How Eisenhower solved illegal border crossings from Mexico

[Kal'Stang]

Then on June 17, 1954, what was called "Operation Wetback" began. Because political resistance was lower in California and Arizona, the roundup of aliens began there. Some 750 agents swept northward through agricultural areas with a goal of 1,000 apprehensions a day. By the end of July, over 50,000 aliens were caught in the two states. Another 488,000, fearing arrest, had fled the country.

By mid-July, the crackdown extended northward into Utah, Nevada, and Idaho, and eastward to Texas.

By September, 80,000 had been taken into custody in Texas, and an estimated 500,000 to 700,000 illegals had left the Lone Star State voluntarily.

Unlike today, Mexicans caught in the roundup were not simply released at the border, where they could easily reenter the US. To discourage their return, Swing arranged for buses and trains to take many aliens deep within Mexico before being set free.

Tens of thousands more were put aboard two hired ships, the Emancipation and the Mercurio. The ships ferried the aliens from Port Isabel, Texas, to Vera Cruz, Mexico, more than 500 miles south.

The sea voyage was "a rough trip, and they did not like it," says Don Coppock, who worked his way up from Border Patrolman in 1941 to eventually head the Border Patrol from 1960 to 1973.

Mr. Coppock says he "cannot understand why [President] Bush let [today's] problem get away from him as it has. I guess it was his compassionate conservatism, and trying to please [Mexican President] Vincente Fox."

There are now said to be 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens in the US. Of the Mexicans who live here, an estimated 85 percent are here illegally.

Link

Sounds good to me. Let's do it.

 

[deadzone]

If Eisenhower can see the border today, he is going postal.

Look at illegal aliens pouring in every day and night.

Border Invasion Pics - Videos and photos of suspected border intruders entering the US

 

[jallman]

Link

Sounds good to me. Let's do it.

Only if we follow up by peppering the border with bear traps and land mines to deter them from returning illegally.

 

[americanwoman]

Link

Sounds good to me. Let's do it.

I think we need a much different approach these days. For one thing, with the anchor baby so popular, what would you do with parents who get rounded up but have underage kids that are legal citizens that cannot be deported, and yet have no one to care for them. Unless the states are prepared to take care of all the underage children of illegals that would get deported, it could not work.

What we need to do is take away the incentives that bring them here. Heavily fine all business that do hire illegals and then monitor and follow up on companies to make sure they are not hiring anyone that is illegal. That would be the best way to start.

Also what a crock-

"cannot understand why [President] Bush let [today's] problem get away from him as it has. I guess it was his compassionate conservatism, and trying to please [Mexican President] Vincente Fox."

:roll:

What a good guess. not.

 

[jamesrage]

I think we need a much different approach these days. For one thing, with the anchor baby so popular, what would you do with parents who get rounded up but have underage kids that are legal citizens that cannot be deported, and yet have no one to care for them.

As far as I know there is no law that states illegals can not take their children with them.
A good way to deter anchor baby births is to repeal the part of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 that allows for the chain migration of relatives other than spouse and minor children. I wonder how many illegals would come accros the border to pop out children if they knew that their child would not be able to facilitate chain migration.

Unless the states are prepared to take care of all the underage children of illegals that would get deported, it could not work

I a have no problem with unwanted children in state care. Better there than aborted,plus an American may want a child.

What we need to do is take away the incentives that bring them here. Heavily fine all business that do hire illegals and then monitor and follow up on companies to make sure they are not hiring anyone that is illegal. That would be the best way to start.

What we need to do is make the assets forfeiture seizure laws that apply to drug dealers and other criminals who profit from illegal activities and use their money for illegal activities apply to those who hire illegals and throw their asses in prison. The assets seized from these companies could be used to either help pay for future operations or go for other tax payer funded projects. Other states could also enact something similar to Oklahoma's hb 1804 aka the tax payer protection act.

 

[Lerxst]

I think we need a much different approach these days. For one thing, with the anchor baby so popular, what would you do with parents who get rounded up but have underage kids that are legal citizens that cannot be deported, and yet have no one to care for them. Unless the states are prepared to take care of all the underage children of illegals that would get deported, it could not work.

What we need to do is take away the incentives that bring them here. Heavily fine all business that do hire illegals and then monitor and follow up on companies to make sure they are not hiring anyone that is illegal. That would be the best way to start.

Also what a crock-
:roll:

What a good guess. not.

