Quote:
Originally Posted by spooled240
[/COLOR]
Also from the article:
"Because of the differences in both seizure
size and average purity, it is currently not
possible to determine which source, Mexico
or China, is the greater direct threat as a
supplier of fentanyl to the United States.
While seizures likely originating in Mexico
represent the largest total gross weight of
fentanyl seized in the United States"
Not exactly what I took away from reading this section.
I'll read more of this later.
|
Fair statement. However, if you read a little further, Mexico gets alot of their supply from China and weight isn't necessarily the only issue to focus on
However, that negates the point I am trying to bring across; they are not smuggling across open, sprawling parts of the SWB through "illegal" entry. That has been the entire argument for a wall; to protect these supposed "illegal" smuggling zones that are currently not patrolled or "protected". Actually, there are really no stats to support such an argument come to think of it. That is contrary to what the DEA report surmises and has made mention to on multiple occasions throughout the report. They are smuggling through LEGAL Points of Entry. That has been the argument since day one.
Not saying it doesn't happen through parts of border not patrolled.
And I am going to ask the question again; what is the difference between border security and the wall?? Border Security has been funded (I think there was $20billion+ (don't quote me on that exact number, but it is in the billions)
allocated in the budget trump vetoed) every single year for the past 20, 30 or whatever it is years. The fact that the media and trump continue to conflate the two is nonsense. Border Security has ALWAYS been funded. Simple