The Dogs Bark But the Caravan Moves On

An excellent post from the Diplomad in which he outlines a robust approach to the problem approaching our southern border. If our readers have other suggestions (mayhem not being one), please share:

A couple of days ago I posted a piece on Trump’s foreign policy with a reference to the ancient Arabic saying, “The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.”

News reports tell us there is another sort of caravan on the move. Some 1000-1200 Central Americans, aided it seems by progressive groups and the Mexican government, are “marching,” driving, hiking, riding a train, whatever, on their way to the USA. It is some self-proclaimed “freedom caravan” that intends to arrive on our border, stream across, and then claim asylum in the USA from the violence in Honduras.

This seems to be a new take on the Moroccan “Green March” of 1975 used against Spain in the Western Sahara. The idea is to defy the superior armed Western power to use force against a “popular” march which seeks only some altruistic goal. Very touching. You will notice these sorts of tactics are not used against certain countries known to shoot without compunction.

Anyhow, this little stunt is outrageous as it is being, as noted, aided by a nominally “friendly” country, Mexico (see my take on Mexico’s friendliness here and here). Not only that but legally the marchers have no case. If they are fleeing Honduras, they can seek asylum in Mexico, the first stop in their “escape.” Mexico has the responsibility to grant them asylum, turn them over to the UN, or return them to their country of origin.

It is the political season in Mexico, and the presidential candidates are trying to outdo each other in “standing up to the gringos.” If this stunt succeeds, there will be a flood of similar “marches” very quickly. We either have a border or we don’t. We either have a regime of laws or we don’t. We either have a country or we don’t. This is an existential threat as much if not more so than any actions by Russia, China, or the jihadi crazies.

We cannot just have the dogs bark. They have to bite.

One of the articles I link above noted that Mexico has over fifty diplomatic and consular missions in the United States; Honduras has about dozen missions here. All of these, the Mexican ones especially, are centers of political and immigration activism. The Mexicans, as I have noted before, have been quite open in their meddling in our internal affairs, including in the last elections.

We need to tell these governments in no uncertain terms that we intend to shut down half of their missions immediately, and will shut down others in accordance with their behavior. We, furthermore, need to tell them that we will cease issuing visas, and even shut the border to normal trade and tourism if these sorts of officially tolerated and sponsored events occur.

This is no joke. Serious as a heart attack.

It’s worth going over there to follow the links in his post.

Thanks to Bill Keezer for the tip.

30 thoughts on “The Dogs Bark But the Caravan Moves On

  1. I can see a huge problem already. I have no doubt at all there will be a federal judge somewhere who will issue an inclusive injunction against any sort of action against the migrants. Their whole status changes once they actually set foot inside the US, so a single inclusive injunction can saddle us with a problem of internment and care for years to come. Plus, any babies born will automatically be considered US citizens.

    So, I see either an ineffective government response, or a literal constitutional crisis. The President will have to use his executive powers to declare the rulings of lower federal courts to be invalid on policy clearly allocated to the President by the Constitution. The President will have to order the Border Patrol to enforce the physical border and the US military to support the Border Patrol as needed, while ignoring the ruling of a federal court. Any President other than Trump could probably get away with an issue this clear-cut, but Trump, of course, will elicit immediate calls for his impeachment, supported by faux Republicans like McCain and Lindsey Graham.

    The Supreme Court will probably eventually uphold the right of the President to guard the borders, but might well declare him subject to federal injunctions until the issue is resolved. In other words, an individual judge would be able to countermand any executive policy, even time-critical policy, for an indefinite time. Trump has called for new laws, but what is the use of new laws if judges, petty dictators in their own domain, can routinely ignore those laws altogether?

    Perhaps this crisis could be averted by the expedient of the President literally invading Mexico, setting up an impenetrable border, including land mines and barbed wire fences, completely on Mexican territory, and denying entry to any aid organizations or relief supplies. This would likely not be under the jurisdiction of the federal courts, would play very well with Trump’s base, and probably wouldn’t make leftists any angrier than anything else he does. And it would have the benefit or avoiding a real constitutional crisis.

