Originally posted by: palehorse74
So, the Mexican military escorting drug smugglers across the modern borders into our country, and shooting at our countrymen, is somehow justified, or should be looked at in a different light, all because of some historical grievances with the way the lines were drawn!?!?
allllllllrighty then.
what a fvcking kook...
Time for more cleanup of righty droppings, who simply cannot read simple English, and correct the misrepresentations of what I said.
My point was at those who are overly self-righteous about our border rights, who either don't know or have double standards about them as a way of pretending their history is unblemished on respecting borders (the same people in most cases who are happy for the US to invade other nations, such as Iraq, as well), to point out that the attitude is wrong.
Who does the kook Palehorse see as a kook - the person who mentions some history, or the guy who says 'let's shoot dozens of civilian mexicans in the head who are trying to find work in the US'? You got it, the one who mentions the history. The people coming to work are not the Mexican military who are doing those things, but see the posts against them.
I said we need to 'defend the border', but the kook Palehorse can't read too well, and so he misrepresents my post as saying the opposite.
The point is that the kooks, Palehorse and others, get into a frenzy over the idea of some issue of border rights giving them the justification for whatever self-righteous claims of being wronged, without any regard to the history, and they get carried away in this self-righteousness to not only 'defending the border' appropriately, but to excessive schemes. The day I see a balanced post from someone like Palehorse, mentioning anything about the larger context of history, of the moral responsibilities regarding the inequities of wealth, along with the issue of border responsibility, well let's just say I'll watch the news for planes crashing into pigs.
It's a disaster how the drug corruption in Mexico and other corruption has affected some of the authorities, where you see shootouts between police and military and such.
The solutions to those problems don't lie in kooks calling for blowing off the heads of the workers who cross the borders and other such yahoo positions.
I think the Border Patrol should hire a few dozen snipers and send them to the hot spots where these idiots cross thinking their shit don't stink and next time they do then see a few of their buddies manning machine gun turrets heads pop off from a 1200 yards out they will think twice about ever crossing again.
Ah yes, nothing like a little extreme overreaction to solve our problems :roll:
Right now the problem is that we do very little to secure the border, I think we can find a middle ground between that and shooting people in the head.
And while I realize enforcing our borders like we're the Soviet Union might satisfy your bloodlust, it's about the worst solution to the problem I can think of. We share a HUGE border with Mexico, it's true, but we share an even larger border with Canada and there aren't huge numbers of Canadian illegal immigrants "invading" Minnesota. Dealing with illegal immigration by militarizing the border is silly, it would be far smarter to solve the reasons BEHIND all the illegal immigration rather than trying to stop people from physically crossing the border. Nobody is crossing the border just because they can, there are reasons behind it that we can deal with far better.
For example, put pressure on the Mexican government to stop encouraging illegal immigration...and maybe try and turn Mexico into a better country while they're at it so people don't WANT to leave in droves. Mexico relies on trade and aid from the US, if we seriously threatened to cut those two things off...they'd get their act in order pretty quickly. That's just one example, and while trying to deal with the source of the problem does not allow anyone to play out their counter-strike inspired fantasies, it seems more likely to work.
I live on the border, so close I can walk out on my front porch look south and see the shanty Mexican slums.
Your big mistake is your assuming you?re dealing with a rational entity that can be dealt with by reasoning which so off the mark it is not funny. They are motivated by two things greed and violence. The cartels/mafias have more control of the Mexican military and Mexican law officials down here on the border than the government does. Any officials that can not be coerced to do their bidding are assassinated, happens all the time.
The only way they will ever stop is be forced to stop.
Originally posted by: Fern
In Georgia they have an event called the rattlesnake round up".
I think where they otta release them.
Seriously, why not start with a formal complaint to their embassy. Our current "head in the sand" behavior is irresponsible.
Fern
Because the number of people calling for responsible behavior is pretty small. A lot of people just don't care about the problem, and a lot of people want to just shoot Mexicans (seriously guys, wtf?). NEITHER group really wants to solve the illegal immigration problem, as far as I can tell.
3chordcharlie
Diamond Member
- Mar 30, 2004
- 9,859
- 1
- 81
Yeah, you know that characterization gets less and less credible the more groups you apply it to? From reading your posts, it seems like EVERYONE is some sort of crazy psycho and the only solution is shooting them in the head.
Illegal immigrants aren't motivated by "greed and violence", they are motivated by the same thing that LEGAL immigrants are motivated by, the promise of a life better than the one they have in their own country. If that motivation is taken away, do you HONESTLY think they're going to keep coming over the border anyways just to piss you off? Seems a little unlikely to me...
