CDZ What should we do?

[Picaro]

The real problem is America is literally disneyland compared to mexico

their country can't suck enough for a multitude of reasons

they need to clean up their act

S~

A lot of them dont come from Mexico.

they nearly all come through Mexico first, so this isn't a point. Mexico has immigration laws, and if they're escorting these illegals north and dumping them on the U.S. they're liable to take them back and pay us for their own illegal dumping.

 

[Coyote]

The real problem is America is literally disneyland compared to mexico

their country can't suck enough for a multitude of reasons

they need to clean up their act

S~

A lot of them dont come from Mexico.

they nearly all come through Mexico first, so this isn't a point. Mexico has immigration laws, and if they're escorting these illegals north and dumping them on the U.S. they're liable to take them back and pay us for their own illegal dumping.

Under what law? Are we stopping people from leaving the US and going inti Mexico?

 

[sparky]

methinks political asylum laws coyote

~S~

 

[Pogo]

I can't help but feel great anger towards the parents who chose to send their children thousands of miles north from Central America to the southern border, alone.

Hiya TK. So I wanted to ask about this premise -- where do you get this idea that parents are sending their children thousands of miles alone?

I just want to figure out where these stories get started.

Well, that comes from the statements made by others here and facts I've read elsewhere on the internet that a lot of these children come from Central America... which is 1,505 miles from our border if you go from there to Guatemala. Not to mention the DHS-SEC said that 10,000 children came here unaccompanied.

But like I said, I was/still am conflicted about this issue. I took one side and I didn't like what came out of my head, and I took the other and I didn't like it either.

I wasn't asking about the geography. I know that part. In fact you should see my ridiculous collection of maps.

I'm asking where you get the idea that "parents are sending their children". And "alone".

If the kids were being "sent" --- how would they get separated here?

I am envious and want to see your ridiculous collection of maps.

It's astounding. Want a map of Chicago from 1959? Got it.
Poland. A fucking road map of Poland.

No cartographer stash is safe around me.

 

[Pogo]

I can't help but feel great anger towards the parents who chose to send their children thousands of miles north from Central America to the southern border, alone.

Hiya TK. So I wanted to ask about this premise -- where do you get this idea that parents are sending their children thousands of miles alone?

I just want to figure out where these stories get started.

Well, that comes from the statements made by others here and facts I've read elsewhere on the internet that a lot of these children come from Central America... which is 1,505 miles from our border if you go from there to Guatemala. Not to mention the DHS-SEC said that 10,000 children came here unaccompanied.

But like I said, I was/still am conflicted about this issue. I took one side and I didn't like what came out of my head, and I took the other and I didn't like it either.

I wasn't asking about the geography. I know that part. In fact you should see my ridiculous collection of maps.

I'm asking where you get the idea that "parents are sending their children". And "alone".

If the kids were being "sent" --- how would they get separated here?

That's it! And in one fell swoop you have defeated the liberal narrative about family separation.

Nah, if you were paying attention to the briefing the DHS gave, she pointed out that 10,000 of these children were unaccompanied when they arrived at the border. Who sent them there?

The other 2000 were in fact separated as she mentioned.

I don't know about any "narratives" or briefing. I've been travelling.

But the question is the verb "sent". Just because somebody shows up somewhere -- doesn't mean somebody "sent" them. So I question whether your whole basis of contempt is based on an ass-sumption, or somebody's suggestion.

 

[Olde Europe]

Here's some information on the Flores Settlement that stands at the center of Trump's current anti-immigrant kids atrocities. As long as it stands, detention (with their parents) is limited to 20 days. If the parents are being detained longer, it mandates that children leave, hence they are being separated. That is also why Trump's EO is basically meaningless, since he himself caused the atrocity with his "zero tolerance" policy, which he could end with a phone call. Also, the kids currently separated are also not addressed, and will not be reunited with their parents, provided they can find them.

