How the Obama Adm. Responds to Armed Invaders

[teflor the ranger]

Post signs warning US citizens to avoid entering US public lands because it now belongs to Mexican drug and human traffickers. This area extends NORTH of Tuscon, AZ.

Well done, Obama administration.

[Sarvis]

After the Obama administration met with border-state governors Monday to detail plans to deploy 1,200 National Guard to the region, Brewer told reporters that the influx of more than 500 National Guard troops to her state would not be enough.

What I don't get is that Arizona is where Hanh went to train... shouldn't there be tons of National Guard troops there?

Also, how disingenuous is it to receive 1200 troops, and then state that 500 isn't enough?

Also love how after all the whining about the signs, paragraphs and paragraphs of it, Fox News concedes that Obama has asked for $600 million in funds for more border patrol, immigration officers and drones (read: cool fighting robots.)

Seems like plenty to me in order to keep people from gaining freedom. Oh, sorry, I mean to keep dirty, savage Mexicans from entering our proud sovereign lands!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06 ... na-desert/

[teflor the ranger]

1200 clearly isn't enough to secure the border, unless you stupidly think that some how the drug traffic has stopped and there's no violence upon Americans by foreign invaders. This administration is as much a failure at securing our border as it continues to be at closing the detention center at Guantanamo Bay.

The signs the Obama administration posted announce that Arizona is an active drug and human smuggling area, and announces that our border is as safe as it ever has been.

Could there be any more bullshit? Is there an administration any more impotent than one that idly watches as our shores are polluted and our states are given up to the drug and human traffickers?

[Sarvis]

You want to secure the border from drug traffickers? (Nice how you just dropped the illegal aliens part, btw.)

LEGALIZE DRUGS!

Then those big, giant shiny corporations of yours will offer a better product at lower prices and the drug cartels will fold like a house of pancakes.

Of course, you'll never go for the option that will actually work. You'd rather put our troops at risk to fight for your moral outrage.

[teflor the ranger]

Legalize a highly addictive substance. Hmm, I wonder why it wouldn't work the way you think it will. Not. Read a book.

A president that has announced defeat at the hands of drug and human traffickers has indeed committed a dereliction of duty.

[teflor the ranger]

(Nice how you just dropped the illegal aliens part, btw.)

Hey, retard, show where I mentioned them in the first place. Quit making shit up, moron.

[Corth]

I'm in total agreement with Sarvis on the drug issue. Legalizing drugs would be the most intelligent thing the US government has done in years. In fact I wouldn't just legalize it. I would have the government subsidize it. Give it out for free - but only if you agree to use it by yourself in a nice sterile government drug taking facility with white walls, no tv, but perhaps a comfortable couch. Bring a book or something. :)

All the addicts would go regularly to maintain, which would drive down crime since money is no longer an issue to get a fix (fewer robberies). The blackmarket drug dealers would go out of business because their product is now being doled out to their best customers for free. My hypothesis is that you would have a lot fewer new addicts since the 'party' element of using drugs is removed. All the existing addicts are off by themselves in sterile government rooms maintaining. Who is going to show up at a government facility and ask to shoot up heroin, by him/herself, for the first time? It gets rid of the entire peer pressure aspect.

[teflor the ranger]

Sure, I can agree with that, but it has nothing to do with Obama's absolute, pathetic failure to defend our nation and protect our citizens from violent drug and human traffickers thanks to impotent inaction.

[Sarvis]

(Nice how you just dropped the illegal aliens part, btw.)

Hey, retard, show where I mentioned them in the first place. Quit making shit up, moron.

human traffickers

How about right there? The "human traffic" from Mexico is people being smuggled in to try and find work, btw, before you claim you meant something else. The article in fact uses human smuggling, as an accurate differentiation.

But go ahead and pull your troll bullshit and say you really meant human trafficking for prostitution or slave labor, even though the whole border dispute issue is REALLY about illegal aliens and Arizona being unhappy about them.

[Sarvis]

I'm in total agreement with Sarvis on the drug issue. Legalizing drugs would be the most intelligent thing the US government has done in years. In fact I wouldn't just legalize it. I would have the government subsidize it. Give it out for free - but only if you agree to use it by yourself in a nice sterile government drug taking facility with white walls, no tv, but perhaps a comfortable couch. Bring a book or something. :)

I actually thought of something similar. I'd only add some testing up front to make sure it's safe, and a "cool down" period at the end for the more addictive drugs. So basically you go in, take whatever you want and then sit there and go through withdrawal too so that you're not out on the street trying to find a cheaper fix.

I'd see no problem with setting it up like a kind of bar, where people could talk and socialize while high.

