Population and Resource Control

I've been kicked by the wind,
robbed by the sleet
Had my head stoved in,
but I'm still on my feet and I'm still... willin'
--Willin', Little Feat

All the Federales say
They could have had him any day
They only let him slip away
Out of kindness I suppose
--Pancho and Lefty,
Townes Van Zandt

And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying,
Command the people of Israel, and say to them,
When you come into the land of Canaan;
this is the land that shall fall to you for an inheritance,
the land of Canaan with its borders
--Numbers 34:1-2
______________

Two elements are key in all of the recent ersatz U.S. Counterinsurgency wars: Border control, and population and resource control. These elements are parts of a broader scheme called IDAD [Internal Defense and Development.]

Border control and PRC never worked in our useless OCONUS adventures, but they could be applied successfully and judiciously here in The Homeland vis-a-vis our concerns with illegal immigration. The question is, how sincere and consistent are our views on protecting the U.S. borders?

PRC and IDAD need not be solely a military application but can work with civilians when used in a controlled and sensitive manner. PRC implies that everyone who is legally here in the U.S. carry biometeric and/or legal state or Federal identification, preferably State, abiding by INS guidelines.

No i.d. means no services or bank accounts, no vehicle purchases, no money orders or out-of-country wire fund transfers. Nobody works without a Social Security number and/or work documents. If you work, you pay taxes and Social Security. This the basis of PRC. The government has the right and responsibility to control the borders and the population within those borders.

Border control fails without PRC. This is the disconnect in our Federal policy. We impose these programs in meaningless wars, but fail to apply them at home. If it works in Iraq and Afghanistan (as the Department of Defense tells us), then it has to work here, also. If it works in Baghdad, then why not in Tucson, Arizona?

If the U.S. were serious about its immigration problem, it would apply these policies; the problem will not disappear without action, and whatever action is taken, both the Right and the Left will complain.

Contrary to political rhetoric, there are no easy choices. We either guard the borders and control our territory, or we should forget the charade of half-measures and throw open the borders.

Yes, most of us are of immigrant stock; yes, much of our territory is ill-gotten. But there is legal immigration, and then there is illegal. When do we stop atonement, and when do we own our country, making the difficult choices with surety?

Whatever route we take, there is no rational middle ground.