Here's information on immigrant arrivals during the surge of "unaccompanied alien children" during the surge 2014 - 2016. Turns out the overwhelming majority of UACs arriving at U.S. shores came from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala.

As it happens, these are also the three countries the U.S., pursuant its War on Drugs, turned into battlegrounds, actually among the most murderous, dangerous countries that are not actually at war.

The three countries in Central America that comprise the “Northern Triangle” – Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras – are the transshipment route for 80 percent of the illegal cocaine entering the U.S. It is no accident that the three countries are also the starting point each year for tens of thousands of migrants to the country.

The U.S. considers both the drugs and the immigration threats to national security. Washington sees the area as a geopolitical unit and has militarized its response to the drug trade in the form of the Central American Regional Security Initiative (CARSI).

The trouble with this policy is that these countries’ populations consider the military part of the problem. Along with poverty, violence and a lack of accountability among the military and police are the principal drivers of mass migration to the U.S. The Obama administration has attempted to deal with the economic and social drivers of migration through an initiative called the Alliance for Prosperity, but Congress has been slow to fund the project.​

What happened and still happens there is that gangs and drug smuggling cartels, flush with (mostly) American drug money and guns, are vying with nation states for power, that is, in case they aren't buying relevant portions thereof outright. While they are battling among themselves and state efforts, such as they are, to reign them in, the populations, already in dire straits after decades of U.S. Cold War meddling, economic stagnation and mismanagement and corruption, see their youth forcibly recruited into gangs, or kidnapped, and often sold as sex slaves. That, by and large, is the reason why parents were so desperate to get their kids, even unaccompanied, to safety through Mexico into the U.S.

So, the War on Drugs, largely funded by the U.S., against drug lords, also largely funded by the U.S., creates a refugee crisis. Of course, nativists demand these countries pay up for it.

So, What should we do? End the War on Drugs would be a fine first step. At least, wage it somewhat intelligently so that it doesn't generate hundreds of billions of dollars in revenues for the cartels, with attendant consequences we get to observe in Central America, and a tiny portion thereof arriving at U.S. shores.

 

[BlackSand]

Here's some information on the Flores Settlement that stands at the center of Trump's current anti-immigrant kids atrocities. As long as it stands, detention (with their parents) is limited to 20 days. If the parents are being detained longer, it mandates that children leave, hence they are being separated. That is also why Trump's EO is basically meaningless, since he himself caused the atrocity with his "zero tolerance" policy, which he could end with a phone call. Also, the kids currently separated are also not addressed, and will not be reunited with their parents, provided they can find them.

Here's information on immigrant arrivals during the surge of "unaccompanied alien children" during the surge 2014 - 2016. Turns out the overwhelming majority of UACs arriving at U.S. shores came from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala.

As it happens, these are also the three countries the U.S., pursuant its War on Drugs, turned into battlegrounds, actually among the most murderous, dangerous countries that are not actually at war.

The three countries in Central America that comprise the “Northern Triangle” – Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras – are the transshipment route for 80 percent of the illegal cocaine entering the U.S. It is no accident that the three countries are also the starting point each year for tens of thousands of migrants to the country.

The U.S. considers both the drugs and the immigration threats to national security. Washington sees the area as a geopolitical unit and has militarized its response to the drug trade in the form of the Central American Regional Security Initiative (CARSI).

The trouble with this policy is that these countries’ populations consider the military part of the problem. Along with poverty, violence and a lack of accountability among the military and police are the principal drivers of mass migration to the U.S. The Obama administration has attempted to deal with the economic and social drivers of migration through an initiative called the Alliance for Prosperity, but Congress has been slow to fund the project.​

What happened and still happens there is that gangs and drug smuggling cartels, flush with (mostly) American drug money and guns, are vying with nation states for power, that is, in case they aren't buying relevant portions thereof outright. While they are battling among themselves and state efforts, such as they are, to reign them in, the populations, already in dire straits after decades of U.S. Cold War meddling, economic stagnation and mismanagement and corruption, see their youth forcibly recruited into gangs, or kidnapped, and often sold as sex slaves. That, by and large, is the reason why parents were so desperate to get their kids, even unaccompanied, to safety through Mexico into the U.S.

