This article covers upcoming deployment.
I haven't come across overall Indiana sentiment on this yet
There are many things I'm unhappy about in this matter:
- Deployment of Indiana guard for something the federal government should be doing.
- Putting Indiana citizen soldiers in a very difficult position: having to deal with immigration policies in actual practice, political shenanigans, dealing with humanitarian issues when the primary mission isn't saving lives. We are good at war and helping save lives, anything else is asking for trouble.
- Combining immigration policy with border protection. I don't like that they aren't separate. I feel like it's all political games, but someone convince me that we can't control borders without barring all immigration.
- Crazy talk about federalizing a state's national guard.
- Crazy talk about States and federal government clashing to the point of escalation. I don't think cool heads and reason win the day anymore. I feel like the populous seems willing to support more extreme measures these days
- Separation of service members from their families
On one positive side, this will give 50 service members and their families a first hand view of a major topic instead of hearing it from the news.
Fentanyl comes through regular entry points not remote wilderness (though the border wall access roads have made remote drops easier)
If we were serious about drugs we'd offer mexico incentives to dismantle the cartels, legalize weed, and offer more clinical support for addicts to reduce demand.
We have tons of border guards, more than enough. Its important to be clear republicans are the most upset about legal refugees and conflate them with "illegals" as indicated by their media constantly portraying bussing of legal refugees as though they aren't legal. More immigration courts are a must.
I'm curious about more of this? Like the Afghans we brought over? Or are you talking about making it harder to receive asylum?