posted
Sheriff Joe Arpaio: ‘We Should Send Troops To Mexico’ This past weekend, three U.S. consulate officials were brutally shot and murdered by the violent Aztecas drug gang in the Mexican city of Juárez. In response, Joe Arpaio, an Arizona sheriff known for his controversial immigration enforcement tactics, announced this morning on MSNBC that the U.S. should send troops to Mexico to deal with the drug cartel problem:
I don’t want to be an extremist. We do send our military to other countries. I know it’s a difficult economic and diplomatic problem what I’m going to say but possibly we should send the troops into Mexico, work with the Mexican government, give them resources, not just technical equipment. When I was in the DEA we worked undercover, involved in gun battles. We were operational. Maybe we should get more operational in that country especially at the border areas.
Arpaio quickly pivoted to the topic of immigration and proceeded to complain about how the drug problem is obscuring the nation’s immigration problem:
I’m not liked by Washington and certain politicians. I’m the poster boy because I go after illegal immigrants, smugglers on crime suppression operations. There’s violence here — tons of violence in this country because of illegal immigration but we seem to always talk about the drug problem because politically people don’t want to talk about the illegal immigration problem. Many experts have pointed out that militarizing the drug war is counterproductive. Shortly after his inauguration in 2006, President Felipe Calderon began assigning large numbers of troops to fighting the drug war. The National Human Rights Commission specifically cited the case of Ciudad Juarez, Mexico’s murder capital, when it concluded that “using the Mexican military against drug cartels has brought no improvement in public safety.” Chances are U.S. troops wouldn’t necessarily be welcomed with open arms either. Jorge Angel Pescador Osuna, the former Mexican consul general in Los Angeles, stated in 2008 “[Mexican] foreign policy has been subordinated to that of the Americans, the policemen of the world. … What we need here is to strengthen our democracy, and we will not accomplish that by using the military for civilian law enforcement.”
Meanwhile, if anyone is guilty of conflating the drug war problem with the problem of immigration, it’s Arpaio. Rather than focusing his resources on violence that has spilled over the border, Arpaio has dedicated most of his energy to chasing busboys and nannies through the desert and most of his talking points to bragging about it. Despite the fact that research shows that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes or be behind bars than the native-born citizens, Arpaio allots an overwhelming amount of his budget to targeting and hunting down non-violent undocumented immigrants and throwing them in jail for “smuggling themselves” across the border. Two independent reports by the East Valley Tribune and the Goldwater Institute show that Arpaio’s immigration-enforcement crusade has contributed to a huge county budget deficit and that crime rates have actually escalated as Arpaio has failed to arrest top smugglers and criminals.
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by raybond: Sheriff Joe Arpaio: ‘We Should Send Troops To Mexico’ This past weekend, three U.S. consulate officials were brutally shot and murdered by the violent Aztecas drug gang in the Mexican city of Juárez. In response, Joe Arpaio, an Arizona sheriff known for his controversial immigration enforcement tactics, announced this morning on MSNBC that the U.S. should send troops to Mexico to deal with the drug cartel problem:
I don’t want to be an extremist. We do send our military to other countries. I know it’s a difficult economic and diplomatic problem what I’m going to say but possibly we should send the troops into Mexico, work with the Mexican government, give them resources, not just technical equipment. When I was in the DEA we worked undercover, involved in gun battles. We were operational. Maybe we should get more operational in that country especially at the border areas.
Arpaio quickly pivoted to the topic of immigration and proceeded to complain about how the drug problem is obscuring the nation’s immigration problem:
I’m not liked by Washington and certain politicians. I’m the poster boy because I go after illegal immigrants, smugglers on crime suppression operations. There’s violence here — tons of violence in this country because of illegal immigration but we seem to always talk about the drug problem because politically people don’t want to talk about the illegal immigration problem. Many experts have pointed out that militarizing the drug war is counterproductive. Shortly after his inauguration in 2006, President Felipe Calderon began assigning large numbers of troops to fighting the drug war. The National Human Rights Commission specifically cited the case of Ciudad Juarez, Mexico’s murder capital, when it concluded that “using the Mexican military against drug cartels has brought no improvement in public safety.” Chances are U.S. troops wouldn’t necessarily be welcomed with open arms either. Jorge Angel Pescador Osuna, the former Mexican consul general in Los Angeles, stated in 2008 “[Mexican] foreign policy has been subordinated to that of the Americans, the policemen of the world. … What we need here is to strengthen our democracy, and we will not accomplish that by using the military for civilian law enforcement.”