So, the War on Drugs, largely funded by the U.S., against drug lords, also largely funded by the U.S., creates a refugee crisis. Of course, nativists demand these countries pay up for it.

So, What should we do? End the War on Drugs would be a fine first step. At least, wage it somewhat intelligently so that it doesn't generate hundreds of billions of dollars in revenues for the cartels, with attendant consequences we get to observe in Central America, and a tiny portion thereof arriving at U.S. shores.

So ... To fix the problem we should let foreign nationals dictate our domestic policy just by showing up at the border ... And make drugs legal ...

.​

 

[Olde Europe]

So ... To fix the problem we should let foreign nationals dictate our domestic policy just by showing up at the border ...

Right. How come I did not see that?

BTW, how vociferously were you criticizing Trump's wall as an instance of letting "foreign nationals dictate our domestic policy just by showing up at the border"? Have a link or two?

 

[Picaro]

The real problem is America is literally disneyland compared to mexico

their country can't suck enough for a multitude of reasons

they need to clean up their act

S~

A lot of them dont come from Mexico.

they nearly all come through Mexico first, so this isn't a point. Mexico has immigration laws, and if they're escorting these illegals north and dumping them on the U.S. they're liable to take them back and pay us for their own illegal dumping.

Under what law? Are we stopping people from leaving the US and going inti Mexico?

You think there are no Mexican Border guards??? And why would that even matter??? You ever been to a border crossing, Mexican or Canadian?

 

[Picaro]

Here's some information on the Flores Settlement that stands at the center of Trump's current anti-immigrant kids atrocities. As long as it stands, detention (with their parents) is limited to 20 days. If the parents are being detained longer, it mandates that children leave, hence they are being separated. That is also why Trump's EO is basically meaningless, since he himself caused the atrocity with his "zero tolerance" policy, which he could end with a phone call. Also, the kids currently separated are also not addressed, and will not be reunited with their parents, provided they can find them.

Here's information on immigrant arrivals during the surge of "unaccompanied alien children" during the surge 2014 - 2016. Turns out the overwhelming majority of UACs arriving at U.S. shores came from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala.

As it happens, these are also the three countries the U.S., pursuant its War on Drugs, turned into battlegrounds, actually among the most murderous, dangerous countries that are not actually at war.

The three countries in Central America that comprise the “Northern Triangle” – Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras – are the transshipment route for 80 percent of the illegal cocaine entering the U.S. It is no accident that the three countries are also the starting point each year for tens of thousands of migrants to the country.

The U.S. considers both the drugs and the immigration threats to national security. Washington sees the area as a geopolitical unit and has militarized its response to the drug trade in the form of the Central American Regional Security Initiative (CARSI).

The trouble with this policy is that these countries’ populations consider the military part of the problem. Along with poverty, violence and a lack of accountability among the military and police are the principal drivers of mass migration to the U.S. The Obama administration has attempted to deal with the economic and social drivers of migration through an initiative called the Alliance for Prosperity, but Congress has been slow to fund the project.​

What happened and still happens there is that gangs and drug smuggling cartels, flush with (mostly) American drug money and guns, are vying with nation states for power, that is, in case they aren't buying relevant portions thereof outright. While they are battling among themselves and state efforts, such as they are, to reign them in, the populations, already in dire straits after decades of U.S. Cold War meddling, economic stagnation and mismanagement and corruption, see their youth forcibly recruited into gangs, or kidnapped, and often sold as sex slaves. That, by and large, is the reason why parents were so desperate to get their kids, even unaccompanied, to safety through Mexico into the U.S.

