Protecting Our Borders?

[mkubal]

I was wondering what everyone thought about sending the military to plug the holes in our border. Aparently a majority of Americans are in favor of it. What do you all think.

P.S. I'm really not interested in who you think is at fault politically for the situation and I really don't want to start the blame game. I just want to know what you all think about troops on the borders. Keep your politics out of it.


Personally, I think its worth a shot. There are alot of people slipping through our borders (North and South) who want nothing more than to do harm to us. I'm not saying to stop all immigration just the illegal immigration. How could you argue against stopping illegal immigration. It is after all illegal. And if using the army doesn't work then we can always change back to the old way or find a new way.

Matt

[krossfyter]

yeah im for sending in the military on the border.


sounds logical at this time.

[D0ct0rteeth]

It is actually on Fox right now...

O'Reilly Factor

-Doc

[mkubal]

Yeah, I watched O'Reilly tonight. That's why I posted this thread. Good call though.

Matt

[krossfyter]

yep... mr bill o'reilly is very vocal about that. he is the first one i heard address it with that view. when i heard that view i was like "brillant"....


he has been saying this for some time now.

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by mkubal
I was wondering what everyone thought about sending the military to plug the holes in our border. Aparently a majority of Americans are in favor of it. What do you all think.

P.S. I'm really not interested in who you think is at fault politically for the situation and I really don't want to start the blame game. I just want to know what you all think about troops on the borders. Keep your politics out of it.


Personally, I think its worth a shot. There are alot of people slipping through our borders (North and South) who want nothing more than to do harm to us. I'm not saying to stop all immigration just the illegal immigration. How could you argue against stopping illegal immigration. It is after all illegal. And if using the army doesn't work then we can always change back to the old way or find a new way.

Matt
How can you keep politics out of a topic that's inherently political? We currently are seeing a lot of illegal immigration, and it seems to me there are two solutions: 1) Clamp down even harder on the borders, and 2) Allow more legal immigrants so that the illegal ones don't have to enter illegally.

I'm against illegal immigration, and for making more immigration legal rather than threatening to shoot innocent people who want to make better lives for themselves on sight.

[MacBandit]

Pull our troops out of the east COMPLETELY and use them to protect the United States here at home. Part of this is border patrol.

[Macette]

<mildly> how about helping the rest of the world solve their problems (declaring war on them doesn't count) so that people don't NEED to illegally or legally enter America? i mean, people don't just immigrate for the hell of it. they immigrate because living whereever they're living has been made impossible because of war, famine, etc etc etc. and contrary to popular belief, MOST people aren't entering America to harm you guys - they're entering America to escape something else. then, because they can't get welfare as 'illegal' immigrants, they're then forced to turn to their communities for help... which makes them easy, vulnerable targets for militants/extremists promoting the nutso ideas that we've all heard abou, unless we've been living in caves for the last 18 months... </mildly>

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by Macette
<mildly> how about helping the rest of the world solve their problems (declaring war on them doesn't count) so that people don't NEED to illegally or legally enter America? i mean, people don't just immigrate for the hell of it. they immigrate because living whereever they're living has been made impossible because of war, famine, etc etc etc. and contrary to popular belief, MOST people aren't entering America to harm you guys - they're entering America to escape something else. then, because they can't get welfare as 'illegal' immigrants, they're then forced to turn to their communities for help... which makes them easy, vulnerable targets for militants/extremists promoting the nutso ideas that we've all heard abou, unless we've been living in caves for the last 18 months... </mildly>

As if we have anyway to fix other peoples problems. We haven't even fixed our own yet. We need to take care of America first and help others later.

[mkubal]

alex ant: I guess there are inherent politics involved in the whole thing, but I was just try to keep people from coming in and saying something stupid like "Bush hates Mexicans." (just a random example)

Macette: I do agree with you that most of the people coming in want nothing more than to be able to get decent work and to leave the problems of their former country behind. For those people I have no problem with them immigrating. I just think that we should force them to do it legally.

Matt

[jefhatfield]

if the terrorists want to do us harm, be sure, they already have enough people in place here already...some for perhaps years, that can do enough harm to the usa

let's focus our monies on geting the al qaeda terrorists already in the us and bring them to justice instead of trying to plug a several thousand mile border with two countires, two oceans, and a large gulf

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by mkubal
Macette: I do agree with you that most of the people coming in want nothing more than to be able to get decent work and to leave the problems of their former country behind. For those people I have no problem with them immigrating. I just think that we should force them to do it legally.
The problem is that if they want to enter legally, they have to wait many years because our immigration quotas are too low. That's why they pay their life savings to professional smugglers and sometimes risk their lives to get across. I'm not saying illegal immigration should be right and OK, but there are other ways to solving this problem than fortifying the border with motion sensors and attack dogs and armed guards.

