Border wall: Should the Military be involved, or no?

2019-02-15T15:29:12-05:00

Unless you've been under a rock the past few months, then I'm sure you're all aware of the current political climate, our Commander in Chief - President Trump, has declared a national emergency to garner 8 Billion dollars to fund the Border Wall.

I'm naturally curious, political bias aside, what's everyone's stance on the border wall situation in regards to military involvement? Should the military send its engineers? Should they provide security or supplies/equipment? Should we be involved at all? Remember, this isn't a political debate, this is a question, to gather insight on how much do Service Members think we should be involved on a project like this, that's been deemed as a matter of securing our border. LEAVE YOUR POLITICAL AGENDA AT HOME PEOPLE. What's your take, vote, and why?

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2019 3:32 PM

2019-02-15T15:32:23-05:00

Ill start, I believe the military should only be partially involved, planning maybe, and helping pull security are both fine in my book, building the wall isn't my area of expertise, and I'm not sure how the engineers would feel about that. However, if the call comes, I believe the military should answer and secure the border if that's what Capitol Hill and our Chiefs of staff decide is what's in this nations best interest.

Response by MAJ Eric G Troup made Feb 15 at 2019 3:33 PM

2019-02-15T15:33:30-05:00

Sounds like a core mission to me. All other countries maintain their borders often with noticeable heavily armed military presence. By the way there are 31 active National Emergencies in effect. Here is a list. https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/NEA%20Declarations.pdf

Page not found | Brennan Center for Justice

The Brennan Center for Justice is a non-partisan public policy and law institute that focuses on the fundamental issues of democracy and justice.

Response by MSG Stan Hutchison made Feb 15 at 2019 3:44 PM

2019-02-15T15:44:06-05:00

I think the Army Corps of Engineers could do something, but only with the approval of Congress.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Feb 15 at 2019 4:07 PM

2019-02-15T16:07:03-05:00

I'll go counterpoint on this. At first blush, protect the border, yada yada yada. Problem is in actually doing it. The military doesn't build large projects, contractors do. So there'd have to be a substantial contract administration organization. That means diverting assets that you use to support military infrastructure and operations to something that doesn't. The only "push" I see would be if a very large chunk of the money comes out of military support, hence the contracts folks follows the money. That would be the double whammy on the MIL side. For stuff like this, you set up temporary contracting offices and staff with term employees, unless your slow-go and set up a long term deal. Many times the positions are finagled to a grade higher to entice the "better" folk. You see a lot of people jumping in because they're late in their career and are bumping up their High 3. That pulls the average skill level down elsewhere. Another Whammy. Stand by for even crappier base support services.

Let's Whammy this more. If DoD is doing the contracting, then the auditing is done by the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA). They are painfully slow in normal times so the impact of being later than ever on the other MIL contracts will be much worse. There'd be significant Executive pressure to set the priority to Wall support.

If the MIL side gets hung with this job, the Army CoE would likely be the where the booger lands. About the only possible positive relating to their programs would be if the wall and workload requirements can be glide sloped to match up to the ebb and flow of their core mission stuff. I doubt it because the Dam/Navigation/Flood Control and Civil Works sides aren't likely to have stuff that would be funded in chunks compatible with the wall stuff.

If another agency like DHS gets it, then they'd be pulling the good talent away from the MIL side. Good people do move around to move up and tend to get all the PCS bennies that goes with it. Bottom line, not a simple question to answer.

Response by LCDR Joshua Gillespie made Feb 15 at 2019 4:19 PM

2019-02-15T16:19:12-05:00

I think the disconnect between what the civil government thinks our capabilities are, and what they really are is going to become an issue very soon. In it's own way, that may be a positive outcome if nothing else.