So, the War on Drugs, largely funded by the U.S., against drug lords, also largely funded by the U.S., creates a refugee crisis. Of course, nativists demand these countries pay up for it.

So, What should we do? End the War on Drugs would be a fine first step. At least, wage it somewhat intelligently so that it doesn't generate hundreds of billions of dollars in revenues for the cartels, with attendant consequences we get to observe in Central America, and a tiny portion thereof arriving at U.S. shores.

Actually drug cartels and their customers turned those countries into 'battlegrounds', not the U.S.; you don't even know enough to get the obvious facts straight, much less the ability to address the problems. Yes, that's right, all those dope addled little Burb brats and baggy pants wearing gangster thuggz are entirely responsible for every single death, every last one of them, along with every one of their customers. Congratulations.

Oh yeah, and it turns out 'legalization' isn't doing squat to get the criminals out of the pot business, either, so they should shove a big bag of that up their butts and light it, too. What you should be doing, if you were actually really all that 'concerned' about it, is going down there yourselves and taking care of them, but we know you're all weak, stupid, and unprincipled, so nobody is holding their breaths waiting on your types to 'fix' anything; you see your jobs as sitting out in the Burbs and sniveling about how 'wrong' everybody else is and of course ignoring your own complicity in the criminal; markets..

 

[TheGreenHornet]

The real problem is America is literally disneyland compared to mexico

their country can't suck enough for a multitude of reasons

they need to clean up their act

S~

A lot of them dont come from Mexico.

they nearly all come through Mexico first, so this isn't a point. Mexico has immigration laws, and if they're escorting these illegals north and dumping them on the U.S. they're liable to take them back and pay us for their own illegal dumping.

Under what law? Are we stopping people from leaving the US and going inti Mexico?

There is a big difference between visiting a country and trying to sneak in to become a resident. BTW Mexico strictly enforces its southern border.

While many Mexican politicians including President Enrique Peña Nieto decry GOP presumptive nominee Donald Trump’s proposal for a border wall, the country deports nine in 10 Central American illegal migrants south of its own border.

Mexico Deports 9 Out Of 10 Illegal Central American Migrants

 

[TemplarKormac]

I can't help but feel great anger towards the parents who chose to send their children thousands of miles north from Central America to the southern border, alone.

Hiya TK. So I wanted to ask about this premise -- where do you get this idea that parents are sending their children thousands of miles alone?

I just want to figure out where these stories get started.

Well, that comes from the statements made by others here and facts I've read elsewhere on the internet that a lot of these children come from Central America... which is 1,505 miles from our border if you go from there to Guatemala. Not to mention the DHS-SEC said that 10,000 children came here unaccompanied.

But like I said, I was/still am conflicted about this issue. I took one side and I didn't like what came out of my head, and I took the other and I didn't like it either.

I wasn't asking about the geography. I know that part. In fact you should see my ridiculous collection of maps.

I'm asking where you get the idea that "parents are sending their children". And "alone".

If the kids were being "sent" --- how would they get separated here?

That's it! And in one fell swoop you have defeated the liberal narrative about family separation.

Nah, if you were paying attention to the briefing the DHS gave, she pointed out that 10,000 of these children were unaccompanied when they arrived at the border. Who sent them there?

The other 2000 were in fact separated as she mentioned.

I don't know about any "narratives" or briefing. I've been travelling.

But the question is the verb "sent". Just because somebody shows up somewhere -- doesn't mean somebody "sent" them. So I question whether your whole basis of contempt is based on an ass-sumption, or somebody's suggestion.

Do you really think these children are mature enough to make these decisions on their own, Pogo?

 

[JoeMoma]

Here's some information on the Flores Settlement that stands at the center of Trump's current anti-immigrant kids atrocities. As long as it stands, detention (with their parents) is limited to 20 days. If the parents are being detained longer, it mandates that children leave, hence they are being separated. That is also why Trump's EO is basically meaningless, since he himself caused the atrocity with his "zero tolerance" policy, which he could end with a phone call. Also, the kids currently separated are also not addressed, and will not be reunited with their parents, provided they can find them.

