seb146 wrote:

This migrant caravan that is still 1000 miles away from the United States/Mexico boarder will be facing unregulated groups of men with private firearms who believe they are sent by the government to protect the borders. That is bad enough but their dear leader said it was okay to shoot

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/02/us/offic ... index.html

This will probably also be used as justification by Republican nationalists to shoot counter protesters......

It's probably smart to send the troops there this far in advance, to train an acclimate for different contingencies they might face in Operation Faithful Patriot. And to clear up what their Rules of Engagement will be.

Here are members of the 89th Military Police and 541st Engineering Company, 19th Engineering Battalion at Fort Knox, Ky., being briefed upon arrival Wednesday at Lackland Air Force Base, Texas.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

seb146 wrote:

This migrant caravan that is still 1000 miles away from the United States/Mexico boarder will be facing unregulated groups of men with private firearms who believe they are sent by the government to protect the borders. That is bad enough but their dear leader said it was okay to shoot

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/02/us/offic ... index.html

This will probably also be used as justification by Republican nationalists to shoot counter protesters......

It's probably smart to send the troops there this far in advance, to train an acclimate for different contingencies they might face in Operation Faithful Patriot. And to clear up what their Rules of Engagement will be.

Here are members of the 89th Military Police and 541st Engineering Company, 19th Engineering Battalion at Fort Knox, Ky., being briefed upon arrival Wednesday at Lackland Air Force Base, Texas.

I was not talking about the already stretched thin military. I was talking about the weekend warriors who use the label "militia" to justify them hating and stockpiling ammo. When they get out there along side the military, it will be a nightmare.

Some news report are saying, per Trump 'beautiful' barbed wire is being installed by US military forces near certain border crossing in TX. These people are fleeing the most violent areas of the world, controlled by gang-cartels that have control of all levels of government, extort millions a week from poor workers, kidnappings, drug dealing. Maybe instead of sending troops to the borders we should invade (again) some of these central American countries to support the governments there in trying to rid of these criminal groups.
This is getting uglier ever day, in part due to the twisted beliefs of Pres. Trump, but also due to generations of failure of dealing with illegal immigration that a large plurality if not a majority of Americans want dealt with.

'U.S. military declined draft request from Trump administration to build migrant detention facilities as part of Mexico border mission - U.S. officials'

https://twitter.com/ReutersPolitics/sta ... 3699831815


Looks like the US Military is not interested building concentration camps for mothers with children. Good on them.

Things are getting real.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 68c30adca7

DIRECTFLT wrote:

Here's what they're doing in Europe for border control. A 10 foot high electrified border fence.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... fence.html

You want the US to be more like Hungary?

Apparently no one told Trump that troops "at home" have a couple of important tasks. First is spending time any home after a deployment - very important for career personnel. Then there is training for the next deployment - also very important. Toss in the need for everyone to take their 30 days leave and the need to spend the Holiday Season with their family. (I spent 1 out of 4 Christmases with my family when I was in the Navy.)

Trump is totally ignorant of these needs, even if he is the Commander in Chief. It's more important for him to spend around $200 Million on his propaganda effort of fear. Impressive.

2122M wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

Here's what they're doing in Europe for border control. A 10 foot high electrified border fence.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... fence.html

You want the US to be more like Hungary?

I want the US to be less the rest of the EU.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

2122M wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

Here's what they're doing in Europe for border control. A 10 foot high electrified border fence.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... fence.html

You want the US to be more like Hungary?

I want the US to be less the rest of the EU.

More like Hungary, less like Germany. Gotcha.

Feel free to do your own research comparing those two countries on standards of living, strength of economy, or basically any other metric including crime and safety.

I don’t really care if Trump builds a wall or sends some troops there, the question is rather does it make sense economically? Has anybody conducted a cost-benefit analysis on the wall or is this like a strongman project found in some dictatorial communist states?

DGVT wrote:

I don’t really care if Trump builds a wall or sends some troops there, the question is rather does it make sense economically? Has anybody conducted a cost-benefit analysis on the wall or is this like a strongman project found in some dictatorial communist states?

By far the best cost / benefit way to handle the illegal immigrant problem is to issue hefty fines and confiscate the businesses and farms of people who hire illegal immigrants. It is also the most just way and the one and only way that is guaranteed to actually permanently solve the problem.

Of course doing this would inconvenience a lot of GOP donors.

NIKV69 wrote:

Things are getting real.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 68c30adca7

Do any of these people have jobs? They just can "head on down to the border" whenever and stay how however long? This has the potential to get really ugly

DGVT wrote:

I don’t really care if Trump builds a wall or sends some troops there, the question is rather does it make sense economically? Has anybody conducted a cost-benefit analysis on the wall or is this like a strongman project found in some dictatorial communist states?