I agree with your approach. Remove incentives and change the laws regarding anchor babies. I don't think that just because you are born here you are automatically a full fledged citizen. I think at least one of your parents needs to be a legal U.S. citizen or you get no citizenship. You are simply a foreigner born in a foreign land. Your citizenship is an issue to be solved between your parents and their home nation. And I am also behind fining the crap out of the employers who violate the law.

 

[Orion]

I don't think it's as easy as removing incentives. People forget that the whole border area was originally Mexican. There are mixed bloodlines on both sides of the border, and families that live in separate countries. Of course the ones who live in the U.S. historically are going to try and help their relatives come across to a better life.

The border has always porrous and transient, and it will always remain that way. You can mine every inch of it (which is not possible fiscally) and people will still find a way in. If the illegals that are already in the U.S. are a drain on the system, then it makes no sense expend even more money in rounding them up and sending them back, separating more families, etc.

I say integrate the, and acknowledge their existence. It's the cheapest way, and the less bloody way.

 

[Wessexman]

I don't think it's as easy as removing incentives. People forget that the whole border area was originally Mexican. There are mixed bloodlines on both sides of the border, and families that live in separate countries. Of course the ones who live in the U.S. historically are going to try and help their relatives come across to a better life.

The border has always porrous and transient, and it will always remain that way. You can mine every inch of it (which is not possible fiscally) and people will still find a way in. If the illegals that are already in the U.S. are a drain on the system, then it makes no sense expend even more money in rounding them up and sending them back, separating more families, etc.

I say integrate the, and acknowledge their existence. It's the cheapest way, and the less bloody way.

Most of the illegals are not relatives of those whose families have lived in the US areas since before those areas were the US, so that argument is silly.

What you are basically advocating is that the US gives up on its borders which is a nonsensical approach.

 

[Orion]

Most of the illegals are not relatives of those whose families have lived in the US areas since before those areas were the US, so that argument is silly.

Really? Can prove that to be factually true?

The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo brought 8,000 Mexican families to the American side, often incompletely. It also displaced trade routes and businesses that had used the region for centuries. You expect that to all just dry up over night?

In the decades after the treaty, the border was a transient place. It still is. The treaty itself was written in an unauthorized way, favoring American business and aggrandizement.

What you are basically advocating is that the US gives up on its borders which is a nonsensical approach.

No, what I am suggesting is that America quit the nationalized outcry that the border belongs to it and it alone. It has always been a joint border, culturally, economically, and yes even in labour. It's only recently because of economic problems that right wing idealists are being made to shift their focus to border security... and why? Because the media told them to do it.

Illegals count for a miniscule percentage of drain on the American economy, and the basis of American cities was done upon immigrant labour. Maybe a lot of those people were legally accepted, but nonetheless, immigrants built America and continue to contribute, illegal or not.

 

[Wessexman]

Really? Can prove that to be factually true?

You made the claim, it seems absurd, you prove it.

The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo brought 8,000 Mexican families to the American side, often incompletely. It also displaced trade routes and businesses that had used the region for centuries. You expect that to all just dry up over night?

In the decades after the treaty, the border was a transient place. It still is. The treaty itself was written in an unauthorized way, favoring American business and aggrandizement.

So? None of this seems to indicate what you seem to be talking about ie that most of these illegals are descended from those who lived in the area when it was still Mexico.

No, what I am suggesting is that America quit the nationalized outcry that the border belongs to it and it alone. It has always been a joint border, culturally, economically, and yes even in labour. It's only recently because of economic problems that right wing idealists are being made to shift their focus to border security... and why? Because the media told them to do it.

What are you talking about? America wants to maintain its own culture and society and to do this it needs borders that mean something. It is quite simple.

Illegals count for a miniscule percentage of drain on the American economy, and the basis of American cities was done upon immigrant labour. Maybe a lot of those people were legally accepted, but nonetheless, immigrants built America and continue to contribute, illegal or not.

So? None of this is a decent argument that the Mexican border be basically adandoned.

 

[Orion]

You made the claim, it seems absurd, you prove it.

Is it not logical that a lot of illegal immigrants crossing the border are relying on support from their relatives on the other side to harbour them? Or companies? Or sympathetic organizations?

So? None of this seems to indicate what you seem to be talking about ie that most of these illegals are descended from those who lived in the area when it was still Mexico.

That is what you read, but that is not what I said. I said that of course families who descend from the treaty era are going to be helping the rest of their relatives to get across. Nowhere did I say that most illegal immigrants are related to the treaty families, now did I?

What are you talking about? America wants to maintain its own culture and society and to do this it needs borders that mean something. It is quite simple.

Can you even define what "American culture" is? Last time I checked, Hispanics have been an integral part of the American Southern cultural landscape even before the American-Mexican war. Even putting aside the issue of illegal immigration, all border downs have Spanish speaking individuals, many of whom rely on a mix of American and Mexican based economy. (i.e. trade.) The cultural carryover is very obvious.

What you said is central to the problem. People view Mexicans living in America as "others", and not part of America's cultural history or Southern traditions.

The idea that you can make a 3000km border impenetrable is just silly. It is a waste of money and there are bigger priorities.

So? None of this is a decent argument that the Mexican border be basically adandoned.

I never said abandoned... again, you think you read it, but I never said it. I am in favour of integrating and acknowledging the current immigrants under some kind of new system. They are clearly going to keep coming, and if it's such a dire issue for the right-wing, then some accommodation will have to be made. Otherwise, accept the reality that they will just keep coming.

 

[Wessexman]

Is it not logical that a lot of illegal immigrants crossing the border are relying on support from their relatives on the other side to harbour them? Or companies? Or sympathetic organizations?

Certainly but you invoked centuries old familial ties, I see little evidence for that on a large scale.

That is what you read, but that is not what I said. I said that of course families who descend from the treaty era are going to be helping the rest of their relatives to get across. Nowhere did I say that most illegal immigrants are related to the treaty families, now did I?

You implied a large proportion. Otherwise it wasn't even worth mentioning. I know on message boards when someone is called on something dodgy they imply they will try and pretend such things don't exist, and hence presumably half of literary criticism doesn't either.

Can you even define what "American culture" is? Last time I checked, Hispanics have been an integral part of the American Southern cultural landscape even before the American-Mexican war. Even putting aside the issue of illegal immigration, all border downs have Spanish speaking individuals, many of whom rely on a mix of American and Mexican based economy. (i.e. trade.) The cultural carryover is very obvious.

The idea that you can make a 3000km border impenetrable is just silly. It is a waste of money and there are bigger priorities.

Obviously no one can define a culture in a few paragraphs, that is against the fundamental nature of culture, that doesn't mean it isn't there. I could not define British culture or Australian past a few phrases but that doesn't mean that is all there is to it. Sure the American culture of this area is influenced by Spanish factors but it is not Spanish and the massive influx you welcome will overwhelm it. Just as British culture is influenced by Europe but it is not helped by massive influxes of Eastern European immigrants.

I never said abandoned... again, you think you read it, but I never said it. I am in favour of integrating and acknowledging the current immigrants under some kind of new system. They are clearly going to keep coming, and if it's such a dire issue for the right-wing, then some accommodation will have to be made. Otherwise, accept the reality that they will just keep coming.

You implied it again. Exactly what suggesting 12 million illegals be allowed to stay is otherwise I don't know.

The best method is to not give in to this liberal nonsense and in stead enforce the borders and remove incentives. It wouldn't be perfect but it will most likely make the problem a little more managable.

 

[Orion]

Certainly but you invoked centuries old familial ties, I see little evidence for that on a large scale.

What you think I invoked is a result of your reading between the lines, and your wrongful assumptions. I mentioned it as an example of why the borders are violated, but it is not the only one.

You implied a large proportion. Otherwise it wasn't even worth mentioning.

Who made you the forum god?

I know on message boards when someone is called on something dodgy they imply they will try and pretend such things don't exist, and hence presumably half of literary criticism doesn't either.

Don't start flaming in this thread too please.

Obviously no one can define a culture in a few paragraphs, that is against the fundamental nature of culture, that doesn't mean it isn't there. I could not define British culture or Australian past a few phrases but that doesn't mean that is all there is to it. Sure the American culture of this area is influenced by Spanish factors but it is not Spanish and the massive influx you welcome will overwhelm it. Just as British culture is influenced by Europe but it is not helped by massive influxes of Eastern European immigrants.

If you can't even define American culture, then how can you prove that Mexican immigration is displacing it, and therefore it is a reason that border security should be increased? You yourself cited sociocultural factors for why America must enforce the border... but the Southern border regions are a mix of Hispanic as well as white Americans. So what is being displaced?

You implied it again. Exactly what suggesting 12 million illegals be allowed to stay is otherwise I don't know.

I don't necessarily think that letting them stay in perpetuity is the answer either, but I think it's better than the current status quo of wasting tax dollars hunting them aimlessly, only for them to be replaced by more later. Clearly, at least in the South, they are part of border economy in the companies there. If the U.S. government really wanted to seed them out, it would implement widescale and unannounced searches of business... but that would be unconstitutional without a warrant. Plus, it would alienate business from growing anyway. So what do you propose?

The best method is to not give in to this liberal nonsense and in stead enforce the borders and remove incentives. It wouldn't be perfect but it will most likely make the problem a little more managable.

There is no cure all solution. If there were, it would have been implemented a long time ago. The idea of the fence has been scrapped... it would alienate relations with the Mexican government. You can't shoot them on sight or dangerously mine the border, as both are against international law; you can continue hunting them and shipping them out, but more will come.

One big way to slow the rate of immigration would be to address the economic inequities caused by NAFTA, then there would be not as much dire poverty in Mexico driving people to flee for their lives. Only the truly desperate would cross a desert into a foreign land, they have to be the poorest of the poor.

 

[Wessexman]

What you think I invoked is a result of your reading between the lines, and your wrongful assumptions. I mentioned it as an example of why the borders are violated, but it is not the only one.

It was obviously implied. You did just as I said and then, which is funny with your track record, accused me of flaming for it.

If you can't even define American culture, then how can you prove that Mexican immigration is displacing it, and therefore it is a reason that border security should be increased? You yourself cited sociocultural factors for why America must enforce the border... but the Southern border regions are a mix of Hispanic as well as white Americans. So what is being displaced?

Aren't you paying attention? The American culture of these parts. Of course you can't define it, that is retarded. Define Welsh culture for me? A lot of it is intangible but it still exists and massive influxes of immigrans don't help it. They will only cause tensions and create a hybrid culture which Americans are more than justified in not wanting.

I don't necessarily think that letting them stay in perpetuity is the answer either, but I think it's better than the current status quo of wasting tax dollars hunting them aimlessly, only for them to be replaced by more later. Clearly, at least in the South, they are part of border economy in the companies there. If the U.S. government really wanted to seed them out, it would implement widescale and unannounced searches of business... but that would be unconstitutional without a warrant. Plus, it would alienate business from growing anyway. So what do you propose?

You basically admit here that it is because they are shetlered by businesses. The solution, as has been known, is to crackdown on said businesses. It is people like you who keep this from happening.

There is no cure all solution. If there were, it would have been implemented a long time ago. The idea of the fence has been scrapped... it would alienate relations with the Mexican government. You can't shoot them on sight or dangerously mine the border, as both are against international law; you can continue hunting them and shipping them out, but more will come.

The border as wel as those who shelter them inside the US are not policed anywhere near as much as they could be. As this OP seems to show a crackdown might well be what is needed.

One big way to slow the rate of immigration would be to address the economic inequities caused by NAFTA, then there would be not as much dire poverty in Mexico driving people to flee for their lives. Only the truly desperate would cross a desert into a foreign land, they have to be the poorest of the poor.

:rofl

What an absurd argument. They are illegally coming into the country so let's reward them by throwing money at their country.

 

[Orion]

It was obviously implied. You did just as I said and then, which is funny with your track record, accused me of flaming for it.

I said: "There are mixed bloodlines on both sides of the border, and families that live in separate countries. Of course the ones who live in the U.S. historically are going to try and help their relatives come across to a better life."

You said: "Most of the illegals are not relatives of those whose families have lived in the US areas since before those areas were the US, so that argument is silly."

Do you see the difference? I wasn't speaking to a majority. You assumed that I implied that, and even after I correct you, you are clinging to that assumption because you just don't want to admit that you misinterpreted what I said. As I said before, I was using it as an example.

Aren't you paying attention? The American culture of these parts. Of course you can't define it, that is retarded. Define Welsh culture for me? A lot of it is intangible but it still exists and massive influxes of immigrans don't help it. They will only cause tensions and create a hybrid culture which Americans are more than justified in not wanting.

¯

The border lands already are a hybrid culture, as is the rest of America for that matter. The only people who are truly from America are the aboriginal people who were there before European settlement. Everyone else is traced back to elsewhere. Your argument implies that white Europeans have an entitlement that Mexicans, who have historically inhabited the region for longer than the white settlers, should not have. This also, of course, ignores the large hispanic populations in the Southern U.S. that were already there after the treaty.

