• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AZ Has ‘Whopping 30’ National Guard & 15 Billboards Warning Citizens of Drug...

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
23,778
Reaction score
7,659
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Our government has more lawyers trying to smash AZ's law than the state has National Guard protecting the border. 3000...??? Nope... 30.

The 15 billboards are a hit though. WARNING: Your country has been invaded by illegals that could harm or kill you. Do not go into areas you once used for recreation.... and on Nov. 2, 2010... vote Democrat, because we are the party of honesty, integrity, protecting the borders and national defense.
Signed,
Your Safety Tzar

Anyone surprised?

Arizona Now Has ‘Whopping 30’ National Guard Troops and 15 Billboard Signs Warning Citizens About Drug Cartels Operating on Public Lands

Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu said requests by Arizona law enforcement personnel and Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) for 3,000 National Guard troops along the state’s border with Mexico have been answered so far with 1 percent of that number deployed there this week.

“We have a whopping 30 [National Guard troops] this week that are showing up,” Babeu told CNSNews.com. “It’s less than a half-hearted measure designed to fail.”

CNSNews.com - Arizona Now Has
 
Last edited:

Wiseone

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I personally know more than 30 people who have been guarding the border in Arizona from the Arizona national guard... These 3,000 must not be from Arizona otherwise the governer herself would have sent them, as the the governer as the power to deploy guard troops anywhere in the state.
 

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
23,778
Reaction score
7,659
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
I personally know more than 30 people who have been guarding the border in Arizona from the Arizona national guard... These 3,000 must not be from Arizona otherwise the governer herself would have sent them, as the the governer as the power to deploy guard troops anywhere in the state.
Obama said he would send 1200 in May... the State wanted at least 3000, and some said 6000 were needed (Kyl).
3+ months later... they get 30.

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-05-25/...s-intercept-illegal-immigrants?_s=PM:POLITICS

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obam...nt-national-guard-southwest/story?id=10740858

Sounds like the Kanuckistani Health Care system. Wait, wait, wait... wait... wait... trickle... come back later... wait... wait...

Meanwhile back at the ranch...

.
 

Wiseone

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
From the ABC article:
The president, who alone cannot formally authorize deployment of the forces, is expected to request $500 million in supplemental funds from Congress to make a state governor's decision to deploy troops financially possible.

So did he get that money? And besides that question Obama only authorized, not promised, 1,200 national guardsmen along the borders of all four states bordering Mexico. The 3,000 was just a request from McCain and Kyl, so Obama has no obligation to send 3,000 troops.

But fact is that there are far more than 30 Guardsmen on the border in Arizona, I should know as I've trained with the guard for 4 years and know their rotation and people who have gone to the border.
 
Last edited:

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
23,778
Reaction score
7,659
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
From the ABC article:
The president, who alone cannot formally authorize deployment of the forces, is expected to request $500 million in supplemental funds from Congress to make a state governor's decision to deploy troops financially possible.

So did he get that money? And besides that question Obama only authorized, not promised, 1,200 national guardsmen along the borders of all four states bordering Mexico. The 3,000 was just a request from McCain and Kyl, so Obama has no obligation to send 3,000 troops.

But fact is that there are far more than 30 Guardsmen on the border in Arizona, I should know as I've trained with the guard for 4 years and know their rotation and people who have gone to the border.
I did note Obama authorized 1200 troops 3-months ago.
At this rate, AZ will see all 1200 in 10-years.
Sorta like the Soviet Union.

KGB agent/LADA invoice filler: What color you want?
Citizen/Slave: Red (has to seem patriotic).

KGB agent/LADA invoice filler: 2 or 4-door?
Citizen/Slave: Either.

KGB agent/LADA invoice filler: You pick up your LADA in 10-years.
Citizen/Slave: Morning or afternoon?

KGB agent/LADA invoice filler: What do you mean peasant, it's in 10-years.
Citizen/Slave: Well, the pumber is coming in the morning.

.
 
Last edited:

Wiseone

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You do know the meaning of the word authorize right? It means to allow or give authority to perform an action or render a decision. It does not mean that the action that been authorized will be undertaken as well. And that those 1,200 were authorize for all four Mexican border states, not just Arizona? That means 400 per state if they are spread out evenly.

But yes I can see how your understanding of the English language and basic math could detach you so much from reality as to make you think you're living under a Soviet government.
 

Wiseone

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You do know the meaning of the word authorize right? It means to allow or give authority to perform an action or render a decision. It does not mean that the action that been authorized will be undertaken as well. And that those 1,200 were authorize for all four Mexican border states, not just Arizona? That means 400 per state if they are spread out evenly.

But yes I can see how your understanding of the English language and basic math could detach you so much from reality as to make you think you're living under a Soviet government.
My mistake, thats 300 per state. Damn that's embarrassing after that comment about your math skills.
 