    • Those 1500 or so marchers are headed for some sanctuary city in California. They’ll join the massive numbers of homeless people already there.

      See Katy Hopkins, who decided to live in Skid Row for 2 days…

      She found the migrant camps in Calais to be less hellish.

      Once the Hondurans arrive, Skid Row will grow exponentially.

      Perhaps it would be better to wall off California. They certainly have the money to address their problems, but not the wisdom or discernment to see their way out.

      • I think you and the Baron pointed out elsewhere, it’s the generalization. If an organized, obviously illegal, activity, can not only take place, but succeed completely, it will lead to multiple such efforts, overwhelming any individual attempt at control. In other words, the time to stop it is right now.

        As far as walling off California, US citizens have a right to travel anywhere in the US. If you’re suggesting, California be booted from the US, it simply kicks the can down the road. Is the US going to protect itself? And, of course, Orange County and other conservative areas in California would want to secede from the state. And the California legislature, being leftists, will not willingly allow any source of money to leave on their own.

        The most obvious defense is for the Justice Department to indict the organizations and individuals organizing the march. Sometimes I think the “insurance” that disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok referred to was not the leaks, but Jeff Sessions as Attorney General. Sessions has all but sabotaged the Trump Presidency, doing only what he absolutely needed to do to keep from getting booted.

  2. Today President Trump has prepared a MILITARY response to the invasion. This is the moment when Donald has to deliver.

    • A military response is just one option. Closing some embassies is another. Making more difficult the remittances of American dollars by Mexican workers who send millions home each week is another course of action.

      Two things to remember: Mexico is really mad about proposed changes to NAFTA by the U.S. And this is election season in Mexico – lots of posturing.

      We talking two thousand (or fewer) people – they could be absorbed into L.A.’s Skid Row section and never be noticed.

      What I’d really like to see is some effective method of stopping the distribution of Mexican black tar heroin into our struggling, left-behind cities. A hard time for middle America as the economy shifts; that’s inevitable. BTH is cheaper and more reliable than opiates. Pain-killers are a deep temptation to older adults with no hope of employment. They begin to seize up with pain as they no longer feel needed or wanted. It’s awful.

      • If you guys take these people in it will send a message for more to come.
        Something to bear in mind is that the 48 contiguous states are the same size as China who has almost five times the population as the USA.
        You have the room to take in hundreds of millions, but do you really want that?
        America better start saying no and soon or it will fill up and not with the world’s best and brightest.

    • Three cheers for President Trump.

      What a leader.

      Right up there with Viktor Orban

  3. A little benign “refoulement” into Mexico might be in order. That would put the incentive on the Mexicans not to participate in such things in the future.

    Another approach would be to make a big visible show of detaining some of the early arrivals. But I don’t mean a normal detention. I mean a super-obvious, doesn’t-look-like-fun show of the kind that only the U.S. federal government seems to be able to put together. Open-air paddy wagons with full-lock everything, locked on face-shield, militaristic treatment of the supermax style, right on arrival. With those guarding the ones about to be processed told to be somewhat lenient on those willing to run away in the general direction of Mexico.

    That could be one option, though if not executed correctly, it could flop very badly.

    Ultimately, it gets down to being willing to shoot, if that’s the only thing that will stop it.

    Trump made a great move threatening Mexico’s NAFTA status over it.

    • So no carrying luggage a la the RCMP up here in Canada? Or telling mothers calling 911 in the middle of the night to let the cold migrants inside?

      The attack of globalism is growing ever more overt but so many are cheering it on. We’ve brainwashed for decades now. Looking back, I am grateful for the mother who told me, while watching a sitcom where the character wished for “world peace” and I echoed that sentiment and she said “you don’t want to wish for that. It’s not possible and anyone who promises it is lying”.

    • Bwaah!I love non-sequiturs.

      Bless your heart, sweet pea. We’re Virginia Episcopalians. Before ECUSA, before the Declaration of Independence, there was The Church of Virginia, with an umbilical cord across the Atlantic to the CofE at Canterbury. Those Catholics were huddled in Maryland where they belonged.