How can you even put a price on our nations security? That caravan is composed almost entirely of very dangerous people. Murderers, rapist, drug dealers, gang members all wanting to do harm to the American people and undermine our democracy.

How can anyone put a price tag on this? Thats why I said the use of deadly force should be used to stop these people.

AA747123 wrote:

DGVT wrote:

I don’t really care if Trump builds a wall or sends some troops there, the question is rather does it make sense economically? Has anybody conducted a cost-benefit analysis on the wall or is this like a strongman project found in some dictatorial communist states?

How can you even put a price on our nations security? That caravan is composed almost entirely of very dangerous people. Murderers, rapist, drug dealers, gang members all wanting to do harm to the American people and undermine our democracy.

How can anyone put a price tag on this? Thats why I said the use of deadly force should be used to stop these people.

Of course security has a price tag. The government is limited by fiscal constraints. Even in the times of war bonds costs and benefits were weighed against each other.

If security didn’t have a price tag, a country would theoretically have a unlimted army guaranteeing absolute security.

ER757 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Things are getting real.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 68c30adca7

Do any of these people have jobs? They just can "head on down to the border" whenever and stay how however long? This has the potential to get really ugly

What do you think would happen if a caravan of thousands of Americans stormed the Mexico border? You think the Federales would hug us? Come on.

salttee wrote:

DGVT wrote:

I don’t really care if Trump builds a wall or sends some troops there, the question is rather does it make sense economically? Has anybody conducted a cost-benefit analysis on the wall or is this like a strongman project found in some dictatorial communist states?

By far the best cost / benefit way to handle the illegal immigrant problem is to issue hefty fines and confiscate the businesses and farms of people who hire illegal immigrants. It is also the most just way and the one and only way that is guaranteed to actually permanently solve the problem.

Of course doing this would inconvenience a lot of GOP donors.

There are those who come here illegally simply because of wages. There are others who come here illegally because that is safer and a much better option than living under oppression and violence in their home country. Does anyone know what it takes to leave your home country? How much violence and chaos there has to be to leave home not knowing if you are even going to be accepted but that is a much better option than what is at home?

AA747123 wrote:

DGVT wrote:

I don’t really care if Trump builds a wall or sends some troops there, the question is rather does it make sense economically? Has anybody conducted a cost-benefit analysis on the wall or is this like a strongman project found in some dictatorial communist states?

How can you even put a price on our nations security? That caravan is composed almost entirely of very dangerous people. Murderers, rapist, drug dealers, gang members all wanting to do harm to the American people and undermine our democracy.

How can anyone put a price tag on this? Thats why I said the use of deadly force should be used to stop these people.

The migrant caravan is still 1000 miles away and walking. They are not a heavily armed and well funded military operation.

My biggest fear is these wanna be troopers will just open fire. On foxes, on American civilians, on illegals, on American soldiers, on each other.....

AA747123 wrote:

That caravan is composed almost entirely of very dangerous people. Murderers, rapist, drug dealers, gang members all wanting to do harm to the American people and undermine our democracy.

How can anyone put a price tag on this? Thats why I said the use of deadly force should be used to stop these people.

Wow, Trump must really love you. Do you work on your trolling skills or are you really not able to see what is reality?
Looks like Trumps strategy of scaring the not so smart ones works out.

A3801000 wrote:

Wow, Trump must really love you. Do you work on your trolling skills or are you really not able to see what is reality?
Looks like Trumps strategy of scaring the not so smart ones works out.

If everyone would flag this troll we might get rid of him and make this forum a bit less of a food fight.

But you're just feeding the troll.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-military-readying-send-5000-troops-border-officials/story?id=58830081

The U.S. military announced Monday that, by the end of the week, it will send 5,200 active duty troops to the southwest border, as well as helicopters and heavy equipment to build new barriers, to meet a request from the Department of Homeland Security to augment resources in anticipation of the arrival of two caravans of migrants currently in Mexico. Gen. Terrence O'Shaughnessy described the 5,200 troops to be deployed as just “the start of this operation” that could be adjusted as needed.

In announcing the deployment, the head of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) cited concerns over the migrant caravans as reasons why his agency was adding 1,000 personnel along the border and requesting assistance from the Department of Defense. He said the caravan in Mexico now numbers 3,500 people and cited a second group of 3,000 that has become a concern because it has had violent interactions with security personnel as it attempted to enter Mexico Sunday. Last week, in an exclusive interview with ABC News, Vice President Mike Pence would not rule out the option of closing down the border ahead of the midterm elections.

The President ran on securing the border. Another promise being kept. Thank goodness President Trump is a man of action.

A little cut and past from another thread.

