The vanguard of the Caravan is already in Mexico City, more than halfway to the border

[Derec]

Only to ignorant bigots.

Only an ignorant open-borders nut would deny they are illegal.

To moral human beings they are fellow human beings.

Nobody denies they are "fellow human beings". That does not give them the right to demand entry into US or to sneak across the border.

And a rich nation should give them some soup and a blanket.

They don't want soup and a blanket. They want, no demand, to be let in.

A desperately poor nation might have the right to harm them.

Unless they engage in violence against border guards they should not be harmed (regardless of richness of the nation). At the same time, they should not be let in either.

 

[untermensche]

Only an ignorant open-borders nut would deny they are illegal.

They are humans beings in violation of a US law.

They are not "illegals".

They are the exact same thing you are.

They don't have the rights of citizens like the right to vote.

But they do have human rights.

Nobody denies they are "fellow human beings". That does not give them the right to demand entry into US or to sneak across the border.

Saying they are AN illegal is saying they are something less than fully a human. It is a dehumanization.

And of course they have the right to sneak across the border. It is a risk they are allowed to take as free human beings. And they have freedom of speech and can demand anything they want.

And a rich nation should give them some soup and a blanket.

They don't want soup and a blanket. They want, no demand, to be let in.

Shame some rich nation can't possibly absorb them.

A desperately poor nation might have the right to harm them.

Unless they engage in violence against border guards they should not be harmed (regardless of richness of the nation). At the same time, they should not be let in either.

Putting somebody in a cell is harming them.

Saying that we could not possibly absorb them is harming them.

A nation is only as great as it treats the least and most desperate.

America is not great again because billionaires are better off.

This miserly treatment of people hard on their luck is inhumane.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Something to keep in mind here: They can both be legitimate refugees and have economic motives.

If you have to flee where you live aren't you going to want to go to where you think you'll do best? Thus their desire to go to America doesn't prove they aren't legitimate refugees.

 

[RavenSky]

I'm so glad to see that Derec thinks so highly of the migrants he keeps calling some of them the "vanguard"

A vanguard is the first part of a larger group. It can be thinkers, but in this case it's just a horde of barely literate illegals.

The definition: vanguard: a group of people leading the way in new developments or ideas.

 

[ZiprHead]

Only an ignorant open-borders nut would deny they are illegal.


Nobody denies they are "fellow human beings". That does not give them the right to demand entry into US or to sneak across the border.

And a rich nation should give them some soup and a blanket.

They don't want soup and a blanket. They want, no demand, to be let in.

A desperately poor nation might have the right to harm them.

Unless they engage in violence against border guards they should not be harmed (regardless of richness of the nation). At the same time, they should not be let in either.

Why would they be illegal to the U.S.? They've never touched U.S. soil before.

And coming to the U.S. and asking for asylum is not illegal.

 

[Ford]

Only an ignorant open-borders nut would deny they are illegal.


Nobody denies they are "fellow human beings". That does not give them the right to demand entry into US or to sneak across the border.


They don't want soup and a blanket. They want, no demand, to be let in.


Unless they engage in violence against border guards they should not be harmed (regardless of richness of the nation). At the same time, they should not be let in either.

Why would they be illegal to the U.S.? They've never touched U.S. soil before.

The constant drumbeat of racist rhetoric has led to a scenario where folks like Derec believe that anyone who crosses our border with Mexico is automatically "illegal." Even if they come through a port of entry and ask for asylum.

 

[laughing dog]

Only an ignorant open-borders nut would deny they are illegal.

They are not illegal until they illegally enter the US. So claim they are illegal is either a deliberate misrepresentation or a delusion.

 

[Opoponax]

I'm still laughing at the use of the word "vanguard" in this context.

 

[bilby]

I don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but 'vanguard' to mean 'the leading elements of a military force' is perfectly legitimate, and not only correct usage, but probably the original usage of that word, with the definitions suggesting innovation being derived from that more technically correct usage.

A military column has a van, and a rear. These have a vanguard, and a rearguard.

It's perfectly good English to use the word 'vanguard' as Derec has used it in this thread.

 

[Politesse]

I don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but 'vanguard' to mean 'the leading elements of a military force' is perfectly legitimate, and not only correct usage, but probably the original usage of that word, with the definitions suggesting innovation being derived from that more technically correct usage.

A military column has a van, and a rear. These have a vanguard, and a rearguard.

It's perfectly good English to use the word 'vanguard' as Derec has used it in this thread.

If he were describing a military force, sure. But interestingly enough, the only actual military unit involved in this situation, our own military deployment, is explicitly not what he means.

In what sense are a smaller group that traveled faster than the rest and are arriving hundreds of miles ahead of them "guarding" the "van" of an army?

 

[PyramidHead]

Something to keep in mind here: They can both be legitimate refugees and have economic motives.

If you have to flee where you live aren't you going to want to go to where you think you'll do best? Thus their desire to go to America doesn't prove they aren't legitimate refugees.

Given the economic reasons for the chaos they are leaving behind, most of it directly caused by Western policies of aggression and manipulation, I would say that all refugees are by definition economic refugees.

 

[Trausti]

Something to keep in mind here: They can both be legitimate refugees and have economic motives.

If you have to flee where you live aren't you going to want to go to where you think you'll do best? Thus their desire to go to America doesn't prove they aren't legitimate refugees.

