|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
01-08-2019, 12:25 PM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,044
|
The National Emergency does not have to concern illegals at all. The amount of drugs that crosses our borders illegally and the number of deaths it causes, is more than enough for him to declare it an emergency.
|
|
|
|
01-08-2019, 12:31 PM
|
#2
|
Ledge Runner Baits
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: I live in a house, but my soul is at sea.
Posts: 8,657
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cool Beans
The National Emergency does not have to concern illegals at all. The amount of drugs that crosses our borders illegally and the number of deaths it causes, is more than enough for him to declare it an emergency.
|
That's the big propaganda message, when in fact most drugs are coming in through ports of entry, not in backpacks by illegals crossing our southern border. I have no doubt that is the big message coming tonight, that somehow if we build a wall our drug problem is somehow dramatically less, what a crock. His understanding of the drug problem is as sharp as his knowledge of history.
|
|
|
|
01-08-2019, 12:46 PM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,044
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Got Stripers
That's the big propaganda message, when in fact most drugs are coming in through ports of entry, not in backpacks by illegals crossing our southern border. I have no doubt that is the big message coming tonight, that somehow if we build a wall our drug problem is somehow dramatically less, what a crock. His understanding of the drug problem is as sharp as his knowledge of history.
|
Well, I have completed 3 (6 month) counter narcotics deployments along both sides of South America and there is an enormous amount of cocaine that crosses our southern border. We can pursue and hopefully intercept the drug boats, before they reach Mexican national waters, where we are called off to "allow" Mexico's navy to apprehend them. We could see the boat reach Mexico's shore, while the Mexican navy ship watches them and then about an hour or so later, the navy ship actually dispatches their small boat to "arrest" the smugglers, who are long gone before they reach them.
In one deployment we captured over 12.5 tons of cocaine in a single bust on a "fishing vessel". During the typical 6 month tour a US navy ship (with a small Coast Guard Detachment onboard) will bring in anywhere from 400 to 800 bales of paste cocaine (20 kilo bales). We are able intercept less than 1/5th of the drug boats coming up the coast, and it all goes right to Mexico and crosses our southern border. The amount of drugs that cross that border is staggering.
Last edited by Cool Beans; 01-08-2019 at 03:10 PM..
|
|
|
|
01-08-2019, 01:34 PM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,481
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cool Beans
Well, I have completed 3 (6 month) counter narcotics deployments along both sides of South America and there is an enormous amount of cocaine that crosses our southern border. We can pursue and hopefully intercept the drug boats, before they reach Mexican national waters, where we are called off to "allow" Mexico's navy to apprehend them. We could see the boat reach Mexico's shore, while the Mexican navy ship watches them and then about an hour or so later, the navy ship actually dispatches their small boat to "arrest" the smugglers, who are long gone before they reach them.
In one deployment we captured over 12.5 tons of cocaine in a single bust on a "fishing vessel". During the typical 6 month tour a US navy ship (with a small Coast Guard Detachment onboard) will bring in anywhere from 400 to 800 bales of paste cocaine (20 kilo bales). We are able intercept less than 1/5th of the drug boats coming up the coast, and it all goes right to Mexico and crosses our southern border. The amount of drugs that cross that border is staggering.
|
That doesn't invalidate his point though, that smuggling drugs across unsecured areas of the Mexican border isn't the primary entry point. A wall isn't going to do much to prevent drug deaths in the US.
|
|
|
|
01-08-2019, 01:50 PM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,725
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
That doesn't invalidate his point though, that smuggling drugs across unsecured areas of the Mexican border isn't the primary entry point. A wall isn't going to do much to prevent drug deaths in the US.
|
If Cool Beans actually is officially involved in counter narcotics and he says " We are able intercept less than 1/5th of the drug boats coming up the coast, and it all goes right to Mexico and crosses our southern border. The amount of drugs that cross that border is staggering" I think there is more credibility to his assertion than yours.
And how do you get from drugs crossing unsecured areas of the border not being the primary entry point to assuming that not much drugs cross those unsecured points? If there are mega tons of drugs entering the US from south of the border, why does that fact that not all come at a supposed "primary" entry point mean that a great deal do not come across at non-primary points?
|
|
|
|
01-08-2019, 01:55 PM
|
#6
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,435
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
If Cool Beans actually is officially involved in counter narcotics and he says " We are able intercept less than 1/5th of the drug boats coming up the coast, and it all goes right to Mexico and crosses our southern border. The amount of drugs that cross that border is staggering" I think there is more credibility to his assertion than yours.
And how do you get from drugs crossing unsecured areas of the border not being the primary entry point to assuming that not much drugs cross those unsecured points? If there are mega tons of drugs entering the US from south of the border, why does that fact that not all come at a supposed "primary" entry point mean that a great deal do not come across at non-primary points?
|
Perhaps because the DEA has said so
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/08/wi...rug-smuggling/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
01-08-2019, 02:13 PM
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,725
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
|
"beginning with the simple fact that much of the drug trade comes through legal ports of entry." doesn't mean that much doesn't. The Fact Check (has it looked into other viewpoints or just those that minimize drug entry across non official border entry points?) article is loaded with undefinitive assertions qualified by words such as "unlikely, much, cannot predict, we believe, mostly or most, common way, skeptical . . ."
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:59 AM.
|
| |