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by jefhatfield
if the terrorists want to do us harm, be sure, they already have enough people in place here already...some for perhaps years, that can do enough harm to the usa

let's focus our monies on geting the al qaeda terrorists already in the us and bring them to justice instead of trying to plug a several thousand mile border with two countires, two oceans, and a large gulf


yeah i agree with you to a point.... but i think we could do both without any trouble. instead of having our military men in other countries doing whatever... protecting others.. etc. etc.... lets bring them back home and have them protect our borders.... the others will be after al qaeda... hows that sound? impractical? i tried.


err

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by Macette
<mildly> how about helping the rest of the world solve their problems (declaring war on them doesn't count) so that people don't NEED to illegally or legally enter America? i mean, people don't just immigrate for the hell of it. they immigrate because living whereever they're living has been made impossible because of war, famine, etc etc etc. and contrary to popular belief, MOST people aren't entering America to harm you guys - they're entering America to escape something else. then, because they can't get welfare as 'illegal' immigrants, they're then forced to turn to their communities for help... which makes them easy, vulnerable targets for militants/extremists promoting the nutso ideas that we've all heard abou, unless we've been living in caves for the last 18 months... </mildly>

I find it sad that over 3,000 people died because of the US putting its noses in other countries buisness, and no one wants our help when we think they need it, but when we don't offer it they require it? the only obligation that the US has is to the people of this country. Do illegal immigrates hurt the US. Sure they do. They take jobs from American Citizens that have a right to work in this country. They lower quality standards, and they feast on the social programs that we have here in the US through illegal means. I say seal the boarders, and place a freeze on immigration totally.

[alex_ant]

It's also a fact that essentially everything illegal immigrants take from the economy they give back. Sure they take jobs, and then they create jobs by contributing to the economy (buying food, paying rent, what have you).

[krossfyter]

im really not sold on either side of the whole immigrant issue. im still trying to figure it all out i guess.


i mean...the immigrants cause a negative and a positive effect on our country. i guess the key is to lessen the negative effect and increase the positive effect as much as possible. im not sure if its possible. now that we are in a time that one of the causes of 9/11 was a problem with immigration i think we have to really consider if we want to sacrifice the positives of immigration to protect us. its a complex situation... im just glad im not the one having to decide for america.. thats why im not a politician.


we are in difficult times that challenges the foundation of what america believes in... but we are stronger because of it.

[kenkooler]

Originally posted by Backtothemac


I find it sad that over 3,000 people died because of the US putting its noses in other countries buisness, and no one wants our help when we think they need it, but when we don't offer it they require it? the only obligation that the US has is to the people of this country. Do illegal immigrates hurt the US. Sure they do. They take jobs from American Citizens that have a right to work in this country. They lower quality standards, and they feast on the social programs that we have here in the US through illegal means. I say seal the boarders, and place a freeze on immigration totally.

What kind of help has the United States ever offered that is not for its own benefit? Declaring war on a country is not helping them.

[Backtothemac]

Gee Ken, lets see, I am sure that if you look you can find lots of instances of us helping your country no?

How about Bosnia? How about all the economic help the US throughs around the world.

Man, you have to be smarter than that statement. :)

[kenkooler]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
Gee Ken, lets see, I am sure that if you look you can find lots of instances of us helping your country no?

How about Bosnia? How about all the economic help the US throughs around the world.

Man, you have to be smarter than that statement. :)

Sure, together with lots of times you have hurted us.
You didn't want ex-Yugoslavian states to have a non capitalist US-like form of government.
Economic help usually comes from conditions like in the case of Argentina and Mexico, having to adopt a Neo-liberalist economy, that was the cause for the economic troubles in Mexico in 1994 and Argentina in 2002.

[mkubal]

alex_ant:
I'm talking about keeping those who wish to harm us from entering the U.S. to begin with, not those who are already here. Sure there are plenty of people in the U.S. already who are here with the intentions of hurting us, but thats no excuse to overlook the source of these people. We spend more money on defense than any other country (by far). I think we can handle both problems at once.

kenkooler:
Argueably, any help the United Sates would offer would be for its benefit. But this is the same for any country that offers help to another country. By offering help to someone else you would reap the benefits of the results whether direct as in monetary or indirect as in making the world a better place for everyone. But this is a philisophical arguement. Namely: Is there such a thing as a good selfless deed? However, philosophy is completely off topic.

Also, I would have to agree with alex_ant about the immigrants helping the economy. Right now those illegal immigrants are occupying millions of jobs that no other american would wish to do. Things such as, picking oranges or strawberries, or being a janitor at a school (please don't take offense to this, it's not meant to be a racial slur). These are jobs that many of those unemployed Americans would never want to do. I think that the immigrants support our economy alot more than we realize. It comes in the form of cheap physical labor. Not that this practice is ethical, but thats just the way it is.

But we also must realize that allowing people to cross the the border illegaly, as if it was going out of style tomorrow, is going to hurt us in the long run. Eventually the job markets will become flooded to the point that even the Mexicans will be out of work. So what happens then? The crime rate goes through the roof. Especially for illegals.

Am I wrong with these assumptions?

Matt

[drastik]

Originally posted by Backtothemac


I find it sad that over 3,000 people died because of the US putting its noses in other countries buisness, and no one wants our help when we think they need it, but when we don't offer it they require it? the only obligation that the US has is to the people of this country. Do illegal immigrates hurt the US. Sure they do. They take jobs from American Citizens that have a right to work in this country. They lower quality standards, and they feast on the social programs that we have here in the US through illegal means. I say seal the boarders, and place a freeze on immigration totally.

And I suppose that you are a native american? Never had family immigrate to this country?

PS. My fiance is from Singapore, she is a legal alien and will soon have a green card that allows her permanent residence without her having to give up her Singaporean citizenship.

And I'm thrilled about it.