All the addicts would go regularly to maintain, which would drive down crime since money is no longer an issue to get a fix (fewer robberies). The blackmarket drug dealers would go out of business because their product is now being doled out to their best customers for free. My hypothesis is that you would have a lot fewer new addicts since the 'party' element of using drugs is removed.

The problem with your version is that the partiers use drugs to supplement their partying, so there'd still be a demand for something you can snort in the bathroom at a club. Making it a club you go to and party while you take whatever, then stick around for the detox, gets both the addicts AND the partiers.

All the existing addicts are off by themselves in sterile government rooms maintaining. Who is going to show up at a government facility and ask to shoot up heroin, by him/herself, for the first time? It gets rid of the entire peer pressure aspect.

Right, because no one ever drunkenly goes to get a tattoo or anything because of peer pressure. ;)

[Sarvis]

Sure, I can agree with that, but it has nothing to do with Obama's absolute, pathetic failure to defend our nation and protect our citizens from violent drug and human traffickers thanks to impotent inaction.

Whatever you do, make sure you ignore the $600 million in new border patrol elements that Obama wants to spend money on! That way Teflor can think he has a point!

[teflor the ranger]

Sure, I can agree with that, but it has nothing to do with Obama's absolute, pathetic failure to defend our nation and protect our citizens from violent drug and human traffickers thanks to impotent inaction.

Whatever you do, make sure you ignore the $600 million in new border patrol elements that Obama wants to spend money on! That way Teflor can think he has a point!

If Obama had any money left to spend, rather than pretend to spend, this might have made a difference. You're the one ignoring the gun violence, the signs warning Americans that we've lost and can't use our own public lands.

The log in your eye must burn.

Drug lords and human traffickers 1 - Obama Administration 0. rtfscoreboard

[Sarvis]

If Obama had any money left to spend,

Must suck to have a President who actually stops spending when we're out of cash. Should be like Bush and just fund it off the books!

[teflor the ranger]

If Obama had any money left to spend,

Must suck to have a President who actually stops spending when we're out of cash. Should be like Bush and just fund it off the books!

If you really want, I can address Obama's $600 million spending proposal directly. The Department of Homeland Security's budget in 2010 was $42,713 million. Congratulations on the 1% drop in the bucket.

[Sarvis]

If Obama had any money left to spend,

Must suck to have a President who actually stops spending when we're out of cash. Should be like Bush and just fund it off the books!

If you really want, I can address Obama's $600 million spending proposal directly. The Department of Homeland Security's budget in 2010 was $42,713 million. Congratulations on the 1% drop in the bucket.

1,000 border patrol agents
160 Customs Enforcement Officials
2 UAVs - http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/arizon ... 03286.html
1200 National Guard troops

Putting nearly 2400 Americans in harms way to prevent people from seeking the freedom and opportunity supposedly found in America: "A drop in the bucket."

[Corth]

No issue with anyone seeking freedom and opportunity. But are you suggesting Sarvis that we just open the borders altogether? Certainly at minimum we want to make sure that known criminals and terrorists don't enter, right? I have no problem making it a hell of a lot easier to legally enter the country - to seek freedom and opportunity - but I'm not sure why people have an issue with kicking people out who enter in violation of the country's laws. If the first interaction you have with our country is to violate a Federal law, are you really someone we want here?

[teflor the ranger]

Must suck to have a President who actually stops spending when we're out of cash. Should be like Bush and just fund it off the books!

If you really want, I can address Obama's $600 million spending proposal directly. The Department of Homeland Security's budget in 2010 was $42,713 million. Congratulations on the 1% drop in the bucket.

1,000 border patrol agents
160 Customs Enforcement Officials
2 UAVs - http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/arizon ... 03286.html
1200 National Guard troops

Putting nearly 2400 Americans in harms way to prevent people from seeking the freedom and opportunity supposedly found in America: "A drop in the bucket."

Ignorance on an astounding scale. Answer a couple of questions and you'll realize why I won't bother responding:
How many miles is our border with mexico?
How many troops are already doing homeland security?
How many customs enforcement officials are already employed?
How little jack squat does what your figures mean to our border?

and before you answer any of those:

Why do we need fucking signs that tell Americans that they can't use public lands because they now belong to drug and human traffickers that will cause them violent bodily harm and death DEEP inside American territory?

[Sarvis]

Why do we need fucking signs that tell Americans that they can't use public lands because they now belong to drug and human traffickers that will cause them violent bodily harm and death DEEP inside American territory?

I think it's because most southerners are as retarded as you, and need signs telling them when something might be unsafe. This is the same reason McDonald's needs to label coffee as possibly being hot, and companies need to write notices on plastic bags so you don't tie one over your head.

