Is it time to end US asylum?

[pismoe]

i hope so but repelling these invaders will take force which i'd like to see but i don't think that we will see force used . Course Military and B.P. may organize the invaders into straight and polite lines so as to be able to do paperwork and issue permission slip for entry to the USA Claudette . --------------------- I hope that you are correct but we will see what happens Claudette .

 

[Godboy]

Ok. So when the Afghan interpreter for the US military needs to flee because he helped US soildiers and now has a taliban bounty on his head , he’s screwed? Sorry buddy, should’ve helped the Americans !

No, his asylum papers will quickly go through, since he helped the US. See how easy that is?

 

[Timmy]

Ok. So when the Afghan interpreter for the US military needs to flee because he helped US soildiers and now has a taliban bounty on his head , he’s screwed? Sorry buddy, should’ve helped the Americans !

No, his asylum papers will quickly go through, since he helped the US. See how easy that is?

No. You’ve ended asylum . Remember?

 

[bendog]

Ok. So when the Afghan interpreter for the US military needs to flee because he helped US soildiers and now has a taliban bounty on his head , he’s screwed? Sorry buddy, should’ve helped the Americans !

No, his asylum papers will quickly go through, since he helped the US. See how easy that is?

No. You’ve ended asylum . Remember?

How long has the interpreter been waiting? (just curious. There have been repeated stories of our abandoning these guys) And in general, I don't see why we have any duty to take in refugees. But for people who helped us ... let em in. Pronto(-:

 

[danielpalos]

The only rights they have are the ones we give them when it applies to this country.

Hope Trump does write that executive order and the military is on the border to meet these invaders.

only "moochers who are too cheap to pay their tax way, say that."

 

[Hum Dinger]

I believe that all who espouse American values (i.e. democracy, inalienable human rights, equality and liberty) should be considered Americans and welcomed to this country.

All those who do not espouse all those values should be considered Un-American and

Yes, obviously I was talking about the principal of the prime directive from Star Trek.

Whatever condition these countries may be in before, we become responsible once we intervene.

For eternity?

No, but at least for several generations.

That's ridiculous. You Blame America First people will keep on inviting these people here until there are enough of them to ruin this country. Then where are we all to go? There is only one America. Once you ruin this place, there is no other America to move to.

Yes, the way the Irish 'ruined' America, then the way the Italians 'Ruined' America, and the way the Jews 'ruined' America, and the way the Asians 'ruined' America, and the way the blacks 'ruined' America....

Is that the kind of 'ruined America' that you mean?

We had 100 million less people here when those immigrants came to the US. We have close to 350 million now. The world has a population of 7.5 billion people. How many of those 7.5 billion people do you want to let in?

Is this what America should look like in your world?

View attachment 225198

How about if we just let in the good looking people?

 

[Hum Dinger]

Basically we're victims of our own bad policies. In a way it's like what happened in Afghaniastan - in the 1970 & 1980s we intervened, changed the course of that country's history, then ignored what happened after. The result was that Afghanistan degenerated into a Taliban shithole and a terrorist haven.

Now the very same central American countries that we intervened in in the 1980s have developed into economic disasters for a huge number of their people. Their government doesn't give a shit about them, there's massive corruption and brutal crime. We ignored what happened in these countries post 1980s intervention and now we're paying for it by this mass migration from these countries - what goes around comes around.

In 'Star Trek' they have the concept of the 'Prime Directive' - a standing order not to interfere in the progress of foreign worlds. If you interfer then you are responsible for everything that happens afterward.

Perhaps there is a great amount of wisdom in the notion of the 'Prime Directive'.

Did you really just quote star trek?

Those countries have been shitholes long before we came around.

Yes, obviously I was talking about the principal of the prime directive from Star Trek.

Whatever condition these countries may be in before, we become responsible once we intervene.

So they were world leaders before we came along?

It isn't any of our business what they were before 'we came along'.

 

[pismoe]

Ok. So when the Afghan interpreter for the US military needs to flee because he helped US soildiers and now has a taliban bounty on his head , he’s screwed? Sorry buddy, should’ve helped the Americans !

No, his asylum papers will quickly go through, since he helped the US. See how easy that is?

No. You’ve ended asylum . Remember?

How long has the interpreter been waiting? (just curious. There have been repeated stories of our abandoning these guys) And in general, I don't see why we have any duty to take in refugees. But for people who helped us ... let em in. Pronto(-:

----------------------------------------- what good are TRAITORS BenDog ??

 

[Hum Dinger]

I believe that all who espouse American values (i.e. democracy, inalienable human rights, equality and liberty) should be considered Americans and welcomed to this country.

