Lawmaker: Obama to send 1,200 troops to border

[grantcart]

Source: Associated Press

PHOENIX -- The Obama administration plans to announce Tuesday that it will send as many as 1,200 National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border to improve border security, an Arizona congresswoman said.

Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords also said in a statement released Tuesday that President Barack Obama will request $500 million in funding for border security.

Part of Giffords' district borders Mexico.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer's spokesman said the governor hadn't been told of the move prior to her office being contacted by The Associated Press and had no immediate comment

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/25/AR2010052503227.html?hpid=topnews

---

Sending National Guard troops to the border has no operational benefit at all.

The troops are parked in the surrounding areas and are generally confined to tents.

National Guard troops are not trained, and most would not have the language skills necessary for, confronting and detaining undocumented migrants.

The article goes on to admit as much:

In 2006, President George W. Bush sent thousands of troops to the border to perform support duties that tie up immigration agents. The troops wouldn't perform significant law enforcement duties.

It is a public relations manouver and, if true, doesn't reflect well on the administration.

[saracat]

1. You may not approve of this but it will go a long way to regaining some trust

many Arizonan's no longer have in the Democrats. Sad but true. Many folks feel the feds have abandoned this issue . And while I am vehemently opposed to SB1070, I cannot deny that for years no one has done anything to settle this issue. This isn't the right answer and will do little but it will make some folks feel better and as though someone cares. For the sake of Gabby and all the other Arizona Democrats who are up for election, I am grateful to the president for doing this.

[FarLeftFist]

2. This should shut some people up for a while.

[Cant trust em]

6. Good on you.

I've seen your posts and know that you've been pretty critical of Obama in many instances. It's nice to see some variance in people's postings.

[grantcart]

8. I can only hope that a serious move on immigration reform is going to follow quickly

The fact is that the number of migrants moving across the border illegally has dropped significantly in the last 2 years.

[Cant trust em]

40. Let's assume that a big move on immigration does come.

How would that make this policy any better? How realistic is it to expect that we can actually keep a 3,000 mile border physically secure? I tend to think that the whole "wall/border guard" concept is really phony since it's just way too big to do effectively.

I don't see this as anything more than political cover to say that we're doing something.

[nichomachus]

12. I'm still not clear what "this issue" is

Even people on the left have bought into the propaganda that "illegal immigrants" are the cause of all our problems and worthy of calling out armed troops. I don't buy it. It's a ginned up issue created by the corporatists to deflect attention away from the fact that most of our problems are caused by greedy bankers, greedy insurance companies, greedy stock companies, etc.

Knowing that the shit was going to hit the fan, the took a page from the playbook of Germany in the 1920s and set up a group as the scapegoat class that would be blamed once the shit hit the fan. For the Germans it was the Jews. For the US it's Mexicans.

The truth is that there has been a negative growth in the rate of entry into the country. Millions of undocumented workers are going the other way, back to Mexico. It's just a function of the collapsing economy. Everyone acts like there were millions coming in. This is not true -- except in the propaganda. This bullshit move by Obama just reinforces the corporate propaganda.

[Downwinder]

33. I thought it was the Irish and then the Italians.

[proudohioan]

43. Followed by my ancestors, the dirty, filthy 'bohunks'. n/t

[Kali]

35. you nailed it

:thumbsup:

constantly amazes me how gullible people are

[Cant trust em]

50. Assuming that migrants have been moving out of the US since the economic collapse

doesn't it then stand to reason that when the economy starts picking up jobs again that we'll have to deal with this issue? When will be a good time to rehaul our entire immigration policy? Why are so many national Latino advocacy groups pushing for immigration reform?

[AlphaCentauri]

75. Simple logic

you deal with immigration reform now that the numbers are low so when the economy rebounds you have the laws and the means to control the flow of immigrants.

[Cant trust em]

77. That creates a political problem

while the economy stinks and unemployment is high, the political climate of allowing additional competition in makes reform a steep uphill climb.

If I were Obama, I wouldn't start immigration reform until at least after the mid-terms. At a minimum.

[AlphaCentauri]

79. 16 or more states plus many cities are creating the political problem for Obama

republicans are trying to make Obama look weak, undecided and not solving problems. The president can opt to be a spectator and let the republicans run the show or show the American public that he can solve problems.

[MellowDem]

76. You have it wrong...

Corporations love the status quo and love illegal immigration. They will do what is necessary to keep the spigot of cheap, illegal labor open.

[krabigirl]

82. Yep. People are scapegoating because these are desperate times. it's to be expected :(

ANd yes, the amount of undocumented immigrants has gone down in recent years due to the housing bust. Many have gone home like you said. I just read something recently, just don't remember where.

