100 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
100 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

We have lost our minds....

by Kay King
75 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
    • |
Underage illegals (many with parents) are flooding our southern border and we've been releasing them into the country for months now.

So what are we going to do about it? Give them money, of course. After all, we have an unlimited supply, don't we?

...announced $254.6 million in new aid for Central American countries today.

The money will go toward returning unaccompanied minors who travel to the U.S. illegally to their families and fostering youth centered programs in their home countries, the White House said this afternoon.

The assistance to the governments of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras announced today is in addition to the $130 million in aid the U.S. already provides those countries in economic assistance.
We are basically tripling the amount of money we send to countries who are not respecting our borders. Meanwhile, we have a Marine being held in Mexico and no one with the guts to demand his release.
  • Profile picture of the author garyv
    It's political strategy. When you're doing the job so bad that you're at risk of losing an election with dead voters... you just flood the border. There's no other explanation.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9297515].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Richard Van
      Originally Posted by garyv View Post

      It's political strategy. When you're doing the job so bad that you're at risk of losing an election with dead voters... you just flood the border. There's no other explanation.
      We have a similar thing here.

      The current opposition had an open door policy in this country for years when they were ruining, I'm sorry, running the country. Anyone that dared mention immigration was branded a racist and a bigot.

      Now the same people no longer in power think we have a problem with immigration and the current government isn't doing enough about the very problem they caused.

      Politics, roughly the same as a blocked toilet.
      Signature

      Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301075].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jason Kanigan
    Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

    Underage illegals (many with parents) are flooding our southern border and we've been releasing them into the country for months now.

    So what are we going to do about it? Give them money, of course. After all, we have an unlimited supply, don't we?



    We are basically tripling the amount of money we send to countries who are not respecting our borders. Meanwhile, we have a Marine being held in Mexico and no one with the guts to demand his release.
    This bugs me. I came to the US legally, paid the full financial price, wasn't able to work for the better part of a year while waiting, jumped through all the hoops (getting your vaccinations again when you discover your GP has retired and all your childhood files are missing isn't fun)...and these folks can just wander in and get paid. What a mess.
    Signature
    >> How To Grow Your Online Business [FREE Training Video, No Opt-In, from 10+ Year Vet]

    >> For Agency Founders: The Fast Shortcut To Selling SEO, Leadgen, Webdesign & Other Services
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9297521].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      Jason -

      That's what is being ignored. This country is full of people who worked hard to come through the front door. This is unfair to the thousands of people patiently trying to come to the US legally!

      It doesn't even make sense. We're told these people are "escaping abject poverty" but then told they "pay $2-5k EACH for passage into the U.S." And no one says...."HUH?"
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
      ***
      One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
      what it is instead of what you think it should be.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9297561].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
      Originally Posted by Jason Kanigan View Post

      This bugs me. I came to the US legally, paid the full financial price, wasn't able to work for the better part of a year while waiting, jumped through all the hoops (getting your vaccinations again when you discover your GP has retired and all your childhood files are missing isn't fun)...and these folks can just wander in and get paid. What a mess.
      Jason every time the subject of illegals comes up I have said giving them amnesty or financial benefits is a slap in the face to every immigrant who has come here legally including the majority of our ancestors.
      Signature

      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
      Getting old ain't for sissy's
      As you are I was, as I am you will be
      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9297567].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author AprilCT
        Why should a foreign country fix themselves when they can depend on generous handouts at the expense of the donor's taxpayers? We certainly have a lot of low wattage bulbs running government affairs to the detriment of our country.

        People who spend money the way the government does would quickly be in huge financial trouble. We just have far too many irresponsible people stirring the pot.

        I don't have a problem with charity for those in need. But when it's a perpetual handout without limit and no advancement toward self-sufficiency on the part of the recipients, it is just continually throwing money down the sewer.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9297691].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
    There is a historical background to this situation and the United States played a huge role in it. You reap what you sow.
    Signature

    Project HERE.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9297703].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
      Originally Posted by thunderbird View Post

      There is a historical background to this situation and the United States played a huge role in it. You reap what you sow.
      TB, you're going to ruin the mood of this threads illegal alien rant, much of which is being wrongfully directed towards Mexico although the story is about Central American minors entering this country.

      But since you brought it up, here's a story that is about what you are referring to.

      The United States, ironically enough, has played a major role in creating the messes in El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala. Under the pretext of containing communism during the Cold War, the U.S. government ushered in decades of violent misrule and civil conflict in Guatemala by helping to overthrow the elected government of Jacobo Arbenz in 1954. Under similar justifications, the U.S. poured billions of dollars into the Salvadoran and Honduran militaries, even as they committed atrocities against civilians.

      "We funded civil wars, which created enormous refugee problems," Isacson said. "We deported anyone who was in those communities that had a criminal record, which started the gang problem. And after the civil wars ended, we slashed our aid programs for almost anything besides drug war policies. To this day, you still can't significantly fund any of those priorities in Congress unless it's going through a counter-narcotics program."

      Political instability has created a favorable environment for lawlessness. The region's recent spike in crime owes to the rise of hyperviolent gangs and drug cartels. Many unaccompanied minors interviewed by researchers said they left due to threats to their lives or their families from gangs attempting to recruit them, according to Mother Jones.

      ...Unlike Mexican minors, most of whom are repatriated immediately through a special process the U.S. only applies to Mexican and Canadian citizens, minors from Central America must be handed off to the Office of Refugee Resettlement. Once a child is given to the ORR, the office shelters him or her and usually locates a parent or guardian to whom he or she can be released while deportation proceedings are initiated. But the sudden surge of unaccompanied minors has overwhelmed a system designed to handle a capacity closer to 8,000 than 70,000.
      These Are The Real Reasons Behind Our Humanitarian Crisis At The Border
      Signature
      Over 50 Dating
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301705].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
        Banned
        Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

        TB, you're going to ruin the mood of this threads illegal alien rant, much of which is being wrongfully directed towards Mexico although the story is about Central American minors entering this country.

        But since you brought it up, here's a story that is about what you are referring to.
        LOL! Like Roque Planas does not have an agenda... Give me a break!

        Roque Planas

        https://twitter.com/RoqPlanas

        El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua are open border countries (CA-4) and they allow free movement through those countries all the way to Mexico. Even though Mexico has strong immigration laws, somehow those laws are not tightly enforced and tons of illegals seem to be allowed free passage all the way to the US.

        Frankly speaking, quoting articles that are found on HuffPo that quote Mother Jones is a bit laughable. Blaming America for the many problems of the world is even more laughable. The only problem America has created regarding this matter is the liberal policy that has bred the influx of South American minors that completely takes advantage of our system.

        I don't think you were around back in the day to understand the threat of communism so for you to pretend to know the deal now is a bit ridiculous. I suppose you have never heard of siding with the lesser of two evils, and I fully realize you may not have not minded the threat and or spread of communism back in the day.

        Cheers

        -don
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301774].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
          Originally Posted by ForumGuru View Post

          Blaming America for the many problems of the world is even more laughable.
          I know, it's more popular these days to have the USA as victim. The poor old USA just minds it's own business and other countries take advantage of them. Now that's not only laughable, but naive and pathetic.

          I don't think you were around back in the day to understand the threat of communism so for you to pretend to know the deal now is a bit ridiculous. I suppose you have never heard of siding with the lesser of two evils...
          I was around when we sided with the over throw of other democratically elected governments in central america. I was around when we supported the Contras who many called terrorists and rightfully so. I was around when we supported military dictatorships who killed tens of thousands of their citizens. Is that the kind of picking between the lesser of two evils you are referring to? You are clueless.
          Signature
          Over 50 Dating
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301911].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
            Banned
            Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

            I know, it's more popular these days to have the USA as victim.

            Unfortunately for America and the rest of the world it seems that guys like you do nothing much more than blame the US for the problems of the world. Talk about pathetic!

            The poor old USA just minds it's own business and other countries take advantage of them.

            If you don't think illegals are taking advantage of US policy then you must be living in a cave.

            Now that's not only laughable, but naive and pathetic.

            Talk about naive and pathetic...not only are you naive but you are about as biased and ill informed on some of these issues as they come. Simply disgusting...

            I was around when we sided with the over throw of other democratically elected governments in central america.

            Wow, congrats. It's too bad we already know you are about as liberally biased as one can get.

            I was around when we supported the Contras who many called terrorists and rightfully so.