Here's information on immigrant arrivals during the surge of "unaccompanied alien children" during the surge 2014 - 2016. Turns out the overwhelming majority of UACs arriving at U.S. shores came from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala.

As it happens, these are also the three countries the U.S., pursuant its War on Drugs, turned into battlegrounds, actually among the most murderous, dangerous countries that are not actually at war.

The three countries in Central America that comprise the “Northern Triangle” – Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras – are the transshipment route for 80 percent of the illegal cocaine entering the U.S. It is no accident that the three countries are also the starting point each year for tens of thousands of migrants to the country.

The U.S. considers both the drugs and the immigration threats to national security. Washington sees the area as a geopolitical unit and has militarized its response to the drug trade in the form of the Central American Regional Security Initiative (CARSI).

The trouble with this policy is that these countries’ populations consider the military part of the problem. Along with poverty, violence and a lack of accountability among the military and police are the principal drivers of mass migration to the U.S. The Obama administration has attempted to deal with the economic and social drivers of migration through an initiative called the Alliance for Prosperity, but Congress has been slow to fund the project.​

What happened and still happens there is that gangs and drug smuggling cartels, flush with (mostly) American drug money and guns, are vying with nation states for power, that is, in case they aren't buying relevant portions thereof outright. While they are battling among themselves and state efforts, such as they are, to reign them in, the populations, already in dire straits after decades of U.S. Cold War meddling, economic stagnation and mismanagement and corruption, see their youth forcibly recruited into gangs, or kidnapped, and often sold as sex slaves. That, by and large, is the reason why parents were so desperate to get their kids, even unaccompanied, to safety through Mexico into the U.S.

So, the War on Drugs, largely funded by the U.S., against drug lords, also largely funded by the U.S., creates a refugee crisis. Of course, nativists demand these countries pay up for it.

So, What should we do? End the War on Drugs would be a fine first step. At least, wage it somewhat intelligently so that it doesn't generate hundreds of billions of dollars in revenues for the cartels, with attendant consequences we get to observe in Central America, and a tiny portion thereof arriving at U.S. shores.

So ... To fix the problem we should let foreign nationals dictate our domestic policy just by showing up at the border ... And make drugs legal ...

.​

A child is an adult's ticket into the country it appears.

 

[TheGreenHornet]

Here's some information on the Flores Settlement that stands at the center of Trump's current anti-immigrant kids atrocities. As long as it stands, detention (with their parents) is limited to 20 days. If the parents are being detained longer, it mandates that children leave, hence they are being separated. That is also why Trump's EO is basically meaningless, since he himself caused the atrocity with his "zero tolerance" policy, which he could end with a phone call. Also, the kids currently separated are also not addressed, and will not be reunited with their parents, provided they can find them.

Here's information on immigrant arrivals during the surge of "unaccompanied alien children" during the surge 2014 - 2016. Turns out the overwhelming majority of UACs arriving at U.S. shores came from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala.

As it happens, these are also the three countries the U.S., pursuant its War on Drugs, turned into battlegrounds, actually among the most murderous, dangerous countries that are not actually at war.

The three countries in Central America that comprise the “Northern Triangle” – Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras – are the transshipment route for 80 percent of the illegal cocaine entering the U.S. It is no accident that the three countries are also the starting point each year for tens of thousands of migrants to the country.

The U.S. considers both the drugs and the immigration threats to national security. Washington sees the area as a geopolitical unit and has militarized its response to the drug trade in the form of the Central American Regional Security Initiative (CARSI).