Frankly if a thousand troops in one state (NOT the entire border, we're just talking Arizona) doesn't make a difference because there is already a shitload there then you need to face one important fact: A military response is not going to work. We could send our entire army there and people would still get through, and in fact the signs would be more necessary because it would be a war zone.

We've outlined the solutions. You, and the government, are going to continue to be stupid about it. The solutions are:

1) Legalize drugs so the cartels aren't smuggling drugs, and are outgunned by private US corporations
2) Allow immigration so that Mexicans can come here legally and enjoy the Freedom that America supposedly stands for.

Anything else Will. Not. Work. It's a waste of both our money and our countrymen.

[Pril]

Why do we need fucking signs that tell Americans that they can't use public lands because they now belong to drug and human traffickers that will cause them violent bodily harm and death DEEP inside American territory?

I think it's because most southerners are as retarded as you, and need signs telling them when something might be unsafe. This is the same reason McDonald's needs to label coffee as possibly being hot, and companies need to write notices on plastic bags so you don't tie one over your head.

Frankly if a thousand troops in one state (NOT the entire border, we're just talking Arizona) doesn't make a difference because there is already a shitload there then you need to face one important fact: A military response is not going to work. We could send our entire army there and people would still get through, and in fact the signs would be more necessary because it would be a war zone.

We've outlined the solutions. You, and the government, are going to continue to be stupid about it. The solutions are:

1) Legalize drugs so the cartels aren't smuggling drugs, and are outgunned by private US corporations
2) Allow immigration so that Mexicans can come here legally and enjoy the Freedom that America supposedly stands for.

Anything else Will. Not. Work. It's a waste of both our money and our countrymen.

Sarvis,

Do you propose to make legal immigration to the US easier for all or just Mexicans?

[Sarvis]

Why do we need fucking signs that tell Americans that they can't use public lands because they now belong to drug and human traffickers that will cause them violent bodily harm and death DEEP inside American territory?

I think it's because most southerners are as retarded as you, and need signs telling them when something might be unsafe. This is the same reason McDonald's needs to label coffee as possibly being hot, and companies need to write notices on plastic bags so you don't tie one over your head.

Frankly if a thousand troops in one state (NOT the entire border, we're just talking Arizona) doesn't make a difference because there is already a shitload there then you need to face one important fact: A military response is not going to work. We could send our entire army there and people would still get through, and in fact the signs would be more necessary because it would be a war zone.

We've outlined the solutions. You, and the government, are going to continue to be stupid about it. The solutions are:

1) Legalize drugs so the cartels aren't smuggling drugs, and are outgunned by private US corporations
2) Allow immigration so that Mexicans can come here legally and enjoy the Freedom that America supposedly stands for.

Anything else Will. Not. Work. It's a waste of both our money and our countrymen.

Sarvis,

Do you propose to make legal immigration to the US easier for all or just Mexicans?

All. Why not? Isn't that how we built this country in the first place? Plus Diep might have a better chance at staying and we could start dating again. ;)

[Pril]

Why do we need fucking signs that tell Americans that they can't use public lands because they now belong to drug and human traffickers that will cause them violent bodily harm and death DEEP inside American territory?

I think it's because most southerners are as retarded as you, and need signs telling them when something might be unsafe. This is the same reason McDonald's needs to label coffee as possibly being hot, and companies need to write notices on plastic bags so you don't tie one over your head.

Frankly if a thousand troops in one state (NOT the entire border, we're just talking Arizona) doesn't make a difference because there is already a shitload there then you need to face one important fact: A military response is not going to work. We could send our entire army there and people would still get through, and in fact the signs would be more necessary because it would be a war zone.

We've outlined the solutions. You, and the government, are going to continue to be stupid about it. The solutions are:

1) Legalize drugs so the cartels aren't smuggling drugs, and are outgunned by private US corporations
2) Allow immigration so that Mexicans can come here legally and enjoy the Freedom that America supposedly stands for.

Anything else Will. Not. Work. It's a waste of both our money and our countrymen.

Sarvis,

Do you propose to make legal immigration to the US easier for all or just Mexicans?

All. Why not? Isn't that how we built this country in the first place? Plus Diep might have a better chance at staying and we could start dating again. ;)

In that case do you have any plans for dealing with overpopulation in the US?

[Sarvis]

Considering food is so plentiful here that most people ca't keep themselves to a healthy bodyweight, I'm not sure we're so low on resources that overpopulation would become a big concern anytime soon.

[Corth]

Overpopulation is a very played out term. The population density of the US is fairly low compared to a lot of other countries. And as Sarvis mentions, there is more than enough food available to even low wage earners in this country. I could accept an argument of overpopulation in a country where people are starving - but I just don't see it in the US anytime soon.