[flamingdem]

13. +1 It won't cost the country much to respond to Arizona's supposed concerns nt

[EFerrari]

19. Oh, yes it will and in the fastest growing voting demographic.

Hello?

[flamingdem]

31. It seems like Obama is trying to cool the turn to AZ type legislation

other states are threatening to do the same.

[EFerrari]

42. I think he's trying to change the topic from the gulf.

You can't counter 1070 clones by agreeing with the premise.

[flamingdem]

46. Sad. You're no doubt right on that. I keep hoping he's making reasonable moves! nt

[EFerrari]

49. He's giving the haters impunity.

I only hope no one gets hurt.

And if that seems over the top, go see this video.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x468247

[flamingdem]

56. Critical thinking, that's what's going out the window. That AZ is scary! nt

[totodeinhere]

60. Undocumented immigrants cannot vote.

And Hispanic citizens who can vote want a solution to the immigration issue just as much as anyone else. If Obama is trying to buy some time on the immigration issue by doing this, I don't understand why Hispanic voters would have a problem with it.

[EFerrari]

86. Really? Then you have no idea how mixed a large number of these

households are or how united the community is.

Latino voters have a stake in comprehensive immigration reform, not in seeing people in the Latino community dehumanized and scapegoated for the crash or the weather or why your children play video games. lol

[totodeinhere]

87. I agree with you. But that's not what Obama is doing.

He opposes the Arizona law and he supports comprehensive immigration reform. Do I wish he could move faster on this issue? Yes, I do. But in his best judgment sending these few unarmed national guardsmen to the border areas might just buy him the political capital he needs to get it done. And by the way, this was done at the request of a Democratic congresswoman from Arizona, Gabrielle Giffords, not a Republican.

[EFerrari]

88. Increasing your political capital via racism is, what? What should we call that?

And, believe me, I've become much too aware of how willing AZ "Democrats" are to exploit illegal immigration -- to their own long term cost.

[EFerrari]

18. Does no one in Arizona know that ICE's "secure communities"

program has been steadily growing? Or that immigrants are leaving, not arriving?

What is the matter with Arizona Democrats? Must be serious because not only are they not in power but they're acting like second rate Republicans.

But I think I understand your position. Send some troops out there to wave good-bye to immigrants who are leaving, not coming in, and if someone gets shot, well, that's just the way it goes.

Forget that it props up Brewer's bullshit. It may get you a vote or two.

Gotcha.

[Kali]

39. no, they jsut know there are "Mexicans" moving into their neighborhoods

and it scares the shit out of them

there is chorizo in the meat section at Safeway OMG!!!

[EFerrari]

41. Next thing you know, quesso fresco and that leads straight to birria!

If you see this goat stew, please dial 911!



lol

[apnu]

44. Questions for you... why only Democrats taking flack for this?

If the Feds have abandoned the issue, how long since the Feds abandoned the issue? Does this perceived abandonment period exist solely during Obama's tenure or is there anger in the Bush years? If there is an impression of Federal abandonment prior to January 20th 2009, then why is it Democrats have lost trust and not Republicans in a Republican dominated state while under a Republican dominate Federal government?

I'm just trying to figure out the thought process in Arizona, not being a native and having spent a total of 3 1/2 days in the state within my lifetime, I know nothing about the perspectives in the area.

[saracat]

63. They are angry at the feds in general but the Dems are the ones in office right now.

The RW nuts have taken over a most of the state government and they want to project the image, they are fighting the government for the defense of our states rights and its preservation. The fact that they are contributing to the economic decline and further destroying the state with their actions is irrelevant to them. The boycott has only intensified their sense of self preservation. The immigration issue is a problem EVERY presidential administration has ducked but the Dems are now IT.

I was out getting petition signatures this weekend and encountered quite a few Dems and Indies who are really angry that the Federal government hasn't intervened in immigration and they put the blame on Obama and by proxy on the local candidates.They think this state has been abandoned.Janet Napolitano used the same argument against Bush that many GOP and Dems are using against Obama. They asked Bush to put troops on the border as well.

This will "look good" to them. It won't work, and the troops can't DO anything but heck, it makes them feel better.

[atreides1]

62. Won't make any difference

It will be spun as "too little, too late".

And the Republicans will just keep lying, and the idiots will just keep believing that these funny talking brown people are trying to steal their cars and rape their wives and daughters.

The man could put an entire division on the border, and it wouldn't change the minds of those who feel that a black man in the White House, should be serving coffee, not having it served to him.

