IDP's http://itsaboutliberty.com/index.php/topic,9.0.html brought this topic to mind:
Author libertasinfinitio
« Thread Started on Feb 17, 2011, 7:56am
http://www.usnews.com/news/washington-whispers/articles/2011/02/16/border-patrol-controls-just-44-percent-of-southSo, let's see, by my math -
Only 129 miles of 2,000 total miles on our sourthern border are "secure". That's just 6.45%.
744 miles are managed, that's 37.2%.
That leaves 1,127 miles unmanaged, that's 56.35%.
So, what percentage of the border that is "managed" could be considered "secure" on any given day? 50%? 30%? Less?
For the sake of argument lets use 30%.
The new calculation gives us 352 miles (17.6%) controlled and 1,648 miles (82.4%) uncontrolled.
At $3b/year, it costs us $8,522,727.27 per secure mile per year, or $23,349.94 per secure mile per day.
Do I even want to ask how much it will cost to secure the other 1,648 miles?
Conclusions -
1) We are not secure.
2) We need a better way to secure all of the border and allocate resources more efficiently.
Resolution -
The only thing I can think of, is a massive electronic network of above and below ground sensors and cameras coupled with aerial drone surveillance and a rapid-reaction style ground and airborne units deployed at key strategic points along the border. In order to prevent end runs there also would have to be deployment of sea-based units along the California coast and gulf coast regions. Some of those new littoral ships could serve as command ships.
I just don't see any other way, if people are serious about securing the border.
Thoughts?