Arizona, a rogue state at war

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Nemesis 1

Lifer
Dec 30, 2006
11,366
2
0
AZ has other opions here that will work much better. This is what I would do . People are leaving central America in droves crossing border illegeally. AZ should be allowed to stop these crossings.

If the federal government doesn't want to help . I would simply bus the caputured illegeals and rather than send them back . Bus them to Washington DC. and drop them off . Telling them not to come back into AZ. It would be costly but AZ would be removing a state problem and putting that problem squarely on the Fed government doorstep . AZ State school buses would work just fine.
 

Deeko

Lifer
Jun 16, 2000
30,213
12
81
Pretty much everything you've posted in this thread, but especially all of your comments regarding the article's opening.
 

Deeko

Lifer
Jun 16, 2000
30,213
12
81
(this is the part where the OP starts trying to change the subject and generally shift focus from discussing the actual article, because he knows he's wrong & made a mistake in posting this. I will take that shift as an admission of said fact. Congrats on doing so, zsdersw)
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
Pretty much everything you've posted in this thread, but especially all of your comments regarding the article's opening.

Gonna have to be more specific about that. Other than the opening, what specifically did I say that's "wrong"?
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
(this is the part where the OP starts trying to change the subject and generally shift focus from discussing the actual article, because he knows he's wrong & made a mistake in posting this. I will take that shift as an admission of said fact. Congrats on doing so, zsdersw)

No, let's discuss everything. I'm game.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
What complete and utter stupid drivel. I expect nothing else on CNN opinions, clearly an article written by a complete moron.
 

MJinZ

Diamond Member
Nov 4, 2009
8,192
0
0

I disagree with almost every part of it:

San Diego, California (CNN) -- Don't be surprised if, any day now, you read that the People's Republic of Arizona is in the market for nuclear warheads to put an end, once and for all, to illegal immigration on its southern border. After all, it's the next logical step for the rogue state.

Sure is, Nuke the Mexicans and we'll be done with it.

The argument that the federal government isn't actively engaged in border enforcement is both dishonest and reckless.
It is dishonest because it's not true. I've visited the U.S.-Mexico border a dozen times in the past 10 years: in Texas, Arizona and California. I've interviewed countless border patrol agents and supervisors. I've also been up in a Border Patrol helicopter flying above the border, which offers a unique perspective on border security.

So I can tell you what the border patrol agents on the ground would tell you: The U.S.-Mexico border has never been more fortified. There are now more than 20,000 border patrol agents on the federal payroll. That's more agents than any other federal enforcement agency, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Those agents apprehend people and deport them at a feverish clip. In fact, it was recently announced that the Obama administration deported more people last year than the Bush administration during its final year in office.

A Band-aid (TM) in the an exploding dam is also fortification that it has never before enjoyed. It doesn't mean a FUCKING THING ASSHOLE when the DAM IS STILL GOING TO EXPLODE.


If the federal government does take border enforcement seriously, critics might ask: Why are there still people trying to enter the United States illegally? Simple. We can dig a moat, deploy an army, build walls or call in an airstrike, but desperate people will always find a way to go around, under or over any impediment in their path to a better life.

Better start on that Great Wall of Mexico before you start talking bullshit about Walls. Last time I heard, Walls are great for keeping things in and out. My apartment has walls.

This isn't to condone illegal immigration. My views -- in support of deportations, workplace raids, giving more resources to the Border Patrol etc. -- are well known. I'm just telling you what Border Patrol agents tell me: that it doesn't make any sense to focus all our attention at the border while turning a blind eye to employers in the interior. That's like trying to fill a bucket with teaspoons of water without first plugging the hole at the bottom.

My question is Mr. CNN - are you a FUCKING DUMBASS?

Because if you just used an analogy of "without first plugging the hole at the bottom" to mean something other, the gigantic HOLE that the Mexicans are crawling through to get here... I think you just did and compared the HOLE to actual employment instead of border security.

Look at that, You ARE a fucking dumbass!

Still, as long as the troops follow the protocol laid out in 2006 when George W. Bush launched Operation Jumpstart -- that they're unarmed and act only in a support capacity to the Border Patrol by fixing vehicles, monitoring surveillance equipment, repairing fences -- I think sending the National Guard is a fine idea. It's just not the magic bullet that the most enthusiastic proponents of the idea would have us believe. There's only one of those. It involves fining, arresting and prosecuting the employers of illegal immigrants, including people who are, this election year, streaming into fundraisers for McCain, Brewer and other tough-talking Republicans vowing to solve a problem that many of their backers helped create.

Yes, let's toss Americans in jail while more illegals stampede into America.

Ahahahha, this is more fucking hilarious than I could imagine. Whites, Asians, (and the remaining Blacks) are now in Jail while the Native Americans get their land back. <- Hey, I'm not saying I would find this completely blasphemous, after all, it would certainly be poetic Justice (well, to everyone except the Blacks, who were already enslaved back then).

I have not laughed this hard at a < 10 IQ Retarded brainfucker ... well ... EVER. I do not like to make fun of mental disabilities, but when your idiocy assaults the very fabric of intelligent life-forms on Earth, you should just fucking lay down and stop your heart.
 
Last edited:

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
I have to regard the Arizona attempt to go against the Federal Government immigration policy which is supposed to be the same for all 50 states for what its is, namely nothing but internal Arizona political grandstanding only for the political benefit of a few Arizona
politicians.

