The Air Force is the only one of the military branches involved in President Donald Trump's mandated border mission to not disclose publicly the number of service members or what units they're coming from.
Last I checked, planes not run by the Air Force flew to pretty much every country on the planet. Also, there are boats. And if we’re talking the Americas, cars and trucks.
And if they have served their time, why do they need to be deported in a military plane?
If we are exiling someone for violent crimes why would they be free to roam the nation? You do not have the right to live anywhere other than the nation you have citizenship in. That isn’t “American” of me as that is the law in all nations.
What are you even talking about now? You said they should be deported after serving their sentence. I’m saying if they’ve already served their sentence, why do they need to be treated like a dangerous criminal and deport them on an Air Force plane? Put them on a United flight to wherever. If they’re such a risk on a plane, have a sky marshal sit next to them on the flight. They’re allowed to be armed and they don’t have to wear anything that identifies them. What is this cartel member going to do?
They transport prisoners still serving sentences domestically that way sometimes. They don’t use the Air Force because it’s one guy on a plane and that’s silly.
That doesn’t mean that reprisals are a realistic possibility.
People manage all sorts of risks every day.
It’s not a question of whether some infinitesimal risk exists, it’s a question of whether removing names is an appropriate mitigation.
Obviously you think that it is, but I think most people value transparency and accountability. The elephant in the room here is that anonymity would hypothetically allow service members to act with impunity.
I’m sure you can see the risks in having service members escort detainees with no accountability for their actions.
Should an airman’s family be targeted by cartels because they flew cartel members back to their home nation?
That’s a good point.
Maybe we shouldn’t have them do that in the first place either and if there are dangerous cartel members in the U.S., they can be put in U.S. prisons.
And after serving prison times what do we do? Most nations kick you out after you serve time in prison for serious crimes. How do you send them home?
Last I checked, planes not run by the Air Force flew to pretty much every country on the planet. Also, there are boats. And if we’re talking the Americas, cars and trucks.
And if they have served their time, why do they need to be deported in a military plane?
Do we deport criminals housed in prisons for being dangerous people using commercial carriers?
They are being permanently exiled for their crimes why would ypu compromise that by letting them wander free?
I see. You think we should continue to treat former prisoners like prisoners even though they’ve served their sentence.
How very American of you.
If we are exiling someone for violent crimes why would they be free to roam the nation? You do not have the right to live anywhere other than the nation you have citizenship in. That isn’t “American” of me as that is the law in all nations.
What are you even talking about now? You said they should be deported after serving their sentence. I’m saying if they’ve already served their sentence, why do they need to be treated like a dangerous criminal and deport them on an Air Force plane? Put them on a United flight to wherever. If they’re such a risk on a plane, have a sky marshal sit next to them on the flight. They’re allowed to be armed and they don’t have to wear anything that identifies them. What is this cartel member going to do?
They transport prisoners still serving sentences domestically that way sometimes. They don’t use the Air Force because it’s one guy on a plane and that’s silly.
Is this a realistic possibility?
Why would a cartel kick that hornets nest?
Yes, and they have killed service members before.
That doesn’t mean that reprisals are a realistic possibility.
People manage all sorts of risks every day.
It’s not a question of whether some infinitesimal risk exists, it’s a question of whether removing names is an appropriate mitigation.
Obviously you think that it is, but I think most people value transparency and accountability. The elephant in the room here is that anonymity would hypothetically allow service members to act with impunity.
I’m sure you can see the risks in having service members escort detainees with no accountability for their actions.