[Sarvis]

Are we violating some kind of forum rule when we agree with each other Corth? This can't be right...

[Ragorn]

I just want to say... there has not been a 9/11 terrorist attack on American soil during Obama's presidency. By this time in Bush's administration, we were all already shitting ourselves.

Obama's policies work. Bush's didn't. Thread pretty much over at this point.

[teflor the ranger]

Why do we need fucking signs that tell Americans that they can't use public lands because they now belong to drug and human traffickers that will cause them violent bodily harm and death DEEP inside American territory?

I think it's because most southerners are as retarded as you, and need signs telling them when something might be unsafe. This is the same reason McDonald's needs to label coffee as possibly being hot, and companies need to write notices on plastic bags so you don't tie one over your head.

Frankly if a thousand troops in one state (NOT the entire border, we're just talking Arizona) doesn't make a difference because there is already a shitload there then you need to face one important fact: A military response is not going to work. We could send our entire army there and people would still get through, and in fact the signs would be more necessary because it would be a war zone.

We've outlined the solutions. You, and the government, are going to continue to be stupid about it. The solutions are:

1) Legalize drugs so the cartels aren't smuggling drugs, and are outgunned by private US corporations
2) Allow immigration so that Mexicans can come here legally and enjoy the Freedom that America supposedly stands for.

Anything else Will. Not. Work. It's a waste of both our money and our countrymen.

I think that's the same giant pile of bullshit you said about Iraq. How can you be so wrong so many times and still not learn a lesson?

And bullshit, retard monkey 'solutions' without answers to the basic questions about our border aren't solutions.

[Sarvis]

Ah, so you have no argument... good. That's progress. Eventually you'll be able to admit you've got nothing... but for now just dropping an ad hominim will work. Btw, if you actually look back you'll see I was in favor of the iraq war...

[Adriorn Darkcloak]

I just want to say... there has not been a 9/11 terrorist attack on American soil during Obama's presidency. By this time in Bush's administration, we were all already shitting ourselves.

Obama's policies work. Bush's didn't. Thread pretty much over at this point.

So what you're saying, Ragorn, is that some people blindly supported Bush regardless, and some people, like you, blindly support Obama regardless. Gotcha.

[Corth]

That is Ragorn trying very hard to be a troll and not entirely succeeding.

[Sarvis]

That is Ragorn trying very hard to be a troll and not entirely succeeding.

He just doesn't have the practice and commitment Teflor does...

[Ragorn]

That is Ragorn trying very hard to be a troll and not entirely succeeding.

I got one :)

[teflor the ranger]

Idiot trap #11? :O

[teflor the ranger]

Ah, so you have no argument... good. That's progress. Eventually you'll be able to admit you've got nothing... but for now just dropping an ad hominim will work. Btw, if you actually look back you'll see I was in favor of the iraq war...

Wow. You are so full of shit it's incredible. I am not making ad hominim arguments, I am simply insulting you while making completely valid arguments you fail to respond to.

Let's break down your bullshit statement piece by piece:

Btw, if you actually look back you'll see I was in favor of the iraq war...

First of all, this is a fucking retarded response. Especially because I am talking about how you supported the view that there was no military solution in Iraq. Whether you were in favor of the war or not has absolutely no bearing on the discussion. First of all, there was no solution in Iraq at all without the military. The same applies to our border. It will not be secure without a military solution. Our borders must be secured first and foremost by force, particularly in the face of a forceful, armed invasion.

Ah, so you have no argument... good. That's progress. Eventually you'll be able to admit you've got nothing...

This is also a fucking retarded response. I've posed this argument plainly and simply, time and time again, across a broad segment of issues. Full spectrum solution - military, political, diplomatic, technological, and human. The United States of America is fully capable of fully securing our southern border. We merely haven't because of the cost/benefit. At the moment, security of the southern border is a political pawn held hostage by the Obama administration who wants to trade security for more needy immigrants that will vote for every handout (democrats) that they can get their hands on. Read this carefully: the Obama administration is allowing the security situation at our southern border get increasingly worse, to the point where they're posting signs that say Americans can't use American public lands, as a political pawn to get what they want.

[teflor the ranger]

I need to balance my previous post. I do find in general that you are intelligent, Sarvis, but I also find that in this particular occasion, your thought process requires more depth.

[Sarvis]

I need to balance my previous post. I do find in general that you are intelligent, Sarvis, but I also find that in this particular occasion, your thought process requires more depth.

Teflor, you have completely and utterly jumped the shark. Your trolls are usually at least something which draws out an argument or is interesting/infuriating. That last one sounds like the crap you'd hear a homeless guy shouting on the street corner.

[teflor the ranger]

I take it you're the bullshit hall monitor?