[mfcorey1]

3. That is easy to fix. Just place bilingual guards within each group of troops where they are ...

stationed. He will be damned now that he has done this and he was damned when he didn't. No win situation and somebody is always going to be upset.

[grantcart]

5. Troops are not trained as law enforcement officers

They will not be used as such. There are substantial legal issues that the army and national guard do not want to engage in - for good reason.


If the Border Patrol guard is close enough to translate then he is close enough to communicate with the migrants directly, showing how completely useless this move is.

Last time the NG never got close to actually interdicting migrants and they won't this time either.

[swilton]

47. He Would Be Better Off

And gain more political capital if he sent these troops to the gulf to work on containing the oil spill.

[nichomachus]

4. So now they'll distract us from the corporate destruction of the economy by shooting a few Mexicans?

If you don't plan on shooting people, why are you sending troops who are armed? This is kind of chilling for those of us old enough to remember the videos of East Germans being shot to death for trying to cross the border.

There's an old saying that if you pull a gun on someone you should be determined to use it. The same goes for deploying an army.

[grantcart]

7. They will be parked out in a remote area and confined to their tents.

They will not be interdicting.

Useless PR manouver.

[nichomachus]

9. I can only hope

Because the drug dealers use the same border and they are not at all shy about wiping out police and federal troops. In fact, in the last year or so, they've become quite proficient at it. Troops stationed along the border are probably in more danger than troops in Baghdad -- and not from the people looking to come here to find work.

[grantcart]

17. The Border Patrol usually loses about 1-2 agents a year along the entire border.

and about half of the deaths are vehicular related and related to human smuggling.

The drug dealers are smart enough to know that killing federal officers is a smart way to bring hundreds of officers down on your neck.

It is true that police officers in the area have an increase in fatalities.

Unfortunately it may be true that some of the officers may have been killed because of their involvement in the trade and not because they were police officers trying to stop drug agents, but obviously we will never know the breakdown.

[nichomachus]

22. You don't have to go very far across the border

to find they are not at all shy about killing police or troops.

[Flaneur]

69. Yes, but it really does seem to stop at the border.

I think the cartels have issued orders to keep the nasty shit south of the river.

[Cant trust em]

10. DU knee-jerk response team is the only thing that is getting operational benefit today.

This could well be a moronic move by the administration, but I'm staying agnostic until I hear more information.

[EFerrari]

24. And you can because you are at zero risk

from the support this mendacity gives to the nativists in Arizona.

Must be nice to be you.

[Cant trust em]

29. I might have a different opinion two hours.

At this point I know nothing other than 1,200 troops are going to the border. I don't know anything about their mission, overall strategy or purpose. I'm just not going to get ramped up about something that I pretty much know nothing about yet. I'm going to take a wait and see approach until I get more information.

[EFerrari]

51. If you know so little about this issue

then perhaps you don't know enough to label those of us who are up on it "knee jerks".

Thanks.

[Cant trust em]

54. I suspect that many of those giving opinions know less than you do.

And less than I do.

I know, it's almost hard to believe that some people on DU talk a lot and know a little.

[EFerrari]

55. And you would be wrong.

There are many posters here who indeed have the facts of this issue in hand.

[Cant trust em]

58. I could be wrong.

I'm totally willing to say that many people on this site do know what they're talking about. I just really bristle at the "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality that I see on this site. Time and time again it happens. I've been around this site long enough to know that a lot of people don't know much about specific policy and can only talk about political posturing or democrats vs. republicans.

[grantcart]

32. This is the information that the Administration has carefully leaked out

or a Congressional Democratic Congresswoman has completely misunderstood.

Its not like this is from an unnamed source.

She has not only gone on the record but released a prepared statement.

If they have more relevent information then they should have released it all at once.

This time the DU reaction is not knee jerk.

[Cant trust em]

36. Reacting to the incomplete information can still be knee-jerk.

We know that additional information is going to come out later today. Why not wait until we rush to judgment? The end result could still be outrage, but at least then we'll know the whole picture.

I'm going to wait until the end of the day, but that's just how I operate.

[grantcart]

52. because in this case we are reacting to an official announcement

including a prepared statement.

the fact is that the President is sending troops to the border and the administration confirms it.

Those are enough facts to give a response to.

Its a bad move, symbolic at best.

The National Guard is not equipped for and not trained for law enforcement responsibilities.


http://news.blogs.cnn.com/
President Barack Obama will deploy up to 1,200 more National Guard troops to the U.S. border with Mexico, an administration official told CNN on Tuesday.

