Obama to slash National Guard force on U.S.-Mexico border

Well yet ANOTHER sign of North American Union... two different in two days...
Yesterday : Government to let the US-Mexico border wide open

Today :
Obama to slash National Guard force on U.S.-Mexico border

Blaming budget cuts, the Obama administration early next year will cut the number of National Guard troops patrolling the U.S.-Mexico border by at least half, according to a congressman who was briefed on the plan.

The National Guard said an announcement will be made by the White House “in the near future,” but Rep. Duncan Hunter, a California Republican who has learned of the plans, said slashing the deployment in half is the minimum number, and he said it will mean reshuffling the remaining troops along the nearly 2,000-mile border.

In California, that will mean going from 264 Guard troops down to just 14, he said.

From 264 to 14... Why put 14 at all... they will be in danger after all. With 264, they could patrol in groups, so if they encounter human/drug smugglers, they can fight back... but if they are alone, fighting back will be a death warrant.

And just you watch, amnesty is not far ahead.

Bring back the troops, put them on the border. Simple. Yet Obama is keeping the ``withdrawn`` troops from Iraq in the middle-east to deal with Iran as his bosses order him to.

Or you know, bring back the 50 000 troops from GERMANY... and put them on the border.

And this whole thing just puts another big hole in the whole ``terrorists are gonna get us so let the TSA rape you and give up your rights`` BS argument that the government is using since 9/11.

Less security : more CIA drugs coming in, more gangs, more violence, more excuses to crackdown on the second amendment and rights in general.

SAN DIEGO
08/18/10 08:59 PM ET
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says the first of 224 National Guard troops have completed their training and are expected to be deployed to California's border with Mexico on Sept. 1.

Schwarzenegger made the announcement Wednesday in San Diego while visiting with the troops. Last month, the governor directed the National Guard to temporarily support federal efforts to secure the U.S.-Mexico border.

The move is in support of President Barack Obama's proposal to deploy 1,200 National Guard personnel along the southwest border of the U.S. The deployment will last up to one year in support of counter-narcotics and border security operations.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

I recall when this happened..notice in the 2nd paragraph it say's "temporarily support" We will still have the Border patrol on duty. Having the National Guard there was never intended to be permanent.

I'm not sure...but it seems like it might be helpful if the border was open to traffic both ways..and find a way to merge the Mexican and U.S. I.D. system for anyone that wants to travel back and forth...something needs to stop the madness at the border..so far...keeping it closed hasn't worked out to well. As a native of California I want to see a solution to this..Cheer Coco

reply to post by Vitchilo


Why any at all? American's obviously don't need jobs, and Mexicans only do jobs "we don't want to do"

I'm all for slave labor. In fact, why don't we just revert to Mexico's Presidente, our President is clearly redundant.

Amnesty in the past only made things worse. The last we thing we need is open borders or amnesty.

Just what we need, less homeland security.

You would think we would be more concerned with our borders in a post-9/11, though clearly we're not.

It's almost like our government is setting up shop in the middle-east for the new America, and leaving us to fend for ourselves.

The ship is sinking, and there just aren't enough lifeboats for us all.

Border control is just as much about keeping people out as it is keeping people in.

Do you really want a militarized border?

According to the GAO there are only 1,200 Guard members assigned to patrol the border in "Operation Phalanx" (assigned in 2009). This was after "Operation Jump Street" assigned a temporary 6,000 members back in 2006. Operation Phalanx was scheduled to end in December of this year.

So to claim that Obama is "slashing the Guard force on the border" by 6,000 members is partisan hyperbole by the Washington Times. Not only are there not now 6,000 members to slash, the 1,200 who are part of Operation Phalanx were scheduled from the beginning of their mission to return to their respective units this month.

National Guard units aren't border patrol agents, these missions cost BILLIONS to fund, and were meant as a "temporary bridge" (using their own words) until the ICE/Border Patrol staffing could be increased. Since then they've increased the border patrol force 20,000 + agents. Using National Guard units as ad-hoc border agents is a waste of resources, they're held in reserve for state emergencies and national/state defense. A temporary mission to go after drug smuggling is one thing, but they were never intended to become permanent.

Obama administration's proposed 2012 budget calls for increasing the the number of border patrol agents to 21,370.

Another factor not being covered by the Washington Times (given it's 'conservative' bias) is that the MILITARY is the real culprit behind ending the Guard units withdrawal;

GAO report reveals a rift over National Guard's role at border

The GAO report above is a must-read to understand just what role the Guard was playing at the border, and why the Washington Times article is an example of bad journalism and partisan sniping.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


Guardsmen were not allowed to detain anyone or stop anyone anyways. Assigning them is pointless.. unless, we give them authority to stop by any means necessary illegals crossing over. Which I believe we should.

reply to post by Rockpuck


I've always been an advocate for more military action along the border, and even joint operations between US/Mexico narcs to go directly after the cartels in the jungles. I'm sure the Guard units had some impact on drug smuggling but they were never meant to be a permanent force, and the military has always bristled at being used as drug-interdiction forces. Their stance that it interferes with operational readiness has some merit, if it means a states ability to respond to emergencies it diminished from having Guard units off along the US/Mexico border. The real goal should continue to be increasing the number of Border Patrol agents, 21,000 still isn't enough.

reply to post by Vitchilo


He's probably making sure those troops can be ready to arrest Americans when the NDAA passes.

Less security : more CIA drugs coming in, more gangs, more violence, more excuses to crackdown on the second amendment and rights in general.

Agreed. He could also be trying to clear the way for more guns and drugs to be shipped across the border.

They could very easily patrol the border with aircraft and fighters.

Any carrier group could sail in the Gulf and handle this.

Obviously, they want trouble.

The CIA is handling the drug money.

Hello NAU

NATO should declare a "No-Walk" Zone.

Carpet bomb everything 5 miles south of the border.

Civilians are civilians right? Just like Libya.