[Macette]

I'm an alien
I'm a legal alien

I'm an Englishman in New York

lalalala

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by mkubal
alex_ant:
I'm talking about keeping those who wish to harm us from entering the U.S. to begin with, not those who are already here. Sure there are plenty of people in the U.S. already who are here with the intentions of hurting us, but thats no excuse to overlook the source of these people. We spend more money on defense than any other country (by far). I think we can handle both problems at once.
I think that anyone who wishes to enter the US in order to do harm will be able to do so no matter how strong of a border we have. Unless we restrict all immigration so that nobody can get in, including fortifying our huge Canadian border, trying to stop terrorists or whoever by this method would be like trying to save a sinking boat by plugging the holes with one's fingers.

I think the real problem is coming to the root of questions like "Why are we hated?" And "Why do people want to attack us?" The only reason we haven't done this, I believe, is because we don't like the answers to these questions, and we refuse to accept that our actions (especially with regard to foreign policy), whatever they may be, could possibly be wrong, or bad for us in the long term.
But we also must realize that allowing people to cross the the border illegaly, as if it was going out of style tomorrow, is going to hurt us in the long run. Eventually the job markets will become flooded to the point that even the Mexicans will be out of work. So what happens then? The crime rate goes through the roof. Especially for illegals.

Am I wrong with these assumptions?
If illegal immigrants were strictly a source of labor competing with Americans for jobs, then this would be true. But they do give back, so I believe it's a false assumption. The US economy has managed to expand from a country with a few million people in the 1800s to one with 280 million people now, and on top of that, quality of life has increased. There's no reason to believe that if the economy were flooded with an extra million immigrants tomorrow, it wouldn't actually grow. Theoretically this would cause a short-term (several months) job shortage and then an evening-out of the employment rate to the level it was before, all other economic factors aside.

[macktheknife]

The "Economist" did a recent study on the immigration issue and found, on the whole, that immigrants do indeed contribute greatly to the economy. Illegal immigration do not hurt native-born Americans as much as immigrants who came earlier but work in the same industry where illegal immigrants usually work, namely agriculture, food services, etc.

Also, remember that the United States enjoys economic growth rates above the average of other industrialized countries due in part to strong population growth, which in turn is fueled by immigration. Japan and Western Europe are facing a demographic timebomb of sorts when their respective populations are expected to decline in the next 20-30 years, increasing the burden on state welfare and pension schemes. Of course, the US is expected to have a similiar problem with respect to Social Security, but it's nowhere as dire as the situation in other industrialized countries.

Remember that the United States is a country founded on immigration and has been made stronger by it. I know this is a cliche', but I think native-born Americans tend to forget this. When the Irish came to the US during the early 1800s, they were not "mericans because they were not of English descent and were not Protestants. When the other Western Europeans came a few decades later, they were told they were not Americans because they spoke no English. When the Southern and Eastern Europeans came in the late 1800s and early 1900s, they were told they were not Americans because they did not share the Western European heritage.

I could go on, but you get the idea: immigrants were often met with fierce resistance while the definition of "American" has been continually enlarged. All the arguements against immigration--that they are not one of "us", that they don't want to integrate, that they bring down the country--have all been heard before.

[mkubal]

No one so far, with the exception of maybe one, has said that they have a problem with immigrants coming to this country. In fact I'm all for it. Those people that hop the border looking for a better life aren't out to kill Americans. They want to be one. The issue here is with those who cross the border with the intentions of killing us.

To say that these undesirable people will make it into our country reguardless of the plugging of the border is a poor excuse to not guard the borders. By that logic, we should just give up our war on terror because we can never get them all. And the FBI should stop looking for terrorists here because we can't stop them from coming.

Think about this: If the Hoover Dam suddenly sprung hundreds of holes, we wouldn't just say screw it. We would plug the holes, and you have to start somewhere. You have to start with the first hole and work your way through them until they're all plugged.

When we apply this to this situation we would first start by plugging the borders. After we had that fixed we would slowly become aware of other ways that people were illegaly getting into America and we would defense against these. No one ever said that guarding our borders would be the end all of terrorists attacks in America, but it's a good starting point.

Also, to deflect attention away from this problem by saying "but look at this, this is worse," is simply an ignorant way to avoid adressing a problem (thanks to Bill O'Reilly for that one). So to say we shouldn't be worrying about protecting our borders, but rather look at why people hate us so much, is simply not addressing the problem. It's plain stupid and to think that doing so will solve the border problem is nothing short of naive.

I don't think anyone has forgotten that with the exception of the Native Americans, we are all of immigrant roots. I'm czech and polish. My family has been in America for five or six generations now, but I don't forget where I came from. I'm not saying that I don't want Mexicans to become Americans, I just want them to do it legally and that goes for people from any other nation. In the end, it doesn't seem like too much to ask and it would aid us in protecting our country from terrorists. That is THE bottom line...but I could be a complete fool.

Matt

<note to self> accidentally hitting the escape key while typing your post will delete all that you have written--this is not desirable </note to self>

[Macette]

Originally posted by MacBandit


As if we have anyway to fix other peoples problems. We haven't even fixed our own yet. We need to take care of America first and help others later.

I think that the solution to the 'problem' of 'illegal immigration' will be found in helping to stabilise other regions. Remember that a lot of so-called illegal immigrants are actually refugees, and their movement across borders is expressly sanctioned by the UN.

As for finding ways to fix other people's problems... well, Bush's rhetoric about the war in Iraq implies that he thinks it will be 'helpful' to depose Saddam Hussain because he's oppressing a lot of people. So even if the rhetoric is ************, he's still got the idea that helping to fix things in Iraq will inevitably sort out some of the problems he's facing at home, and that there's general community agreement about that.