Immigration is not the reason this country is $20 trillion in debt, it's not the reason our roads and bridges are falling apart, not the reason why our kids are doing active shoter drills in school, not the reason for a seemingly endless war in the middle east. You see these issues are a whole lot more important than birthright citizenship/ immigration. However there are people in positions of power that don't want you to think about those issues so they find something to distract you with. And if you think that does not happen then you are naive.

Let me add that the reason a lot of these people are showing up on our southern border are due in part to past and present foreign and domestic policies of this country. So don't be surprised when those policies cause death and chaos people come looking for a place to stay.

salttee wrote:

A3801000 wrote:

Wow, Trump must really love you. Do you work on your trolling skills or are you really not able to see what is reality?
Looks like Trumps strategy of scaring the not so smart ones works out.

If everyone would flag this troll we might get rid of him and make this forum a bit less of a food fight.

But you're just feeding the troll.

Who? A380 or A747?

NIKV69 wrote:

ER757 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Things are getting real.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 68c30adca7

Do any of these people have jobs? They just can "head on down to the border" whenever and stay how however long? This has the potential to get really ugly

What do you think would happen if a caravan of thousands of Americans stormed the Mexico border? You think the Federales would hug us? Come on.

Absolutely not, I am sure there would be a response. I have NO PROBLEM with the US military going down there. I actually support Trump on curtailing illegal immigration. My issue is with these pretend soldier boys deciding it's time to take up arms and head off on a cowboy posse. This can't end well.

2122M wrote:

More like Hungary, less like Germany. Gotcha.

Feel free to do your own research comparing those two countries on standards of living, strength of economy, or basically any other metric including crime and safety.

Well, if the USA would be ever able to achieve the same crime rate and level of safety as Hungary, it would be a massive improvement

Now that the mid-term elections are over, the migrant caravan story will go away. The wanna be soldiers who are waiting to open fire on anything that moves will get bored and leave over the next couple of weeks, anyway.

seb146 wrote:

Now that the mid-term elections are over, the migrant caravan story will go away. The wanna be soldiers who are waiting to open fire on anything that moves will get bored and leave over the next couple of weeks, anyway.

Probably, just an election stunt. Fear mongering and it works unfortunately.

Dutchy wrote:

Probably, just an election stunt. Fear mongering and it works unfortunately.

That's what I've been trying to say!

NIKV69 wrote:

ER757 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Things are getting real.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 68c30adca7

Do any of these people have jobs? They just can "head on down to the border" whenever and stay how however long? This has the potential to get really ugly

What do you think would happen if a caravan of thousands of Americans stormed the Mexico border? You think the Federales would hug us? Come on.

Maybe not hug us, but out of one million US citizens living in Mexico about 800,000 are there illegally. So some irony there. Most are retirees and I would imagine Mexico would probably welcome more as they do put some $$$ into the economy.

seb146 wrote:

Now that the mid-term elections are over, the migrant caravan story will go away. The wanna be soldiers who are waiting to open fire on anything that moves will get bored and leave over the next couple of weeks, anyway.

Not yet...

President Trump demands wall funding in ‘major border security package’

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... ty-package

President Trump in an early-morning tweet the day after Thanksgiving demanded funding for a wall at the Southern border as part of a "major border security package." "Republicans and Democrats MUST come together, finally, with a major Border Security package, which will include funding for the Wall," Trump wrote from his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

Trump has kept the door open to a potential government shutdown if an upcoming deal to fund parts of the government does not include funding for a border wall. Congress has until Dec. 7 to fund the rest of the government after lawmakers punted on seven of the 12 individual funding bills before the end of the fiscal year deadline.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Now that the mid-term elections are over, the migrant caravan story will go away. The wanna be soldiers who are waiting to open fire on anything that moves will get bored and leave over the next couple of weeks, anyway.

Not yet...

President Trump demands wall funding in ‘major border security package’

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... ty-package

President Trump in an early-morning tweet the day after Thanksgiving demanded funding for a wall at the Southern border as part of a "major border security package." "Republicans and Democrats MUST come together, finally, with a major Border Security package, which will include funding for the Wall," Trump wrote from his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

Trump has kept the door open to a potential government shutdown if an upcoming deal to fund parts of the government does not include funding for a border wall. Congress has until Dec. 7 to fund the rest of the government after lawmakers punted on seven of the 12 individual funding bills before the end of the fiscal year deadline.

I find it hilarious that Republicans are just now DEMANDING nothing less than bipartisanship over everything. For the past... what? 10 years? all he have heard from you Republicans is "Eff you all" and "we can do what we want, screw everyone else" and "this is a mandate (to blow up the deficit)" and so forth.