            Ollie is good man....it's too bad you can't understand why!

            I was around when we supported military dictatorships who killed tens of thousands of their citizens.

            Obviously you don't have a strong understanding of US foreign policy, or the underlying reasons for those policies.

            Is that the kind of picking between the lesser of two evils you are referring to? You are clueless.

            Calling me clueless, eh? No problem...it's a tactic that many severe lefties use. We open-minded people are well used to it.
            Obviously not every action has the US has taken over the years has been the correct one...but when a country makes millions of tough policy decisions the simple fact of the matter is not every one of those decisions is going to be the correct one. As they say --> hindsight is 20/20.

            Have another nice day blaming America for the problems of this world.

            Cheers!

            -don
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301926].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
              Originally Posted by ForumGuru View Post

              Have another nice day blaming America for the problems of this world.

              Cheers!

              -don
              Nope, I don't do that. But I am aware we were in other countries business for decades when we shouldn't have been. If you want to burry your head in the sand about that that's fine. I like dealing with reality and understanding history.

              Ollie is good man....it's too bad you can't understand why!
              Lol. And you call me biased?! I bet you also thought invading Iraq was a swell idea.
              Signature
              Over 50 Dating
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301951].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Kay King
                Tim -

                I don't disagree -no country has always done the right thing. We have a history of choosing the wrong side - but we don't know that until the hindsight kicks in.

                At the same time we are known for the billions of dollars we give to these same countries. In fact we give more than DOUBLE the amount of the second most generous country....

                Donors of Foreign Aid - World Top Ten

                When you point that out, often someone says "we try to buy them off". Fine, if that's a bad thing let's KEEP the money and just apologize instead. I'll go for that.

                The US has provided more in the way of money and supplies to other nations than any nation in history. In spite of our own debt and economic problems we continue to provide funds/services/supplies to other countries.

                Is it too much to ask that other nations that are on the receiving end of our largesse have the courtesy to respect our boundaries?

                Years ago I had a good friend from Iran. Garic came to the US on a student visa. By the time he finished his doctorate he had obtained permission to stay and work in the U.S.

                Over the next 8 years he brought his brothers into the US one by one. They paid their own way - they came in the front door - and every one of them paid for their education here and became legal residents.

                They are all self supporting and their children are US citizens. Their family IS the American Dream...and they know it and are proud of it.

                Compare that to people who spend all of their money to criminals who smuggle them into the US (in plain sight) - and then wait to be taken care of. They break our law and then we are expected to feed and cloth them and provide safety and shelter.

                There are times when action is required. Talking and thinking and pondering won't do it. Focusing on old mistakes or partisan bickering won't get anything done. Nero fiddled while Rome burned....didn't end well.
                Signature
                Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
                ***
                One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
                what it is instead of what you think it should be.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9302041].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
                Banned
                Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

                Nope, I don't do that. But I am aware we were in other countries business for decades when we shouldn't have been. If you want to burry your head in the sand about that that's fine. I like dealing with reality and understanding history.

                That explains a few things...it seems that you may be basing a ton of of your political views on your perception of "history" when in-fact the problems and potential issues of the world must be dealt with in real-time. Sure we need to keep history in mind, and learn from it, but we must also think in a forward direction as well. This requires the so-called experts to make many assumptions and educated guesses.


                Lol. And you call me biased?! I bet you also thought invading Iraq was a swell idea.

                Actually, I thought kicking Iraq out of Kuwait was probably a decent idea...but I also believe that if we had made Saddam pay a bigger price for the invasion we may not have ever went back a second time.

                When we decided enforce the UN Resolutions and go after the chemical/biological weapons that the United Nations thought Iraq had --> of course I supported the allied troops. You must remember that Saddam would not make the proper disclosures and he was paying suicide bombers for their work in Israel. Saddam had used chemical weapons against Iran in the Iran and Iraq war, and he had used them against the Kurds so it was pretty clear that he had a viable program.

                Did I think it was the right decision? I don't know and it was not my position make that call. Did I support the troops once deployed...of course I did.
                Remember 1441?

                United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 is a United Nations Security Council resolution adopted unanimously by the United Nations Security Council on 8 November 2002, offering Iraq under Saddam Hussein "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" that had been set out in several previous resolutions (Resolution 660, Resolution 661, Resolution 678, Resolution 686, Resolution 687, Resolution 688, Resolution 707, Resolution 715, Resolution 986, and Resolution 1284).

                Resolution 1441 stated that Iraq was in material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait for the widespread looting conducted by its troops during the 1990–1991 invasion and occupation. It also stated that "...false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations."

                United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

                http://www.un.org/depts/unmovic/new/...s-res-1441.pdf
                It appears as if you may believe the world is filled with all peachy swell folks that mean innocents no harm --> but it's just not the case. It also appears as if you think that the problems of the earth can be solved with absolutely no US or third party intervention --> also not the case.

                Back in 1986 I sailed to Karachi, Pakistan which was a scheduled port call for us. Unfortunately and appallingly, dozens of Christians were being killed on a weekly basis in Karachi. Karachi was so dangerous for Christians we were not allowed to to actually go ashore once we got there. We had to sit just outside the harbor for a week looking at Karachi from a short distance.

                Do you know why we sat outside the harbor? We were worried about suicide bombers floating a small craft close enough to blow up our ship. We had to post many, many special watches just to observe the waters around the ship to make sure we would not be blown up, damaged, or sunk.

                I suspect I may have seen more of the "front-lines" of terrorism than you have, and that does give me a much greater appreciation for the work this country tries to do.

                What year did you first learn about the threat from Muslim radicals? Yeah, I learned about it back in 1986...

                In-fact we also made a stop in the beautiful Maldives...Yeah, even the remote Muslim island country of the Maldives is being threatened by radicals these days.

                Maldives Turning Into a Terrorist Haven | South Asia Analysis Group

                Cheers

                -don
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9302086].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
                  Originally Posted by ForumGuru View Post



                  What year did you first learn about the threat from Muslim radicals?
                  I first heard the term terrorism back in 1972 at the Munich Olympics and have been aware of terrorism ever since. I read and saw what the Contras did in the early 1980s. They were clearly terrorists.

                  I also supported the Afghanistan war although I understood the history of our involvement in the past. I also support the war against Al Qaeda although I understand their history. My niece just got back from serving an extended tour in Afghanistan. My ex fiance was stationed in Pakistan for a year as a diplomate at the Embassy in Islamabad while Bin Laden was just a few miles away. Another niece works for the VA helping severely wounded soldiers returning from the wars. Of course I support the troops also.

                  The Iraq war was a war of choice. The UN weapons inspectors wanted more time to do their job and they said they were making progress. Hans Blick said it would just take a few months more to complete the job. The Senate Intelligence Committee found in 2008 that the administration "misrepresented the intelligence and the threat from Iraq". A key CIA informant in Iraq admitted that he lied about his allegations, "then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war".

                  The truth is the Afghanistan war was terribly mismanaged because we took our eye off it and attacked a country that had nothing to do with 9-11. Our soldiers and the citizens of Afghanistan and Iraq are both paying the price for that now. Our military decisions in the past many times come back to bite us in the future. It's called blowback by the CIA.
                  Signature
                  Over 50 Dating
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9302227].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

                    I first heard the term terrorism back in 1972 at the Munich Olympics and have been aware of terrorism ever since.

                    I did not ask if you watched the '72 Olympics, but oh well. I think most people alive back then had heard the word terrorist after that incident occurred. Many of us remember that the attack occurred just hours after the great Mark Spitz had won his seventh gold medal. I think most people believed that attack was an attack on Israel, and not a general Jihad on Christians and/or the West.

                    I read and saw about what the Contras did in the early 1980s. They were clearly terrorists.

                    And you think the guys they were after were great guys? I think we get your liberal drift on the Contras. It sounds like you are still peeved at the way they were funded.

                    I also supported the Afghanistan war although I understood the history of our involvement in the past. I also support the war against Al Qaeda although I understand their history. My niece just got back from serving an extended tour in Afghanistan.

                    Feel free to thank your niece for her service for me when you get a chance.

                    My ex fiance was stationed in Pakistan for a year as a diplomate at the Embassy in Islamabad while Bin Laden was just a few miles away.

                    It's a damn shame the people that knew where he was did not do anything about it until relatively recently.