The flaw in your argument revolves around the fact that the border lands are already a "mixed culture" (if I am to humour your notion that there is somehow a distinction between white-Americans and hispanic-Americans in terms of who is "American"). More Mexicans entering the borderlands is not going to change its hybrid nature.

You basically admit here that it is because they are shetlered by businesses. The solution, as has been known, is to crackdown on said businesses. It is people like you who keep this from happening.

People like me? I don't live in the United States my friend, this has no bearing on my existence. I brought up business because clearly the borderlands have historically relied on immigrant labour, and still do. The modern right-wing agenda will never change this. Even now, the border issue is not in the spotlight anymore and fewer people care.

The border as wel as those who shelter them inside the US are not policed anywhere near as much as they could be. As this OP seems to show a crackdown might well be what is needed.

This won't happen as long as the economy is on the downturn.

What an absurd argument. They are illegally coming into the country so let's reward them by throwing money at their country.

Again, your assumption, but I made no mention of money whatsoever, only a reference to inequity.

When NAFTA was created, the U.S. began outsourcing in a large scale manner to Mexico, crushing local business and reducing average wages. This is the primary reason why poverty spiked so to such a high degree within the past decade. There has always been illegal immigration, but the scale now is unprecedented.

If the U.S. wants to pillage Mexican economy without regard for its people (which was the whole point of NAFTA in regards to the U.S/Mexican side), then it can expect its people to flood its borders looking for better opportunity. That is what happens in unequal policy creation.

 

[Wessexman]

I said: "There are mixed bloodlines on both sides of the border, and families that live in separate countries. Of course the ones who live in the U.S. historically are going to try and help their relatives come across to a better life."

You said: "Most of the illegals are not relatives of those whose families have lived in the US areas since before those areas were the US, so that argument is silly."

Do you see the difference? I wasn't speaking to a majority. You assumed that I implied that, and even after I correct you, you are clinging to that assumption because you just don't want to admit that you misinterpreted what I said. As I said before, I was using it as an example.

Of course you implied, it wouldn't worth bringing up otherwise. Try for a bit of common sense.

The border lands already are a hybrid culture, as is the rest of America for that matter. The only people who are truly from America are the aboriginal people who were there before European settlement. Everyone else is traced back to elsewhere. Your argument implies that white Europeans have an entitlement that Mexicans, who have historically inhabited the region for longer than the white settlers, should not have. This also, of course, ignores the large hispanic populations in the Southern U.S. that were already there after the treaty.

The flaw in your argument revolves around the fact that the border lands are already a "mixed culture" (if I am to humour your notion that there is somehow a distinction between white-Americans and hispanic-Americans in terms of who is "American"). More Mexicans entering the borderlands is not going to change its hybrid nature.

The flaw in your argument revolves around the fact that the borderlands may have a hybrid culture but that culture isn't almost completely Spanish, which is what will happen if you get away with your plots.

People like me? I don't live in the United States my friend, this has no bearing on my existence. I brought up business because clearly the borderlands have historically relied on immigrant labour, and still do. The modern right-wing agenda will never change this. Even now, the border issue is not in the spotlight anymore and fewer people care.

I think a lot of people care.

Again, your assumption, but I made no mention of money whatsoever, only a reference to inequity.

When NAFTA was created, the U.S. began outsourcing in a large scale manner to Mexico, crushing local business and reducing average wages. This is the primary reason why poverty spiked so to such a high degree within the past decade. There has always been illegal immigration, but the scale now is unprecedented.

If the U.S. wants to pillage Mexican economy without regard for its people (which was the whole point of NAFTA in regards to the U.S/Mexican side), then it can expect its people to flood its borders looking for better opportunity. That is what happens in unequal policy creation.

And what is your plan to solve this?

 

[Kal'Stang]

I don't care if an illegal has cultural ties to here or if their families moved here long ago (or even a short time ago). If they are here illegally get them out. We already tried giving them amnesty once already...look what it's got us. Instead of 3 million illegals we now have 12-20 million illegals all demanding amnesty also. Screw them. They take jobs away from me and they take my money. Get them the F*** out of here. I personally wouldn't care if they were shot. I've always held that if we started shooting them once they crossed the border then a hell of a lot less of em would come over. Regardless of the potential to make money.

I don't care if they come here legally. Just don't come here illegally demanding crap.