You all had 10 years to fix this. And, now, you are demanding bipartisanship to get something done.

What a joke.

BTW, you all built a few hundred yards of a wall a millions and millions of dollars of taxpayer expense. Why are you all not crowing about that?

DIRECTFLT wrote:

President Trump in an early-morning tweet the day after Thanksgiving demanded funding for a wall at the Southern border as part of a "major border security package." "Republicans and Democrats MUST come together, finally, with a major Border Security package, which will include funding for the Wall," Trump wrote from his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

Trump has kept the door open to a potential government shutdown if an upcoming deal to fund parts of the government does not include funding for a border wall. Congress has until Dec. 7 to fund the rest of the government after lawmakers punted on seven of the 12 individual funding bills before the end of the fiscal year deadline.

Yep, need money to protect us from all the scary little brown people who don't speak American.

A couple questions though, whose going to protect us from all the scary white guys going into schools, churches, synagogues, restaurants, malls etc with guns? Also what about the roads and bridges that would carry all that material and people for that wall that's falling apart. Any money for that?

DIRECTFLT wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Now that the mid-term elections are over, the migrant caravan story will go away. The wanna be soldiers who are waiting to open fire on anything that moves will get bored and leave over the next couple of weeks, anyway.

Not yet...

President Trump demands wall funding in ‘major border security package’

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... ty-package

President Trump in an early-morning tweet the day after Thanksgiving demanded funding for a wall at the Southern border as part of a "major border security package." "Republicans and Democrats MUST come together, finally, with a major Border Security package, which will include funding for the Wall," Trump wrote from his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

Trump has kept the door open to a potential government shutdown if an upcoming deal to fund parts of the government does not include funding for a border wall. Congress has until Dec. 7 to fund the rest of the government after lawmakers punted on seven of the 12 individual funding bills before the end of the fiscal year deadline.

Where is the Health Care Reform and the Raises from the Tax Cut ? Seriously.

Trump and his lousy lowest rate staff can't even provide for domestic necessities, and he wants to waste money on a long term maintenance nightmare that isn't cost effective

At least we know why he declared bankruptcy so many times. Maybe he can go ask his father for another free loan to fund the border wall.
?

A little rich coming from the Reagan SecState, but the elderly Mr. Shultz now says we should end violence in Central America by decriminalizing illicit drugs in the US and cut the cartels' legs out.

https://thehill.com/policy/internationa ... olence?amp

Racism/immigration walk a VERY fine line. It's a very delicate subject that requires finesse. Unfortunately, the president, not really understanding how ANYTHING works, is a bull in a china shop with this subject, and many more. He inflames everything with every childish tweet. Charging up the nation with bad rhetoric, false news from his mind, and just amps everything to the extreme it becomes uncontrollable. Hey, it's great this country is doing well. I'm not so sure how much of it is because of Trump...however, we are in dire straits if the rhetoric isn't tamped down, and we actually work on these sensitive issues with grace and dignity. It's not good. And the president is the culprit in all of this. It's terrible, really. He plays to EVERYONE's ignorant fears. He finds the darkest of dark and blasts it all over the twitter sphere like a child. He whines, complains, EVERY MORNING and EVERY NIGHT and it's just become boring. Unfortunately, it's not boring to many...and that is dangerous. This subject included.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/25/us/san-y ... index.html

After United States border agents closed the San Ysidro crossing (a legal point of entry) they fired tear gas across the border into Mexico.

seb146 wrote:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/25/us/san-ysidro-port-of-entry-closed/index.html

After United States border agents closed the San Ysidro crossing (a legal point of entry) they fired tear gas across the border into Mexico.

A have a lot of thoughts on this.

I cannot for the life of me understand why someone would go through all that they went through and then throw rocks or haphazardly try and jump the fence. I know it's not all of them, but it seems like quite a bit are doing that... do they think that's going to help their asylum case!?

My first impressions of the decision to keep asylum seekers in Mexico while the claims are being processed... So? Not seeing an issue, and please enlighten me on how supposedly bad this is. Mexico isn't the greatest these days but it's not like they're waiting in the DMZ. Least Mexico can do share a bit of the burden. Isn't asylum supposed to be applied at the first good country you get to? Again, Mexico has its problems but I'd argue it's definitely safe enough, especially if you're really facing problems back home

And although it got recently blocked, I also have no problems granting asylum only to people applying legally at a border crossing. The Constitutional question may override my personal opinion but if you want help from us, do it legitimately

And before I receive a ton of flack, I have no problem increasing legal immigration and work permits massively. I just hate the lawlessness of our current state of affairs. I'd like to see a strong, secure, but welcoming border (through legal means.) I'm even pro-amnesty. I hate the fact that they're illegal but couldn't care less about them being here in a documented, legal fashion.