I know that in Australia at least, a high proportion of refugees are from Iraq. So if America would only donate the billions of dollars they're spending on arms to some better cause (food, medicine etc) and stop the sanctions (which are killing innocents, while Saddam smiles on)which would in turn allow some kind of internal Iraqi opposition to Saddam to develop, then the world would be a better place. And that would plug one of the border holes people are so worried about.

[Choppaface]

doesn't Cuba benefit greatly from the $$ that they get from the Cubans here? perhaps letting the troops go and putting the money into education may have a similar effect. or perhaps not. just put the $$ in education anyways, public schools really need work >_< he he :D :D

[zimv20]

Originally posted by mkubal
I was wondering what everyone thought about sending the military to plug the holes in our border. Aparently a majority of Americans are in favor of it. What do you all think.


well, for one thing, it's illegal.

posse comitatus act of 1878 (http://www.dojgov.net/posse_comitatus_act.htm)

[Macette]

Originally posted by zimv20


well, for one thing, it's illegal.

posse comitatus act of 1878 (http://www.dojgov.net/posse_comitatus_act.htm)

That's very interesting. It's also a relief.

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by mkubal
To say that these undesirable people will make it into our country reguardless of the plugging of the border is a poor excuse to not guard the borders. By that logic, we should just give up our war on terror because we can never get them all. And the FBI should stop looking for terrorists here because we can't stop them from coming.
I would actually agree with both of those statements IF, instead of carrying on our War on Terror, we would enact a War on Our Own Bad Foreign Policy, and change the way we behave with regards to the rest of the world. At the moment, we're the world's lone superpower, and so it's easy for us to do pretty much whatever we want and justify it pretty much however we'd like to, and think of ourselves as "correct" while most the rest of the world is wrong and evil for disagreeing with our actions. What I find very disturbing about this, just as much as the fact that we're doing it, is that many of us don't even realize that we're doing wrong, and don't understand why we're so hated as a result. Much of the reason the U.S. is so hated is due to its actions abroad. We were attacked on Sept. 11, for example, because one group hated us so much that they saw fit to you-know-what. It's easy to write off al-Qaida as a group of crazed lunatics until you realize there are millions of people who are just like them, who view the U.S. as evil incarnate, whose greatest wish would be to blow up our entire country. (Just as there are millions of Americans who would love to see a large portion of the Middle East paved over with radioactive fallout.) And it's easy to write these millions of people off as crazed lunatics until you realize that, if the USA were off the map and out of the picture, a good deal of them would be surprisingly "normal" people, not filled with hate, with loving families and jobs and so on.

This is not to say that "the people who hate us are good and we're bad." It's to suggest that maybe our enemies are human after all, even if they would like to see us dead, and that perhaps this hatred could be mediated if the USA were to undergo a dramatic shift in its foreign policy and start to abide more closely by the Golden Rule. I really do see the prevention and elimination of terrorism as a simple matter of being universally considerate to all groups worldwide. Those in favor of "nuking the evil-doers" would call me utopian, but I would say, "What do they know about peace other than that it can only exist under their own terms." So I'm sorry to write so much here, but to connect this all to terrorism and immigration policy: If we weren't so hated, we wouldn't need a strong border. I think we should hold our Canadian border up as a shining example of what we should strive to achieve on our southern border.

Of course we need to deal with real threats against our security, but what I proposed (if I haven't explained it enough already) is a way to dramatically reduce the numbers of these threats so that we would no longer need to (at least not on the scale we do now).
Think about this: If the Hoover Dam suddenly sprung hundreds of holes, we wouldn't just say screw it. We would plug the holes, and you have to start somewhere. You have to start with the first hole and work your way through them until they're all plugged.
The problem is that, unlike what would be the case with a dam, we can't plug all the holes. The more we plug, the more that appear. The more terrorists we nab, the greater the number of terrorists that will get pissed at us and take their place. So as I said before, I see two solutions to this (two that would work, anyway - there are more solutions if you want to count the ones that wouldn't): 1) building an impenetrable wall around our entire geographic border, both land & sea, and 2) finding a way to eliminate the type of mindset that would cause people to want to attack us.
When we apply this to this situation we would first start by plugging the borders. After we had that fixed we would slowly become aware of other ways that people were illegaly getting into America and we would defense against these. No one ever said that guarding our borders would be the end all of terrorists attacks in America, but it's a good starting point.
Sounds a lot like the War on Drugs. "First we'll find out where the drugs are coming from. Then we'll cut off supply. Then, when we realize that we're still no closer to solving the problem than we were before, we'll happen upon more supply networks and squash them, and so on and so on until we finally get them all and all drug trafficking is dead like smallpox." The problem is that idea works really well in theory but not too well in acutality.

Or, to use another analogy, nuclear missile defense. "We need a system in place that can take down airborne ICBMs so that rogue nations can't nuke our cities." Nevermind that if any rogue nation wanted to nuke one of our cities, an NMD system certainly wouldn't stop them. Or even make it much more difficult.
Also, to deflect attention away from this problem by saying "but look at this, this is worse," is simply an ignorant way to avoid adressing a problem (thanks to Bill O'Reilly for that one). So to say we shouldn't be worrying about protecting our borders, but rather look at why people hate us so much, is simply not addressing the problem. It's plain stupid and to think that doing so will solve the border problem is nothing short of naive.
You say it's naive, but you don't explain why. In calling for a greater awareness of the effects our nation's policies have on the rest of the world (especially insofar as they breed enemies of the US), I don't wish to shift attention away from the problem but rather shift attention to the source of the problem. (The source being that a lot of people around the world, for some reason, hate us.)
I don't think anyone has forgotten that with the exception of the Native Americans, we are all of immigrant roots. I'm czech and polish. My family has been in America for five or six generations now, but I don't forget where I came from. I'm not saying that I don't want Mexicans to become Americans, I just want them to do it legally and that goes for people from any other nation. In the end, it doesn't seem like too much to ask and it would aid us in protecting our country from terrorists. That is THE bottom line...but I could be a complete fool.
I agree with you here (not with the part about you being a complete fool). If we wish to ask Mexicans or people from any other country to immigrate legally, though, we need to have in place a means by which they can do so. We can't maintain our strict immigration quotas and simply tell the millions of people who want in, "Hey, stop crossing over into our country - if you want to come in, just do it legally." Because I'm sure they would love to if they could.

