Biden cancels all Pentagon money used for Trump's Mexico border wall

[HARK!]

Many unaccompanied children come to the United States to reunite with family members

What family? Parents? Do you have any stats on that?

or escape violence and poverty in their home countries, according to immigration experts.

How would they escape poverty here....hmmm....could it be by *GASP* ...working?

 

[Tanj]

What family? Parents? Do you have any stats on that?



How would they escape poverty here....hmmm....could it be by *GASP* ...working?

I wont be answering any more of your questions, which you could find an answer to just as easily via google, until you show a touch of decency, honesty or integrity, stop moving the goalposts, and answer mine.

 

[HARK!]

I wont be answering any more of your questions, which you could find an answer to just as easily via google, until you show a touch of decency, honesty or integrity, stop moving the goalposts, and answer mine.

Currently, immigrant advocates are concerned that parents may be traveling to the border with their children and sending them to the United States alone so that they will be permitted to enter.

Explainer: Why more migrant children are arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border

 

[7thKeeper]

Oh my...

A = Illegal crossings captured.
B = Estimated illegal crossings uncaptured.
C = Captured terrorist crossings
D = Estimated terrorist crossings.
X = Factor for undetected terrorists, as they are highly trained to not be detected.

To solve for D, multiply B by C; then take the product and divide by A.

Then multiply D by X to get a realistic estimation.

What kind of engineering do you do?

Aah, thank you. It was quite late then which probably had something to do with my understanding of what you were trying to say. I am not very convinced by that math though, because it depends on that the number of illegals and number of terrorists would correlate with each other. But I do not see by what mechanism this would necessarily hold true, they seem more like independent factors from each other, as there are several factors that could affect the number of illegals trying to cross that wouldn't have any effect on the number of terrorists attempting the same or through other means.

And communications engineering (wired and wireless).

 

[Pommer]

Aah, thank you. It was quite late then which probably had something to do with my understanding of what you were trying to say. I am not very convinced by that math though, because it depends on that the number of illegals and number of terrorists would correlate with each other. But I do not see by what mechanism this would necessarily hold true, they seem more like independent factors from each other, as there are several factors that could affect the number of illegals trying to cross that wouldn't have any effect on the number of terrorists attempting the same or through other means.

And communications engineering (wired and wireless).

Any ONE of them could be a terrorist so they’re ALL suspect, seems to be the line-of-thought.
Has a “zero-tolerance policy” vibe too?

 

[HARK!]

Aah, thank you. It was quite late then which probably had something to do with my understanding of what you were trying to say. I am not very convinced by that math though, because it depends on that the number of illegals and number of terrorists would correlate with each other. But I do not see by what mechanism this would necessarily hold true, they seem more like independent factors from each other, as there are several factors that could affect the number of illegals trying to cross that wouldn't have any effect on the number of terrorists attempting the same or through other means.

And communications engineering (wired and wireless).

The fact is that it is just a means of estimating; and after it is estimated; it is still just an estimate.

The Officers of the Roman army were required to learn math. The idea being, that one doesn't effectively have control of something; if he can't quantify it.

The fact is that we don't know how may terrorists are pouring through our porous borders.

This is an indication that we don't have control of our borders.

 

[wing2000]

How many terrorist have crossed the border undetected? If we look at the overall numbers of those who cross the border undetected, and the numbers of those who are caught, and compare that ratio, with the ratio of illegal immigrants who are caught, with the number of terrorists who are caught; we might be able to get some idea.

However, I suspect that trained terrorists are less likely to get caught than the average illegal immigrant.

Since 9/11 how many terrorist attacks in the United States were carried out by those who crossed our southern border illegally?

[btw, the 9/11 terrorists were here on expired visas ]

 

[HARK!]

Since 9/11 how many terrorist attacks in the United States were carried out by those who crossed our southern border illegally?

Do you think that we should wait for them to act, before we do?

[btw, the 9/11 terrorists were here on expired visas ]

So in other words the terrorists were illegal immigrants?

 

[wing2000]

[

Do you think that we should wait for them to act, before we do?

IOW, zero.
And yes, we should continually act to prevent terrorist acts. The point is, however, there are much easier ways for an International terrorist to attack the US than hoofing it across the southern border. It's much easier to convert someone already in the US....(as history as shown).

So in other words the terrorists were illegal immigrants?

Yes and....?

 

[HARK!]

there are much easier ways for an International terrorist to attack the US than hoofing it across the southern border.

If your speculation is true; then why do you suppose they are hoofing it across the southern border?

Yes and....?

Do you suppose that if we had been more active with enforcing illegal immigration; that American lives could have been saved?

 

[wing2000]

Do you suppose that if we had been more active with enforcing illegal immigration; that American lives could have been saved?

Sure, if the US had tracked those with expired visas and followed up on existing intel, it's possible the 9/11 terrorist could have been apprehended. In any case, violent ideology is not contained by national borders. Research the attacks since 9/11....

 

[Fantine]

Do you think that we should wait for them to act, before we do?

We have to put most of our resources where the threat is greatest.

In my experience, that's eastern Oklahoma and Harrison and Russellville, Arkansas.

Obviously the cell near Lansing. Michigan that tried to kidnap Whitmer is another.

 

[7thKeeper]

The fact is that it is just a means of estimating; and after it is estimated; it is still just an estimate.

The Officers of the Roman army were required to learn math. The idea being, that one doesn't effectively have control of something; if he can't quantify it.

The fact is that we don't know how may terrorists are pouring through our porous borders.

This is an indication that we don't have control of our borders.

But it's a pointless and worthless estimate because the underlying logic of it doesn't work, as we can't show that there is correlation/relation between the two numbers. So you aren't estimating anything, the number resulting from that doesn't tell us anything, because the underlying logic of it doesn't pan out.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I thought that the purpose of the Pentagon was to defend our borders.

My bad.

An honest mistake. The purpose of the Pentagon is to coordinate the use of military force when called upon to carry out the political goals assigned to it by civilian leadership -- i. e. the President.

What you're thinking of is the US Border Patrol -- which is a branch of the Department of Homeland Security, not the Pentagon.

 

[HARK!]

An honest mistake. The purpose of the Pentagon is to coordinate the use of military force when called upon to carry out the political goals assigned to it by civilian leadership -- i. e. the President.

What you're thinking of is the US Border Patrol -- which is a branch of the Department of Homeland Security, not the Pentagon.

No, I'm thinking of the Pentagon. Have you read the Constitution? I don't see anything in there about the military being assembled to accomplish the President's political goals. Where are you getting your information?

 

[HARK!]

But it's a pointless and worthless estimate

No it's not.

because the underlying logic of it doesn't work,

It works if you work it.

as we can't show that there is correlation/relation between the two numbers.

There is a correlation. Both numbers document captured illegal aliens. And by breaking out the illegal aliens who are also on the terrorist watch list; we get a ratio.

This is rock solid math.

So you aren't estimating anything

With this ratio; an estimate can be derived. This is one basic way that estimates work. Pretty basic stuff.

the number resulting from that doesn't tell us anything

It gives us an estimate.

 

[TLK Valentine]

No, I'm thinking of the Pentagon. Have you read the Constitution? I don't see anything in there about the military being assembled to accomplish the President's political goals. Where are you getting your information?

Basic military theory and philosophy, really, going back to Carl von Clausewitz: "War is merely the continuation of politics with other means." Still studied at military academies in many countries... including this one.

There's a reason, after all, that the President, while "Commander-in-Chief" of the armed forces, is still considered a civilian.

Also a fair-to-middlin' understanding of US history and legal precedent helps here. Now, I did err by omission when I said that the military is a tool to enforce politics, because I should have specified a tool to enforce foreign policy only, as the Posse Comitamus act of 1878 (signed by President Rutherford B. Hayes) severely limits the use of the military to enforce domestic policy.

...and as I mentioned, immigration enforcement is a domestic policy issue, which is why the Customs and Border Patrol reports to the Department of Homeland Security -- a civilian branch of the President's Cabinet, and not to the Pentagon.

It's all common sense, really. Let's say, for example, that a foreign government -- oh, I don't know, Madagascar -- is doing something we'd prefer they weren't, and we want to convince them to stop.

Our President's options can be easily broken down in three categories:

1. Diplomatic: go to the UN; condemn Madagascar.
2. Economic: go to Congress; impose sanctions against Madagascar.
3. Military: go to the Pentagon; authorize "Operation Bomb Madagascar Back to the Stone Age."

Obviously this is a gross oversimplification, but you get the idea. The point is that if, instead of Madagascar, it was, let's say, South Dakota doing something naughty, option 3 is absolutely off the table... and if you think about it, you'll see why this must be so.

You do not want a president who can use the military to enforce his will within these borders.

 

[HARK!]

Basic military theory and philosophy, really, going back to Carl von Clausewitz:

He was not even an American. I'd rather just go back to the Constitution; thanks.

It might not be perfect; but it's better than what we have.

 

[TLK Valentine]

He was not even an American. I'd rather just go back to the Constitution; thanks.

It might not be perfect; but it's better than what we have.

Who said we ever left it?

You're making a common authoritarian mistake; while it is true that the Constitution is both the first and the last word when it comes to U.S. law, it is far from the only word.

The role of the U.S. military -- what it can and more importantly cannot be used for is well established. Erasing 200+ years of precedent and sound governing simply because you want x, you want y, or you want z, is hardly a prudent idea.

 

[Ringo84]

Good.
Ringo