Thread: A question about NAFTA and Border Security.

I was listening to the radio today and I heard a man tell the radio talk host that the NAFTA agreement that we signed forbids us to use military force on the border with Mexico and that this is why there has been such a reluctance to see National Guard there and those that were there were unarmed. Can someone please confirm that this is the case?

If this is true, it tells us a lot about why things are being done as they are.

Thanks

I have heard this too. When I first saw your post I tried to google some info...but did not find anything difinitive. However, in reading parts of the actual NAFTA agreement...there is an arbitration clause. It does not clearly say that the border cannot be defended with force or troops....but it does say disputes will be handled through arbitration. I would also love to get a clear picture on the answer to this question. Anyone know? This is actually a very important point.

Originally Posted by redpony353

I have heard this too. When I first saw your post I tried to google some info...but did not find anything difinitive. However, in reading parts of the actual NAFTA agreement...there is an arbitration clause. It does not clearly say that the border cannot be defended with force or troops....but it does say disputes will be handled through arbitration. I would also love to get a clear picture on the answer to this question. Anyone know? This is actually a very important point.

Thanks for trying to find out.
I am sure there will be a lot more of the more experienced posters on the board tomorrow and someone will know. I will also try to see if I can find anything too later this evening. We do need to know this.

I was shocked when Tancredo said that Nafta is a treaty and not an agreement and as such was not supposed to be signed without a majority. I guess I really do have a lot to learn.

The best I can give you is that Chris Simcox said this very same thing about NAFTA. He said we agreed to not militarize our border -- not even in the event of war. He said this was also in CAFTA.

Originally Posted by BearFlagRepublic

The best I can give you is that Chris Simcox said this very same thing about NAFTA. He said we agreed to not militarize our border -- not even in the event of war. He said this was also in CAFTA.

Well, I am speechless.