In addition, Obama will request $500 million in supplemental funds to current spending for enhanced border protection and law enforcement activities, the official said.

[Cant trust em]

59. We know that 1,200 troops will be at the border.

Hardly enough info to have a clear understanding of what this could be. What is the specific mission? What are the goals? Is this related to the drug war?

These are questions that I'm interested in finding out more information on.

[EFerrari]

53. So, you don't know the context but you know enough to name call?

Okay.

[chowder66]

48. ...drug running and smuggling of people

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dcnow/2010/05/obama-to-send-troops-to-mexcio.html

"Obama has repeatedly argued for better border security, a position backed by Mexico President Felipe Calderon, who recently visited the White House."

[Arkana]

11. Seriously.

This I can't support.

It has virtually no benefit other than kowtowing to those racist fucks in Arizona. Why do this now? Why?

[flamingdem]

14. Wake up. Lots of US Citizens resent the illegals, more with the economic downturn nt

[nichomachus]

25. The downturn was expected (engineered), which is why the Mexicans were set up as the scapegoats

The corporatists didn't want people blaming them for ruining the economy, so they needed someone to take the fall. The Mexicans drew the short straw. We're ready to shoot Mexicans and nothing is happening to the people in the big banks who made billions while looting the economy.

[krabigirl]

84. Yep, and no one cares about the wars anymore. Hey, people on here are cheering for more wars!

[krabigirl]

83. Yeah, and these same people admit to doing illegal things themselves. I hate that term.

[grantcart]

20. I expect that this is done at the request of AZ Democrats who want to

beat back against Brewer.

Can't agree with it but the 'leak' comes from a Democratic AZ congresswoman.

[Arkana]

23. How exactly does it "beat back" against Brewer?

To me, it looks like they're just capitulating to her--acknowledging that she was right.

[EFerrari]

26. It doesn't. It makes her look right when she's full of sh!t. n/t

[grantcart]

28. Agreed

[EFerrari]

38. We could take the Southwest out of the swing column

by doing right just on this issue.

ETA: And I don't even mean amnesty. But by treating working people with respect. That's all it would take. Isn't that something.

[saracat]

64. It takes the steam out of the RW argument. They can't say that

"Nothing" is being done or the Feds are ignoring them. They can't say the Democrats "support illegal immigration. it gives us a counter. Janet Napolitano put troops on the border before. It isn't saying the new law is correct. It is acknowledging we have a problem on the border. And we do. This just isn't a solution.

[EFerrari]

68. You conflate drug violence with immigration but you know that.

It conflates criminal activity that the US is a party to with working immigrants that have nada, nadita to do with this.

Good going, sara.

[saracat]

71. What? I do not. I explained my point..

[flamingdem]

27. makes sense, plus other states want to enact the same legislation nt

[DURHAM D]

15. Is this to keep them in or keep them out? nt

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

16. Eeek!

[madrchsod]

21. let`s see....

a thousand or so national guard to protect our borders for what?

oh i forgot the war on drugs and illegals

over 22 thousand mexicans have been killed since 2006 in mexico.
an unknown number of dead here in the usa due to violence and overdoses.
tens billions of dollars in interdiction,prosecution,and incarceration
tens of billions in the degradation of communities and regions in the usa

has anyone in Afghanistan caused the same amount of suffering that the war on drugs has caused.

1000 or so troops is bullshit. if we really want to do something...

change nafta

place enough troops to keep people from crossing

reform our drug laws

actually help those who want to get clean

restore our job base in the cities and countryside so men and women have a decent job

but it`s easier to send blood and money to fight a war on people who hate us.

[nichomachus]

30. Arizona's "immigrant crisis" is really a GOP plot to steal the election in November

http://www.gregpalast.com/behind-the-arizona-immigration-lawgop-game-to-swipe-the-november-election/

Greg Palast

Don't be fooled. The way the media plays the story, it was a wave of racist, anti-immigrant hysteria that moved Arizona Republicans to pass a sick little law, signed last week, requiring every person in the state to carry papers proving they are US citizens. I don't buy it. Anti-Hispanic hysteria has always been as much a part of Arizona as the Saguaro cactus and excessive air-conditioning. What's new here is not the politicians' fear of a xenophobic "Teabag" uprising.

What moved GOP Governor Jan Brewer to sign the Soviet-style show-me-your-papers law is the exploding number of legal Hispanics, US citizens all, who are daring to vote -- and daring to vote Democratic by more than two-to-one. Unless this demographic locomotive is halted, Arizona Republicans know their party will soon be electoral toast. Or, if you like, tortillas.

