Gun Hub Forums banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,549 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
As part of the U.S. Crisis Support Package for Ukraine announced by the White House in April, the State Department awarded a $435,000 contract to B.K. Engineering System in Kyiv for razor wire to help "defend the newly imposed borders between Ukraine's mainland and the Crimean peninsula." The contract was awarded on June 12, but was just posted online this week.

[T]his order is for the delivery of 2,500 spools of Concertina wire for the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine referenced in the Office of the Vice President's Fact Sheet entitled "U.S. Crisis Support Package for Ukraine" dated 22 April 2014. This Fact Sheet includes Security Assistance in which the Office of the Vice President announced the provision of urgently needed non-lethal assistance to the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine to fulfill its core security mission.

Feds Buy Border Fence ... for Ukraine | The Weekly Standard

This contract that we the US citizens are paying for in the Ukraine is suppose to cover the whole border between Ukraine and Crimea?WTF!!We cannot get our government to build us a GD fence on our southern border but by God we can pay for it in the Ukraine ? Up is Down,Left is Right it is all SCREWED UP FELLAS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
:censored::censored::argh::argh::argh::argh::argh::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::censored::censored::censored::argh::argh::argh:
:banghead:


If you get the idea this makes me so tee'd off that words fail me, you may be on to something ... ... ... ... ... ... :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
WTF!!We cannot get our government to build us a GD fence on our southern border but by God we can pay for it in the Ukraine ? Up is Down,Left is Right it is all SCREWED UP FELLAS.
Well we're not building a border fence for a few reasons.

- NEITHER party is interested in it.

- The border fence is the Right's version of feel good legislation; and it's a really dumb idea.

- It' a horrible idea fiscally; maximum dollar output for minimum performance.

- It's 2 THOUSAND MILES OF FENCE; we can't afford it.

- Even with a fence, we still have to man it; we can't afford that either. A fence is a TOOL, not a solution; you still have to man it. There are 4 steps to security: Deter, Detect, Delay, Respond. The fence is minor deterrence, it will be gone over, under, or through. Then even if you put sensors to Detect, you have the fence which provides it's primary function which is, Delay. The last part is Respond, and we can't afford to put enough people across 2,000 miles of border to Respond.

- Places that have fences now are being breached (over, under, through) every day. It only keeps the dumb ones away, and not a whole lot of those.

But here's the biggest reason why the border fence is NOT the solution for the border. More than half of all illegals CAME TO AMERICA LEGALLY!!! Most are people whom came across the border legally and just didn't go back when their visa expired.

The way to secure the border is to just use the resources we have, and actually SECURE the border. We have the solution in place now, we're just not using it.

We're not lacking tools, we're lacking WILL.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,117 Posts
Frankly, I think the Ukrainians need automated flamethrower turrets for the border. When Russians start coming home barbecued by napalm, I'll bet their families will start throwing a fit... besides, it's fairly efficient as weapons go, a football-field-long stream of fire can cut a nice swath across a line of troops, maybe even suck the O2 out of an AFV.

Seriously, the message that needs to be sent to Putin right now isn't this namby-pamby pansy-ass BS, it's "Call them home or WATCH THEM DIE!" (We'll omit my preferred extension, "and prepare to JOIN THEM," for purposes of this discussion...)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
Well we're not building a border fence for a few reasons.

- NEITHER party is interested in it.
Unfortunatly, this is true; demorats want future voters, repukeagains are interested in the business vote (who hires cheap labor).

- The border fence is the Right's version of feel good legislation; and it's a really dumb idea.

- It' a horrible idea fiscally; maximum dollar output for minimum performance.
Would you rather have a cavalry patrol the Mexican border? We actually did that in World War 1. Having effective military patrols might be more expensive if you were to do it to the point where it becomes truly effective.

- It's 2 THOUSAND MILES OF FENCE; we can't afford it.
That's a myth. We don't need 2,000 miles of fencing. There are some places where we need NO fence because the geology presents a natural border -- such as a CLIFF.

- Even with a fence, we still have to man it; we can't afford that either. A fence is a TOOL, not a solution; you still have to man it. There are 4 steps to security: Deter, Detect, Delay, Respond. The fence is minor deterrence, it will be gone over, under, or through. Then even if you put sensors to Detect, you have the fence which provides it's primary function which is, Delay. The last part is Respond, and we can't afford to put enough people across 2,000 miles of border to Respond.

- Places that have fences now are being breached (over, under, through) every day. It only keeps the dumb ones away, and not a whole lot of those.