Response by LTC Eugene Chu made Feb 15 at 2019 4:24 PM

2019-02-15T16:24:21-05:00

Army Corps of Engineers is a federal agency under DoD. It does exist to coordinate the building of infrastructure , but federal and state regulations also emphasize what role it plays

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2019 4:33 PM

2019-02-15T16:33:20-05:00

Somebody thought this was important enough to pass legislation: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/284

10 U.S. Code § 284 - Support for counterdrug activities and activities to counter transnational...

Section 376 of this title, referred to in subsecs. (e) and (g)(2), was renumbered section 276 of this title by Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XII, §1241(a)(2), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2497.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2019 5:44 PM

2019-02-15T17:44:58-05:00

Use of military would likely require taking the funding form some major programs. It should follow regular procurement processes:
That is, if the declaration of a national emergency passes the legal challenges; and,
if a lawful means to obtain the funds is found. Reprogramming doesn't appear lawful option, as the cost wasn't unexpected, as it was requested, and denied. Disaster funds dont appear to be a available. Some types of transfer and carried over funds may be an option, but those, too will require withstanding legal challenges.
If this passes legal challenges, be prepared for Medicare for all and severe restrictions on gun rights the next time a Democrat is elected.

Response by Pvt Diane Pownall made Feb 15 at 2019 6:24 PM

2019-02-15T18:24:50-05:00

I just don’t understand what the problem is to begin with. What is wrong with funding border security and keeping the American people safe? Why all the controversy? Aren’t we all Americans?

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2019 6:27 PM

2019-02-15T18:27:17-05:00

I don't think the military is needed in a situation like this. The US already has CBP personnel there that are equipped to handle that type of stuff. The data does not support to the claims that warrant a national emergency. Quite the opposite. Illegal crossings are at a record low. So the situation does not seem to warrant the involvement of military assets, IMHO.

Response by Cpl Bill Johnson made Feb 15 at 2019 8:55 PM

2019-02-15T20:55:45-05:00

No.

Response by CSM Charles Hayden made Feb 15 at 2019 9:34 PM

2019-02-15T21:34:38-05:00

Is the military’s mission to defend America?

Are these ‘caravans’ intending to overwhelm our current border enforcement forces and enter the US? SPC Private RallyPoint Member

Response by SGT Louise Hawthorne made Feb 15 at 2019 10:33 PM

2019-02-15T22:33:15-05:00

NO. PERIOD.

Response by SPC Erich Guenther made Feb 16 at 2019 5:34 AM

2019-02-16T05:34:23-05:00

So just being politically neutral here in my response to this issue. The Military HAS ALWAYS BEEN INVOLVED IN BORDER ISSUES. This is nothing new TX ARNG has always since before I moved here been directly involved in helping police the border as far as helping with intelligence and interdiction of smugglers. It is not new and has been going on since the early 1990's at least in Texas. I am sure the same is happening in California, Arizona, and New Mexico even though some of those Governors put on these big public displays of withdrawing or deploying troops........they are leaving some in place to support Homeland Security because they are not stupid and the liason to the Pentagon is needed. As for building the wall or providing engineers for border protection, that might be new......have no clue on that. My feelings are that should remain in civilian hands as they can build fortifications just as well as the military can.

Response by LTC John Griscom made Feb 16 at 2019 7:38 AM

2019-02-16T07:38:41-05:00

The oath I took included "all enemies, foreign and domestic". This is an invasion. Until the Border Patrol has adequate resources, the military should provide support.

Response by SGT Sherrie Fanning made Feb 16 at 2019 9:40 AM

2019-02-16T09:40:13-05:00

The MILITARY already has its hands full doing what they are trained to do.Buliding a wall should probably be a job for Civilian
Contractors. IjS

Response by SPC Erich Guenther made Feb 16 at 2019 5:13 PM

2019-02-16T17:13:22-05:00

BTW, Texas Border Security, in case your interested. Almost all of this predates Trump and goes back to the 1990's at least.
https://www.dps.texas.gov/PublicInformation/documents/borderSecPerfMeasures20160719.pdf