                    Another niece works for the VA helping severely wounded soldiers returning from the wars. Of course I support the troops also.

                    Yeah, my father served in WW2 and my uncle earned two purple hearts and a Bronze Star in Vietnam. I served during Grenada (was not there though) and I am a proud American Legion member.

                    The Iraq war was a war of choice.

                    Sure was.

                    The UN weapons inspectors wanted more time to do their job and they said they were making progress.

                    Progress my butt....resolution after resolution after resolution had not been complied with.

                    Hans Blick said it would just take a few months more to complete the job.

                    A complete guess and if you ask many --> a bogus assessment. The fact is Saddam had not complied in the past and he was not going to comply in the future. If he did comply it would have been after he had moved his stuff to Syria.

                    The Senate Intelligence Committee found in 2008 that his administration "misrepresented the intelligence and the threat from Iraq". A key CIA informant in Iraq admitted that he lied about his allegations, "then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war".

                    LOL! You mean Colin Powell misreprenseted a few things, eh? Remember those dry cleaning trucks? C'mon man...look at all of those UN Resolutions Saddam blatantly ignored. Maybe you should ask the Kurds about Saddam's chemical program, eh?

                    The truth is the Afghanistan war was terribly mismanaged because we took our eye off it and attacked a country that had nothing to do with 9-11.

                    I won't argue that it was mismanaged and you know as well as I do that they were attacked because Saddam was thought to be a threat and he was not in compliance with several UN Resolutions.

                    Our soldiers and the citizens of Afghanistan and Iraq are both paying the price now for that now. Our military decisions in the past many times come back to bite us in the future. It's called blowback by the CIA.

                    Afghanistan probably would have went better if Shah Massoud would not have been assassinated, having him would have been a tremendous asset. I also believe a terrible mistake was made when we allowed the 12-24 hour ceasefire based on trusting those ragtag Western Alliance forces that said they could negotiate with Bin Laden. If we could have killed him in the mountains that day/night then the course of Afghanistan may have been much different.

                    I believe Iraq went bad in large part because the US thought they would be able to lead a third front in Iraq from Turkey. When Turkey did not allow us to operate out of there that hindered us in stabilizing Iraq and led to mass looting and chaos --> and ultimately the loss of support and trust of many Iraqi citizens. I believe our original plan may have been fairly solid, but when Turkey did not allow us operations we should have rethought our entire strategy and war plan. Heck, I don't even know if that giant hiccup even caused a delay in our actions.
                    Yeah, blowback does happen, but just imagine what the world would be like if the US had not given aid and intervened when necessary this past century.

                    Maybe we should get back to something a little bit closer to the immigration topic now.

                    Cheers

                    -don
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9302310].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author seasoned
            Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

            I know, it's more popular these days to have the USA as victim. The poor old USA just minds it's own business and other countries take advantage of them. Now that's not only laughable, but naive and pathetic.



            I was around when we sided with the over throw of other democratically elected governments in central america. I was around when we supported the Contras who many called terrorists and rightfully so. I was around when we supported military dictatorships who killed tens of thousands of their citizens. Is that the kind of picking between the lesser of two evils you are referring to? You are clueless.
            Russia's still waiting! Snowden could probably use another person to talk to!

            Steve
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9302010].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
              Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

              Russia's still waiting! Snowden could probably use another person to talk to!

              Steve
              The people with the white coats are waiting for you.
              Signature
              Over 50 Dating
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9302027].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    Illegals pouring into the country isn't a new issue. What's new is that now they're being rounded up and dumped on bases.

    In Arizona a few years ago there were so many very dangerous illegals (diseased, armed) crossing the border that AZ called for federal help to shut the border. They were refused. AZ has shut down 3 counties of land with signs for Americans to stay out because they get killed in that zone. No word from the press. People screaming about "tolerance" and "conspiracy theory" (because, of course, if it's not in the news, it's not really happening, right).

    I don't know how many Americans in this forum realize it, but the Senate just narrowly voted against signing the UN Arms treaty. 46 Senators voted to hand OUR second amendment rights to control of the UN (and the treaty DOES call for disarmament of citizens). 53, thankfully, voted for US sovereignty.

    Open borders also are a means of destroying sovereignty. This situation is not an accident, or stupidity, it's a plan - and sorry if the only way you can react to that is to do the "conspiracy theory" air raid siren trick.

    Texas is motivating to protect their own border now. They've had it. Arizona, after years of trying to get help to secure them, seems to be ignoring the issue - but the citizens are getting very angry there at their gov's lack of action.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9297783].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Rod Cortez
    My mother was born in Mexico and before she met my American father, she went through a long, legal process to come to the USA legally. She has mixed feelings about the whole illegal immigration subject matter though.

    I don't.

    I and many Americans here work very hard for our money. We pay a ton of taxes with the expectation that the government is going to do their jobs and protect this country. My heart goes out to people who are suffering from other countries, but I'm an American, born and raised. We should take care of our own first.

    There are 25 million children in the USA who go hungry each night. Why don't we focus on them first instead of trying to solve the world's problems?

    It's geo-politics and money that's driving this.

    I once lived in a beautiful neighborhood in Orange County. After the neighborhood got flooded with illegal immigrants, the neighborhood went to the crapper. Crime went up. You had food and other street vendors walking the streets selling stuff. People were parking their cars on their lawns, doing weird stuff to their homes, and the neighbor hood went from being nice to run-down. So I moved to a nicer city and neighborhood where they don't allow that kind of stuff.

    I've very passionate about this because I am of Mexican heritage, but my mom's family followed the law and followed the process, even though it took over 10 years for their entire family to be together. I'm also passionate about this because I've had people very close to me have crimes committed against them by illegal immigrants. When you're poor and desperate and can't find a job, some people turn to crime.

    Yes Kay, we've lost our minds. The government could shut down the borders if they really wanted to and inspect every single person who crosses them. Israel can do it, why can't we?

    Big business wants their cheap labor and that's just the tip of the iceberg.

    RoD
    Signature
    "Your personal philosophy is the greatest determining factor in how your life works out."
    - Jim Rohn
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9297816].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
      Originally Posted by Rod Cortez View Post

      <snip>

      Big business wants their cheap labor and that's just the tip of the iceberg.

      RoD
      Yes. Follow the money and see who benefits most from the way it is now. It is a documentary I wouldn't want to produce. I prefer to reside above the ground.
      Signature

      Project HERE.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9297974].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kay King
        More like - follow the voting bloc these days

        Looks like some people have finally had enough....

        Video: Angry Residents of Tiny Farm Town Take on the Obama Administration Over Controversial Plan
        Signature
        Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
        ***
        One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
        what it is instead of what you think it should be.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298120].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kurt
          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

          More like - follow the voting bloc these days

          Looks like some people have finally had enough....

          Video: Angry Residents of Tiny Farm Town Take on the Obama Administration Over Controversial Plan
          No, more like follow the money too. Illegal workers have been allowed and even encouraged by BOTH parties. The Ds benefit from the voting block. The Rs have used illegal immigrants to under-cut wages for American workers. One would have to be pretty biased to not recognize that both parties have allowed illegals for the past 30+ years.

          The question is, what to do about it? What do you do with 12 year olds illegally crossing the border? Gun them down? Put them in labor camps? Deport them to where? With or without a guardian to take responsibility for them?

          Sorry, I just don't see the issue of young illegals as black and white as you do. Sure, something has to be done, I just haven't seen a good solution to the problem. But the article you linked to is typical of the "not in my backyard" train of thought that is so prevalent with so many issues.
          Signature
          Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
          Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298163].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ThomM
            Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

            No, more like follow the money too. Illegal workers have been allowed and even encouraged by BOTH parties. The Ds benefit from the voting block. The Rs have used illegal immigrants to under-cut wages for American workers. One would have to be pretty biased to not recognize that both parties have allowed illegals for the past 30+ years.

            The question is, what to do about it? What do you do with 12 year olds illegally crossing the border? Gun them down? Put them in labor camps? Deport them to where? With or without a guardian to take responsibility for them?

            Sorry, I just don't see the issue of young illegals as black and white as you do. Sure, something has to be done, I just haven't seen a good solution to the problem. But the article you linked to is typical of the "not in my backyard" train of thought that is so prevalent with so many issues.
            You're right both sides are just as guilty in this, which is one reason nothing is done.
            I think we should just send them back as soon as they get here. Stop giving freebies to those already here. If they have been here for a while and are gainfully employed let them go through the citizen process like those who enter legally have done.
            Signature

            Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
            Getting old ain't for sissy's
            As you are I was, as I am you will be
            You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298182].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Kay King
              Of course it's happened with both parties - all of our most serious problems aren't one side or the other - but both contributing.