Given the economic reasons for the chaos they are leaving behind, most of it directly caused by Western policies of aggression and manipulation, I would say that all refugees are by definition economic refugees.

Well, that's bullshit. Why can't people take responsibility for their own lives and not blames others?

 

[laughing dog]

Something to keep in mind here: They can both be legitimate refugees and have economic motives.

If you have to flee where you live aren't you going to want to go to where you think you'll do best? Thus their desire to go to America doesn't prove they aren't legitimate refugees.

Given the economic reasons for the chaos they are leaving behind, most of it directly caused by Western policies of aggression and manipulation, I would say that all refugees are by definition economic refugees.

Well, that's bullshit. Why can't people take responsibility for their own lives and not blames others?

Do you feel the same when someone is robbed or raped?

 

[PyramidHead]

Something to keep in mind here: They can both be legitimate refugees and have economic motives.

If you have to flee where you live aren't you going to want to go to where you think you'll do best? Thus their desire to go to America doesn't prove they aren't legitimate refugees.

Given the economic reasons for the chaos they are leaving behind, most of it directly caused by Western policies of aggression and manipulation, I would say that all refugees are by definition economic refugees.

Well, that's bullshit. Why can't people take responsibility for their own lives and not blames others?

Because in this case they aren't actually responsible and others are to blame. Just calling it like I see it.

 

[untermensche]

Something to keep in mind here: They can both be legitimate refugees and have economic motives.

If you have to flee where you live aren't you going to want to go to where you think you'll do best? Thus their desire to go to America doesn't prove they aren't legitimate refugees.

Given the economic reasons for the chaos they are leaving behind, most of it directly caused by Western policies of aggression and manipulation, I would say that all refugees are by definition economic refugees.

Well, that's bullshit. Why can't people take responsibility for their own lives and not blames others?

There is thing thing called power.

There is this thing called corrupt power.

There is this place called Mexico with corrupted power.

Corrupted by the US and other nations.

And terribly burdened by violent gangs due to US insane prohibitions.

 

[Trausti]

Well, that's bullshit. Why can't people take responsibility for their own lives and not blames others?

Because in this case they aren't actually responsible and others are to blame. Just calling it like I see it.

It's not the fault of the US. The US is not responsible for the world. Do these people have no independent agency? But, I know, those cheering on the "refugees" hate the US and want to change it to something else. Inviting in Strongbow for your domestic disputes might not end as well as you planned.

 

[laughing dog]

Well, that's bullshit. Why can't people take responsibility for their own lives and not blames others?

Because in this case they aren't actually responsible and others are to blame. Just calling it like I see it.

It's not the fault of the US. The US is not responsible for the world. Do these people have no independent agency? But, I know, those cheering on the "refugees" hate the US and want to change it to something else. Inviting in Strongbow for your domestic disputes might not end as well as you planned.

Ah, Trump derangement syndrome inducing more cra-cra talk.

 

[Patooka]

I'm so glad to see that Derec thinks so highly of the migrants he keeps calling some of them the "vanguard"

A vanguard is the first part of a larger group. It can be thinkers, but in this case it's just a horde of barely literate illegals.

Barely literate? Let 'em in, I'm not sure you would notice any difference, frankly.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Do these people have no independent agency?

Why do you even pretend to give a shit? If every single one of these people is granted asylum it literally won't negatively impact your life AT ALL. Zero. As if it never happened. You won't ever meet any of these people; you won't have any increase in your taxes (in fact, they will only improve the economy); no jobs will be taken away from you or anyone; no crimes will be committed (certainly no more so than other citizens carry out).

ZERO impact on your or anyone else's life.

ZERO IMPACT ON YOUR LIFE FOR A GUARANTEED ABSOLUTE FACT

Which means you have no legitimate reason to give any shit at all about any of this, which in turn means you can really only be giving a shit because (a) you're just programmed to like a fucking robot or (b) you're a piece of shit racist.

I'm not saying you are either of those things; just those are really the only two viable hypothetical options left since these people will LITERALLY HAVE ZERO IMPACT ON YOUR LIFE FOR A GUARANTEED ABSOLUTE FACT.

 

[Derec]

They are humans beings in violation of a US law.
They are not "illegals".
They are the exact same thing you are.

Wrong. I am a US citizen. I came here legally.

They don't have the rights of citizens like the right to vote.
But they do have human rights.

There is no human right to enter a country illegally.

Saying they are AN illegal is saying they are something less than fully a human. It is a dehumanization.

Wrong. "Illegal" is short for "illegal alien" or (in another context) an "illegal spy". It is not dehumanizing.

And of course they have the right to sneak across the border.

What? How do you figure that?

Shame some rich nation can't possibly absorb them.

Look at what is happening in Europe. Merkel in 2015 unilaterally (without consulting her cabinet, much less the Bundestag) open the borders to migrants. It was initially supposed to be a group of a few hundred but by the end of the year a million mass migrants came into Germany. And they are still coming, albeit at a somewhat reduced rate.
It is not really the question if we can absorb a few thousand migrants from this caravan, but what kind of signal that sends to future would-be migrants.

Putting somebody in a cell is harming them.
Saying that we could not possibly absorb them is harming them.

So you are for totally open borders. I think that's national suicide.

This miserly treatment of people hard on their luck is inhumane.

There are a few billion desperately poor people all around the world. Should they all get to come to US?