I am not talking about the illegal immigrants I am talking about the drug smugglers and human traffickers that are protected by Mexican law officials and Mexican military who think the borders only apply to Americans thus move in and out at will like they own it and pretty much do.
Orignal Earl
Diamond Member
- Oct 27, 2005
- 8,059
- 55
- 86
Orignal Earl
Diamond Member
- Oct 27, 2005
- 8,059
- 55
- 86
It would be nice if we could just somehow "solve" all of mexico's problems, but that wouldn't stem the flow of illegal immigrants. Many come from other countries and make their way through mexico (where they are totally treated like dirt) to make it here. Fixing mexico, which we already have a vested interest in (because of all the oil they ship over here and tons of exports) is comparatively simple to fixing a half a dozen other countries with no major natural resources and no industrial production.
There's no way we'd militarize the border. The pr backlash both internally and internationally would make it untenable. "US goes to war against poor innocent mexicans"
There's no way we'd militarize the border. The pr backlash both internally and internationally would make it untenable. "US goes to war against poor innocent mexicans"
waggy
No Lifer
- Dec 14, 2000
- 68,145
- 10
- 81
it really amazes me that we can't put the military on the boarder. i could have sworn protecting the US was one of its jobs.
i think we s hould have them on it. WE should be keeping people from crossing illegaly.
BUT we also need a real program to allow people to become citizens faster.
i think we s hould have them on it. WE should be keeping people from crossing illegaly.
BUT we also need a real program to allow people to become citizens faster.
what's really funny is that the proponents for having the government stay out of regulating big corporations like those agribusinesses that rely heavily on the use of illegal immigrants for cheap labor are the very ones screaming for the government to interfere with the way these corporations do their business by choking off their main source of cheap labor.
palehorse
Lifer
- Dec 21, 2005
- 11,521
- 0
- 76
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: palehorse74
So, the Mexican military escorting drug smugglers across the modern borders into our country, and shooting at our countrymen, is somehow justified, or should be looked at in a different light, all because of some historical grievances with the way the lines were drawn!?!?
allllllllrighty then.
what a fvcking kook...
Time for more cleanup of righty droppings, who simply cannot read simple English, and correct the misrepresentations of what I said.
My point was at those who are overly self-righteous about our border rights, who either don't know or have double standards about them as a way of pretending their history is unblemished on respecting borders (the same people in most cases who are happy for the US to invade other nations, such as Iraq, as well), to point out that the attitude is wrong.
Who does the kook Palehorse see as a kook - the person who mentions some history, or the guy who says 'let's shoot dozens of civilian mexicans in the head who are trying to find work in the US'? You got it, the one who mentions the history. The people coming to work are not the Mexican military who are doing those things, but see the posts against them.
I said we need to 'defend the border', but the kook Palehorse can't read too well, and so he misrepresents my post as saying the opposite.
The point is that the kooks, Palehorse and others, get into a frenzy over the idea of some issue of border rights giving them the justification for whatever self-righteous claims of being wronged, without any regard to the history, and they get carried away in this self-righteousness to not only 'defending the border' appropriately, but to excessive schemes. The day I see a balanced post from someone like Palehorse, mentioning anything about the larger context of history, of the moral responsibilities regarding the inequities of wealth, along with the issue of border responsibility, well let's just say I'll watch the news for planes crashing into pigs.
It's a disaster how the drug corruption in Mexico and other corruption has affected some of the authorities, where you see shootouts between police and military and such.
The solutions to those problems don't lie in kooks calling for blowing off the heads of the workers who cross the borders and other such yahoo positions.
once again, what in the helllll does "history" have to do with armed drug smuggling?!
quit acting so damn self-righteous for a minute, and actually focus on the issue here. We are discussing armed Mexican military personnel escorting drug smugglers into our country, and shooting at our own law enforcement personnel when they get here!
All of your damn history lessons, and rants on wealth distribution, are completely fvcking irrelevant!
All your talk about "yes, sure, we do need to secure the border, but..." is only lip-service since you fail to recognize that doing so involves real guns and real bullets and real killing.
bah... forget it. go hug some drug-smuggling Mexicans. do that, and then come back and tell us how many you were able to stop...
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: palehorse74
So, the Mexican military escorting drug smugglers across the modern borders into our country, and shooting at our countrymen, is somehow justified, or should be looked at in a different light, all because of some historical grievances with the way the lines were drawn!?!?
allllllllrighty then.
what a fvcking kook...
Time for more cleanup of righty droppings, who simply cannot read simple English, and correct the misrepresentations of what I said.
My point was at those who are overly self-righteous about our border rights, who either don't know or have double standards about them as a way of pretending their history is unblemished on respecting borders (the same people in most cases who are happy for the US to invade other nations, such as Iraq, as well), to point out that the attitude is wrong.