      Yep, we moderate comments and have for some years now. Your remarks above ably demonstrate why that’s a superlative idea.

      Pox vobiscum, dear heart.

    • Why is disgusting?
      You love the hordes,then take them in your home or go to their country.

  4. I understand these marchers are without passports or visas to enter either Mexico or USA. They could be stopped by Mexico if they wished too. So the problem has been created by Mexico to lever some pressure on the US. According to international law, an asylum-seeking refugee must register as such at first port of call, ie in Mexico. This was the issue with the “Syrian migrants” who moved on to other countries instead of staying in Greece and Italy. The US is perfectly in its rights to refuse entry as they are already in Mexico who should be the country to process any asylum application. But in reality, they are of course simply economic migrants stirred up activists telling them that “migration is a human right.”

  5. I say our military should welcome them at the border with water and food. Then we load them onto buses designed to transport them to their new home. That home being a C-130 that will transport them all back to Honduras. Have some fighter jets accompany them too in case the Honduran government throws up any static. PR disaster averted.

    • Water and food ok. Don’t let them in, let mexico figure it out. They allowed the problem to fester.

      • we Mexicans , had an experience when we have migrants from o ther countries just passing by,as soon as they get as far as north baja,the locals offer them a job, but they refuse to work here,that happens with people from other countries too, they have a misconception of Mexico, life here could be much better than the USA, we may not have a choice but to wall our south border too,

    • That’s expensive. How many cargo planes will they need? And flying through Mexican airspace would be problematic.

      I still believe the best remedies are economic:

      close embassies and Mexican consular offices;
      cut American tourism the way we did Cuba;
      stop the flow of remittances to Mexico from the US. Those remittances are worth more to Mexico than all its oil. And no up-keep.

      All of those don’t require any troops or outlay of money/materiel.

      I was joking about building a wall between California and the rest of us. Even if I were serious, it would be prohibitively expensive (ever looked at the north/south boundary in California?) and ultimately pointless. California is rapidly making itself irrelevant anyway. The most billionaires, the most poverty is not a place the rest of us want to emulate.

      • Yes, it’s expensive but it’s more expensive and damaging to give them what they want which is a confrontation. If they arrive and violence erupts they gain sympathy. If they arrive and are denied entry they will sit it the desert and no matter how much aid is provided they will be portrayed as suffering, ie more sympathy. In either of those scenarios the media will have an orgasm and it will give them headlines for weeks until it’s resolved.

        If on the other hand we unexpectedly greet them, provide a small amount of aid, and then promptly fly them back to their [sumps] we will have defused the situation and given the media blue balls.

        It should only be a one-time thing anyway. Could they organize another caravan? Sure, but it won’t have the same impact and we can be much more forceful since we showed such compassion the first time.

  6. Mexico has long had an official policy of not helping its poor so they would seek out a better life in America. To solve that problem, we proposed NAFTA. After a couple decades of NAFTA, we have found out that illegal immigration is still happening.

    Now that a US president is using a stick rather than a carrot to solve the problem, the Mexicans say they are upset. I bet they are. Their gravy train is being threatened. A government backed mass movement of people from one country to another is an invasion. It is officially an act of war.

  7. Another point is that refugees are required to stop in the first nation that allows them safe harbor from political persecution. A Honduran caravan driving across Mexico is required to stop there if it is made up of true refugees.

    • Right. Just like they did in Italy and Greece. Those people are headed for California. They could blend in with the many thousands of homeless along the southern coast of California…who could tell?

      • My comment was arguing law. Your reply regarding enforcement tells me that you support the flouting of that law. Your assumption that US immigration enforcement can’t find a batch of Hondurans in California acts as an argument for deporting all Hispanics from America. Thank you for sharing that.

        I’ll tell you how we can stop them. They’re a big caravan. Have border patrol agents track them, then arrest the lot as soon as they enter the country. Then interrogate them to find out who helped. Put involved US person’s on trial.