              But the article you linked to is typical of the "not in my backyard" train of thought that is so prevalent with so many issues.
              If you can't protect your own "back yard" what is the point of living in this country? The federal govt can't go into communities and dump illegals into it. That's exactly what they are trying to do.

              It's not an easy problem - but it's a problem we would not have if both parties had CLOSED our borders as they were supposed to do for the past 30 years. We have the problem - we have to be strong enough to deal with it.

              If we send them home as fast as they come in - the flood will stop. By keeping them here - by letting them loose in our towns - we encourage more and more to come here.
              Signature
              Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
              ***
              One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
              what it is instead of what you think it should be.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298221].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Kurt
                Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

                Of course it's happened with both parties - all of our most serious problems aren't one side or the other - but both contributing.
                That's not what you said here:

                More like - follow the voting bloc these days
                The "voting block" is clearly directed at a single party.



                If you can't protect your own "back yard" what is the point of living in this country? The federal govt can't go into communities and dump illegals into it. That's exactly what they are trying to do.
                Yep...just push the issues onto someone else. Like you've said before, you support nuclear power. But I'll bet you don't want the nuke waste in your own backyard and instead want it in someone else's. As a long time Las Vegas resident and familar with Yucca Mountain, I wanted to protect my own backyard from people with similar opinions to your own.

                It's not an easy problem - but it's a problem we would not have if both parties had CLOSED our borders as they were supposed to do for the past 30 years. We have the problem - we have to be strong enough to deal with it.
                Yep. But since when is compasion for kids a weakness? Talking tough doesn't solve anything. Surely there's a better idea than simply dumping them on the streets in another country?

                If we send them home as fast as they come in - the flood will stop. By keeping them here - by letting them loose in our towns - we encourage more and more to come here.
                And the Feds can't just "dump" children in another country, either. The kids need to be put somewhere, just not near me, right?
                Signature
                Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
                Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298236].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Kurt
              Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

              You're right both sides are just as guilty in this, which is one reason nothing is done.
              I think we should just send them back as soon as they get here. Stop giving freebies to those already here. If they have been here for a while and are gainfully employed let them go through the citizen process like those who enter legally have done.
              I don't have a problem with deporting adults. I do have a problem with sending 12 year olds "somewhere" without them being taken care of. Yes, treating them well will encourage more, but I just don't like the other suggestions.

              As a solutions orientated person, I personally would enact and enforce laws that punished employers for hiring illegals. If illegals weren't given jobs, they won't stay or come in the first place.

              The exception would be for those that are fullfilling jobs Amercians won't do. This would need some type of formula, something like if you advertise for someone to pick lettuce and no American applies within something like 120 days, you can hire an illegal and that person can earn citizenship by doing a job an American won't do. Of course this is over-simplified, but it's a start.

              Maybe another way for an illegal to earn citizenship would be through military service? If someone is willing to defend the US, they probably deserve citizenship.
              Signature
              Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
              Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298224].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author ThomM
                Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                I don't have a problem with deporting adults. I do have a problem with sending 12 year olds "somewhere" without them being taken care of. Yes, treating them well will encourage more, but I just don't like the other suggestions.

                As a solutions orientated person, I personally would enact and enforce laws that punished employers for hiring illegals. If illegals weren't given jobs, they won't stay or come in the first place.

                The exception would be for those that are fullfilling jobs Amercians won't do. This would need some type of formula, something like if you advertise for someone to pick lettuce and no American applies within something like 120 days, you can hire an illegal and that person can earn citizenship by doing a job an American won't do. Of course this is over-simplified, but it's a start.

                Maybe another way for an illegal to earn citizenship would be through military service? If someone is willing to defend the US, they probably deserve citizenship.
                The thing with the kids is a tough call. No matter what they are the victims stuck in the middle.

                The first thing we really have to do is get a tighter control over our borders and start sending the illegals back as soon as they cross, kids also. When we get that under control we can start figuring out what to do with the ones already here.

                I think we have at least three different types of illegals. First we have the criminal element. I think with them if we catch them and deport them, they'll just figure out a way to return. So arrest them. give them a trial and send them to prison, unless we know they will be sent to prison in their own country, then send them back. The second group would be the ones looking for a govt. hand out.

                Them you just send back to their own country. The third are those who are here for a better life and for whatever reason couldn't do it through proper channels. I still wouldn't give them total amnesty but we could work out ways for them to become citizens. That bit about needing them to do the jobs Americans won't do is bull actually.

                Back in the thirties before we had a min wage, the unemployment rate for blacks was lower then it was for whites. The reason was they where doing the jobs that whites wouldn't do because of what they paid. The solution was to set a min wage that was higher then what those jobs paid. It was done for a crappy racist reason but it did what it was intended to do.

                After it was enacted the unemployment numbers reversed.
                Sure things like vegetables would cost more and it would cost thoroughbred horse owners a little more, but that's the price we pay for putting Americans to work. The up side is more people would start growing their own food like they did during WWII with the victory gardens.
                Signature

                Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
                Getting old ain't for sissy's
                As you are I was, as I am you will be
                You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298282].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author HeySal
                Originally Posted by Kurt View Post

                I don't have a problem with deporting adults. I do have a problem with sending 12 year olds "somewhere" without them being taken care of. Yes, treating them well will encourage more, but I just don't like the other suggestions.

                As a solutions orientated person, I personally would enact and enforce laws that punished employers for hiring illegals. If illegals weren't given jobs, they won't stay or come in the first place.

                The exception would be for those that are fullfilling jobs Amercians won't do. This would need some type of formula, something like if you advertise for someone to pick lettuce and no American applies within something like 120 days, you can hire an illegal and that person can earn citizenship by doing a job an American won't do. Of course this is over-simplified, but it's a start.

                Maybe another way for an illegal to earn citizenship would be through military service? If someone is willing to defend the US, they probably deserve citizenship.
                A lot of them have been sent by their families so they can follow them later. I see not one damned thing wrong with dumping them at gov offices back over their own border. Let their own country officials fend for them until they find the parents. The USA is not a babysitting service. If you're implying that the Mexican gov can't/won't take care of its own citizens, then that is a problem for its own citizens to tackle. We have enough on our plate, and misplaced empathy could bury us all.
                Signature

                Sal
                When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
                Beyond the Path

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298616].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
      That is a fair observation. I also think the primary reason for this happening to this degree is that the socialist (democrats) see this as millions of voters for their political agenda.

      Joe Mobley

      Originally Posted by Rod Cortez View Post


      Big business wants their cheap labor and that's just the tip of the iceberg.

      RoD
      Signature

      .

      Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298355].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Joe Mobley View Post

        That is a fair observation. I also think the primary reason for this happening to this degree is that the socialist (democrats) see this as millions of voters for their political agenda.

        Joe Mobley
        ...and it sure doesn't hurt in winning the votes of those sympathetic to cause and inline with the policy. I mean sympathetic to the policy of allowing illegal immigrants safe haven while dropping the word "illegal" from illegal immigrant.

        I notice lately that many in the media and on the left are now calling illegal immigrants just "immigrants" dropping the illegal descriptor altogether, which is a smack in the face to all that have immigrated to the US legally.

        In-fact we have strict limits on legal immigration --> note the per country yearly cap of just 25,620 as of 2012.

        It is estimated that at least 11.5 illegal immigrants are in this US today, and some place the estimate as high as 20 million.

        The annual limit for total number of legal immigrants is 675,000. This is the maximum allotment of visa numbers per year, covering both foreign nationals who receive immigrant visas at consular offices abroad, and those who adjust status within the United States.

        675,000 is a "flexible" cap, with certain categories of immigrants exempted from the limit (for example, immediate relatives of U.S. Citizens and certain special immigrants)
        The annual limit is divided into three main categories: family sponsored, employment-based, and diversity visa 675,000 = 480,000 + 140,000 + 55,000

        ---

        Diversity visa (green card lottery) annual limit: 55,000, of which up to 5,000 will be made available for use under the NACARA program.