All those who do not espouse all those values should be considered Un-American and

Yes, obviously I was talking about the principal of the prime directive from Star Trek.

Whatever condition these countries may be in before, we become responsible once we intervene.

For eternity?

No, but at least for several generations.

That's ridiculous. You Blame America First people will keep on inviting these people here until there are enough of them to ruin this country. Then where are we all to go? There is only one America. Once you ruin this place, there is no other America to move to.

Yes, the way the Irish 'ruined' America, then the way the Italians 'Ruined' America, and the way the Jews 'ruined' America, and the way the Asians 'ruined' America, and the way the blacks 'ruined' America....

Is that the kind of 'ruined America' that you mean?

There's a big difference between the two.
Are you man enough to admit those differences?

Yes there's a HUGE difference!

Unlike other minorities, a very large part of the U.S. - Florida, Puerto Rico, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and California were all Hispanic long before they became part of the U.S. - therefore having an increase in the number of Hispanic people in the U.S. doesn't change anything culturally.

 

[pismoe]

the TRAITOR Interpreter worked for American money BenDog .

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Basically we're victims of our own bad policies. In a way it's like what happened in Afghaniastan - in the 1970 & 1980s we intervened, changed the course of that country's history, then ignored what happened after. The result was that Afghanistan degenerated into a Taliban shithole and a terrorist haven.

Now the very same central American countries that we intervened in in the 1980s have developed into economic disasters for a huge number of their people. Their government doesn't give a shit about them, there's massive corruption and brutal crime. We ignored what happened in these countries post 1980s intervention and now we're paying for it by this mass migration from these countries - what goes around comes around.

In 'Star Trek' they have the concept of the 'Prime Directive' - a standing order not to interfere in the progress of foreign worlds. If you interfer then you are responsible for everything that happens afterward.

Perhaps there is a great amount of wisdom in the notion of the 'Prime Directive'.

Did you really just quote star trek?

Those countries have been shitholes long before we came around.

Yes, obviously I was talking about the principal of the prime directive from Star Trek.

Whatever condition these countries may be in before, we become responsible once we intervene.

So they were world leaders before we came along?

It isn't any of our business what they were before 'we came along'.

And it's not our fault they're still third world shitholes.
Imagine how bad they'd be without our hundreds of millions in aid.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I believe that all who espouse American values (i.e. democracy, inalienable human rights, equality and liberty) should be considered Americans and welcomed to this country.

All those who do not espouse all those values should be considered Un-American and

For eternity?

No, but at least for several generations.

That's ridiculous. You Blame America First people will keep on inviting these people here until there are enough of them to ruin this country. Then where are we all to go? There is only one America. Once you ruin this place, there is no other America to move to.

Yes, the way the Irish 'ruined' America, then the way the Italians 'Ruined' America, and the way the Jews 'ruined' America, and the way the Asians 'ruined' America, and the way the blacks 'ruined' America....

Is that the kind of 'ruined America' that you mean?

There's a big difference between the two.
Are you man enough to admit those differences?

Yes there's a HUGE difference!

Unlike other minorities, a very large part of the U.S. - Florida, Puerto Rico, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and California were all Hispanic long before they became part of the U.S. - therefore having an increase in the number of Hispanic people in the U.S. doesn't change anything culturally.

Do you live in the West or Southwest?
As someone who does there's a huge difference between now and back in the eighties.
You obviously dont know shit about the influx of mexicans...
MAP: See how Houston's demographics have changed since 1980

 

[Godboy]

Ok. So when the Afghan interpreter for the US military needs to flee because he helped US soildiers and now has a taliban bounty on his head , he’s screwed? Sorry buddy, should’ve helped the Americans !

No, his asylum papers will quickly go through, since he helped the US. See how easy that is?

No. You’ve ended asylum . Remember?

Nope, not for him. HE gets in because he did something for us.

 

[pismoe]

Ok. So when the Afghan interpreter for the US military needs to flee because he helped US soildiers and now has a taliban bounty on his head , he’s screwed? Sorry buddy, should’ve helped the Americans !

No, his asylum papers will quickly go through, since he helped the US. See how easy that is?

No. You’ve ended asylum . Remember?

Nope, not for him. HE gets in because he did something for us.

----------------------------------------------- INTERPRETER , he sounds like a traitor to his own people and did his traitorous work for American money . I wonder , how much money will it take to make him a traitor to the USA Godboy .

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

And as usual, it's divided on political lines. On the left, the tears flow over children being separated from their so-called parents, and on the right, tough love is the only way to have a long lasting solution.