Does anyone have similar points of view? I feel like I'm some bastardization of very strong borders and amnesty, a mix like oil and water

DeltaMD90 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/25/us/san-ysidro-port-of-entry-closed/index.html

After United States border agents closed the San Ysidro crossing (a legal point of entry) they fired tear gas across the border into Mexico.

A have a lot of thoughts on this.

I cannot for the life of me understand why someone would go through all that they went through and then throw rocks or haphazardly try and jump the fence. I know it's not all of them, but it seems like quite a bit are doing that... do they think that's going to help their asylum case!?

My first impressions of the decision to keep asylum seekers in Mexico while the claims are being processed... So? Not seeing an issue, and please enlighten me on how supposedly bad this is. Mexico isn't the greatest these days but it's not like they're waiting in the DMZ. Least Mexico can do share a bit of the burden. Isn't asylum supposed to be applied at the first good country you get to? Again, Mexico has its problems but I'd argue it's definitely safe enough, especially if you're really facing problems back home

And although it got recently blocked, I also have no problems granting asylum only to people applying legally at a border crossing. The Constitutional question may override my personal opinion but if you want help from us, do it legitimately

And before I receive a ton of flack, I have no problem increasing legal immigration and work permits massively. I just hate the lawlessness of our current state of affairs. I'd like to see a strong, secure, but welcoming border (through legal means.) I'm even pro-amnesty. I hate the fact that they're illegal but couldn't care less about them being here in a documented, legal fashion.

Does anyone have similar points of view? I feel like I'm some bastardization of very strong borders and amnesty, a mix like oil and water

Because San Ysidro was closed, those seeking asylum could not even apply for asylum. IIRC, there are only certain crossings where one is allowed to apply for asylum.

seb146 wrote:

DeltaMD90 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/25/us/san-ysidro-port-of-entry-closed/index.html

After United States border agents closed the San Ysidro crossing (a legal point of entry) they fired tear gas across the border into Mexico.

A have a lot of thoughts on this.

I cannot for the life of me understand why someone would go through all that they went through and then throw rocks or haphazardly try and jump the fence. I know it's not all of them, but it seems like quite a bit are doing that... do they think that's going to help their asylum case!?

My first impressions of the decision to keep asylum seekers in Mexico while the claims are being processed... So? Not seeing an issue, and please enlighten me on how supposedly bad this is. Mexico isn't the greatest these days but it's not like they're waiting in the DMZ. Least Mexico can do share a bit of the burden. Isn't asylum supposed to be applied at the first good country you get to? Again, Mexico has its problems but I'd argue it's definitely safe enough, especially if you're really facing problems back home

And although it got recently blocked, I also have no problems granting asylum only to people applying legally at a border crossing. The Constitutional question may override my personal opinion but if you want help from us, do it legitimately

And before I receive a ton of flack, I have no problem increasing legal immigration and work permits massively. I just hate the lawlessness of our current state of affairs. I'd like to see a strong, secure, but welcoming border (through legal means.) I'm even pro-amnesty. I hate the fact that they're illegal but couldn't care less about them being here in a documented, legal fashion.

Does anyone have similar points of view? I feel like I'm some bastardization of very strong borders and amnesty, a mix like oil and water

Because San Ysidro was closed, those seeking asylum could not even apply for asylum. IIRC, there are only certain crossings where one is allowed to apply for asylum.

Yeah... while I guess I can see a situation where closing the border temporarily because of a problem would be justified, it was probably done as an overreaction for dramatic effect.

Either way, throwing rocks and charging the border should not be condoned and I have no problem with Mexico supposedly working to deport this crowd. Say what you want about the US and its flaws, but you're coming here for a new start/asylum, there is NO excuse for rowdiness and lawbreaking.

But yeah, the border crossing was closed yesterday, it's not like it's been closed for weeks and is closed for the unforeseeable future. They haven't been stranded in Tijuana with no end in sight.

Asylum should be addressed and the rules should be known. Legal ports of entry only, and should be easy and available (not necessarily instantly available but shouldn't be more than a couple weeks.) As long as you're not in immediate danger in Tijuana or whatever, hang out there while it's being processed. And finally, asylum is for specific cases, not a generalized "coming to America for more opportunity." While I sympathize, that is not what asylum is for. I have no problem increasing LEGAL immigration instead, but this lawlessness needs to stop/be reduced IMO

DeltaMD90 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

DeltaMD90 wrote:

A have a lot of thoughts on this.

I cannot for the life of me understand why someone would go through all that they went through and then throw rocks or haphazardly try and jump the fence. I know it's not all of them, but it seems like quite a bit are doing that... do they think that's going to help their asylum case!?

