Solving the Humanitarian Crisis ...
17 responses | 0 likes
Started by carlberky - March 7, 2019, 1:52 p.m.

There are hundreds-of-thousands of Army and Marines personnel, just sitting around in barracks, reading comic books and watching TV.

Put enough of them in the rural areas where illegals are likely to cross. That would immediately stop adding to the humanitarian crisis. 

Also provide emergency aid to the private organizations helping the illegals, and to the US facilities holding those apprehended ... or just ignore them. Nobody asked them to come, right?

By mcfarm - March 7, 2019, 2:06 p.m.
Like Reply

uhh Carl where ya been? this approach has been offered and offered and what did we get from the socialist? More talk of impeachment for using military personal without congressional approval. Something along the lines of scaring the poor women and children who are the only ones crossing and are just looking for "human mobility"

By carlberky - March 7, 2019, 4:17 p.m.
Like Reply

"The War Powers Act: As opposition to the Vietnam War grew, Congress passed a new law in 1973 to limit presidential power to launch the military into armed conflict. The War Powers Act became law after Congress overrode President Richard Nixon’s veto. It allows the president to use military force only with congressional approval or in response to a direct threat; requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of putting troops into hostilities; and limits such actions to 60 days without congressional approval, among other measures.

"The problem with the War Powers Act? Multiple presidents have virtually ignored it or bent these rules, with no consequences. In 1986, Ronald Reagan attacked sites in Libya in retaliation for a bombing which injured Americans, but did not have congressional approval. In 1999, Bill Clinton launched airstrikes in Yugoslavia, aimed at preventing genocide, without giving proper notice to Congress or consulting lawmakers. In 2011, Barack Obama authorized military strikes in Libya, and argued that the War Powers Act simply didn’t apply."
Peace time duties of Marines are to be embassy guards and military base gate guards. Trump can argue that they are guarding the border without expecting hostilities.

 As commander-in-Chief There is nothing to prevent Trump from just doing it.

After 60 days, congress can refuse to fund it, but how much funding is needed? The troops are already geting paid.

By mcfarm - March 7, 2019, 6:24 p.m.
Like Reply

of course Trump can do it...are you blind to the numerous extra constitutional orders Obama pulled.....the major difference of course the entire doj, msm, and every lib and part of the spineless rinos afraid to confront him on it because why...member of a special group? or groups? yes and yes and yes

By GunterK - March 7, 2019, 7:20 p.m.
Like Reply

just heard on the radio..... in the Los Angeles school system, some 7000 students are homeless ( assume, most of them are US citizens) .

IMHO, it is absurd to offer foreign asylum seekers free housing, food, education, health care, and some spending cash, while US children are homeless.

The thousands of illegal "family units" who cross the borders illegally, every month, make this situation even worse.

any politician helping asylum seekers, or even worse, illegal aliens, is either heartless and turning a blind eye to the suffering of our own, or he/she is uninformed and should be kicked out of office.

By carlberky - March 7, 2019, 9:26 p.m.
Like Reply

mc, when you are in a hole, stop digging.

Gunter, your solution to the problem is to just ignore it? Your focus seems to be only on the aliens, not to the disruption to the system that they have caused.

By GunterK - March 7, 2019, 11:21 p.m.
Like Reply

Hi Carl,

Some people say, illegals don't affect our lives much, but they do.... there have been numerous articles written about the hidden costs of illegal immigration. 76,000 of them intercepted last month. How many made it through? And what happens to the intercepted ones? They are told to show up in court, some 10 months from now, where it would be decided whether they can stay or get deported. Needless to say, most of them don't show up.

However, legal immigration also has it's dark side. In 2016, Trump said he would curtail legal immigration to give our own people a better chance of finding a job. Now he turned the other way, and said that the US need skilled workers, and he wants to increase legal immigration... how about all those college grads who can't find work???? very disappointing

By TimNew - March 8, 2019, 3:51 a.m.
Like Reply

"how about all those college grads who can't find work???? very disappointing"..

I'd first ask, what degree did they earn in college?  Was in engineering/technical/accounting?  I suspect they are not having trouble finding work. Was it women's studies or something similar?  I don't think importing skilled/trained workers will have much impact on them either way. 

