Seriously Fred?

After reading TexasFred’s blog posting in response to the AP story about the dire situation on the Mexican border Fear Grips Mexican Border Families Amid Violence, my initial response was “is this guy serious?” I understand that he is frustrated by the situation and by our government's sedentary approach in dealing with it, but the policy approach that he is advocating is - to say the least –nonsensical. What I find most frustrating about his statements, is that he seems to be taking advantage of the necessity of greater security to justify his attitude towards all the complex border issues that exist.

First of all, his constant demand that there be “boots on the ground” is somewhat redundant. Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn't that exactly what the current border patrol already in deployment are doing? This also somewhat applies to his request that there be a presence by the National Guard. OH I'm sorry, not just the National Guard but the National Guard equipped with “Bradley Fighting Vehicles, M1A1/M1A2 Abrams Main Battle Tanks, AH-64 Apaches, 240-Bravo machine guns, M-249 Squad Automatic Weapons (SAW), land mines, dogs, Night Vision Glasses (NVGs)”. How is this beneficial in any way? I mean, tanks & landmines, seriously? Is he suggesting that we should turn the southern border into an active battlefield? Furthermore, how on earth can he believe that we should be engaged in a policy where our border security has “a GREEN LIGHT to shoot anything crossing OUR border at anything other than a LEGAL border crossing!” ? The majority f the illegal crossing taking place is by civilians attempting to go somewhere were their is hope for the future. The same things many of our ancestors were doing when they first came to Texas.

He claims to be making these suggestions because he “STILL stands for America 1st and the sovereignty of our borders”. But what does that mean?? If he cared so much about America and wants to uphold its values then how do his suggestions really do that? They just don't. I think that the border policy which best fits our American values and ideals, should be one of compassion and restraint, instead of isolation and combativeness.

It is wrong to simply distance and separate ourselves from the issue by bolstering our border. It is wrong to simply blame the Mexican people and its government for the difficult situation that they find themselves in. I think that the policy he advocates, is one that punishes the innocent Mexican civilian population, exacerbates the violence, and blames (as usual) the Mexican “socialist” government for the problem.

What the United States should do is enact a policy, where we devote the bulk of our resources on bolstering the Mexican government's attempts to quell the violence. There should be a comprehensive policy that supports the victimized civilian population on the border in their quest of pursuing happiness, by providing them with the opportunities that they seek so desperately, regardless of which side of the border they are on.

By supporting the Mexican government efforts to quell the violence you will in effect eliminate the need for heavy border security. By legally enabling Mexican civilians with their quest of pursuing of happiness, whether it be on our side of the border or theirs, we will effectively eliminate their suffering and plight - and in doing so largely eliminate the heavy illegal crossing activities.