My first impressions of the decision to keep asylum seekers in Mexico while the claims are being processed... So? Not seeing an issue, and please enlighten me on how supposedly bad this is. Mexico isn't the greatest these days but it's not like they're waiting in the DMZ. Least Mexico can do share a bit of the burden. Isn't asylum supposed to be applied at the first good country you get to? Again, Mexico has its problems but I'd argue it's definitely safe enough, especially if you're really facing problems back home

And although it got recently blocked, I also have no problems granting asylum only to people applying legally at a border crossing. The Constitutional question may override my personal opinion but if you want help from us, do it legitimately

And before I receive a ton of flack, I have no problem increasing legal immigration and work permits massively. I just hate the lawlessness of our current state of affairs. I'd like to see a strong, secure, but welcoming border (through legal means.) I'm even pro-amnesty. I hate the fact that they're illegal but couldn't care less about them being here in a documented, legal fashion.

Does anyone have similar points of view? I feel like I'm some bastardization of very strong borders and amnesty, a mix like oil and water

Because San Ysidro was closed, those seeking asylum could not even apply for asylum. IIRC, there are only certain crossings where one is allowed to apply for asylum.

Yeah... while I guess I can see a situation where closing the border temporarily because of a problem would be justified, it was probably done as an overreaction for dramatic effect.

Either way, throwing rocks and charging the border should not be condoned and I have no problem with Mexico supposedly working to deport this crowd. Say what you want about the US and its flaws, but you're coming here for a new start/asylum, there is NO excuse for rowdiness and lawbreaking.

But yeah, the border crossing was closed yesterday, it's not like it's been closed for weeks and is closed for the unforeseeable future. They haven't been stranded in Tijuana with no end in sight.

Asylum should be addressed and the rules should be known. Legal ports of entry only, and should be easy and available (not necessarily instantly available but shouldn't be more than a couple weeks.) As long as you're not in immediate danger in Tijuana or whatever, hang out there while it's being processed. And finally, asylum is for specific cases, not a generalized "coming to America for more opportunity." While I sympathize, that is not what asylum is for. I have no problem increasing LEGAL immigration instead, but this lawlessness needs to stop/be reduced IMO

The problem is that since the border was closed, we have no clue who was seeking asylum. Some of these folks may have just been young kids looking to get a rise out of the border.
Based on the below video, the ones causing the problems were folks jumping the border and not seeking asylum. So all in all we have issues with closing the border, and officers arresting 42 of the counless folks that actually crossed the border where they wanted due to low barriers.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/11/2 ... ay-vpx.cnn

casinterest wrote:

The problem is that since the border was closed, we have no clue who was seeking asylum.

Ok again, it's not like the border has been closed for weeks. People were able to apply for asylum and they will when it reopens. I'm not defending the decision to close it, and it will definitely be problematic if it remains closed for a long period of time, but it's not like the migrants have to instantly apply for asylum or jump the fence the second they arrive. Not really understanding "but the border is closed" argument, at least not yet (again, it's been like a day)

casinterest wrote:

Some of these folks may have just been young kids looking to get a rise out of the border.
Based on the below video, the ones causing the problems were folks jumping the border and not seeking asylum. So all in all we have issues with closing the border, and officers arresting 42 of the counless folks that actually crossed the border where they wanted due to low barriers.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/11/2 ... ay-vpx.cnn

Well obviously if they are rounding up everyone (including people not involved in lawlessness) and deporting them that's a problem, but I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about deporting anyone (asylum seekers or not) throwing rocks or jumping the border


There is a obviously a lot that is and has been going on that is problematic, you'll have no trouble finding plenty of cases I'd disagree with. But I'm talking about some specific issues here. I am not gonna change my mind on some broad issue based off a semi-unrelated injustice somewhere else, I can criticize that separately

DeltaMD90 wrote:

Either way, throwing rocks and charging the border should not be condoned and I have no problem with Mexico supposedly working to deport this crowd. Say what you want about the US and its flaws, but you're coming here for a new start/asylum, there is NO excuse for rowdiness and lawbreaking.

Were they throwing rocks because the border was closed by order of his orangeness or were they throwing rocks to cause trouble?

But yeah, the border crossing was closed yesterday, it's not like it's been closed for weeks and is closed for the unforeseeable future. They haven't been stranded in Tijuana with no end in sight.

And if the border had been open, so they could legally apply for asylum, most likely none of this would have happened.