        --

        Per-country cap: 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits. If the limits are 226,000 and 140,000, respectively, the per-country limit will be 25,620, which is 7% of (226,000 + 140,000). Furthermore, the per-country cap of 25,620 is divided into family-based limit (15,820) and employment-based limit (9800).

        Visa Bulletin: Immigrant Visa Annual Limits and Caps






        Cost at the state and local level 2010)...



        ...and another 29 billion at the federal level.

        http://www.fairus.org/publications/t...-u-s-taxpayers

        Executive Summary
        This report estimates the annual costs ofillegal immigration atthefederal, state and local level to be about $113 billion; nearly $29 billion at the federal level and $84 billion at the state and local level. The study also estimates tax collections from illegal alien workers, both those in the above-ground economy and those in the underground economy. Those receipts do not come close to the level of expenditures and, in any case, are misleading as an offset because over time unemployed and underemployed U.S. workers would replace illegal alien workers.

        http://www.fairus.org/site/DocServer...pdf?docID=4921
        Cheers

        -don
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298490].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kay King
          The graph is interesting. We started this mess with Reagan's amnesty programs in the 80's. Many people on both sides of the aisle said at the time it set a dangerous precedent.

          Looking at that graph - I'd say those people were right.
          Signature
          Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
          ***
          One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
          what it is instead of what you think it should be.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298521].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

            The graph is interesting. We started this mess with Reagan's amnesty programs in the 80's. Many people on both sides of the aisle said at the time it set a dangerous precedent.

            Looking at that graph - I'd say those people were right.
            Yup, you can say that again!

            Cheers

            -don
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298527].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author seasoned
            Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

            The graph is interesting. We started this mess with Reagan's amnesty programs in the 80's. Many people on both sides of the aisle said at the time it set a dangerous precedent.

            Looking at that graph - I'd say those people were right.
            I didn't, and DON'T like it, but the idea was to do it for THOSE THEN, and STOP ALL OTHERS!

            NOW, they take the illegals that they CLAIMED/CLAIM they couldn't afford to deport, and are shipping them ALL OVER THE COUNTRY! QUICK QUESTION! WHICH is cheaper? A couple blocks WALK back across the border, or a flight to MASSACHUSETTS!?!?!? The federal government has opted for MA! Oh SURE, they are sending them to arizona, texas, etc.... ALSO.

            Steve
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298562].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
              Banned
              Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

              I didn't, and DON'T like it, but the idea was to do it for THOSE THEN, and STOP ALL OTHERS!
              But even back then many were saying the "stop all others" part of the deal would never hold up...much like making a deal with the devil. Obviously those folks were correct...

              -don
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298570].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author seasoned
                Originally Posted by ForumGuru View Post

                But even back then many were saying the "stop all others" part of the deal would never hold up...much like making a deal with the devil. Obviously those folks were correct...

                -don
                Yeah, as dumb as it is, nothing goes forward without some "trust". I stumble on the word "trust" because, as you said, it will never be respected. Look at TEFRA, ALSO in reagans admin. Had that been followed, our debt would be LOW, if we had any at all.

                Still, my point was that it wasn't done properly. If it were, it could not be a precedent as the demand could not be there.

                Steve
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299389].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author HeySal
            Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

            The graph is interesting. We started this mess with Reagan's amnesty programs in the 80's. Many people on both sides of the aisle said at the time it set a dangerous precedent.

            Looking at that graph - I'd say those people were right.
            You'd be surprised (well maybe YOU wouldn't, but a lot of people would be) how many of those Hollywood stars and how many politicians that are screaming for "tolerance" use illegals for their own cheap labor - housekeeping, gardening, etc.
            Signature

            Sal
            When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
            Beyond the Path

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298622].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author David Maschke
    Just another example of chaos out of order.

    It's the new norm.
    Signature

    I

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298140].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mark Hess
    "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..."

    "free" used to mean opportunity... now "free" means "FREE"...
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9298592].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author chavez
    Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

    We are basically tripling the amount of money we send to countries who are not respecting our borders.
    I think it is ironic that people who's ancestors stole the land from Indians talk about respecting "their borders".
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299008].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by chavez View Post

      I think it is ironic that people who's ancestors stole the land from Indians talk about respecting "their borders".
      About those indians. And WHO did the MEXICANS get the land from? Frankly, I wonder how much of the story about the indians is even true. BTW disclaimer to all.... In a context such as this, we DON'T mean people from India. We mean the apparently original people in America. The story goes that columbus thought he was in india, and the name stuck. Christopher Columbus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

      Still, the US DID create a rather nice treaty with the indians. They can have their own land, buy/sell some things tax free, have their own rules, and even do some things that would otherwise be illegal. They also get various breaks. In short, they are treated kind of like diplomats, and their reservations are treated like an embassy.

      It is interesting how the US gets all the blame even though Mexico and Canada have done the same thing. Read it and WEEP! Spanish conquest of Yucatán - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

      BTW That predates the US by hundreds of years, and is worse.

      As for indians today? WOW! The washington redskins just lost their trademark because it is supposedly offensive. People are now asking if oklahoma is NEXT! OKLAHOMA is from the choctaw(A tribe of indians) words ("OKLA" "HUMMA") meaning RED PEOPLE!

      BTW for the record, Dallas Cowboys AREN'T against that team!

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299451].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ThomM
        Originally Posted by seasoned View Post


        As for indians today? WOW! The washington redskins just lost their trademark because it is supposedly offensive. People are now asking if oklahoma is NEXT! OKLAHOMA is from the choctaw(A tribe of indians) words ("OKLA" "HUMMA") meaning RED PEOPLE!

        BTW for the record, Dallas Cowboys AREN'T against that team!

        Steve
        Actually they didn't Steve. It was a split decision that is under an appeal that the team will most likely win as they have in the past. Even if by some fluke they do loose the appeal they will still use the name and logo. Here's the statement from the teams trademark attorney.
        http://files.redskins.com/pdf/Statem...n-Redskins.pdf
        Signature

        Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
        Getting old ain't for sissy's
        As you are I was, as I am you will be
        You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299709].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
          Originally Posted by ThomM View Post

          Actually they didn't Steve. It was a split decision that is under an appeal that the team will most likely win as they have in the past. Even if by some fluke they do loose the appeal they will still use the name and logo. Here's the statement from the teams trademark attorney.
          http://files.redskins.com/pdf/Statem...n-Redskins.pdf
          OK, I mispoke there. My point, that the US persecutes such people so,still stands!

          Steve
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299918].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ThomM
            Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

            OK, I mispoke there. My point, that the US persecutes such people so,still stands!

            Steve
            I have a lot of friends that are football fans (including myself) and it seems this comes up every time I see or talk to one of them.
            I've been sharing that statement so much it's gotten automatic when I see the trade mark thing mentioned.
            Signature

            Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
            Getting old ain't for sissy's
            As you are I was, as I am you will be
            You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299936].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
      Banned
      Originally Posted by chavez View Post

      I think it is ironic that people who's ancestors stole the land from Indians talk about respecting "their borders".
      Your diatribe is almost laughable and your premise could be considered absurd. Have you forgotten about Cortés? The Aztecs? Tenochtitlan?





      Are the Nahuas still in power down there? Do you speak Nahuatl? Maybe Colima-Durango, Isthmus or Michoacán? I read that only 10% of the population identify themselves as indigenous people and only 6% speak an indigenous language these days.

      Cheers

      -don
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299570].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author HeySal
      Originally Posted by chavez View Post

      I think it is ironic that people who's ancestors stole the land from Indians talk about respecting "their borders".
      Really? What country are you in that its okay to just skip in and out of at will?

      Did you notice that all sovereign industrialized countries have border security and rules of entry? Immigration control is necessary for disease control, population control. Too many people too fast and you go beyond carrying capacity. Control is also necessary to keep terrorist elements under check.

      I find it interesting that people point to what we did to the Indians. That is a clear demonstration of why you should have immigration control, ya think? You think Americans are the only people that have destroyed another people? There have been genocides all over this planet throughout history. Does that mean that we never get smart about taking precautions against it?

      Tell ya what, pal. Before you criticize us........you think of what tens of thousands to millions of people hostile enough to you country not to enter legally pouring over your borders demanding that you take care of them when your own people are struggling. You have them come over with no medical exams, with weapons. Just because your gov or people might have done something to another people in the past sometime - are you willing to watch your people destroyed now?

      Before you criticize us -- drop your own border security.
      Signature

      Sal
      When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
      Beyond the Path

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299657].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
        Banned
        Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

        Really? What country are you in that its okay to just skip in and out of at will?