Alex

[zimv20]

alex said some good stuff.

there should be a conversation going on in this country:

1. why does so much of the world hate us?
2. how can we be a better world citizen to eliminate that hate?

it's not happening. the conversation taking place is:

1. who hates us?
2. how can we kill them?

all that does is further the problem. permanent war.

oh, and the sad thing is: those who ask the first two questions are labeled unpatriotic. because we question what's going on.

[3rdpath]

nice post alex. excellent points. wish i had written it.






you seem so....mellow now.






;) :D ;)

[Macette]

Originally posted by zimv20

1. who hates us?
2. how can we kill them?



ha!

it's like that old chestnut:

WAR
Go to great new places
Meet interesting people
Kill them.

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by 3rdpath
nice post alex. excellent points. wish i had written it.






you seem so....mellow now.
I blame it on the antihistamine... thank you, and don't worry, I'm still a dick :)

[MacBandit]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by alex_ant

I would actually agree with both of those statements IF, instead of carrying on our War on Terror, we would enact a War on Our Own Bad Foreign Policy, and change the way we behave with regards to the rest of the world.

Thank you. You took the words right out of my mouth for the whole post. I haven't had time enough and haven't really wanted to be the center of a flame war as I have in the past so I haven't posted anything like this.

You are so right though. There are way too many people in the middle east that hate us to proetect ourselves from. The problem as I see it is we stepped into there war and tried to stop the fighting when all they know is fighting. What this did is divert a small amount of there attention and hatred from eachother to us. What we got was a result of our ongoing meddling in foreign affairs. We need to realize that we are not like throughout the world and a big part of that is because of our efforts to try to control other countries often through the use of our military. We need to end this. Let other countries work things out on there own. What we need to do as a society is realize that everyone is human and as humans they have there own lives and they are ran with there own set of rules. It may be different from ours but it is there ways and we have no business screwing with it. So in my oppinion at this point the quick way to divert a lot of attention from us in the middle east is to somehow get there angers refocussed on eachother. This will help them forget about us. The next thing we need to do is welcome them into our country if they wish to come. They think we are a big controling country like any other simply because they no no differently. We need to educate them and let them know that they can live here freely and practice there own religion.

A big part of conflict in the world is simply because people don't take the time step back and think about what it is like to live and be these other people. You have to realize that there views are limited by there surroundings as are ours. We seem to think that all of them are backwards cave dwellers which is a big part of why Americans can't seem to come to respect these people. You have to realize that a large portion of those people live in cities as we do and go to work every day as doctors, engineers, architects and have gone to schools there and elsewhere. They have families and homes and tv. No it's not just like here but the point is these people are not stupid. They don't need our help. If there problem could have been solved they would have a long time ago. It's arrogant of us to think that we can step in and end a fight that has been going on for thousands of years. How can we solve there problems when we can't even solve our own. That my friends is what got us in over our heads and the only way out is to quit involving ourselves over there. Do you really think attacking Irag (which is a religious center) will get the masses to quit hatting us? Every day we spend over there we create more people with enough hatred that they are willing to come here and do what happened last year.

Enough for now I'm sure I've started plenty of discussion.

[mkubal]

So do you guys think we should become isolationists again? If not how do we decide where we should become involved with foreign coutries? We give an awful lot of money to help other countries. Should we still do this, but just give it to them and leave them alone?

I'm not trying to say there's anything wrong with the points you guys made, but I think in todays age of free flowing information and ideas it would be much harder to stay out of foreign affaris.

Also, I will acknowledge the possibility that our involvement in foreign affairs makes us hated by many people. But I think we can't just say that terrorists attacking us is the result of them hating us. The French hate us, they don't attack us. The difference between the French and the terrorists that attack us is the extremist religion. They think that western civilization is trying to change their ways, but that isn't what makes them become terrorists. A few of these people go crazy and think that God want them to kill us...these are the terrorists. The majority of Muslims that hate us would not blow themsleves up just to kill us.

Blowing up innocent people is no way to express your dislike of American involvement in your country. The way to do that is through diplomacy.

On a side note, yes, Christianity has its fair share of extremists too. But at worst they knock on your door to try to get you to join their cult and at best they commit mass suicides (making sure to only kill themselves, not innocent people from another country). And yes I realize that a good many people have been killed in wars in the name of a christian god, but christianity has grown out of that and it is no longer.

Matt

[macktheknife]

Originally posted by mkubal
So do you guys think we should become isolationists again? If not how do we decide where we should become involved with foreign coutries? We give an awful lot of money to help other countries. Should we still do this, but just give it to them and leave them alone?