Asylum should be addressed and the rules should be known. Legal ports of entry only, and should be easy and available (not necessarily instantly available but shouldn't be more than a couple weeks.) As long as you're not in immediate danger in Tijuana or whatever, hang out there while it's being processed. And finally, asylum is for specific cases, not a generalized "coming to America for more opportunity." While I sympathize, that is not what asylum is for. I have no problem increasing LEGAL immigration instead, but this lawlessness needs to stop/be reduced IMO

There actually are rules in place for seeking asylum. They actually wanted to follow the rules and apply for asylum at a legal crossing. They wanted to follow our rules.

These people left their homeland of civil war, drug cartels, and death. Maybe some of them were directly threatened by the cartels? Maybe some of them would have eventually be allowed asylum. Instead of firing into Mexico, let immigration courts decide. The legal way. As you suggest.

seb146 wrote:

Because San Ysidro was closed, those seeking asylum could not even apply for asylum. IIRC, there are only certain crossings where one is allowed to apply for asylum.

Not to be pedantic but isn't the correct way to apply for asylum to go through the embassy in one's originating country anyways? Or apply at the first country they arrive at if fleeing said country?

trpmb6 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Because San Ysidro was closed, those seeking asylum could not even apply for asylum. IIRC, there are only certain crossings where one is allowed to apply for asylum.

Not to be pedantic but isn't the correct way to apply for asylum to go through the embassy in one's originating country anyways? Or apply at the first country they arrive at if fleeing said country?

They could do that, as an embassy is technically foreign soil. Or, they could ask for asylum once they are in the United States

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/43442030/ns/u ... _wfkflKiM8

My guess is there is no embassy in the country where the immigrants came from.

DeltaMD90 wrote:

Does anyone have similar points of view? I feel like I'm some bastardization of very strong borders and amnesty, a mix like oil and water

I'd wager a majority of Americans feel the same way. I know I do. Immigration is good for this country. Legal immigration is better. And legal immigration of the best and brightest the world has to offer is the best of all things. Amnesty is really the only practical way forward for the vast majority of illegal immigrants already here, those that are productive, working and tax-paying immigrants ideally. Those that aren't, especially those that have criminal records for serious crimes or are known gang members..out. The real issue as we've discussed many times is fixing the legal immigration process. Every one of the countries of origin in this current wave has a US Embassy. But what none of them has because our country doesn't have one in place, is a realistic, time-sensitive and logical immigration process. One barely exists for full tuition-paying elite college-bound foreigners of which any one could the next Steve Jobs or Elon Musk. For these types of super premium immigrants throwing $200,000 into the US educational system the process to a green card is 6-8 years during which time the applicant cannot leave their sponsoring employer for a better job. So just imagine what the process looks like in Tegucigalpa for a peasant farmer trying to feed his kids and whose neighbors are being murdered one by one in vicious drug gang battles (and the great irony being that the drugs, guns and money all go to or from the United States directly)? We snort the blow and ship all that cash and weaponry into a cauldron of despair and death and then have the balls to instruct all of these innocent people caught in the crossfire to stand in line at the local embassy for what..10 years, 14 years, until the whole family is dead and the US has magically cured itself of illicit drug use? There's a better way to do this and I think it would garner sufficient bipartisan support given the chance. The first step is having a leader in the White House with the intelligence and political bravery to lead..so at minimum we need to wait another 2.3 years. Until then the long-term solution to immigration is a "wall of fantasy" and the 101st Airborne. That's the best Pussy Bonespurs could come up with.

DeltaMD90 wrote:

Does anyone have similar points of view? I feel like I'm some bastardization of very strong borders and amnesty, a mix like oil and water

My struggle is why people assume I am racist or misogynist or some other ism for wanting people to follow our laws and processes. I literally don't follow the logic. It frustrates me further when people don't follow the economics of what illegal immigration does to our country. It doesn't hurt someone like me in a professional job. In fact, I probably benefit quite well from illegal immigration due to cheaper products and labor. It's the American's who are already on the lower echelon of the wage pyramid that are affected the most. Want to understand why wages have stagnated for the poorest in the country? Start there. Simple supply and demand. Enforce E-Verify and prosecute any business owners violating it and you solve the problem.

[quote="777222LR”] Unfortunately, the president, not really understanding how ANYTHING works...He plays to EVERYONE's ignorant fears.[/quote]

You can’t have it both ways. Trump is a total idiot who can’t do anything. Trump coordinated the theft of an election of the greatest superpower and democracy on earth with another superpower adversary. Please make up your mind.

trpmb6 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Because San Ysidro was closed, those seeking asylum could not even apply for asylum. IIRC, there are only certain crossings where one is allowed to apply for asylum.

Not to be pedantic but isn't the correct way to apply for asylum to go through the embassy in one's originating country anyways? Or apply at the first country they arrive at if fleeing said country?