But here's the biggest reason why the border fence is NOT the solution for the border. More than half of all illegals CAME TO AMERICA LEGALLY!!! Most are people whom came across the border legally and just didn't go back when their visa expired.

The way to secure the border is to just use the resources we have, and actually SECURE the border. We have the solution in place now, we're just not using it.

We're not lacking tools, we're lacking WILL.
If we have the resources to stop illegals from coming over, we have the resources to maintain and secure the fence should it be built. Any fencing (or wall) we build will just be another tool that we will use. Currently it is true that there will be people who dig under it but if we use those resources we have (but are not using) this can be thwarted.
Walls and fences worked very well for both the East Germans and the Chinese. It's true you simply can't just build it and expect it to keep the highly ambitious and resourceful out, you have to maintain & secure the area; both the Chinese & the Germans did this. The walls (or fences) simply allowed the borders to be sealed with lesser manpower entangled in the process than otherwise.

We can also help solve the problem by more effectively going after those businesses that hire illegals and making it REALLY TOUGH on them. Make illegal workers less attractive, and both the workers and those who hire them will get the idea.

We used to have what were called IIRC Matadoras, a system where Mexicans could come here, legally, and work, and then go home. This system worked pretty well; returning to it could also help.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
To All,

IF we had THE WILL to stop "the cross-border traffic" we could by the following means:
1. Make it a FELONY to hire any illegal alien & IMPRISON the illegal employers for a minimum of 5 years for EACH unlawful hire,
2. Deport with a court order to NOT return to the USA, any person crossing our borders unlawfully. In the event that they choose to return, imprison them for a YEAR at hard labor, with any future unlawful entry to be punished by evermore severe sentences at hard labor,
3. Make any unlawful entry for the purpose of smuggling unlawful drugs or firearms a felony punishable by TEN YEARS at hard labor without probation, parole or pardon AND specifically forbidding any "plea bargains" for any WILLFUL violator,
4. Automatically deport as an "undesirable" any illegal immigrant, who is convicted of any felony, any "breach of the peace" or crime involving moral turpitude or unlawful drugs, regardless of how long that they have been in the USA and/or whatever "family connection" that they have to a lawful resident and FORBID them from ever returning to our country,
5. Allow "sponsorship" by American citizens of up to two children under the age of 12 years, provided that those children do NOT become "a burden on the public treasury". In the event that their sponsor is unwilling/unable to continue their care, that the minor child be removed from our borders,
6. Lawful residents/citizens, who arrived here as a child (under provision #5) and were sponsored by a citizen, upon attaining the age of 21 years may sponsor/support financially a single parent, child or spouse & forever be barred from sponsoring any other person.
7. That the Congress of the USA may, from time to time, issue TEMPORARY WORK PERMITS for NO more than 3 years to any individual person & that having a work permit requires the worker to leave and remain outside of the USA for a year prior to returning under any new work permit
and
8. That the above provisions are PERMANENT & may only be made more restrictive in the future.

IF these proposed laws sound SEVERE to any reader, they are LESS restrictive than the immigration laws of any Latin American nation.
(I've lived south of our southern border & my daughter is adopted out of Mexico. = She is now a proud/naturalized US citizen as of 05JUL09. = I had to "sign my life away" to bring my daughter to the USA.)

just my opinion, sw
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
Unfortunatly, this is true; demorats want future voters, repukeagains are interested in the business vote (who hires cheap labor).

Would you rather have a cavalry patrol the Mexican border? We actually did that in World War 1. Having effective military patrols might be more expensive if you were to do it to the point where it becomes truly effective.

That's a myth. We don't need 2,000 miles of fencing. There are some places where we need NO fence because the geology presents a natural border -- such as a CLIFF.

If we have the resources to stop illegals from coming over, we have the resources to maintain and secure the fence should it be built. Any fencing (or wall) we build will just be another tool that we will use. Currently it is true that there will be people who dig under it but if we use those resources we have (but are not using) this can be thwarted.
Walls and fences worked very well for both the East Germans and the Chinese. It's true you simply can't just build it and expect it to keep the highly ambitious and resourceful out, you have to maintain & secure the area; both the Chinese & the Germans did this. The walls (or fences) simply allowed the borders to be sealed with lesser manpower entangled in the process than otherwise.

We can also help solve the problem by more effectively going after those businesses that hire illegals and making it REALLY TOUGH on them. Make illegal workers less attractive, and both the workers and those who hire them will get the idea.

