Trump: We Will Guard Our Border With Our Military

a reply to: Gothmog

Sorry but there's nothing in the three laws I listed that specify the President can deploy US troops on US soil so long as the "opposing force" are foreign nationals.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: shooterbrody

Cool.

Like I said, I think he can articulate a reason for doing it. I just don't think it's a reason that will hold up very long.

It only has to hold for 60 days.
Think any of those 1500 has tb? Gee that wouldn't extend it at all?

Perhaps this will get congresses attention and our system can finally be repaired.

What is hilarious is POTUS is trying to protect the country and everyone is rooting for the foreign nationals.
What a joke.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: theantediluvian

But muh invasion!

Here's the juxtaposition of the reality of illegal border crossings versus the ratcheting up of "conservative" hysteria:

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Plus all of us with our quotes and links are not constitutional lawyers so there is that.
Apparently sometimes it is cut and dry and other times it can be interpreted. Who knew?

a reply to: eriktheawful

Page 3 was enlightening, particularly the parts about how the military is limited to support roles.

And the military in a support role would, one would think, be able to spot a "very large group of people" strolling towards the border and be able to direct law enforcement to the area. Declaring it an "invasion" opens up a whole slew of other things, but would certainly be the quickest way to get armed Marines going for walks along the border.

a reply to: shooterbrody

But as far as I can see it's business as usual in the affected states.

If it's okay for the President to deploy the military this instance then it seems like any moderately sized protest would also warrant a military response.

a reply to: Gothmog

That way I can rest knowing I have done my due diligence to the ATS Motto in Denying Ignorance.

If you let ATS get so important to you that you can't rest until certain things have happened, that's pretty sad, amigo.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Here's the kicker — it's completely legal for asylum seekers to arrive at our border, turn themselves into customs/border patrol and request asylum.

It's literally the proper legal process.

Is the military going to intervene to "secure" us against proper legal process? Nope.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: carewemust

If you have an issue with that, you may want to bring it up with the Founding Fathers. Limiting the President's ability to deploy the military on US soil goes back to the Insurrection Act of 1807.

Never did include a scenario of an invasion by a foreign force , though.
Did not then , does not now.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Section 2
Clause 1

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

Since this self identified group has sent demands to the us government POTUS has every right to determine they are a threat.
Let alone a serious public emergency.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: shooterbrody

But as far as I can see it's business as usual in the affected states.

If it's okay for the President to deploy the military this instance then it seems like any moderately sized protest would also warrant a military response.

Are those protesters foreign nationals trying to invade the usa?

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Shamrock6

Here's the kicker — it's completely legal for asylum seekers to arrive at our border, turn themselves into customs/border patrol and request asylum.

It's literally the proper legal process.

Is the military going to intervene to "secure" us against proper legal process? Nope.

Thats it. You got it (dang , I believe that is the second time in the years we have agreed)
They have to make known they are going to turn themselves in to custom officials BEFORE entering the US.

originally posted by: MarkOfTheV
I'm curious about how a policy like this would go over on a state level.

As in... the whole country may be for, or against it... but the "Border" is really only touching four states.

I can't imagine that Texas would have a problem militarizing the border, but I could see California being the only state to resist... so could/would that create a bottleneck for immigration?

As in... nobody crosses into Texas because its HEAVILY armed... and New Mexico and Arizona aren't safe bets either... so Cali just becomes the open gate.

The main point is, does the Prez have power over the states in this particular manner? (deploying military forces)

I say we build a wall along Cali if they refuse to help.

I can't wait to see if this is real or not. As soon as Mattis draws up plans. We are a go for containment if this comes true. Marine expeditionary forces and Soldiers + Hardware + FOBs.

DIS GON B GOOD!

a reply to: shooterbrody

So there's nothing in there about an "invading force" or foreign nationals? I rest my case. The Insurrection Act and its predecessors limit those exact powers of the President. If you have a problem with that you may want to take it up with Thomas Jefferson.

a reply to: xuenchen

"Trump now says the Military will guard "The Border" !!"

Wonder how much that will cost?

My guess would be rather a lot not to mention America's common sense.

originally posted by: MisterSpock

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Just think of the panic that would ensue if Obama had talked about deploying federal troops internally (Jade Helm comes to mind).

But now it's a great idea.

Lulz

Isn't the key difference in who they are deployed against? That being US citizens vs illegals compromising our border.

Of course...If it was the Chinese military we can know for sure our military would be there to protect the soverignty of our borders...This is no different...

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: shooterbrody

But as far as I can see it's business as usual in the affected states.

If it's okay for the President to deploy the military this instance then it seems like any moderately sized protest would also warrant a military response.

Are those protesters foreign nationals trying to invade the usa?

It can be declared as such . They made a slight mistake when they stated they had "demands" . That most definitely did not help their case.

a reply to: WarPig1939

How is this good? The second a civilian gets shot it's going to alienate us from most of the world. We'll join Russia in having our economy trashed by sanctions.

They are threatening violence if we don't let them in. I think the President can counter that without question. They put it in writing so we can defend.


+