyone would build houses that close to a countrys boarder. That is beyond me.

so as to help illegal-aliens who are criminals to illegally enter the U.S...that's why. It helps them to smuggle as many illegal-alien criminals into this country as they can and these criminals are frequently their friends and relatives and inlaws.

So either way, the governors are going to say no but they want something done? This BS about we are over stretched is Bullsht!t, i work at a base and there are at least 50,000 troops there including about 30,000 NATO troops which he could ask to shore up the southern border. That way it takes it out of the hands of the Governors and really the US government.

The issue of placing the troops on the border i think is nothing nothing more than grandstanding, i am not against this and i think we should have at least minunuim of 10.000 troops until we have reasonable numbers to take over temp fix until proper level of PB can take care of it on there own.

Also, it might be a deter if they know US troops are on the border that they wont risk the travel.

This nonsense that if we have distaster we wont have the personal is complete BS and if think if you asked the American people they would help!


T

Titus,

You are so right. We have enough troops for a two front war. Right now, I bet we don't even have half of what we can throw at Iraq over there. America has military out the woo hoo. Let's put them to work doing something they might actually like doing. Defending the homeland against foreign invaders. How honorable is that! Very in my book.

Dixie

I believe that we need our borders secured by military. But, as far as Bush sending our troops to secure our borders, I'll believe it when I actually see it.

American troops employed in Iraq, North Korea and other foreign countries need to be returned home and deployed on OUR BORDERS. The USA government protects the borders of many foreign nations much better than it protects our borders.

And of course the Border patrol will inform the Mexican Governmemt were the troops are deployed

noillegalimmigrationannie,
RE:But, as far as Bush sending our troops to secure our borders, I'll believe it when I actually see it.

I SECOND THAT!

Since we have so much "cheap labor" at our disposal, we should pay them to build a 2,000 mile long cinder-block wall along the border. Once it is done, pay them in full and send them on their way; on the South side of the "Great wall of America". -Sure they can spray paint graffiti on their side of the wall.

I'm just wondering what Bush will do if our troops are sent to the border and one of them are shot by either and illegal or the Mexican military. Knowing how Bush has reacted to other incidents on the border, will he say opps it was just an accident? I doubt if he would say it was an act of aggression against the United States. More than likely the solider would be the one to blame, Mexico would lie, Bush would believe them over the US and the troops would be pulled out.