The trouble with this policy is that these countries’ populations consider the military part of the problem. Along with poverty, violence and a lack of accountability among the military and police are the principal drivers of mass migration to the U.S. The Obama administration has attempted to deal with the economic and social drivers of migration through an initiative called the Alliance for Prosperity, but Congress has been slow to fund the project.​

What happened and still happens there is that gangs and drug smuggling cartels, flush with (mostly) American drug money and guns, are vying with nation states for power, that is, in case they aren't buying relevant portions thereof outright. While they are battling among themselves and state efforts, such as they are, to reign them in, the populations, already in dire straits after decades of U.S. Cold War meddling, economic stagnation and mismanagement and corruption, see their youth forcibly recruited into gangs, or kidnapped, and often sold as sex slaves. That, by and large, is the reason why parents were so desperate to get their kids, even unaccompanied, to safety through Mexico into the U.S.

So, the War on Drugs, largely funded by the U.S., against drug lords, also largely funded by the U.S., creates a refugee crisis. Of course, nativists demand these countries pay up for it.

So, What should we do? End the War on Drugs would be a fine first step. At least, wage it somewhat intelligently so that it doesn't generate hundreds of billions of dollars in revenues for the cartels, with attendant consequences we get to observe in Central America, and a tiny portion thereof arriving at U.S. shores.

So ... To fix the problem we should let foreign nationals dictate our domestic policy just by showing up at the border ... And make drugs legal ...

.​

A child is an adult's ticket into the country it appears.

The Democrats real policy on immigration boils down to two things.......the only immigrants they want are the ones they believe will vote democratic and they do not care how they get here. Thus to the democrats it is all about politics.

 

[BlackSand]

Right. How come I did not see that?

BTW, how vociferously were you criticizing Trump's wall as an instance of letting "foreign nationals dictate our domestic policy just by showing up at the border"? Have a link or two?

Establishing facilities to maintain our sovereignty and accommodating foreign nationals country shopping are not the same thing ...

.​

 

[Picaro]

The real problem is America is literally disneyland compared to mexico

their country can't suck enough for a multitude of reasons

they need to clean up their act

S~

A lot of them dont come from Mexico.

they nearly all come through Mexico first, so this isn't a point. Mexico has immigration laws, and if they're escorting these illegals north and dumping them on the U.S. they're liable to take them back and pay us for their own illegal dumping.

Under what law? Are we stopping people from leaving the US and going inti Mexico?

There is a big difference between visiting a country and trying to sneak in to become a resident. BTW Mexico strictly enforces its southern border.

While many Mexican politicians including President Enrique Peña Nieto decry GOP presumptive nominee Donald Trump’s proposal for a border wall, the country deports nine in 10 Central American illegal migrants south of its own border.

Mexico Deports 9 Out Of 10 Illegal Central American Migrants

Another myth is that these fake 'refugees' are 'desparately poor n stuff'. Yet they live and work in these supposed 'horror states' in dire poverty' but can come up with $5,000- $7,000 cash to pay the tour guides to get them to the border. A lot of American can't come up with that kind of cash, yet these alleged 'desperately poor refugees' can???? And some of them get caught several times and return.

Yeah right ... they're ' poor n stuff'.

 

[Olde Europe]

Right. How come I did not see that?

BTW, how vociferously were you criticizing Trump's wall as an instance of letting "foreign nationals dictate our domestic policy just by showing up at the border"? Have a link or two?

Establishing facilities to maintain our sovereignty and accommodating foreign nationals country shopping are not the same thing ...

Ah, of course, the old trope of sealing the border as a precondition for "sovereignty" (it isn't) is quite unlike that pejorative intended to diminish, belittle, and ultimately disappear, the migrants' plight, and, moreover, it also wasn't at issue. The issue was, however, whether or not any nation should ever suffer domestic policies dictated to them by foreign nationals. That, of course, happens quite frequently, such as in raising an army, lest them foreign nationals come with tanks, ships and jets, right? Anyway, I guess no derogatory remarks by you about letting "foreign nationals dictate our domestic policy just by showing up at the border" concerning Trump's wall have ever been made by you before, right? Even though, in this regard, it's the exact same thing.

