Yeah, Them the dumb fuckers who are easily arrested because they queue up for deportation. Sure, do it because you will catch some easily, but most of them will cross while those idiots asking for asylum are being handcuffed. If I was in the caravan I would send a couple of dumb fucks into easy traps just so those border control people had something to do aside from look for me.
From the article: Yeah, that's a problem. They should be treated humanely and decently, as guests. But, they should not be allowed to disappear into society. Sorry.
I imagine you're trying to draw me into a gun debate here despite not being a US citizen? Sure the army needs guns, and I'm not against their having a proportionate role in this situation, but this isn't proportionate or responsible. It's deliberately and visibly heavy handed and politically motivated. Those refugees/asylum seekers/whatever simply don't warrant a deployment of troops on that scale. By all means provide security for the border personnel who will be required to do a mammoth task, have reserves available in case they are needed, but don't treat women and children looking for new lives like an invading Russian army. These people are being intimidated as pawns in a domestic political agenda, nothing more and with all due respect to @oldfella1962 this could go disastrously wrong.
Um, American Exceptionalism doesn't mean believing America is exceptionally good, it means believing America is an exception to the normal rules of political discourse. I don't think anyone's actually claimed there's a human right to live in America (there isn't), but a lot of people have questioned a policy decision which is blatantly intended to have thick people waving flags rather than thinking for themselves or considering whether they're showing any compassion.
When they're released, they're released with ankle monitors...and the vast majority show up for their court cases.
According to this article, it's much more complicated than that, and it should be. They can apply for a hearing regarding their detention after being held for six months. Apparently there is a backlog of almost 700,000 cases and it's taking between 700 - 1,000 days for due process to take its course.
Well, that and there has been a 16 fold increase in the number of cases each year from 2009 (5,000 cases per year) and 2017 (80,000 cases per year). That's not anywhere near the total heard by Asylum Officers, that's just the people that met the credible fear criteria to get a hearing after talking with an Asylum Officer. For comparison, there are 40,000 total Asylum Seekers in the UK. Total. Canada had 48,000 requests last year which was double the previous year. Now, Germany really is getting slammed with nearly 2,000,000 in the last four years in a nation of 81 million. Obviously there are some administrative things we could do to speed the process along but I'd rather look at other factors too.
I agree that it's more complicated than that. I was just pointing out that the asylum seekers aren't allowed to "disappear" while the process is carried out. Some of them do, which is illegal.
you can't POSSIBLY be this stupid. Thus I'm forced to assume the only plausible alternative explanation.
If.... IF..... by some fantastically implausible happenstance this were being somehow orchestrated...it is every bit as plausible that some Trump proxy is down their urging on the crowd in order to give Trump an "invasion" to rail against in order to prove to the gullible bigots that he's tough on brown people. To be clear, both claims are insane - but they are equally likely. At least.
remember when certain folks - like the fucking governor of Texas - were pretending to lose their shit over Jade Helm? Oddly none seem to be weighing in now.
and they always play out before they reach the U.S. border. Which is why this is a stunt. By the president. Who knows his base loves it when he plays to their bigotry.
For the most part you do not want a military person making their own judgments regarding orders. What you are talking about destabilizes strategy and it gets people killed more when you are considering direct contact missions. If you leave your post out of fear or moral problems you endanger the people who are relying on your presence. - Tererun exactly! The military is not McDonalds - you can't just throw down your apron and quit without endangering everyone who depends on you. That's why it's better for people like Amaris to never join up, rather than there remain even a shadow of a doubt in their minds when they sign that contract. Military members who are of the mindset "sure I'll do X if I have to, but not Y" are an accident waiting to happen. You better be "sure I'll do X and Y" or pound sand out the recruiter's door. As for sending troops to meet the caravan a general (or some high ranking military figure) was on the news and said "we don't do stunts" and went on to explain that the military is there for "tactical support" meaning they won't be the ones confronting/interviewing/etc. the people. I don't know what kind of mental picture some of you people have of all these troops on the border. A giant wall of 18 year olds with belt fed M60's pointed downrange? I think you've been watching too much TV or action movies.
That was Mattis, and given that Trump has been toying with the idea of firing him and apparently taken to calling him "Moderate Dog" rather than "Mad Dog", may be trying to save his own skin.
hmmm......if I were Trump I wouldn't fire Mattis especially right now. Let this caravan/troops situation run it's course safely and successfully and both Trump & Mattis can come out looking like winners. But that's just me armchair quarterbacking it.
Showing up at a border and requesting asylum is totally one of the legal ways of doing it. There are a variety of reasons you don't want to restrict people to only being able to do it at embassies. Now that says nothing about this particular case, but if they aren't sneaking across the border and trying to hide but instead make themselves known then that is a valid way to claim asylum.
Pretty sure our military has been deployed for disaster relief and other charitable intents more than any other nation's.
Not fully armed and in overwhelming force with a view to stopping an invading army of small children.
Who says they're going to be fully armed? Last time they went to the border it was totally for logistical support. Are you saying Trump's sending tanks this time?
If they aren't I'll be rather happy, but it would seem rather at odds with the general tone of enforcement being played up here.
But deploying troops against small children they outnumber eight to one isn't overkill? It's a bit late to be worried about hyperbole when the threat of this marauding horde has been ever so slightly overstated....
Nah...Trump did the same thing last time. He makes it sound like he's sending in the entire 7th fleet to the Arizona border to defend against Mexican rape gangs in powered body armor because his base licks that kind of stuff up...but it'll just be National Guardsmen changing diapers and doing paperwork.