American foreign policy in the past 20 or 30 years is a product of two conflicting impulses: isolationism and internationalism. The former grew out of the United States' desire to not get into another "Vietnam" and risk the lives of our soldiers unnecessarily. The latter grew out of the WW II generation who wondered aloud what carnage could have been avoided had the US involved itself in the League of Nations and/or stopped Hitler at Munich and the Japanese at Manchuria.

Currently, I would say the best course for the US is to continue promoting free trade, but stop being so damn hypocritical by subsidizing politically-important industries like steel and agriculture. Bush's recent farm bill for instance, make us look like hypocrites when we preach the virtues of open and free trade and ask other countries to lower their tariffs or quotas.

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by drastik


And I suppose that you are a native american? Never had family immigrate to this country?

PS. My fiance is from Singapore, she is a legal alien and will soon have a green card that allows her permanent residence without her having to give up her Singaporean citizenship.

And I'm thrilled about it.

Actually, yes, I am half Cherokee. My mother was full blood indian. My Grandfather on my Dad's side, Irish, Grandmother was Choctaw Indian.

Still, why should I let my government tax me and then take that money and give it to foriegn countries? For example, the us gave an African country under Clinton 50 million a year for doctors and supplies for abortions!?!?!?!

Why should I have to pay for that?

[macktheknife]

Originally posted by Backtothemac


Actually, yes, I am half Cherokee. My mother was full blood indian. My Grandfather on my Dad's side, Irish, Grandmother was Choctaw Indian.

Still, why should I let my government tax me and then take that money and give it to foriegn countries? For example, the us gave an African country under Clinton 50 million a year for doctors and supplies for abortions!?!?!?!

Why should I have to pay for that?

There are many things we don't like the US government doing with our tax money, but what does the case you cite have to do with immigration? I don't know anything about the case you're talking about, but in general, foreign aid is another extension of foreign policy. I usually don't support the US just giving out money, but I do see the logic in such actions.

[Judo]

Originally posted by Backtothemac


Actually, yes, I am half Cherokee. My mother was full blood indian. My Grandfather on my Dad's side, Irish, Grandmother was Choctaw Indian.

Still, why should I let my government tax me and then take that money and give it to foriegn countries? For example, the us gave an African country under Clinton 50 million a year for doctors and supplies for abortions!?!?!?!

Why should I have to pay for that?

Because you don't just live in America, you live on this thing called The World where you are living a better lifestyle then most because of luck. How much money has America made exploiting 3rd world countries?? Look at all of your clothing and electronics you have, how much of that is made and assembled in a third world country??? Have you heard of export zones??? How many weapons has America sold to the wrong people??
America has alot to answer for in my eyes. Especially American Business. I don't think Amereica is all bad though . honest :p thinking of traveling there one day.

[zimv20]

Originally posted by Backtothemac

For example, the us gave an African country under Clinton 50 million a year for doctors and supplies for abortions!?!?!?!

Why should I have to pay for that?

i propose we invoke a gentleman's agreement to not discuss abortion on these boards.

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by zimv20


i propose we invoke a gentleman's agreement to not discuss abortion on these boards.

Now why would we do that? I am not talking about it here. What I am talking about is my tax dollars paying for them in another country.

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by mkubal
So do you guys think we should become isolationists again? If not how do we decide where we should become involved with foreign coutries? We give an awful lot of money to help other countries. Should we still do this, but just give it to them and leave them alone?
I don't think isolationism is necessary. Actually I think it's bad. One thing about giving aid to other countries is that it arguably sets up a dominant/subordinate relationship between us and whoever we're helping. "Here, we're giving this money to you because you need it, because you're inferior and we're better." Also, if we give money and not any other type of aid, it sends the message that we don't care. "You can have our money but you can't have our time or energy - just take it and leave us alone." When other countries need help, I don't think giving them money is necessarily the best way to help them.

We also need to do a better job of recognizing the consequences of our actions. If we give money to country A, is one of country A's enemies going to get pissed at us? In the case of e.g. famine, I think it would be a lot better if we gave food instead of money to help, because money has a way of not going to pay for what it was intended to pay for, and nobody can really argue with feeding starving children. This is very simplistic but the starting sentence of the paragraph hopefully sums it up.
Also, I will acknowledge the possibility that our involvement in foreign affairs makes us hated by many people. But I think we can't just say that terrorists attacking us is the result of them hating us. The French hate us, they don't attack us.
The French definitely don't "hate" the US in the same way Iraqis do. :) Having met a few French people, there are certainly various aspects of American culture that they don't like, but by and large they respect us and are warm to us.
The difference between the French and the terrorists that attack us is the extremist religion. They think that western civilization is trying to change their ways, but that isn't what makes them become terrorists. A few of these people go crazy and think that God want them to kill us...these are the terrorists. The majority of Muslims that hate us would not blow themsleves up just to kill us.
I agree with this, but I doubt this kind of religious extremism would exist if the US weren't widely disliked in the Middle East (and elsewhere) to begin with. Even if we could somehow snuff all that out (which is not possible) - I still wouldn't be comfortable knowing that an entire international region hated or even disliked me. Or even my government. Something would seem wrong with that to me.
Blowing up innocent people is no way to express your dislike of American involvement in your country. The way to do that is through diplomacy.
Absolutely right, and by trying to explain how/why it occurs, I'm not condoning it. Just saying that we can either behave as if any action we could possibly take is without negative consequence, or we can acknowledge that the way we involve ourselves in the world does ultimately affect the way we are treated in return, even the way we're treated by extremist psychos.