In 2008, working for Rolling Stone with civil rights attorney Bobby Kennedy, our team flew to Arizona to investigate what smelled like an electoral pogrom against Chicano voters ... directed by one Jan Brewer.

Brewer, then Secretary of State, had organized a racially loaded purge of the voter rolls that would have made Katherine Harris blush. Beginning after the 2004 election, under Brewer's command, no less than 100,000 voters, overwhelmingly Hispanics, were blocked from registering to vote. In 2005, the first year of the Great Brown-Out, one in three Phoenix residents found their registration applications rejected.

[Lorien]

37. And it's sick that Obama is playing into their hands instead of turning the conversation

to issues that truly matter in America; our environment, education, the economy, jobs, ending two wars, ending the corporate crime that is ten thousand times more harmful to America than "illegals" or drugs could ever be...
oh, wait....

:banghead:

[EFerrari]

45. Sicker yet, that's exactly what AZ Democrats are asking him to do.

No wonder the Latino voters don't come out in Arizona.

[saracat]

66. That isn't the reason. And troops on the border isn't new. Janet did that too.

Are we supposed to have "open " borders? The troops can't do anything anyway. This is just admitting we have a problem. And we do. This isn't a solution, and likely isn't intended to be.And you REALLY don't know the Arizona electorate if you think the Latinos support illegal immigration just because they are Latino. The AZ Democrats want to be able to win in November. I have major issues with the AZ Dem State party but no way is a Democrat of any kind going to support illegal acts, or illegal immigration and win. We can support the immigrants without supporting illegality. SB1070 is a disgrace but it never would have been allowed to happen if either Janet had remained in office or we had promoted down line voting and local candidates in 2008.

[EFerrari]

67. As I said, I know now exactly why Latinos don't come out

for Arizona Democrats. You have a nice day.

[saracat]

70. Actually, you prove you don't know any Arizona Latino voters.

[EFerrari]

85. Oh, please. You were just last week or so extolling the Maricopa Co. voting systems

when they've come up, over and over again, in problem reports of race based voter suppression and vote counting opacity, you complain about a boycott of obviously racist legislation, and now you're defending this? Nice going.

You know, AZ Democrats can throw Latinos under the bus, again, for now. But it's a stupid strategy that won't serve you for more than a couple of years, maximum, and probably why AZ was a swing state in the first place.

[sandnsea]

34. This is a seriously stupid idea

This is how border wars start. Who the hell is advising him on this shit anyway.

[Bette Noir]

57. I'd think, if we have 1,200 Naional Guard troops available,

they could be better used helping clean up the Gulf.

Every time I've gone to Organ Pipe, on the Arizona/Mexico border, the place has been crawling with troops. Where does this idea come from, that the feds are doing nothing?

[greencharlie]

61. mmmm hmmmm... it's an election year! nt

[Aslanspal]

65. The right move considering what Arizona is doing

Instead of the problem getting internalized and politicized. Doing this will go a long way in preventing internal and political strife.

If only he had made this move before the Arizona Governor , but the reality was crime was not really a problem , bigots were.

throw bricks at me but does it seem this President is getting his act together and stringing together some success , albeit at a slower pace than progressives would want.

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

72. Hey Obama! Where's the change you promised US?

[alp227]

73. Obama to Send 1,200 Guard Troops to Mexico Border

Source: The New York Times

LOS ANGELES — President Obama will send up to 1,200 National Guard troops to the Southwest border and increase spending on law enforcement, yielding to demands from both Republican and Democratic lawmakers there that border security be tightened, administration officials said.

Mr. Obama is expected to make the announcement Tuesday, the officials said, after a meeting with lawmakers.

Homeland Security officials said that the troops would provide support to law enforcement officers already working along the border by helping observe and monitor traffic between official crossing points, and would help analyze trafficking patterns in hopes of intercepting illegal drug shipments. They performed similar tasks in an earlier deployment along the border from 2006 to 2008, when they also assisted with road and fence construction. The troops have not been involved directly in intercepting border crossers.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/26/us/26border.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

[emilyg]

80. Thanks.

[Baclava]

74. So we now have our own 2000 mile long Gaza Strip?

I hope the rocket and mortar blasts don't keep the locals up at night.

[The abyss]

78. Which way are they sealing?

In or out?

Just asking.

[krabigirl]

81. Soon, we are going to run out of troops. I don't see why Arizona can't send in their own, lol.

Don't they have minutemen who would do it? lol

[Steve20]

89. re

Good start but 1200 troops is a drop in the bucket. Enough worrying about offending Mexico.