Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 22 of 22

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #21
    Senior Member redpony353's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    SF
    Posts
    4,883
    Quote Originally Posted by Justthatguy
    NAFTA is actually a contract. The U. S. can do whatever is necessary to defend its borders. That includes putting the military on the borders. There isn't enough law enforcement personnel on or near the borders to do the job. Thus the U. S. needs to use the military. It is completely legal.
    Sure we can do anything we want to secure the borders....and we will. But some actions may violate NAFTA. I don't really care. They should wrap that piece of paper around a stick of dynamite and light the fuse. However, that is why they don't want to send the military to the border. The actual border is international territory so of course we can use the military to defend it. That is what the military is for. Posse Comitatus refers to usage of the military inside our country to police our own citizens. But defending the border does not fall under that description. It is our NAFTA agreement that keeps our leaders from using the military on the border. Even when they sent the National Guard, they sent them without firearms, fgs. I say screw NAFTA. In reality we can do anything we want to do...or need to do. And we should do it right now.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #22
    Senior Member ReformUSA2012's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,305
    I gotta agree with Justthefacts. There is NOTHING in the US Constitution against using the military to secure the borders. Only the NAFTA agreement has something with that and thats easy to throw out simply by sending the troops to the border.

    Infact in states of massive invasion the US Government could declare temporary restricted martial law and post soldiers at state exit points in a state like California checking people's paperwork as they leave while having ICE go through major sweeps of the city. Soldiers could even hold checkpoints at airports, government buildings, and some other specific areas.

    As long as the soldiers don't actively and knowingly detain a citizen. For extra precaution likely have a BP, ICE agent, or local police assigned to do the actual check with the national guard.

    Such would all be completely legal.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •