Okay, so now we're militarizing the border. This should please anyone who was freaked out by the immigration marches, and maybe boost the Decider's poll numbers a bit. I guess he has to worry about how this immigration "issue" effects his party. I actually prefered his old stance on immigration, which was rational and humane. But, people don't want rational and humane, I guess.
I guess my first problem with this idea is that it's just a collosal waste of money and manpower. It might please l'électorat conservateur, but probably won't. They want a wall, and generally believe that the President is doing too little too late since 9/11 happened nearly five years ago, and by now, millions of Mexican terrorists are in the coutnry, planning to take over America one landscaping job at a time, and the sky is falling and they want their mommies!! The pandering won't stop their panic attacks. Nothing will, short of a police state. And without a draft, we can't afford to use the guard to solve every problem we have.
My second problem with the idea is that it isn't clear why we need a military buildup on the border of a country that we aren't going to war with in the first place. The problem with having a war on terror is just this- you have to be prepared for a threat from every country on earth. So, we have to take a tough stance against Mexico for Christ's sake. But, what about the border up here? Anyone forgotten about Canada? And, who's to say that Mexicans won't save up for the flight to Toronto and then simply walk across this largely undefended border? Scary, eh?
My third problem is that I don't like the idea of the military being used to enforce domestic law. It should be obvious why this is a bad idea, but sadly, it isn't for most people. When the military takes over domestic law enforcement in a territory, that territory falls under martial law. In this case, the territory in question is just the border, but does this include all of the American border towns? Do they now come under military law? Outsourcing police matters to the military is problematic for just this reason. And, at this time in our history, the distinction between military and police matters should be more strongly maintained, not weakened.
The antithesis of fear isn't security- it's reason. And this just isn't reasonable. I don't honestly think we're going to wind up with martial law- the administration is too incompetent for that. But a lot of things have happened that I didn't expect.
"One thing the Bush administration says it can do with this meta-data is to start tapping your calls and listening in, without getting a warrant from anyone. Having listened in on your calls, the administration asserts that if it doesn't like what it hears, it has the authority to detain you indefinitely without trial or charges, torture you until you confess or implicate others, extradite you to a Third World country to be tortured, ship you to a secret prison facility in Eastern Europe, or all of the above. If, having kidnapped and tortured you, the administration determines you were innocent after all, you'll be dumped without papers somewhere in Albania left to fend for yourself. Once you start in with this business, it's a widening cycle of lawlessness with almost endless possibilities for abuse."
But, at least, it'll be home-grown abuse, right?