As I said in many other threads. The State of Texas has a close working relationship with the government of Mexico as well as neighboring Mexican states and usually phone calls take place between Mexico and the Governors office on border issues among other items. Texas DPS officers ride along in Border Patrol vehicles now so they can charge illegal border crossers with texas state charges if they are breaking state laws. DPS is also in charge of the Texas Rangers that are also at the Border and performing some border assist functions.

borderSecPerfMeasures20160719.pdf

Response by Cpl Mark A. Morris made Feb 16 at 2019 8:20 PM

2019-02-16T20:20:55-05:00

20 million plus illegal aliens inside these United States. It appears, the border should have been secured years ago.
Send 1/3 of all Infrantry units both active, reserve and National Guard units to the southern border. Use escalation of force, patrol and avenues of approach. Rotate units every 60 days. C130s can air drop supplies.
Find those responsible for funding the caravans and drug/human smuggling. Destroy them.
It is great training terrian. Plus, send more bodies from overseas who are protecting other countries.
That's for starters.

Response by SGT Sherrie Fanning made Feb 17 at 2019 11:09 AM

2019-02-17T11:09:37-05:00

Thats why Border Security was put in place. 1.365 billion was given to enhance the border, and add more Border Guards.Not Soldiers.

Response by CMSgt James Nolan made Feb 18 at 2019 1:03 PM

2019-02-18T13:03:30-05:00

The cool thing about political opinions is that everyone gets one and gets to freely express it. In this instance, talking about our National Security, those opinions need to stay in the can.
I think that we are mistaken if the military should not play an integral role in making America Safe, whether you are Dem, Rep, or other. That said, they would serve to complement, not replace the Border Patrol and DHS. Make no mistake, well armed groups, with military support from the south are making their way to crossings, it only makes sense to have that level of response and capability there to serve as, if nothing else, a deterrent. BP has BORTAC, very capable special team, but they are small in comparison to what military can offer.

Response by CSM Richard StCyr made Feb 19 at 2019 4:41 PM

2019-02-19T16:41:09-05:00

We deployed and installed border fencing and patrol roads in the 90's in the area around Nogales. So what's the big deal with sending the military now.

There is clearly a greater threat now than there was then, with the back to back caravans trying to infiltrate the border and their stated intent to disobey the sovereign borders of our country and knowingly disobey the laws established by congress.

Deployments like the border wall, obstacle, fence , barrier or what ever moniker we give it today to make it sound less imposing are great training missions for the Combat and Construction Engineer units and exercise a wide array of high pay off training tasks that relate directly to combat operations.

So heck yes send the troops, it was a valid mission 20 years ago and remains a valid mission today.

Response by PO3 Rod Arnold made Apr 14 at 2019 11:47 PM

2019-04-14T23:47:14-04:00

Most definitely, let the illegals, whoever they are, know that we are extremely serious about defending our border!!

Response by MSG Robert Conrad made Apr 15 at 2019 5:09 PM

2019-04-15T17:09:40-04:00

Kind of seems like an opportunity to provide real world training for horizontal and vertical construction units, both Reserve and AD forces have this as a number one complaint in most command climate surveys. It seems silly this is even a debate.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 27 at 2019 6:13 AM

2019-04-27T06:13:47-04:00

I stand corrected. The stats show that illegal crossings at the border are up for 2019.

I believe that a southern border wall is still a financially poor choice and a waste of resources. But if it will be done...it sounds like something for the National Guard to help CBP with....along with anything else.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 27 at 2019 6:13 AM

2019-04-27T06:13:51-04:00

Response by CW4 Craig Urban made Apr 27 at 2019 12:54 PM

2019-04-27T12:54:43-04:00

Yes

Response by CMSgt Gary Fichman made May 4 at 2019 6:42 PM

2019-05-04T18:42:36-04:00

Yes, it is an invasion. Thousands of people crossing into the U.S. Pretty good way to destabilize our southern border.

Response by A1C Riley Sanders made Feb 22 at 2020 2:39 PM

2020-02-22T14:39:21-05:00

Border Wall ,
At the Presidents call, If he calls the Military will be there.