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by zimv20
i propose we invoke a gentleman's agreement to not discuss abortion on these boards.
BABY KILLER!! :D

[krossfyter]

i propose we invoke a gentleman's agreement to discuss abortion on these boards.

[jelloshotsrule]

the abortion issue certainly doesn't belong in this thread.

and as for a discussion about it.

it just boils down to when one thinks the life begins. which can't usually be debated. just a matter of belief really.. unless you get all scientific. but those "facts" are easily contradicted with "facts" from the "other" side.

as for our borders.

alex's plan represents my beliefs pretty well.

can't wait to put them into action. (early 2k17)

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
the abortion issue certainly doesn't belong in this thread.




on this thread... i agree... but on these boards why the hell should it not?





rock

[Choppaface]

Originally posted by krossfyter
on this thread... i agree... but on these boards why the hell should it not?


it's one of the most subjective issues of our time. discussions usually boil down to either people getting mad at each other and throwing mud, or people respecting each other's opinions without any progress. perhaps it might be good for people to vent, but likely the discussion will get ugly given the quality of the political discussions

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by Choppaface


it's one of the most subjective issues of our time. discussions usually boil down to either people getting mad at each other and throwing mud, or people respecting each other's opinions without any progress. perhaps it might be good for people to vent, but likely the discussion will get ugly given the quality of the political discussions


alright. but isnt this the way most political threads go in the first place? perhaps you are saying out of those political threads... the abortion issue is the single most controversial issue.... if so then... i understand.

[3rdpath]

there is something you can do if you don't like the way your tax dollars are being spent....though few people do it.

i suggest you watch the documentary "An Act of Conscience". it documents the choices and consequences of a family protesting their tax dollars going to the war machine. they choose to pay their tax dollars directly to the social causes they consider most important and endure/overcome the wrath of the irs in the process.

i truly admire people willing to give up everything for their beliefs...now THATS the american spirit.

[wdlove]

On point, we need to vigorously protect our borders. There are ~5,000 illegal aliens entering this country each day. Its devestating the economy in our border states. Emergency rooms are overcrowded. It hurts the education of resident children.

http://www.fairus.org/html/04113604.htm

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b30c0535a05.htm

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by wdlove
On point, we need to vigorously protect our borders. There are ~5,000 illegal aliens entering this country each day. Its devestating the economy in our border states. Emergency rooms are overcrowded. It hurts the education of resident children.

http://www.fairus.org/html/04113604.htm

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b30c0535a05.htm


yes those are some of the negatives.


are you aware of the positives?

but the questions are ...can we or should we
trade in the positves for our protection?

is it worth it?



i think this is a fair assesment of the situation... breaking it down to its most common denominator.... if i have forgoten anything or if anyone would like to correct it or tell me that im not looking at the situation right... please feel free to tell me.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by mkubal

On a side note, yes, Christianity has its fair share of extremists too. But at worst they knock on your door to try to get you to join their cult and at best they commit mass suicides (making sure to only kill themselves, not innocent people from another country). And yes I realize that a good many people have been killed in wars in the name of a christian god, but christianity has grown out of that and it is no longer.

Matt

Never forget the Crusades. That killed way more people then the the terrorists on 9/11. What would you call the people involved?

[Choppaface]

Originally posted by wdlove
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b30c0535a05.htm

this page is more like propoganda than evidence... a source that uses arguments in its presentation of "truth" is not very convincing.... it's got some useful data though

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by MacBandit


Never forget the Crusades. That killed way more people then the the terrorists on 9/11. What would you call the people involved?

Honestly, the men that carried out the Crusades were no better than the scum that attacked us on 9/11.

We just don't get it, God never wanted us to ever kill in his name. Sad when you really think how badly modern religion, and pre-modern religion has missed the message of the teachings.

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by MacBandit


Never forget the Crusades. That killed way more people then the the terrorists on 9/11. What would you call the people involved?

yes... the cursades were terrible and they never should happen again.


the difference between fundamentalism islam and fundamentalism christianity is that

in fundie islam violence = good

in fundie christianity violence = bad

[Backtothemac]

Well put Krossfyter! well put. It seems that Christians have paid the price for the crusades, but yet radical Islam is rewarded for its violence.

[jelloshotsrule]

Originally posted by Backtothemac
Well put Krossfyter! well put. It seems that Christians have paid the price for the crusades, but yet radical Islam is rewarded for its violence.

it's only rewarded by other radical muslims...

not by islam as a whole

[BenderBot1138]

Well, I don't think this is feasable. Between the Secret underground Canadian Tunnels, the nightly clandestine border crossing of Canadian Senior Citizens trying to cross so they can get to Disneyland, and the Fish trying to sneek on shore, I can't understand how we'll do this.

Everyone knows that those unruly Canadians will ruin our way of life if we don't post a guard every ten feet across the border of Canada. And if one more person from Mexico comes to the US to pick our corn and clean our toilets for half of minimum wage, I'm going to have an embolism.

But I'm far more worried about the Mackrels and Cod, and everyone's seen Jaws! The last thing I want is a Great White sneeking into our Land of the Free.

Better yet, we should not only send border guards to guard our stuff - you know - our stuff - but we should send them with rocket propelled Napalm guns... or even Nuclear Weapons as a deterent. Nobody will challenge border guards with Nuclear Weapons I'll bet!!!

:mad:

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by BenderBot1138
Well, I don't think this is feasable. Between the Secret underground Canadian Tunnels, the nightly clandestine border crossing of Canadian Senior Citizens trying to cross so they can get to Disneyland, and the Fish trying to sneek on shore, I can't understand how we'll do this.