Who does the kook Palehorse see as a kook - the person who mentions some history, or the guy who says 'let's shoot dozens of civilian mexicans in the head who are trying to find work in the US'? You got it, the one who mentions the history. The people coming to work are not the Mexican military who are doing those things, but see the posts against them.
I said we need to 'defend the border', but the kook Palehorse can't read too well, and so he misrepresents my post as saying the opposite.
The point is that the kooks, Palehorse and others, get into a frenzy over the idea of some issue of border rights giving them the justification for whatever self-righteous claims of being wronged, without any regard to the history, and they get carried away in this self-righteousness to not only 'defending the border' appropriately, but to excessive schemes. The day I see a balanced post from someone like Palehorse, mentioning anything about the larger context of history, of the moral responsibilities regarding the inequities of wealth, along with the issue of border responsibility, well let's just say I'll watch the news for planes crashing into pigs.
It's a disaster how the drug corruption in Mexico and other corruption has affected some of the authorities, where you see shootouts between police and military and such.
The solutions to those problems don't lie in kooks calling for blowing off the heads of the workers who cross the borders and other such yahoo positions.
once again, what in the helllll does "history" have to do with armed drug smuggling?!
quit acting so damn self-righteous for a minute, and actually focus on the issue here. We are discussing armed Mexican military personnel escorting drug smugglers into our country, and shooting at our own law enforcement personnel when they get here!
All of your damn history lessons, and rants on wealth distribution, are completely fvcking irrelevant!
All your talk about "yes, sure, we do need to secure the border, but..." is only lip-service since you fail to recognize that doing so involves real guns and real bullets and real killing.
bah... forget it. go hug some drug-smuggling Mexicans. do that, and then come back and tell us how many you were able to stop...
Well to be fair, YOU are talking about "armed Mexican military personnel escorting drug smugglers", but I think other people are talking about using "headshots" to protect the US from the grave threat of migrant farm workers. I'm not sure why Craig234 is responding to you, since you seem to be among the sane border security crowd, but clearly not everyone calling for troops on the border is after the same thing.
JSt0rm
Lifer
- Sep 5, 2000
- 27,399
- 3,947
- 126
the reality is we went to war and took that land a while ago. I mean if we are going to give it back to anybody it should be the native americans not the mexicans. We should have a closed border with mexico because they can't keep it together down there. Ship people in to pick fruit or whatever for more money then they make in mexico but don't let them die in the desert or get into it with "minutemen". it all comes back to that dumb ass war in iraq. We cant hold our own dick anymore.
Look, I'm not on board with much of the kneejerk xenophobia that goes around, but these Mexican military units - if they're really doing this - have gone rogue, and their asses are grass as far as I'm concerned.
I can sympathize with Mexicans ravaged by NAFTA, and I'm not going to buy into the Manifest Destiny guilt trip - the sins of my fathers aren't mine. We have a clear and undisputed border with Mexico here in the now.
Rogue Mexican troops crossing our border and shooting at Americans who are just trying to do their jobs need to be answered with lethal force. Send in the snipers. I have no problem with that. Unfortunately, they're bogged down in Iraq instead of doing the things they are meant to do... like taking care of this horseshit.
NAFTA is a deep fried abortion for both the US and Mexico, but laws are fungible, given enough pressure.
"But our politicians are corrupt"
Throw the bastards out.
"But our system is corrupt"
Have a fuckin' revolution. They're messy, but we pulled one off. Got Patriotism?
Shoot at US Border Patrol - these men and women are LEOs, not military personnel. They're not equipped for warfare, or sanctioned to engage in it.
Time for some troops.
I can sympathize with Mexicans ravaged by NAFTA, and I'm not going to buy into the Manifest Destiny guilt trip - the sins of my fathers aren't mine. We have a clear and undisputed border with Mexico here in the now.
Rogue Mexican troops crossing our border and shooting at Americans who are just trying to do their jobs need to be answered with lethal force. Send in the snipers. I have no problem with that. Unfortunately, they're bogged down in Iraq instead of doing the things they are meant to do... like taking care of this horseshit.
NAFTA is a deep fried abortion for both the US and Mexico, but laws are fungible, given enough pressure.
"But our politicians are corrupt"
Throw the bastards out.
"But our system is corrupt"
Have a fuckin' revolution. They're messy, but we pulled one off. Got Patriotism?
Shoot at US Border Patrol - these men and women are LEOs, not military personnel. They're not equipped for warfare, or sanctioned to engage in it.