Wiseone

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I did some digging around about this 1,200 strong troop deployment to the Mexican border and apparently... you're wrong there isn't simply 30 troops being deployed in Arizona, its 524. These 30 are actually just the first arrivals in what will be a stream of guardsmen that will bring the troop level up to 524 by October. Also the 1,200 guardsmen are only the FEDERALIZED guardsmen, as in they have been activated which is why the funding for their operations is coming from the federal government as opposed to the state. In Arizona's case they have deployed 300 guardsmen under orders from the governor and the state in that case is footing the bill. So in total Arizona will have 824 by October and already has 330, not 30...
By State(roughly):
AZ: 524
TX: 286
NM: 72
CA: 224

Sources: The Associated Press: New Mexico National Guard deployed to border
286 Texas National Guard troops to arrive in Valley this month to help secure border | help, valley, month - Now - TheMonitor.com
Guard troops on the border in Arizona | Fox 11 | KMSB Tucson | Local News
And one I found in a link on your original article page:
CNSNews.com - 1,200 National Guard Troops Being Deployed to Border Will Not Be Used to Stop and Detain Illegal Aliens

Then there is this nice quotation: Media reports suggested that the National Guard missed its alleged deadline of deploying the 1,200 troops by Aug. 1. However, Harrison said that the objective has always been to incrementally deploy those troops. “We are following the plan as it was agreed to by DHS and DOD and the Guard is not missing any deadline whatsoever,” said Harrison.
That Harrison is Jack Harrison, National Guard Bureau Director of Communications.

So not only are there more than 30 Guard troops in Arizona, but the plan from the start was to not send all 1,200 at once.

And lastly the reason, in my opinion, of Sheriff Paul Babeu's remarks about there only being 30 Guardsmen on the border probably has something to do with the fact that he is a registered Republican and a very vocal opponent of Obama. His website is full of statements to the President, leaders to the President, challenges to the President, and other material of that sort. He's also up for re-election in about a year. So he is clearly very partisan.
Sheriff Paul Babeu, Pinal County, Arizona
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
You do know the meaning of the word authorize right? It means to allow or give authority to perform an action or render a decision. It does not mean that the action that been authorized will be undertaken as well. And that those 1,200 were authorize for all four Mexican border states, not just Arizona? That means 400 per state if they are spread out evenly.

But yes I can see how your understanding of the English language and basic math could detach you so much from reality as to make you think you're living under a Soviet government.
I thought Obama could get things done quickly? Or is that just things that are against the will of the people, such as the moratorium on drilling.
If it was something he really wanted to do, it would be done already.
 

Wiseone

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I thought Obama could get things done quickly? Or is that just things that are against the will of the people, such as the moratorium on drilling.
If it was something he really wanted to do, it would be done already.
I'm just here to give the facts. But I think you should remember the length of time required to plan and prepare for a deployment of troops, logistics have to be taken care of first. Everything from water, food, living areas, security, transportation, a planned mission, an objective, etc have to planned and in place before the actual troops arrive in force, additionally training must be conducted for their mission and operating environment. And all that only takes place after the "go" decision has been made, making that decision takes time as well. And by 'in force' I mean the military definition meaning at their operational size.

Now I have no idea the exact operational needs of these troops, nor exactly what their plan is for their use, none of us here do. But if I had to guess I'd say that yes in fact Obama could have started this troop movement in a more speedy manner, in any military operation there's always wasted time. And knowing Obama he hasnt been the fastest President at moving troops, he always seem hesitant to do so and likes to have an extremely detailed plan in place. But thats just my impression from the decision making process that went on before the Afghan surge and reading what the DoD and DHS have to say about this operation on the border.

But, again, thats just speculation. However what information is purely factual is all that I posted in my last posted except for where I specifically say its an opinion. I'm concerned only with facts which I then use to try and analyze the situation in the most reasonable way I can while at the same time addressing any gaps and other possibilities which exist for whatever reason in my analysis. I'm not political, this isn't about defending Obama or anything else this is simply about the most rational fact driven thought I can provide.

So to answer your question, since the authorization was given in late May it would be unrealistic to expect it to get underway any sooner than August or Sept in my professional opinion, assuming that things like the "go/no go" decision were handled rapidly and immediately. However don't be so quick to think that the decision to go or not to go was an easy or should be a simple straight forward one. Even if it had been decided "to go" before Obama requested or received authorization to move those guardsmen, like I said, the question of HOW to go still has to be decided. And if you rush the how you risk deploying in an ineffective or worse totally useless manner. So since we have no idea how that decision process was handled its only speculation as to how "good" it was. "Good" being a totally relative term of course.
 

American

Constitutionalist
Bartender
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
88,743
Reaction score
27,894
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I did note Obama authorized 1200 troops 3-months ago.
At this rate, AZ will see all 1200 in 10-years.
Sorta like the Soviet Union.

KGB agent/LADA invoice filler: What color you want?
Citizen/Slave: Red (has to seem patriotic).

KGB agent/LADA invoice filler: 2 or 4-door?
Citizen/Slave: Either.

KGB agent/LADA invoice filler: You pick up your LADA in 10-years.
Citizen/Slave: Morning or afternoon?

KGB agent/LADA invoice filler: What do you mean peasant, it's in 10-years.
Citizen/Slave: Well, the pumber is coming in the morning.

.

I hope the riot police have full auto assault weapons with armor-piercing rounds. I hear false teeth can deflect normal NATO rounds.
From a blog. :lamo
 

d0gbreath

Yellow Dog Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
14,043
Reaction score
4,093
Location
Denton, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Assuaging Arizona has become a big pain in the ass. They'll never be happy.
 

Wiseone

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
12,177
Reaction score
7,550
Location
Ft. Campbell, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So more partisan bs? I guess thats more important than acknowledging the numerous errors in the OP and then actually knowing what is going on.
 
Top Bottom