Everyone knows that those unruly Canadians will ruin our way of life if we don't post a guard every ten feet across the border of Canada. And if one more person from Mexico comes to the US to pick our corn and clean our toilets for half of minimum wage, I'm going to have an embolism.

But I'm far more worried about the Mackrels and Cod, and everyone's seen Jaws! The last thing I want is a Great White sneeking into our Land of the Free.

Better yet, we should not only send border guards to guard our stuff - you know - our stuff - but we should send them with rocket propelled Napalm guns... or even Nuclear Weapons as a deterent. Nobody will challenge border guards with Nuclear Weapons I'll bet!!!

:mad: What's so great about this post is that B2tm and Ovi are going to see it and go, "Brilliant! My thoughts exactly!" :D

[Choppaface]

this reminds me, weren't there tons of elderly in the US going to canada to buy their prescription drugs for ultra cheap?

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by BenderBot1138
Well, I don't think this is feasable. Between the Secret underground Canadian Tunnels, the nightly clandestine border crossing of Canadian Senior Citizens trying to cross so they can get to Disneyland, and the Fish trying to sneek on shore, I can't understand how we'll do this.

Everyone knows that those unruly Canadians will ruin our way of life if we don't post a guard every ten feet across the border of Canada. And if one more person from Mexico comes to the US to pick our corn and clean our toilets for half of minimum wage, I'm going to have an embolism.

But I'm far more worried about the Mackrels and Cod, and everyone's seen Jaws! The last thing I want is a Great White sneeking into our Land of the Free.

Better yet, we should not only send border guards to guard our stuff - you know - our stuff - but we should send them with rocket propelled Napalm guns... or even Nuclear Weapons as a deterent. Nobody will challenge border guards with Nuclear Weapons I'll bet!!!

:mad:



you cant be serious.

[diorio]

I believe that more immigrants should legally be allowed to enter. As far as illegal immigration is concerned I can't say I blame those trying to cross. I lucked out and my great grandparents came 100 years ago when it was legal. Should these people living in third world countries be denied the freedoms that every one of us has? Every American immigrated somewhere between 1500-present, unless their a Native American. Most came around the turn of the 1900's. Should we be as hypocritical as to say, **** the dirty third worlders, when most of us are decendents of dirty third worlders who immigrated to this country?

[MyLeftNut]

Dont mean to pick on you here but:

MacBandit wrote:

As if we have anyway to fix other peoples problems. We haven't even fixed our own yet. We need to take care of America first and help others later.

Um...you guys spend almost a trillion dollars on defence every year...so why dont you get on with it!

Oh, dont tell me you need that money for defence. You guys still have only 20,000 nuclear weapons. Honestly...whos going to attack you again?

I agree...you should probably stay out of other peoples problems..let them take out centuries of rage on each other not on you.

HOWEVER MacBandit you are dead on right when you say America should fix its own problems (and the west in general) first. How about this:

Stop buying gas guzzling SUVs (I think you call them) that continue our lazy way of life and our dependance on oil (the middle east) and work on pressuring your government to push new technolgies and....ooops, I'm sorry, I forgot you guys dont vote...couldnt be bothered with the choices youve got. Mmmm, well I guess that just gives them a mandate to do whatever they like with their fat cat business friends. Funny that, until you guys vote a minority leader in, your government will never understand what its like to be on the other side and thus never be able to resolve effectively the politics of countries in crisis.

America is supposed to be the leader of the free world. So lead for christ's sake. Use intelligence instead of brute force...this isnt the 1900s anymore.

mmmm waiting for flames to arrive hehehe

[krossfyter]

ummm are those generalizations you are making myleftnut?

[idkew]

Originally posted by drastik


And I suppose that you are a native american? Never had family immigrate to this country?

PS. My fiance is from Singapore, she is a legal alien and will soon have a green card that allows her permanent residence without her having to give up her Singaporean citizenship.

And I'm thrilled about it.

there is no such this as a NATIVE american. every homo sapien (spelling?) migrated / immigrated here. remember the bering straight land bridge? humans came from the east, not the west. basically, the way i see it, there is virtually no such thing as native. you can be ethnically something or another, but not natively.

while the people we call native american or indian were here before the white man, they were not the first. the oldest skull found in america is caucasoid in nature and related most closely to the "native" japanese people (not the japanese people you think of, these were hairy, more "white" looking people than modern Japanese. there are maybe 100 pure bloods left), not to native americans.

therefore, on that argument, there should be immigration allowed, but it must be controlled. we can not let people like those hijackers get on american soil. we can not let people illegally immigrate and not pay taxes but reap government benefits like free schooling, medical care... if it takes troops to do this, so be it.

my 2¢

[MyLeftNut]

Anyone got any better suggestions...?

Maybe there are some generalisations in my argument but the truth hurts....deal with it....

BTW in regard to my own country...

NO hoWARd

(John Howard is the name of our Prime Minister)

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by MyLeftNut
Anyone got any better suggestions...?

Maybe there are some generalisations in my argument but the truth hurts....deal with it....
(John Howard is the name of our Prime Minister)


it doesnt hurt and i can deal with it.


its just not good to paint with a broad stroke in such matters thats all.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by krossfyter



it doesnt hurt and i can deal with it.


its just not good to paint with a broad stroke in such matters thats all.


I happen to agree with MyLeftNut. That is one strange sentence but you get the gist.