        Did you notice that all sovereign industrialized countries have border security and rules of entry? Immigration control is necessary for disease control, population control. Too many people too fast and you go beyond carrying capacity. Control is also necessary to keep terrorist elements under check.
        While I strongly agree that we do need border security and a well controlled border --> some open borders and open border agreements do exist in various forms. I do realize that some of the EU countries have tightened, temporarily tightened, or are considering tightening border controls.

        Open border - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

        Schengen Area as of January 2013...



        The free movement of persons is a fundamental right guaranteed by the EU to its citizens. It entitles every EU citizen to travel, work and live in any EU country without special formalities. Schengen cooperation enhances this freedom by enabling citizens to cross internal borders without being subjected to border checks. The border-free Schengen Area guarantees free movement to more than 400 million EU citizens, as well as to many non-EU nationals, businessmen, tourists or other persons legally present on the EU territory.

        http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs...n/index_en.htm

        The CTA....

        The Common Travel Area (CTA) is a travel zone that comprises the Republic of Ireland, United Kingdom, Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey. In general, the CTA's internal borders are subject to minimal or non-existent border controls and can normally be crossed by British and Irish citizens with minimal identity documents; however, the use of a passport is required by the airline Ryanair.

        Since 1997, the Irish government has imposed systematic identity checks on air passengers coming from the United Kingdom and selective checks on sea passengers, and occasional checks on land crossings.[4] In 2008, the British government announced that it planned to impose systematic identity controls on air and sea passengers arriving from the Republic,[5][6] but the proposals were abandoned.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Travel_Area
        India-Nepal border crossing...


        This photo was taken at Sunauli, the India-Nepal border crossing located north of Gorakhpur in eastern India. After crossing into India from Nepal without so much as a “hello”, we continued down the dusty road until we found a small, open-aired retail storefront with an inconspicuous sign that read “Immigration”. It was not the establishment one would expect to find when looking for a government building – but that’s the charm of India.

        We entered the room and approached the lone wooden table, greeted by a friendly man wearing a dated USA Olympic tracksuit from the 80′s. He was helpful, stamping our passports and pointing us in the right direction to find the bus from Sunauli to Gorakhpur. It was a fairly simple process because we had already secured our visas ahead of time, though most people just wandered across the border without being questioned by anyone.

        http://travelingcanucks.com/2011/04/...epal-to-india/
        The CA-4...(albeit non-industrialized)

        The Central America-4 (CA-4) Border Control Agreement was a treaty signed in June 2006 between the Central American nations of El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua, establishing the free movement across borders between the four signatory states of their citizens without any restrictions or checks.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central...trol_Agreement
        Cheers

        -don
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299748].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
          Originally Posted by ForumGuru View Post

          While I strongly agree we do need border security and a well controlled border --> some open borders and open border agreements do exist in various forms. I do realize that some of the EU countries have tightened, temporarily tightened, or are considering tightening border controls.

          Open border - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

          Schengen Area as of January 2013...






          The CTA....



          India-Nepal border crossing...




          The CA-4...(albeit non-industrialized)



          Cheers

          -don
          I was IN europe when they had been in the EU for a while. They are like gates at an airport in the US. You are right! They USUALLY don't check the states, though they MAY and DO periodically. They DO check the periphery, and at various points inside. When I was there, they DID check my passport when I landed, and on the train in switzerland, and they DID check over a bus I was on.

          HECK, the US has special visas for foreign workers. I have heard, from respective news services, that Canada, Germany, and others, have SIMILAR visas! I bet THEY are less lenient than the US.

          BTW externally, it DOES look, freedom wise, like the US appears. In the US, each state is SUPPOSED to have various requirements for various things. The LAWS are different ALSO! Some things that are freely allowed in some states are JAILABLE offenses in others. Even a radar detector, in your car, could be trouble in some states. But if you come in from outside of the US, they ARE supposed to check your IDs and INSIDE they DON'T, but can.

          Steve
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299926].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
            Banned
            Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

            I was IN europe when they had been in the EU for a while.
            Hey Steve,

            I think you misspoke or made a typo....the EU is still made up of European countries.



            Cheers

            -don
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299955].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author seasoned
              Originally Posted by ForumGuru View Post

              Hey Steve,

              I think you misspoke or made a typo....the EU is still made up of European countries.



              Cheers

              -don
              OK, I was in european COUNTRIES! Denmark, Germany, Switzerland, to be precise. And YEAH, I had my blue covered US passport, and others had their green(IIRC) covered EU country passports. The person ddin't give THEIRS a second glance, but DID look at mine. They got a laugh out of that, but I got the last laugh when the guy looked at their tickets, and only glanced at my eurail pass!

              Steve
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9300092].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author thunderbird
      Originally Posted by chavez View Post

      I think it is ironic that people who's ancestors stole the land from Indians talk about respecting "their borders".
      That point has crossed my mind as well. For tens of thousands of years, the ancestors of people sneaking across the border also resided in the territory their descendants have to sneak into. However reality and pragmatic solutions don't always coincide with historical fairness which is plain infeasible in most cases, especially if we're talking about the descendents of people who were wronged.
      Signature

      Project HERE.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299721].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Rod Cortez
      Originally Posted by chavez View Post

      I think it is ironic that people who's ancestors stole the land from Indians talk about respecting "their borders".
      Ah, the age old argument of what we did to the Native Americans. C'mon, you must be intelligent enough to realize that is a completely different point than what we are talking about here. It's a very weak argument because we're talking about the present and the impact that illegal immigration is having here, not what we did over 200 years ago.

      Of course what we did to the Native Americans was horrible. It was a travesty. In fact, I think we should do more for them, even today, but that's not what we're talking about here. Kay hit the nail on the head, you should read her post, twice.

      Mexico wants us to let their citizens come over here yet they viciously defend their own borders, especially to the south. Do you want to know what happens to people from El Salvador, Guatemala, etc. if they try to come into Mexico illegally? They get robbed. They usually get beat up and sometimes they are killed.

      The hypocrisy of the Mexican government when it comes to immigration is beyond frustrating.

      I don't have the answers for this complex issue. When children and families get caught in the cross-fire, it makes me realize this is not an easy problem to fix. One thing I do know is that what we're doing now isn't working.

      RoD
      Signature
      "Your personal philosophy is the greatest determining factor in how your life works out."
      - Jim Rohn
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301310].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author socialentry
    Banned
    Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

    Underage illegals (many with parents) are flooding our southern border and we've been releasing them into the country for months now.

    So what are we going to do about it? Give them money, of course. After all, we have an unlimited supply, don't we?

    We are basically tripling the amount of money we send to countries who are not respecting our borders. .
    u mad?

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299010].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      Not so much 'mad' as 'disgusted'. Tired of being the nanny state for the world.
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
      ***
      One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
      what it is instead of what you think it should be.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299062].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ken Leatherman
    I have wondered where these illegal immigrants come up with the $2-5K they pay to get smuggled from their country into the U.S. Perhaps the government of these countries are involved in paying their citizens way, so they can send money back to the home country.

    There are no facts to back up my thoughts its just something this old man has often thought about.

    Ken


    The Old Geezer
    Signature
    Ghost Writing Services Coming Soon


    So Check Out My WSO
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299376].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author socialentry
    Banned
    IMO, the positive side of mexican immigration is that they bring mexican culture along with them .

    Tacos and tortillas == delicious winz
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299533].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
    Banned
    Mexico has a serious illegal immigration policy...

    Illegal entry into Mexico is a felony punishable by up to 2 years in prison for the first offense, and up to 10 years for a second offense. Visa violators can get a 6 year prison term. On top of that Mexican authorities can deport foreigners that are detrimental to their society...and please do check that list of what can be considered detrimental.

    Under the Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison. Immigrants who are deported and attempt to re-enter can be imprisoned for 10 years. Visa violators can be sentenced to six-year terms. Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered criminals. The law also says Mexico can deport foreigners who are deemed detrimental to “economic or national interests,” violate Mexican law, are not “physically or mentally healthy” or lack the “necessary funds for their sustenance” and for their dependents.

    Mexico's illegals laws tougher than Arizona's - Washington Times
    You would think we would develop a policy that makes sense here in the US that would be a bit stiffer than it what is being enforced now. Just think how many people would freak out if we instituted the policy that the majority of the illegal immigrants homeland has.