We've been on the wrong side of immigration reform since the 60's.

By mcfarm - March 8, 2019, 6:43 a.m.
Like Reply

wouldn't the elites just crap their pants if they ever learned we shut down immigration from the 20' to the 60's and guess what...not a protest anywhere. This even highlights even more how this latest rush to the boarder is driven by leftist behind the scenes

By TimNew - March 8, 2019, 7:10 a.m.
Like Reply

Liberal politicians wrap most of their ideas in "compassion" and many of their faithful unquestionably buy it.  How can you argue against "compassion"..

But,  as so often seems to be the case,  that "compassion" is conditional.  A vast majority of those fleeing from the "violence and unrest" of their home countries south of our borders (oddly, Mexico is not quite to their liking, so they MUST make it to the US) identify as leftist and if they don't actually vote, their off spring most certainly will and the vast majority will vote for government handouts.  So,  according to the left, they deserve "compassion".

In the 70's, when Vietnamese refugees were fleeing the oppression of leftist regimes, and identified mostly with conservative values, they were deemed undeserving of "compassion".

But it really comes down to the demographics.  In the 60's, leftists knew they could never sell their ideas to the typical American citizen.  Sure, they got a lot done with activist judges and they were slowly taking control of education.  But that was just taking too long.  Importing a few million leftists per year would pay off big time.  

So, as we work our way into this century, US demographics are far different than they were in the last century. Patience and determination has paid off.  Soon,  we'll have a socialist president and a majority socialist congress, and we can begin our journey down the same path that has worked so well for countries like Venezuela.

It will be very "compassionate".  

By mojo - March 8, 2019, 7:35 a.m.
Like Reply

Spoken like a true white nationalist. Your rhetoric is very similar to what is espoused in Mein Kampf.

The similarity is uncanny.

By TimNew - March 8, 2019, 7:50 a.m.
Like Reply

"Spoken like a true white nationalist. Your rhetoric is very similar to what is espoused in Mein Kampf.

The similarity is uncanny."

Could you refer me to the specific passage to which you refer?   Or are you just relying on Saul Alinky's "Rule book for Radicals" and engaging in ad hominem attacks?  

Much easier than actual debate,  right Moj?

By carlberky - March 8, 2019, 9:21 a.m.
Like Reply

Well, congratulations, cons. You've managed to turn the discussion from what to do about an immediate crisis into a rehash of what caused it.

Much easier than actual debate,  right?

By TimNew - March 8, 2019, 9:25 a.m.
Like Reply

My apologies Carl.   but I really don't think there's much in the way of rational debate on how to address it.

The reasons for the current debate have a lot more subject matter.

At least we've gotten away from the debate as to whether or not it's a crisis.

By mojo - March 8, 2019, 10:01 a.m.
Like Reply

"Could you refer me to the specific passage to which you refer? "

I can't refer you to any one specific passage. It's been many many years since I read Mein Kampf but I still remember the impression I got when reading it. It's the same impression I get when reading some of you posts.

If you've never read Mein Kampf I recommend you doing so, I think you'll be able to relate to it quite well & will enjoy the read.

By TimNew - March 8, 2019, 10:30 a.m.
Like Reply

Actually, as you have clearly stated that you feel that anyone who disagrees with you reminds you of Hitler,  it's quite possible that an opinion In support of border security would elicit such a reaction.

But, there is nothing in my post that is based on Mein Kampf. 

By mojo - March 8, 2019, 12:38 p.m.
Like Reply

"Actually, as you have clearly stated that you feel that anyone who disagrees with you reminds you of Hitler"

Ok, can you show me the post where I clearly stated that?  I do not recall making any such statement.

I do however remember stating on quite a few occasions that YOU remind of Hitler.

By metmike - March 8, 2019, 1:10 p.m.
Like Reply

Don't expect a response from mojo. He's already had a gazzilion warnings. 

I'm busy getting everything ready for our huge scholastic chess tournament with over 200 K-12 students signed up to compete in the "Sport for the Brain" tomorrow.