If we are all lucky the courts will simply kill the law before its ever enforced, because its in reality unenforceble without running roughshod over the rights of millions of US citizens.
 

Drako

Lifer
Jun 9, 2007
10,697
161
106
I have to regard the Arizona attempt to go against the Federal Government immigration policy ...

Apparently you are just like every other moron who has not read the Arizona law. It's exactly the same as the Federal law with some actual anti-discrimination verbiage added to it.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
Two things have to happen simultaneously to fix the illegal immigration problem:

1. Do a much better job at the border of stopping more from coming in.

2. Punish employers who hired illegal immigrants and impose stiffer penalties for doing so.

The problem has to be attacked from both the supply and demand sides of the equation at the same time. It's the only way to guarantee maximum effectiveness with minimum disruption to the economy.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Two things have to happen simultaneously to fix the illegal immigration problem:

1. Do a much better job at the border of stopping more from coming in.

2. Punish employers who hired illegal immigrants and impose stiffer penalties for doing so.

The problem has to be attacked from both the supply and demand sides of the equation at the same time. It's the only way to guarantee maximum effectiveness with minimum disruption to the economy.
Agree...but feel that we also need (3.) an expanded work visa vehicle to allow illegals to legally work on a temporary basis. This needs to be in place prior to making it a crime to hire illegals so that employers have ample time to assure compliance.

BTW...that oped was horrid. Surely you could have picked a better one.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
Agree...but feel that we also need (3.) an expanded work visa vehicle to allow illegals to legally work on a temporary basis. This needs to be in place prior to making it a crime to hire illegals so that employers have ample time to assure compliance.

Yeah, that would be another way to smooth over the transition.

BTW...that oped was horrid. Surely you could have picked a better one.

If I spent more time searching for illegal immigration opeds, probably.. but I don't.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
Your credibility is in play here. Just saying.

*shrug*. I wasn't aware I had any, but message board credibility is about as worthless as it gets anyway. Everyone believes what they want to believe, regardless, so I'll post something which has things in it that I agree with. People's hyperbolic reactions to both me and the oped are their business, not mine.. and in no way do they change anything.
 
Last edited:

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
An employer should have the assumption that all people applying for a job is in the United States legally as by the fact that under federal law illegal immigrations shouldn't be here to begin with.
Well using that apologist logic shouldn't the Cops be under the same assumption on not check their immigration status? The only excuse for an employer hiring an illegal is if the illegal has fake papers stating he's here legally to work, other than that the Employer should be fined and any monies made using the illegal should be forfeited. If they did this it would go a very long way to solving the Illegal Alien problem.
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
LOL... selective reading is definitely a skill you've mastered.

Keep thinking that brah, I already have outlined everything I disagree with you in the first few pages of this thread. If you think I'm selective then I'd call you a dolt.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
Keep thinking that brah, I already have outlined everything I disagree with you in the first few pages of this thread. If you think I'm selective then I'd call you a dolt.

Yup, you certainly have.. and failed to address some of the points I made. That's either selective reading or negligence. Take your pick.

You also, just now, think both the oped author and me believe that AZ might nuke Mexico. Neither the oped author nor I said that. The oped author said we shouldn't be surprised if AZ was in the market for nukes. I said I wouldn't be surprised if they requested them. Last time I checked, request for nukes != use nukes.
 
Last edited:

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
Yup, you certainly have.. and failed to address some of the points I made. That's either selective reading or negligence. Take your pick.

You also, just now, think both the oped author and me believe that AZ might nuke Mexico. Neither the oped author nor I said that. The oped author said we shouldn't be surprised if AZ was in the market for nukes. I said I wouldn't be surprised if they requested them. Last time I checked, request for nukes != use nukes.

The article said more than just "it wouldnt be suprised if Arizona was in the market" for nukes. Re-read it. Selective reading, are you?

Here, let me post what they said afterwards

"...to put an end, once and for all, to illegal immigration on its southern border".

Gee, thats a tad further than just aquiring nukes, now isnt it?

The one thing I do admire, is that you will ALWAYS reply to me anytime I quote you and post. I think a good 20-30&#37; of your posts have been replies to me. I'm flattered
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
The article said more than just "it wouldnt be suprised if Arizona was in the market" for nukes. Re-read it. Selective reading, are you?

Here, let me post what they said afterwards

"...to put an end, once and for all, to illegal immigration on its southern border".

Gee, thats a tad further than just aquiring nukes, now isnt it?

Nope, I read it entirely. The less-thoughtful among us would, as you did, assume that means AZ would actually nuke Mexico. The more-thoughtful among us would conclude that nukes are most effective as a threat and deterrent. The threat of nukes could, for example, get Mexico to take this problem seriously.

Lots of nations and states acquire nukes... but none have used them (except us). They've all been used in diplomatic and rhetorical brinkmanship to deter or elicit.
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,153
6
81
The more-thoughtful among us would conclude that nukes are most effective as a threat and deterrent. The threat of nukes could, for example, get Mexico to take this problem seriously.

Lots of people, nations, and states acquire nukes... but none have used them (except us). They've all been used in diplomatic and rhetorical brinkmanship to deter or elicit.

LOL...

Since when can an individual state act unilaterally with threats of nuclear war? Unless they leave the Union that cant happen.

Get real brah.


I eagerly await your next reply. I hope the two of us can make this a 50 page thread.