Meanwhile, if anyone is guilty of conflating the drug war problem with the problem of immigration, it’s Arpaio. Rather than focusing his resources on violence that has spilled over the border, Arpaio has dedicated most of his energy to chasing busboys and nannies through the desert and most of his talking points to bragging about it. Despite the fact that research shows that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes or be behind bars than the native-born citizens, Arpaio allots an overwhelming amount of his budget to targeting and hunting down non-violent undocumented immigrants and throwing them in jail for “smuggling themselves” across the border. Two independent reports by the East Valley Tribune and the Goldwater Institute show that Arpaio’s immigration-enforcement crusade has contributed to a huge county budget deficit and that crime rates have actually escalated as Arpaio has failed to arrest top smugglers and criminals.
Are you for blanket amnesty ray? yes or no?
Posts: 6949 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I will do something you refuse to do answer you. no I am not for a blanket ammnesty.
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
New Study Estimates Mass Deportation Of Undocumented Immigrants Would Cost $285 Billion This weekend, several thousands of people are expected to gather on the National Mall to demand action on immigration reform. The immigration restrictionist group NumbersUSA is meanwhile responding with a four-day campaign to “stop amnesty” which starts today.
However, a study released this afternoon by the Center for American Progress shows that the enforcement-only approach that restrictionist groups incessantly advocate for isn’t sustainable in the long-term. CAP estimates that a strategy aimed at deporting the nation’s population of undocumented immigrants would total approximately $285 billion over five years. According to the report, a deportation-only policy would amount to $922 in new taxes for “every man, woman, and child in this country”:
The undeniable conclusion from these findings is that the federal price tag to deport all undocumented immigrants currently in the United States is prohibitive. The operational feasibility of such a massive effort is dubious at best. It would require an unprecedented deployment of resources, and the problems currently plaguing our detention system and immigration courts would be exacerbated in the extreme and would likely precipitate widespread human rights and due process violations. Moreover, a mass deportation strategy would have a crippling impact on economic growth. The exorbitant direct costs of such a strategy detailed in this report should be the final nail in the coffin of a moribund idea.
Groups that support an enforcement-only approach to immigration insist that they do not advocate a policy of mass deportation, but rather support an “attrition through enforcement” strategy — a harsh strategy used to “wear down the will” of undocumented immigrants through increased deportations, detentions, and anti-immigrant ordinances. According to these groups, many immigrants will choose to deport themselves at minimal cost to the U.S. taxpayer. However, research has shown that ramped up enforcement doesn’t drive most immigrants back to their home countries, rather it only pushes them deeper into the shadows.
Even if the U.S. didn’t aim to deport every single undocumented immigrant, the costs associated with any large-scale deportation program like the anti-immigration groups propose are significant. CAP estimates that it costs $23,148 for each person to be apprehended, detained, legally processed, and finally transported out of the country. ICE deported 349,041 immigrants during the 2008 fiscal year ending September 30. Using CAP’s estimates, that means that the government spent approximately $8,079,601,068 last year alone.
Ultimately, anti-immigration groups couldn’t even wish undocumented immigrants away for free. In a paper released in January, UCLA professor Raúl Hinojosa-Ojeda published research which found that if undocumented immigrants were removed from the economy, it would reduce U.S. GDP by $2.6 trillion over ten years. Hinojosa-Ojeda also affirmed that if undocumented immigrants were put on an earned path to legalization as part of a comprehensive immigration reform package, it would result in at least $1.5 trillion in added U.S. gross domestic product over 10 years.
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise. Posts: 3827 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
