We live in a day and age where a small group of dedicated individuals, possibly not even very closely associated with any state or government, can commit acts that would destroy thousands of lives. It was one thing when nations could do this with nuclear weapons; at least this meant a government had to decide to do this, which is much harder than a bunch of nutjobs, whatever their reason.
Agreed, it seems like give us your tired, your poor, your hungry has gone by the wayside in ways that our founding fathers would find reprehensible. Even in the big immigration booms we were selective in who we took - focusing on issues of public health and ability to contribute to the economy. Nothing wrong with this, as I don't want people coming to live off our public services without being able to work.
As far as securing our borders goes, I think we're a lot more capable with the presence of technology than we ever were. The problem is really diplomatic - we've long held an open border with Canada, and we consider the trafficking of drugs and humans that comes in through it to be a comparatively small price to pay for such close relations. And even then, in my experience, it is far easier to get into Canada from the USA than vice versa. We could lock down the Mexican border if we really tried and were willing to put the resources into it. We have the survellience capabilities now, what with the vast reconnaissance means our military has. It would be a matter of being willing to get out of some of these wars that supposedly protect us but really drain our pockets, and putting people on the border (not necessarily military, but some stripe of law enforcement) that can respond quickly and decisively to border runners.
A nation that cannot control its borders is not sovereign.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-04-28 11:41 am (UTC)Agreed, it seems like give us your tired, your poor, your hungry has gone by the wayside in ways that our founding fathers would find reprehensible. Even in the big immigration booms we were selective in who we took - focusing on issues of public health and ability to contribute to the economy. Nothing wrong with this, as I don't want people coming to live off our public services without being able to work.
As far as securing our borders goes, I think we're a lot more capable with the presence of technology than we ever were. The problem is really diplomatic - we've long held an open border with Canada, and we consider the trafficking of drugs and humans that comes in through it to be a comparatively small price to pay for such close relations. And even then, in my experience, it is far easier to get into Canada from the USA than vice versa. We could lock down the Mexican border if we really tried and were willing to put the resources into it. We have the survellience capabilities now, what with the vast reconnaissance means our military has. It would be a matter of being willing to get out of some of these wars that supposedly protect us but really drain our pockets, and putting people on the border (not necessarily military, but some stripe of law enforcement) that can respond quickly and decisively to border runners.
A nation that cannot control its borders is not sovereign.