Time for some troops.
palehorse
Lifer
- Dec 21, 2005
- 11,521
- 0
- 76
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: palehorse74
So, the Mexican military escorting drug smugglers across the modern borders into our country, and shooting at our countrymen, is somehow justified, or should be looked at in a different light, all because of some historical grievances with the way the lines were drawn!?!?
allllllllrighty then.
what a fvcking kook...
Time for more cleanup of righty droppings, who simply cannot read simple English, and correct the misrepresentations of what I said.
My point was at those who are overly self-righteous about our border rights, who either don't know or have double standards about them as a way of pretending their history is unblemished on respecting borders (the same people in most cases who are happy for the US to invade other nations, such as Iraq, as well), to point out that the attitude is wrong.
Who does the kook Palehorse see as a kook - the person who mentions some history, or the guy who says 'let's shoot dozens of civilian mexicans in the head who are trying to find work in the US'? You got it, the one who mentions the history. The people coming to work are not the Mexican military who are doing those things, but see the posts against them.
I said we need to 'defend the border', but the kook Palehorse can't read too well, and so he misrepresents my post as saying the opposite.
The point is that the kooks, Palehorse and others, get into a frenzy over the idea of some issue of border rights giving them the justification for whatever self-righteous claims of being wronged, without any regard to the history, and they get carried away in this self-righteousness to not only 'defending the border' appropriately, but to excessive schemes. The day I see a balanced post from someone like Palehorse, mentioning anything about the larger context of history, of the moral responsibilities regarding the inequities of wealth, along with the issue of border responsibility, well let's just say I'll watch the news for planes crashing into pigs.
It's a disaster how the drug corruption in Mexico and other corruption has affected some of the authorities, where you see shootouts between police and military and such.
The solutions to those problems don't lie in kooks calling for blowing off the heads of the workers who cross the borders and other such yahoo positions.
once again, what in the helllll does "history" have to do with armed drug smuggling?!
quit acting so damn self-righteous for a minute, and actually focus on the issue here. We are discussing armed Mexican military personnel escorting drug smugglers into our country, and shooting at our own law enforcement personnel when they get here!
All of your damn history lessons, and rants on wealth distribution, are completely fvcking irrelevant!
All your talk about "yes, sure, we do need to secure the border, but..." is only lip-service since you fail to recognize that doing so involves real guns and real bullets and real killing.
bah... forget it. go hug some drug-smuggling Mexicans. do that, and then come back and tell us how many you were able to stop...
Well to be fair, YOU are talking about "armed Mexican military personnel escorting drug smugglers", but I think other people are talking about using "headshots" to protect the US from the grave threat of migrant farm workers. I'm not sure why Craig234 is responding to you, since you seem to be among the sane border security crowd, but clearly not everyone calling for troops on the border is after the same thing.
hmm.. OK.. maybe you're right. I'll back off a bit... but it still seems as though he's opposed to stopping ANY of them by force, even the armed drug smugglers. It really did seem as though he was pointing at history as some sort of excuse for their violence.
For me, this is a criminal matter, so the flow of violence and drugs may need to be met, and stopped, with violence of our own. I also thought that some of the "headshot crowd" were speaking to the same, but you may be right, and they may just be out to kill brown people... which is certainly unacceptable.
But, headshots against the armed Mexican military who are shooting at our border patrol? Sign me up! Seriously...
You want to talk about a little perspective? Yours might be a little better if you'd pull your head out of your ass on the subject. Who cares about what happend in the past. If you want to open that can of worms then we just as well all move back top Europe and give the country to the native americans.
If these were Iranians going into Iraq with cover provided by the Iranian military it'd be all we hear about on the news. Instead we have over 200 documented incidents and hardly anybody knows about it and people like you try to downplay what's going on.
That's my perspective and I don't really care what anybody else thinks. I live well over 1000 miles form the border and we have illegals all over the place. They have NO ancestoral claims on any of the land around here so your argument is without merit to me.
BoomerD
No Lifer
- Feb 26, 2006
- 62,844
- 11,257
- 136
I know my relatives who have been shoved onto reservations would vote for that plan...
I've been all over the US and have seen Mexicans/Central Americans (not just Americans of Hispanic origin) everywhere I've been. Are they ALL Illegal Immigrants? Certainly I don't know, but I sure can't believe they are all here on green cards. While I think we are letting too dammed many in as it is, I know we're not letting them in by the millions every year.
Here in Kahleeforneeya, it's a fucking invasion.
I do NOT advocate killing the folks who are coming here looking for work, but FAR TOO MANY of the illegals end up in gangs and are involved in drug (meth) production and sales, as well as auto theft and other violent crimes.
SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE!
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 9K
-
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter