Bush Immigration Plan: New DMZ or Iron Curtain?

dmz.GIF

I’ll be the first to admit that there is a problem with U.S. immigration policy. However, the plan we anticipate that Bush will present tonight is far scarier than any of the problems involved. From Reuters:

U.S. President George W. Bush will announce plans on Monday to deploy thousands of National Guard troops along the U.S.-Mexico border to support efforts to catch more illegal immigrants, as he tries to placate conservatives demanding a tougher policy.

Bush is to address Americans for about 20 minutes from the Oval Office at 8 p.m./0000 GMT to announce increased security along the 2,000-mile (3,219 km) U.S. border with Mexico, and to insist a temporary guest-worker program loathed by many conservatives is needed as part of an overall reform of immigration law.

DMZ

To begin, let’s take a look at what naturally occurs when a country places troops on an international border. Obviously, when country A places guns and tanks on the border, country B begins to feel threatened and places a few troops their side of the border. The result of country B placing troops on the border is that country A will place a few more troops on the border. Why not add a couple of heavy artillery units at the same time. Then country B adds a division and a few helicoptor squadrons. Then county A…

You get the idea. Of course, some nitwits might actually argue that Mexico would know that we are a peace-loving nation and of no possible threat to them. However, our track record in the Middle East won’t comfort many Mexican minds when our tanks and guns are pointed in their direction.

As a matter of fact, Mexico is already worried about this:

Mexico’s President Vincente Fox called Mr Bush yesterday to express his concerns about White House plans to “militarise” the 3200km U.S./Mexico border with up to 10,000 National Guard troops.

If you don’t believe that hawks aren’t already gearing up to engage Mexico with military force, please explain why protesters are using the line “Remember the Alamo.”

Move over Korea, as the current plan from the White House is to turn the Rio Grande into a giant demilitarized zone.

ABOUT FACE

The alternative picture I see is equally scary. In military drill and ceremony, there is a command that every soldier knows. When the commander orders “about face”, everyone simultaneously turns around 180 degrees — weapons, too. If Bush is successful in his apparant attempt to place troops on the border, it will only take one “about face” order for the guns on the border to be aimed directly at the American people.

If you think it was difficult for political dissidents to leave eastern Europe during the Cold War, wait until Bush establishes all of America as a “free speech zone.”

posted by Stephen Gordon
  • http://www.cmlc.org George Phillies

    10000 troops, perhaps a third on duty at once. That’s two per mile. In order to have the defensive position in your photo, we would find a four mile wide gap before the next position.

    You’re right. That is about par for Bush policy analysis.

    Mind you, the thought the that Mexican Army would be deployed as you propose seems a bit unlikely also.

    On the other hand, the notion that we cannot afford (should and can are different) to move 10 million people back to their country suffers from one riddle. We are the wealthiest country in the world. If we cannot afford to move them back, who was able to afford the vast goverment subsidies needed to move them in? The answer, of course, is no one did, or needed to.

  • Stephen Gordon

    George,

    There is but one (and it’s so obvious) solution to the whole problem: Replace the welfare state with a true free-market economy.

  • http://libertarianyouth.blogspot.com Nigel Watt

    I’d rather have troops on the borders than troops in Iraq. By all means, militarize our borders, prevent terrorists from getting in, and don’t give the propaganda to create new ones any fuel by getting troops out of the Middle East.

  • http://www.tom-hanna.org Tom Hanna

    Bush has been on the right side of the immigration debate (opposing the fence, favoring increased freedom of movement) for quite some time. Had “libertarians” paused in their Bush bashing to show a little support on the immigration issue, he might not have been backed into this corner by Tom Tancredo and Chris Simcox’s racist followers.

  • Terry

    I believe that once you give the immigrants a easy, relevant, legal way to work in our country most of our problems will go away. Businesses who employ immigrants will do a much better job of policing themselves and only hiring immigrants with legal status IMO. Once most of the immigrants are legalized (not made a citizen) law enforcement can concentrate on the immigrants that are here for unlawful purposes.

    While I believe that enforcement of our border is quite important, putting an additional 10,000 military troops along the border doesn’t really seem like the best answer. These people were trained to kill enemies, not police a border. This sounds more like Communist Germany where they had the military stationed along the border asking for papers as well as a wall. Is this really what we want? Were we not the ones that called for Germany to bring down the wall? Now we want to put one up along with the military to boot. Little hypocritical don’t you think.

  • Stephen VanDyke

    I’m not going to slam Bush for finally doing the right thing here. While it’s not like we need to have armed guards patrolling the border and shooting people on sight, it’s a step towards actually securing our borders, which is something we should have done immediately after 9/11 anyways.

    On the flip side”¦ Bush has shown a keen ability to fuck up everything he touches anyways (then getting do-overs where he changes the rules so that he wins). So I look forward to this being a complete clusterfuck in no time.

  • Stuart Richards

    Is this the same bill as CIRA? Because if the CIRA bill (cosponsored by Hagel (R-NE) and Martinez (R-FL)) passes, up to 200 million legal immigrants would be able to come into America over the next 20 years, a tenfold increase.

    There’s not much in CIRA that the Democrats could oppose, and as two Republicans opposed it, the racist section of the Republicans will be drowned out by attempts for a GOP quorum.

    If they can legally come in those kinds of numbers, there won’t be any illegal immigration and placing troops on the border would be superfluous but would placate the conservatives. It’ll also help us secure the border against any attempts by al-Qaeda to get in. I think 10,000 is a good number though… no more than that.

  • Braxton S. Cook

    I wonder if the Romans had the same paranoid wankers spouting the same paranoid drivel as the Germans slowly destroyed everything they had worked – and died – for? I believe in immigration. My grandparents immigrated from Ireland. They became Americans. 11 million illegals is not immigration. It is a migration in the same way the Germans migrated into Rome and then destroyed it. There is another name for that – invasion.

  • Daniel

    This is just a cynical Bush ploy to get people to accept amnesty as some sort of “compromise.” Once amnesty is passed, it back to business as usual.

    Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

    Amnesty was tried in ’86, it didn’t work. Let’s nor repeat the same mistake again.

  • Oje

    They are here illegally, kick them the hell out and dont let them back! Im sick of this damn country not growing some balls and telling people if they dont like it go back where they came from, where they are a citizen. What makes their crime different from robbing a bank? Stealing a car? Selling drugs? These are all illegal acts and if you or i did one of them we would be caught and put in jail in a heartbeat. These mexicans can have a rally of how illegal they are and they have commited a crime and we dont do shit.

    My solution, and yes its cruel but thats what we need to get the message across. When they have these stupid rallys start rounding them up, handcuff them, do whatever it takes. Then get an empty cargo plane and just start filling them in there. Give them each a parachute and fly them over the border and kick them out of the plane. Then on the ground you build a sniper tower every 500 yards and you instruct them if anyone tries to sneak in you pick them off.

  • Oje

    I have no problem making it so they dont want to come here illegally, you want to come the right way and make yourself a citizen be my guest. If they start hearing they get kicked out of planes when they are caught and they will be shot if they try to sneak in i bet they wont be trying as much.

    Then to replace all their jobs you call up all the pathetic Americans on welfare who are collecting a check from you and i working our asses off day in and day out. You tell them their money stops this week, if they would like to continue to earn money they can show up to x location and being working like a normal contributing member of society.

    And before anyone jumps down my throat i know welfare helps handicapped and also children who have lost a parent and things like that. Im fine with them having it, they deserve a little help. Im talking about the perfectly capable people who have no reason not to work, cut them off.

  • Wes P

    Nobody currently is allowed to get in “the right way” unless they’re highly educated or rich or have legal family here or political connections. Even then it may take years of legal limbo.

    Libertarians don’t support the welfare state. Private help will be provided to those who seem to deserve it and benefit from it.

    We’d be much better off letting the world’s poor come here to work than trying to conquer and “fix” their countries.

  • Wes P

    And people who can’t make it here by their own efforts or charity may want to try somewhere else.

  • Paul N. Andrews

    The Boston Tea Party was illegal. The French Resistance was illegal. Scaling the Iron Curtain in search of a better life was illegal. Being a Christian in the 1st century was illegal.
    Bombing the IRS building in Oklahoma City was illegal, and, immoral. Attacking the twin towers and killing so many innocents was illegal, and, immoral.
    “Immoral” is never justifiable but “Illegal” covers a broad spectrum and, often, is purely political.
    Down through the centuries, the “illegals” have often been the ones with the most courage and spirit – the same spirit that made this country great.
    We cheered those who risked their life breaching the Soviet Iron Curtain to join our way of life but we despise those who breach our Iron Curtain to join our way of life.