Aid is the word you chose.
I am talking about investing in projects that create jobs. Building schools, homes, hospitals, etc.
I am confident that these projects can be awarded void of “endemic corruption”.
When the people have jobs, roof, frijoles and health care, they are less likely to want to leave their family and country.
This is obvious.
That’s a confidence I don’t have. Where does your confidence stem from?
The question I have is this:
If our military is deployed to the border as promised, would they seriously open fire on a group of women and children if ordered to? Granted, the diehard radical righties would be ecstatic. But even Trump would have to realize exactly how the optics would look. I can’t imagine that a lot of the Christian base would be okay with a wholesale slaughter of so many innocent children, since so many of that base claim to be pro-life.
If something happens, it could be an unmitigated disaster for the Republican party. There may not be enough time to pivot away from Trump’s rhetoric in an instance like that.
And would the caravan be willing to call his bluff on his military promise?
Superdude, we already have a standing policy of separating families and keeping children in jail, and the republican party has not wavered. Why do you think this would be the thing that finally makes them blink?
Maybe I’m a little naive, but I would imagine that the actual images and videos of children being ripped open by gunfire would have a bigger impact than kids in cages.
Then again, they don’t seem to give a shit when American kids are ripped open by gunfire. They just want to make sure that they don’t ban the gun. Ban the kids, by all means. Not the guns.
It’s not really a serious question. They might not even fire if they are fired upon, depending on what their ROE are. I seriously doubt their ROE says to just randomly fire on the caravan to make some ‘diehard radical rigties’ ‘ecstatic’.
They are there more for show than any serious reason. Well, that and it is going to take some management to control 5000+ hungry and desperate people.
Because the US military opening fire on unarmed civilians takes it to a whole other level. Also, the policy has to do with felony crimes which we’ve recently decided to enforce on illegal immigrants…we already do this in other felony crime cases. It’s unclear to me that these people in this caravan would be felons if they are requesting asylum.
Ok. What next? Are those turned away go “oh, shucks, back to Nicaragua”?
It has never worked, unless you want to turn these countries into semi-colonies.
Putting endemic corruption in scare quotes means you don’t understand Latin America. Corruption is the #1 problem, not money. Venezuela is swimming in oil but people escape because of corruption and mismanagement. These guys are escaping repression and the beginnings of a civil war. There is corruption in programs that give one glass of milk for people. People cheat to get in even when they own houses and cars-
It isn’t obvious outside a back-of-the-envelope plan.
Exactly
Why is that the United States’ problem? We didn’t invite them, we have said they’re not welcome, and they’re going to show up anyway? And now it’s OUR problem what happens to them if we turn them away?
Fuck that- we’re not, and shouldn’t be responsible for that kind of thing.
That’s why I was saying that the Mexican government is being dicks about this- if we refuse them entry and turn them away, they are certainly going to cry about how they’re unprepared or unable to help, despite having done almost nothing to prevent the situation in the first place.
BZZZZZZZZZZT!!
Sorry, you didn’t Beat the Reaper. But thanks for playing.
“If that is not the case” - if they DO get to keep on going until they get to their preferred country - then when we drop them off at the Canadian border, they get to keep on going - south, now - to their preferred country, the U.S.A.
(Unless their preferred country is Canada, of course.)
I think you’re making a leap from “military deployed” to “open fire” / “wholsesale slaughter” that is not warranted. The most likely scenario, if the military is deployed, is that a few National Guard troops help flex-cuff a few fence-jumpers. No one (aside from you) is talking about shooting indiscriminately into the caravan crowd. Your post represents a real break with reality. You might want to give some consideration to why that is.
Of course.
But many people say “they don’t want to go illegally, they want asylum” as a justification for letting them come to the border. Those same people, not you, will moan at the, say, 1000 people who won’t go in and who will try to get in anyway.
If it were me I’d set an “Asylum Seeker Center” as south as possible IN Mexico a process them there.
Or, if I were devious, just ship’em to Trudeau.
We will give them all brochures about how nice Toronto is this time of year.
This is why I believe it is important to have an overwhelming show of force. If we send 1,000 guys and there are 12,000 people in the caravan, then a few of the hotter heads may attempt to overpower the soldiers to get in the country, and cause this type of disaster. If we have 20,000 soldiers, then we can resist them without resorting to violence.
Some are saying OMG soldiers! but what are soldiers for if not to protect the sovereign border of the United States? Are they only to fight foreign wars?
If actual troops are sent, they will serve in a supporting role. They are not going to literally stand guard at the border. This is how the National Guard has been used in the past (ie, a supporting role such as logistics).
There has to be some significant guarding of the border. If I am one of 12,000 hungry and desperate people attempting to get into the United States and I only see a handful of people guarding the border, I would damn sure rush the checkpoint.
Then when that works, the next caravan will be 100,000 people. At that point we would either have to throw our hands up and let everyone in or open fire. That first point is unacceptable and will make not only Trump, but the entire country look incredibly weak. The second point is disastrous on a human rights level.
That’s why I say we need a show of force now so this doesn’t escalate into that possibility.
A numerous military presence may be good because there should be lots of bottles of water to distribute. Just don’t send a crew like the Kent State crew.
I can’t believe how some people think that 7,000 refugees from violence and poverty are somehow a grave threat to the nation. First of all, it’s only a drop in the bucket in our overall immigration rates. Secondly, they pose no threat to us.
I mean, sure, make them follow the rules and apply for asylum and send them back if they’re not accepted. But all this hang-wringing and OMG! IMMIGRANT CRISIS! is nonsense and just political theater. It just preys on people’s fears of brown people. Sadly it works.
Yeah but what happens when it’s a billion people in the caravan next time?
This isn’t the only caravan that ever happened. This isn’t even the only one that happened this year.
Did any of the many other migrant caravans rush the checkpoint? Did the hotter heads attempt to force their way into the country?