Should Canada protect the Can/USA border with Canadian military troops at border crossing?
818528
well, that might be a good idea, if canada and america worked together with the military, to protect the bourders, not really thinking so much of immigrants but more of terrorist , sneaking in that way
1103406
No ! Keep the Minutemen on the Canadian border. We had seventeen supposed prepetrators in Canada and you only had seven.in Florida and they don't look so guilty right now
470813
I always believed Canada not to be a threat, then came Canadian Bacon, and eventually 9/11. They started out from Portland, Maine (my home state).\n\nThe mexican border (in my opinion) should be this:\n\n-A 20 foot tall, 10 foot wide cement (fortified with steel inside) barracade, with at least 5-10 feet buried underground the entire length of the US/Mexican border, with no entrances/exits within 25 miles of each other, and each of these border crossings are guarded heavily of no fewer than 25 armed soldiers/policemen/guards. More at bigger crossings\n\n-On each side of the "MEXICAN WALL" is a 20 foot high chain-link fence with barbed wire on the top. At least 5 feet is buried underground with barbed wire also on the ground. Each of these fences would be equipped with highly sensitive 'motion-detection' sensors, and inbetween the 25 mile border crossings (every 5 miles) would be a guard outpost of no fewer than 3 armed and ready guards, and a vehicle.\n\n-These guardhouses would be equipped with a large holding cell as well as 2 smaller cells, living quarters, and a field hospital.\n\nAnd thats what should be done.
991578
as far as i know the united states is stretched to the point of not having a military.to take on n.korea and iran is suicide.if bush keeps sending reservists and national guard troops to iraq and afganistan he will start the draft.if he does i hope the young people take off to canada like they did during vietnam.i served my time during vietnam and was injured but where i grew up was getting on my nerves but i came home and im 53 years old and very disabled.the military is not a bad thing but it can change your life forever
651130
It's a wonderful idea. I would love to go help build it! Unless, of course, George comes to his senses and puts the national guard onto building it.\n\nAnd YES, the border needs to be closed to all people unless they come across at legal checkpoints with proper identification.
609844
wait by the border or join one of the troops in the National Guards that Bush is sending to protect it.
124805
Absolutely. In fact, we need the military, walls, mine fields, razor wire, concertina wire, heat sensors, motion sensors, seismic sensors, gates, dogs, and Lord knows what else on our borders.\n\nIt seems kind of foolish to me to spend billions of dollars securing the airports when any would-be terrorist can simply walk across the border from either Canada or Mexico, and no one would know about it.
1028597
I'm not concerned about immigrants, but there have been several cases of paid off Mexican army units with machine gun mounted trucks escorting shipments fully into US territory & even exchanging fire with local law enforcement - mex govt says stolen uniforms. Corrupt mexican national & local police have long done similar. Then there's the smugglers themselves. \n\nAnyway, from what I understand the troops will not be patrolling the border. They'll be engineer units building access roads & survellince posts, and intel operating air & ground based detection equipment from the military inventory. The Border Patrol will still be the ones doing all the apprehending. \n\nThat said, the national guard DOES have law enforcement authority while under the Gov's command (just like after hurricanes), and it is the PRIMARY mission of the national guard to defend the boarders & internal security of the United States. Backing up federal troops overseas comes second, followed by disaster response.
979854
If you are refering to a possible millitary draft, if you go to Canada to avoid it they will cross the border and get you  and bring you back.  And, the draft age may be going up to 42, and both men and woman can be drafted.  But, it is a good steady job with food included so I don't know what the problem would be.
886410
If there is an iron clad agenda to kill our enemy, and to discourage, forever more, the insurgents from entering Iraq, then I say yes.  This would require a serious ratcheting up of our activities, it would require the use of bigger and meaner weapons and ordinance, it would require border crossings to get to the real bad guys.  If this is our game plan, then I say yes.\n\nIf the purpose of sending more troops is to expand patrols and police action, then I say NOT.  We don't need more of the same bull sh it, we need a policy that will destroy the enemy, and let them know, we finally mean business.\n\nSorry, libs, your pacification program has been put back on the shelf!