The normal procedure of asylum seekers, under US law, is to apply at the border; there is no requirement that anyone apply at "the first country they arrive at" unless they seek asylum in that country. Under normal circumstances (read: forever, except under Trump), applicants have been processed at the border and, if it was determined they had an adequate case to present, allowed to enter the country pending their appearance before the Court. What Trump is trying to do is to deny them the opportunity to even apply for asylum, which appears to be clearly in opposition to the written statutes.

In short, the asylum seekers are trying to "follow the rules". but the administration is trying to change the rules; thus there will be many Court cases filed and heard.

afcjets wrote:

You can’t have it both ways. Trump is a total idiot who can’t do anything. Trump coordinated the theft of an election of the greatest superpower and democracy on earth with another superpower adversary. Please make up your mind.

Not a total idiot; he is a very professional huckster, who knows how to appeal to the fears and prejudices that all of us have, but that drive only a certain segment of the electorate. He makes no attempt to represent the country as a whole, but continues to appeal to his base and stir their emotions. He has always had a knack for self-promotion, even if not necessarily success in business. He views everything in terms of dollars-and-cents (look at him asking Iraq to repay us for our ill-advised invasion of that country), with no regard for humanity and no sense of empathy.

He began as a real estate huckster because of his dad's money. Without that money, he probably would have been a used car salesman. Same mentality; different level.

trpmb6 wrote:

DeltaMD90 wrote:

Does anyone have similar points of view? I feel like I'm some bastardization of very strong borders and amnesty, a mix like oil and water

My struggle is why people assume I am racist or misogynist or some other ism for wanting people to follow our laws and processes. I literally don't follow the logic. It frustrates me further when people don't follow the economics of what illegal immigration does to our country. It doesn't hurt someone like me in a professional job. In fact, I probably benefit quite well from illegal immigration due to cheaper products and labor. It's the American's who are already on the lower echelon of the wage pyramid that are affected the most. Want to understand why wages have stagnated for the poorest in the country? Start there. Simple supply and demand. Enforce E-Verify and prosecute any business owners violating it and you solve the problem.

Illegal Immigration has been a problem for decades. The issue that currently stands is that we have a very RACIST president making up lies about the caravan to drum up support for attacking them. Trump is assuming guilt where there is none on the parts of most of the asylum seekers. There was an army of THOUSANDS, and currently all we have is about 100 people arrested on both sides of the border. There are countless issues with Illegal immigration, but the greatest issue is that they can get jobs in the US. So E-Verify should be enforced, and there should be spot checks of employer records to see if visa's have expired.

A Border Wall, as Racist Trump wants, is an expensive and maintenance intensive eyesore that creates environmental as well as logistical issues for the thousand + miles it would be required on.

On your initial question is of why people will advance you as a racist is if you stand with a man that so accurately demonstrates flat out racism and misogyny, people will not be able to tell the difference when you support such a person.

afcjets wrote:

[quote="777222LR”] Unfortunately, the president, not really understanding how ANYTHING works...He plays to EVERYONE's ignorant fears.[/quote]

You can’t have it both ways. Trump is a total idiot who can’t do anything. Trump coordinated the theft of an election of the greatest superpower and democracy on earth with another superpower adversary. Please make up your mind.[/quote][/quote]

Well that's not really true at all. For example, I am quite smart when it comes to aviation but would be considered a complete and total idiot if I tried to give a speech on rhythmic gymnastics or particle physics or any one of a great number of topics I know very little or nothing about.

Trump is very good at being a self serving, win-at-all-costs egomaniac, but a complete a total idiot when it comes to governing a country or understanding a constitution.

2122M wrote:

Trump is very good at being a self serving, win-at-all-costs egomaniac, but a complete a total idiot when it comes to governing a country or understanding a constitution.

Mia Love (GOP Congresswoman just defeated for reelection in Utah) put is well: Trump has "no real relationships, just convenient transactions."

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/ ... op-1015757

seb146 wrote:

trpmb6 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Because San Ysidro was closed, those seeking asylum could not even apply for asylum. IIRC, there are only certain crossings where one is allowed to apply for asylum.

Not to be pedantic but isn't the correct way to apply for asylum to go through the embassy in one's originating country anyways? Or apply at the first country they arrive at if fleeing said country?

They could do that, as an embassy is technically foreign soil. Or, they could ask for asylum once they are in the United States

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/43442030/ns/u ... _wfkflKiM8

My guess is there is no embassy in the country where the immigrants came from.

The US has a heavy presence w/ embassy and/or consulates in almost all countries. The exceptions are North Korea, Cuba and Iran. We do have some offices in Cuba within the Swiss embassy, but no idea if you can apply for asylum there. Taiwan, while not called an "Embassy," that is just terminology, much like the US Hong Kong presence for example (these are effectively embassies).