        • You and I hold different opinions as to the wisest course to take when countries come into conflict. These Hondurans are pawns being used by Mexico. Now it seems they’re leaving the chessboard:

          I don’t support flouting the law; I was saying what was likely to happen if/when any central Americans get through. Your idea that ICE will find law enforcement in California willing to help them means you don’t follow the ICE website or the local California news. Sanctuary cities??

          That’s why I see economic penalties as being the most effective against governments (who are pushing this sham “caravan”) while they leave people alone.

          What you want, however logical and straightforward, ain’t gonna happen. You say:

          ’ll tell you how we can stop them. They’re a big caravan. Have border patrol agents track them, then arrest the lot as soon as they enter the country. Then interrogate them to find out who helped. Put involved US person’s on trial.

          1.They’re not a “big caravan’. It’s shrunk to a few hundred now and it’s getting smaller all the time. Some are trying to save face before they return home by saying it’s an “annual event”.

          2. How many border patrol agents do you think we have? They can’t keep up with the current numbers, how would they handle a huge crowd?

          3. Arresting them as soon as they enter the country?? No, our best bet is to make it inconvenient for their owners to any longer think this surge is a good idea.

          4. Where would these people be “interrogated”. Over-worked ICE personnel wouldn’t want the job.

          5. What does a peon know about who is in charge?

          6. Put involved US persons on trial. Really? Obama and Holder got off scott-free with their idiotic and lethal “Fast and Furious” debacle. And there are hundreds of California officials, state AND local, who are already in violation of the laws regarding our borders. They laugh at those laws.

          I haven’t gone back to read my comment to see what got your dander up. But I do know I don’t believe in flouting the law. I encourage its wise application.

  8. is not easy for us Mexicans to deal with that problem, if the hondurans are crossing to the usa, through our borders , if they are a small group, our inmigration oficers see them, they arrest them and deportet them inmediatly, i seen it, happening, but if they are more than a thousand, is not that easy,i seen african nationals coming to the Mexican border, asking for asylum , but when the asylum is denied, the Mexican autorities ask them if they want to stay and work, they say no, we gladly would help but we have to do it together ,
    one more thing, we do not need to go to the usa, to make a good living, life is better here,

    • Thanks for your input.

      Many Americans tend to agree with you since they retire to Mexico. But attempting to stay requires a rigorous process. Mexico is picky about who it lets in. Too bad America is much less so. And you must admit that the poor, illiterate indo-Mexicans have a rough go of wherever they are. Thus the attraction to the US, where they live together in large groups (violating housing codes) in order to send money back home. A laudable thing to do, but there needs to be some arrangement that is more symmetrical.

      • The word “Honduras” in Russian sounds anecdotal: funny and almost indecent. Why these people will not be told that no one in America expects them and America should not owe them anything?
        Although … Our migrants from Central Asia are exactly like that. Someone told them that they saved Russia from Nazism during the Second World War.
        There is such a higher combat reward – “Hero of the Soviet Union”.
        During the Second World War, it received 8 thousand Russians, 1 thousand 200 Ukrainians and only 15 Tajiks. And now they say that we owe them for their grandfathers-heroes. Every such “grandfather” has from 50 to 100 insatiable grandson.

        • The Hondurans don’t expect to be welcomed. They are simply cannon fodder in the cultural/economic war Mexico is playing with the U.S. They don’t care – getting into California is the point.

          Last I read – and I quit following the story closely when the so-called “caravan” dwindled in size and people began making excuses for why they were there or why they were leaving – it seemed to be fizzling out. I don’t know if Trump and Mexico’s presidential candidates are still sword-clashing, either, or if they’ve put them in their scabbards and returned to regular programming.

      • here in Puerto Vallarta, I see Americans working as mechanics, chefs, waiters and other jobs, some of them speak Spanish fluidly, and even we give them Mexican names, as Juanito, don Pablo, and so on, some of them are invited to sit a the table to share a meal with the families. There is one of them, don Pablo, the had to earn the locals call him Don, almost as a nobility title,

Comments are closed.