760357
Canada will not defend you with military force.  And Canada has a mutual legal assistance treaty with Poland allowing for extradition if the alleged crime would be a crime under Canadian law.\n\nhttp://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/intpolicing/centralauth_e.htm\n\nSorry.
811167
Ummm..... Canada.  Check a map and you will see how huge Canada is geographically.  They help us police our borders and are a good ally in most things.\n\nSue
512309
Your question is, I think, why those politicians who claim that the Mexican border should be closed because of national security issues (instead of immigration issues) are not equally as concerned with the Canadian border?\n\nThe answer is complex, but I think that the main answer is that the "national security" rationalization for tightening the Mexican border is just an excuse. No would-be terrorist with half a brain would endanger a terrorist project that he and his cohorts have been working on for years by trying to cross the border from Mexico. That's preposterous. All the 9-11 operatives gained access into the country legally. Why not just slip through the Canadian border unnoticed? Or more effectively, why not just send over the guys who can get through our borders legally, or through legal borders with false documentation? The routes of entry are endless.\n\nAt the rate we're creating terrorists thanks to our mockery of a "war for democracy" in Iraq and the numerous human rights abuses our government has been engaging in, coupled with our self-serving, hypocritical, and uneven foreign policy in the Middle East, there's no reason that Islamic extremists wishing to wreak havoc in the U.S. should have to sneak across any borders to get here. There are so many of them by now, that surely Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups can recruit them easily and find easy legal ways to get them into the country without having to resort to illegal Mexican-American border crossings or other such nonsense. It's simply a matter of time.
349151
You have a point.  The recent arguments about immigration have focused on the border with Mexico.  But immigration can come overland from Canada, as well.  Which means whatever security we really need at airports to prevent terrorists, we also realistically need at every part of every border.  Such a thorough system of electronic search and so on is obviously impractical.  Therefore, are we kidding ourselves that the extra manpower, expense and inconvenience at the airports is serving any useful purpose?  As the questioner points out, it probably never did make much difference, anyway; the original 9/11 gang did not come in through an airport.\n\nSo how do we combat terrorism if these measures are about guaranteed to be ineffective?  It has been said repeatedly that the intelligence community (the spies, if you will) knew a great deal about Osama bit Leaden (I don't use his real name on purpose) before 9/11/2001.  They warned their bosses, including the president, who played it his way.  You gotta wonder if he didn't like the idea of an excuse to put restrictive measures on airports and the various other compromises to our freedom we have accepted under the "homeland security" rubric.  (Love the tee shirt with a picture of several old Indian warriors!)  \n\nFolks, our borders are too long, and with modern transportation, too open to everyone and anyone, for us to even try to stem the flow.  Why not say come; I lift my lamp beside the golden door.  If you come in peace, and are willing to work hard to make your way here, come.  If you do not behave well, we will send you home.
585351
Stop? No.\n\nWill the National Guard help at all?  In their present "supporting role", all they will be able to do is count how many illegal border crossers run past them and radio it to the Border Patrol.\n\nWill a wall help? Anecdotal evidence from parts of the border that have walls says that it will reduce the number of crossings but nothing will stop some crossings. Even the Berlin Wall didn't stop people from crossing but the numbers that did make it were really small.  (Please note that I am not saying that we need to make our southern border like the Berlin Wall, I am merely pointing out that no wall is 100% crossing proof but they do cut down on the easy crossings).
817377
Yes I Believe That\n\nA serious commitment to border security \nwould require fencing off the entire southern border—\nall 1,891 miles of it. \n(For comparison, \nwe have 40,000 miles of Maintained US Interstate Highways.)\n\nAt $1.7 million per mile \n(the cost of the first 10 mile stretch in San Diego), \nthe entire U.S.-Mexican border could be sealed off\n(all 1,891 miles of it )\nfor $3.3 billion dollars.\n\nIraq spending equivalent: 13.8 days.\n\nCost / benefit analysis, anyone? \n\n\n\n\nIf / When We MILITARIZE That Border\nThat Border WILL Be Secure
1040367
I disagree.  Canada & Mexico have always worked together independent of the US and with the US.  We're living in a globalizing world where no nations should be excluded.  The world should "come together" & not divide.