We used to have what were called IIRC Matadoras, a system where Mexicans could come here, legally, and work, and then go home. This system worked pretty well; returning to it could also help.
The fence is the most financial outlay for the least return...I thought you were for fiscal responsibility.

I'd much rather we just actually USE the assets we have in place; that's FREE!!!

Given the way we're doing things now, the fence would be just one more HUGE outlay of money that we won't use. We'll build the fence, and then not patrol it, not repair it...or be nickle & dime'd to death repairing all the holes that are cut in it.

Just use what we have...USE IT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
To All,

IF we had THE WILL to stop "the cross-border traffic" we could by the following means:
1. Make it a FELONY to hire any illegal alien & IMPRISON the illegal employers for a minimum of 5 years for EACH unlawful hire,
2. Deport with a court order to NOT return to the USA, any person crossing our borders unlawfully. In the event that they choose to return, imprison them for a YEAR at hard labor, with any future unlawful entry to be punished by evermore severe sentences at hard labor,
3. Make any unlawful entry for the purpose of smuggling unlawful drugs or firearms a felony punishable by TEN YEARS at hard labor without probation, parole or pardon AND specifically forbidding any "plea bargains" for any WILLFUL violator,
4. Automatically deport as an "undesirable" any illegal immigrant, who is convicted of any felony, any "breach of the peace" or crime involving moral turpitude or unlawful drugs, regardless of how long that they have been in the USA and/or whatever "family connection" that they have to a lawful resident and FORBID them from ever returning to our country,
5. Allow "sponsorship" by American citizens of up to two children under the age of 12 years, provided that those children do NOT become "a burden on the public treasury". In the event that their sponsor is unwilling/unable to continue their care, that the minor child be removed from our borders,
6. Lawful residents/citizens, who arrived here as a child (under provision #5) and were sponsored by a citizen, upon attaining the age of 21 years may sponsor/support financially a single parent, child or spouse & forever be barred from sponsoring any other person.
7. That the Congress of the USA may, from time to time, issue TEMPORARY WORK PERMITS for NO more than 3 years to any individual person & that having a work permit requires the worker to leave and remain outside of the USA for a year prior to returning under any new work permit
and
8. That the above provisions are PERMANENT & may only be made more restrictive in the future.

IF these proposed laws sound SEVERE to any reader, they are LESS restrictive than the immigration laws of any Latin American nation.
(I've lived south of our southern border & my daughter is adopted out of Mexico. = She is now a proud/naturalized US citizen as of 05JUL09. = I had to "sign my life away" to bring my daughter to the USA.)

just my opinion, sw
Well we could do that, but we need to also implement a migrant worker program. Otherwise a head of lettuce will cost $75.00 if an American picks the lettuce.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
The fence is the most financial outlay for the least return...I thought you were for fiscal responsibility.

I'd much rather we just actually USE the assets we have in place; that's FREE!!!

Given the way we're doing things now, the fence would be just one more HUGE outlay of money that we won't use. We'll build the fence, and then not patrol it, not repair it...or be nickle & dime'd to death repairing all the holes that are cut in it.

Just use what we have...USE IT.
Rather cynical of you. I AM for fiscal responsibility --- BUT I AM ALSO FOR CONTROLING OUR BORDERS.
"The way we're doing things now" doesn't have to be the way we're going to do it. It's up to us, the American People.

"I'd much rather we just actually USE the assets we have in place; that's FREE!!!"

~What assets would those be? Do we have border patrol that report for duty gratis?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
Kevin Gibson,

See#7. = We USED TO HAVE such a program & the program worked WELL. = A migrant could spend 179 days here & then go home for the other 6 months & LIVE WELL there on the previous 6 month's wages.
(Our farm's contractor was a NM-born Chicano citizen named JUAN P. TORRES headquartered out of Nueva Leon, Mexico & he took care of their lodging, food, medical care, etc. while the laborers were in TX & the migrants AND northeast TX farmers liked him. = A labor contractor that was BAD didn't last long in the business, as IF he took advantage of his laborers, they wouldn't work for him AND if he wasn't "good to" the farmers, we wouldn't use his firm.)

Fwiw, the POLITICIANS didn't like it because it was pure CAPITALISM & there was little or no government "involvement". - You should read "government involvement" here as: SNOOPING into the private affairs of the ordinary people.

ADDENDA: One of the FEW problems with the old program was that jobs other than farm work took too much of the 6 months to train a worker. - On the other hand 5 years is too long BUT 2 or 3 years is just about right.

just my opinion, sw
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top