    Cheers

    -don
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9299672].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Michael Mayo
      If true then you would think that our Marine(detrimental to their society) would have been spit back into the USI by now.
      United States of Immigrants.
      Originally Posted by ForumGuru View Post

      Mexico has a serious illegal immigration policy...

      Illegal entry into Mexico is a felony punishable by up to 2 years in prison for the first offense, and up to 10 years for a second offense. Visa violators can get a 6 year prison term. On top of that Mexican authorities can deport foreigners that are detrimental to their society...and please do check that list of what can be considered detrimental.



      You would think we would develop a policy that makes sense here in the US that would be a bit stiffer than it what is being enforced now. Just think how many people would freak out if we instituted the policy that the majority of the illegal immigrants homeland has.

      Cheers

      -don
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9300078].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Michael Mayo View Post

        If true then you would think that our Marine(detrimental to their society) would have been spit back into the USI by now.
        United States of Immigrants.
        I don't think so because right turn or wrong turn --> they have him jailed just like their policy states for illegal immigration into Mexico. He has never lived in Mexico so the detrimental foreigner part of the equation is not really a factor at this time. The Mexican policy does not state that they automatically deport everyone that enters the country illegally, it states that illegal entry can get you up to 2 years in prison for the first offense.

        My family immigrated here in the 1600's so I don't care if you refer to the US as the USI. What I don't want to be known as is the United States of Illegal Immigrants.

        One more thing...you might want to check the website listed in your profile as an account suspended page is coming up.

        Cheers

        -don
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9300111].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Michael Mayo
          Originally Posted by ForumGuru View Post

          One more thing...you might want to check the website listed in your profile as an account suspended page is coming up.

          Cheers

          -don
          The page has been down for months now! I sold the site and the num nut let it go? I kept my part of the deal leaving the link till he was to take it over... Anyway Thanks for the reminder. I edit it out of my WF account next chance I get.

          PS, I'm not anti American, I served this country in the US Navy. I'm just not happy with the results I see right now.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9300228].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
          Originally Posted by ForumGuru View Post

          I don't think so because right turn or wrong turn --> they have him jailed just like their policy states for illegal immigration into Mexico. He has never lived in Mexico so the detrimental foreigner part of the equation is not really a factor at this time. The Mexican policy does not state that they automatically deport everyone that enters the country illegally, it states that illegal entry can get you up to 2 years in prison for the first offense.

          My family immigrated here in the 1600's so I don't care if you refer to the US as the USI. What I don't want to be known as is the United States of Illegal Immigrants.

          One more thing...you might want to check the website listed in your profile as an account suspended page is coming up.

          Cheers

          -don
          He didn't break any laws though! Some IDIOT Bureaucrat, who did this for the US BTW, setup a TRAP! HE fell into it, had NO way out, and when he got where he was FORCED to be, declared all, and asked to simply go back to the US!

          GEE, if I were the president, I would DEMAND that the guilty party be punished, and FIRED with NO ability to work for the US government again. I would ALSO ask that they return the marine. If they failed to do it graciously and quickly, it would quickly turn into a DEMAND!

          WHY did he do SO much for a TRAITOR, and NOTHING for a HERO!?!?!?!? He never even MENTIONED Tahmooressi!?!?!?!? As for that trap? There are WAY too many of them. I have fallen for them a few times. Luckily, at worst, I got led through some city I had to navigate. THIS created an international incident!

          Are SIGNS too much to ask for? They can QUICKLY put up a sign stating a LIE that a road was repaired with funds from tarp, but they CAN'T put up a sign saying it is a DOGLEG to MEXICO!??!?!?!? OR, and here is a BETTER IDEA, how about a larger street, with several signs, and a way to turn BACK!!!!!!!!

          SURE, there was a little sign that said SOMETHING, supposedly, but it wasn't there when HE went through. Still, ONE sign with NO way to get back, is almost as bad as NO sign.

          How many OTHER people fell for that trap, but got back because the border agent was nicer or they weren't as honest, or no contraband was found? How many simply avoided it because THEY knew the area?:

          The story, as I understand it, is he was jailed because he had contraband, 3 guns, that were Legal on the US side. If this was because of "illegal immigration", it would even be LESS understandable! He asked to simply come back! Logically, he turned the right way! He was TRYING to go to the US! There were no signs to say it turned back into mexico.

          Steve
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301126].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
            Banned
            Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

            He didn't break any laws though! Some IDIOT Bureaucrat, who did this for the US BTW, setup a TRAP! HE fell into it, had NO way out, and when he got where he was FORCED to be, declared all, and asked to simply go back to the US!
            He did not fall into a trap. I read the stories and I listened to his interview with Greta, and unfortunately, IMHO the dude was something less than convincing in that interview. He admitted he could not find the paperwork on his guns, he admitted accidentally going to Mexico, he admitted he had all of the stuff he owned in his vehicle, he admitted he was drinking the first time he was in the parking lot on an earlier occasion (so was he drinking on this occasion?), he admitted he got annoyed and was cranky with the Mexican officials, he admitted he had checked into a Mexican hotel earlier that day, etc. etc. In-fact the longer I listened to this guy it seemed the less convincing he and his story were.

            Do I think he should remain jailed if he made a wrong turn? No. Should the guy be taking beatings etc? No. Do I think the guy was an idiot for carrying all of his possessions, including 3 guns, and making a wrong turn to the border crossing? Yes!

            I used to live about a mile from the San Ysidro border crossing in California and I never once made a wrong turn to Mexico. Anyway, I was much more sympathetic to this dude's cause until I heard heard his interview. Seriously, I thought this guy gave a poor interview and if the story he told the guards at the crossing was anything similar or worse it's no wonder he got himself jammed up.

            Consider what penalties an American can receive for bringing guns into Mexico.

            GUNS ARE ILLEGAL IN MEXICO

            Don’t bring firearms or ammunition across the border into Mexico.

            You may become one of dozens of U.S. Citizens who are arrested each month for unintentionally violating Mexico’s strict weapons laws.

            If you are caught with firearms or ammunition in Mexico...

            You will go to jail and your vehicle will be seized;
            You will be separated from your family, friends, and your job, and likely suffer substantial financial hardship;
            You will pay court costs and other fees ranging into the tens of thousands of dollars defending yourself;
            You may get up to a 30-year sentence in a Mexican prison if found guilty.

            Claiming not to know about the law will not get you leniency from a police officer or the judicial system. Leave your firearms, ammunition, and knives at home. Don’t bring them into Mexico.

            http://tijuana.usconsulate.gov/tijuana/warning.html
            Please don't chew me out, I am not the person that "accidentally" drove to Mexico with all of my possessions including my 12 gauge shotgun, my assault style rifle, and my .45 caliber handgun in the truck and decided to get cranky with the officials at the border crossing.

            Cheers

            -don
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301472].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author TLTheLiberator
    BTW...

    It doesn't look like the 11 million illegals are going anywhere.

    Unless we round them up and deport them.

    If not round them up and deport, then what??? I say to those opposed to 21 century immigration reform.


    The CBO (Congressional Budget Office) Says...

    If they are legalized, at least they won't continue to be a net minus for state and federal budgets, and legalization would provide a nice boost to the economy when it comes to GDP and job creation and IMHO, this is an economy that needs any and every boost it can get.

    The 6 Key Takeaways from the CBO Cost Estimate of S. 744 | Center for American Progress

    The Economic Impact of S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act - CBO

    Yea, I say we've lost our minds as we continue to cut our own economic throats on many, many issues and this is just one of them.


    IMHO, small business people should be in favor of just about ethical national economic policy that increases the amount of economic activity/money in the general economy - anything the increases GDP and job creation and cuts the negative outlay at the state and federal levels as the CBO says immigration reform will do.
    Signature

    "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301510].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kay King
      What's happening now at the border isn't going to help the cause of immigration reform - in fact, it's probably killed any chance of it happening now.

      With the numbers we face now I think citizenship needs to be off the table. An illegal immigrant might be made a legal resident but not have full citizen rights in this country.

      Maybe we need to go back to ideas we had years ago - or find new solutions. What we HAVE to do is stop parroting the same talking poinst of both partisan sides because they are getting us nowhere on the immigration issue.