But the solution to both of our concerns is just to end asylum in the US. Yes, we tried to be nice, we tried to be caring, but our empathy is now being used as a tool against us.

Simple solutions to complex problems is the winger way, and of course, it never works. 'We' never tried to be nice nor caring nor empathetic to the issue of immigration. 'We' used the hammer of ICE, declaring all immigrants, legal and illegal, nails and rounded them up like cattle into various makeshift deportation centers. Republicans seem to have no plan beyond that. How is ending asylum any different than the path currently being followed by Republicans?

After getting rid of asylum, no more will these children be our concern. We won't have to be criticized about separation of children and adults because they won't be in this country.

We know wingers don't like criticism. Tough shit for them.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Simple solutions to complex problems is the winger way, and of course, it never works. 'We' never tried to be nice nor caring nor empathetic to the issue of immigration. 'We' used the hammer of ICE, declaring all immigrants, legal and illegal, nails and rounded them up like cattle into various makeshift deportation centers. Republicans seem to have no plan beyond that. How is ending asylum any different than the path currently being followed by Republicans?

We have been more than nice, that is unless you can tell me of any other country in the world that allows a million new foreigners a year to become citizens in their country. That's not to mention work permits, student VISA"s, and various other ways we allow people into our country. What other country is more empathetic than the US?

If we abolished asylum, what wouldn't work? They wouldn't be allowed here period. They could not come marching over and claiming fake asylum as they are today. If they did come, they would have to admit they came here to invade our sovereignty. We on the right know that's why they come here, but the left are brainwashed by their leaders. If we could prove to them we were right, maybe a few leftist will finally wake up and understand what this is really all about.

 

[pismoe]

And as usual, it's divided on political lines. On the left, the tears flow over children being separated from their so-called parents, and on the right, tough love is the only way to have a long lasting solution.

But the solution to both of our concerns is just to end asylum in the US. Yes, we tried to be nice, we tried to be caring, but our empathy is now being used as a tool against us.

Simple solutions to complex problems is the winger way, and of course, it never works. 'We' never tried to be nice nor caring nor empathetic to the issue of immigration. 'We' used the hammer of ICE, declaring all immigrants, legal and illegal, nails and rounded them up like cattle into various makeshift deportation centers. Republicans seem to have no plan beyond that. How is ending asylum any different than the path currently being followed by Republicans?

After getting rid of asylum, no more will these children be our concern. We won't have to be criticized about separation of children and adults because they won't be in this country.

We know wingers don't like criticism. Tough shit for them.

----------------------------- be nice , well USA is nice but i see no reason to be nice . USA has Sovereignty when and if we ever decide to enforce it . None of these third worlders has a RIGHT to come to the USA TTWeed .

 

[Staidhup]

Just for a second lets return to an earlier statement regarding those that directly aide American servicemen in the field, the question is should they receive asylum, no, should they receive unabridged entrance into the United States with a direct path toward citizenship, yes. The fundamental difference remains in that asylum is claimed by one that has or is in the process of escaping tyranny while the other is for one supporting our efforts overseas. The argument can be and is frequently made by anyone entering the United States, from a second tier or third world country, that they are fleeing political, or economic tyranny. So the question remains why do not the later remain in their country and fight injustice? Go figure.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Just for a second lets return to an earlier statement regarding those that directly aide American servicemen in the field, the question is should they receive asylum, no, should they receive unabridged entrance into the United States with a direct path toward citizenship, yes. The fundamental difference remains in that asylum is claimed by one that has or is in the process of escaping tyranny while the other is for one supporting our efforts overseas. The argument can be and is frequently made by anyone entering the United States, from a second tier or third world country, that they are fleeing political, or economic tyranny. So the question remains why do not the later remain in their country and fight injustice? Go figure.

This new batch of vagrants are not applicable for asylum anyway. First off, asylum is for people who get to the US as first country of escape. These people already entered Mexico which makes them disqualified for US asylum. Secondly, they were all offered Mexican asylum which they refused. That's a strict no-no in US law.

So what they are doing is coming here to invade our country and break our laws for entry. They are not refugees, and they are not asylum seekers. They are invaders.

 

[Staidhup]

Agree, so again why is it they they are not willing to demand, fight for change, within their own country? From from my own point of view cowards, quick to abandon, run, when in fact they have the power to force change. Are these the people we want, can ,or intrust to preserve the fundamental tenets of our freedom? I think not. For one minute can you envision what changes could and should be made to change the lives of future generations in their country if they only had the courage to fight for change and personal freedom? why is it they run?