Anyways...

 

[BlackSand]

Ah, of course, the old trope of sealing the border as a precondition for "sovereignty" (it isn't) is quite unlike that pejorative intended to diminish, belittle, and ultimately disappear, the migrants' plight, and, moreover, it also wasn't at issue. The issue was, however, whether or not any nation should ever suffer domestic policies dictated to them by foreign nationals. That, of course, happens quite frequently, such as in raising an army, lest them foreign nationals come with tanks, ships and jets, right? Anyway, I guess no derogatory remarks by you about letting "foreign nationals dictate our domestic policy just by showing up at the border" concerning Trump's wall have ever been made by you before, right? Even though, in this regard, it's the exact same thing.

Anyways...

Why come with ships, jets and tanks when you can accomplish the same with women and children?

.​

 

[Coyote]

Hiya TK. So I wanted to ask about this premise -- where do you get this idea that parents are sending their children thousands of miles alone?

I just want to figure out where these stories get started.

Well, that comes from the statements made by others here and facts I've read elsewhere on the internet that a lot of these children come from Central America... which is 1,505 miles from our border if you go from there to Guatemala. Not to mention the DHS-SEC said that 10,000 children came here unaccompanied.

But like I said, I was/still am conflicted about this issue. I took one side and I didn't like what came out of my head, and I took the other and I didn't like it either.

I wasn't asking about the geography. I know that part. In fact you should see my ridiculous collection of maps.

I'm asking where you get the idea that "parents are sending their children". And "alone".

If the kids were being "sent" --- how would they get separated here?

That's it! And in one fell swoop you have defeated the liberal narrative about family separation.

Nah, if you were paying attention to the briefing the DHS gave, she pointed out that 10,000 of these children were unaccompanied when they arrived at the border. Who sent them there?

The other 2000 were in fact separated as she mentioned.

I don't know about any "narratives" or briefing. I've been travelling.

But the question is the verb "sent". Just because somebody shows up somewhere -- doesn't mean somebody "sent" them. So I question whether your whole basis of contempt is based on an ass-sumption, or somebody's suggestion.

Do you really think these children are mature enough to make these decisions on their own, Pogo?

In many cases, children in those pars of the world don't have the luxery of a childhood. They may already havr dropped (or never gone) to school in order to support the family so I think they can make those decisions on their own.

 

[Picaro]

Well, that comes from the statements made by others here and facts I've read elsewhere on the internet that a lot of these children come from Central America... which is 1,505 miles from our border if you go from there to Guatemala. Not to mention the DHS-SEC said that 10,000 children came here unaccompanied.

But like I said, I was/still am conflicted about this issue. I took one side and I didn't like what came out of my head, and I took the other and I didn't like it either.

I wasn't asking about the geography. I know that part. In fact you should see my ridiculous collection of maps.

I'm asking where you get the idea that "parents are sending their children". And "alone".

If the kids were being "sent" --- how would they get separated here?

That's it! And in one fell swoop you have defeated the liberal narrative about family separation.

Nah, if you were paying attention to the briefing the DHS gave, she pointed out that 10,000 of these children were unaccompanied when they arrived at the border. Who sent them there?

The other 2000 were in fact separated as she mentioned.

I don't know about any "narratives" or briefing. I've been travelling.

But the question is the verb "sent". Just because somebody shows up somewhere -- doesn't mean somebody "sent" them. So I question whether your whole basis of contempt is based on an ass-sumption, or somebody's suggestion.

Do you really think these children are mature enough to make these decisions on their own, Pogo?

In many cases, children in those pars of the world don't have the luxery of a childhood. They may already havr dropped (or never gone) to school in order to support the family so I think they can make those decisions on their own.

never been to Latin America, except maybe to some tourist resort, have you?