      We might talk about granting either provisional or legal immigrant status. I'd reserve full citizenship for immigrants who are willing to serve in the military or perhaps earn the privilege over time through their accomplishments in this country.

      another limited alternative could be to revive a program known as 245(i), which in the past has allowed some immigrants to legalize through family or an employer if they pay a steep fine. The last cutoff date for petitions filed was in 2001; at the time the fee was $1,000.
      Something like that makes sense to me. If your family or employer is willing to vouch for you - be responsible for your income - and you pay a fee - you can work /live here legally on a permanent basis. The fee could be paid over time. It's not to take money from - but to award "value" to the new legal status. The fees would cover some of the paperwork and administrative costs of becoming a legal resident of the US.

      The 11 million estimate is from the census folks but many experts say the real number is much higher. We need to find a way to bring these people out of the shadows - give them opportunity without giving away our country in some grand gesture.

      But I don't think we can do anything to make illegals legal - without closing our border and we don't seem to have the will to do that.
      Signature
      Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
      ***
      One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
      what it is instead of what you think it should be.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301763].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kay King
        has played a major role in creating the messes in El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala.
        What else is new - seems like every problem in the world is the fault of the US. Never mind we've then spent generations giving the same countries millions and even billions of dollars every year.

        That article says the global financial crisis in the US harmed those Central American countries.

        News Flash: The economic crisis didn't do much for people in the US, either!!!

        It's the old argument of "they got to do it - why can't we"?

        He asked why Central American undocumented minors can't be treated the same way the U.S. government treats Cuban nationals, who are allowed to become legal residents and apply for citizenship if they make it to U.S. soil under a policy known as "wet foot/dry foot."
        Making a mistake once doesn't mean you should keep repeating it.

        The people coming over the border now are paying more per person to get here than the average income in their country. How is that happening?

        Instead of a "foot" policy - we need an "ass" policy. Come here illegally and we'll kick your ass back where you came from. You want to come to this country - use the front door like others do.
        Signature
        Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
        ***
        One secret to happiness is to let every situation be
        what it is instead of what you think it should be.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301800].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

          Instead of a "foot" policy - we need an "ass" policy. Come here illegally and we'll kick your ass back where you came from. You want to come to this country - use the front door like others do.
          >>> +1 <<<
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301840].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
          Originally Posted by Kay King View Post

          Come here illegally and we'll kick your ass back where you came from.
          How stupid is this, sending them back to the starting line?!


          Introducing the Illegal Immigrant Deterrent Policy.

          Illegal immigrants are sent to a US Military base in the Middle East for processing for a 30 day period.

          They will be well-fed, cared for and have access to phones and other forms of communications to arrange for pickup.

          After 30 days, they will be released.

          Let me recommend that they have someone pick them up, it's a long walk from Afghanistan to Guatemala.

          I predict that the illegal immigration problem in the US would be all but non-existent within 30 days.

          Joe Mobley
          Signature

          .

          Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301861].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Joe Mobley View Post

            How stupid is this, sending them back to the starting line?!
            Introducing the Illegal Immigrant Deterrent Policy.
            Illegal immigrants are sent to a US Military base in the Middle East for processing for a 30 day period.They will be well-fed, cared for and have access to phones and other forms of communications to arrange for pickup. After 30 days, they will be released. Let me recommend that they have someone pick them up, it's a long walk from Afghanistan to Guatemala. I predict that the illegal immigration problem in the US would be all but non-existent within 30 days.

            Joe Mobley
            Funny stuff for sure, and no doubt it could be effective, but as you know it's completely unrealistic. So in addition to Kay's standard "ass" policy maybe the extended version of the "ass" policy would include a 2 or 3 strikes and your ass gets a long prison term and then deportation for your efforts amendment. Maybe this would act as a strong enough deterrent to the people thinking about making multiple efforts. Since you can't put young minors in prison, or send them to Afghanistan, then those kids probably need swift turnarounds as we don't have many other viable options.

            The reason sending illegals back to the starting line may be a decent solution is because it will costs us less than it does to lock the illegals up for long terms.

            Cheers
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301888].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Joe Mobley
        These Are The Real Reasons Behind Our Humanitarian Crisis At The Border
        I don't give a damn about the Reasons Behind THEIR Humanitarian Crisis At The Border

        I want some Real Methods to End It!

        U.S. government ushered in decades of violent misrule and civil conflict in Guatemala by helping to overthrow the elected government of Jacobo Arbenz in 1954
        A fool will lose tomorrow reaching back for yesterday
        Dionne Warwick/Burt Bacharach

        Joe Mobley
        Signature

        .

        Follow Me on Twitter: @daVinciJoe
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9301819].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    I was watching "The Invasion" today. It is about a #$%^&*( that claims to be peaceful and bring peace to the world!

    Sounds neat, huh? And they get rid of strife, etc.... Sounds NEAT, HUH?

    They claim to be peaceful, etc... So HOW do they do this? Well, they are a disease that causes the HOST(humans in this case) to do their bidding. As long as the humans allow themselves to be infected, they promise that that is ALL they will care about. NO strife about kids, etc....

    But there IS a problem, and that is that some humans had some bad illnesses that made them IMMUNE to the virus, so the virus will, like it will with those that resist infection other ways, KILL THEM!

    Sounds like some people I know!

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9302045].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author TimPhelan
      Kay, much of what is considered foreign aid is military aid. For example we provide about $3,100,000,000 in aid to Israel. Of that $3,075,000,000 is military aid. There are many other countries where the breakdown is similar. Then there are countries where we spend more on economic aid than military. I wonder where we stand among other countries when just economic aid is considered.
      Signature
      Over 50 Dating
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9302141].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
        Banned
        Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

        Kay, much of what is considered foreign aid is military aid. For example we provide about $3,100,000,000 in aid to Israel. Of that $3,075,000,000 is military aid. There are many other countries where the breakdown is similar.
        And now let us have a look at another example...

        Before PEPFAR, an estimated 100,000 people were on anti-retroviral drugs in sub-Saharan Africa. By the time Bush left office in 2008 that number had increased to about 2 million.

        At more than $5 billion a year in humanitarian aid to Africa, President Bush has given more assistance to the continent than any other president. His administration’s aid was largely targeted to fight the major global health issues facing the continent, HIV/AIDS and malaria.

        In 2005 Bush started a $1.2 billion initiative to fight malaria. He defended the request for funding in 2007, saying, “There’s no reason for little babies to be dying of mosquito bites around the world.”

        http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...ven-from-foes/
        Cheers

        -don
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9302166].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ForumGuru
        Banned
        Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

        I wonder where we stand among other countries when just economic aid is considered.
        Kay showed you how we stand when just economic aid is considered.

        Originally Posted by TimPhelan View Post

        Kay, much of what is considered foreign aid is military aid.
        And the answer is --> ALL OF IT. Below is the underlying data that the map Kay linked is based upon.



        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Officia...ent_assistance



        Here are some other numbers you may be interested in as far as who receives what kind of aid...

        In fiscal year 2012, the U.S. government allocated the following amounts for aid:

        Total economic and military assistance: $48.4 billion

        Total military assistance: $17.2billion
        Total economic assistance: $31.2 billion
        of which, USAID assistance: $11.75 billion


        United States foreign aid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

        Cheers

        -don
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9302201].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rwhite10
    This is a complete mess caused by total incompetence.
    Signature

    Learn Affiliate Marketing the Right Way

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9302239].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author ThomM
      Our military decisions in the past many times come back to bite us in the future. It's called blowback by the CIA.
      More the actions of our CIA. Most of the military actions are a response to the blowback caused by the actions of the CIA and our political agenda.
      Our meddling in the Middle East sense the end of WWII is responsible for pretty much all the terrorist attacks that have happened against us since.
      Propping up the Shah in Iran is what led them to be our "enemies". When they became our "enemies" we supported Sadam in Iraq thinking he would fight and beat Iran. When that didn't work we organized the Kurds in northern Iraq to revolt against Sadam, but instead of sticking with them, we hung them out to dry causing their massacre. We've even armed and funded Al Queda and the Taliban in the past when we thought they would be on our side.
      Now we are killing innocent people in Chad, Yemen, and assorted other countries over there.
      A man from Yemen testified in front of congress a while back (I wish I could find the video again). One thing he said was about our actions in his country. He said the Taliban didn't have to turn anybody against America, we are doing it for them.
      Signature

      Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
      Getting old ain't for sissy's
      As you are I was, as I am you will be
      You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9302303].message }}

Trending Topics