C
P
PoorOldSpike
Guest
In exactly what ways are the illegals damaging the USA?
Are they damaging the economy or what?
Are they damaging the economy or what?
J
Jonny
Guest
Don't you know
Puts on best redneck yelp
"They took our jobs!"
Puts on best redneck yelp
"They took our jobs!"
C
Cargol
Guest
Its enough that they are illegals.
L
Lord Bane (FGM)
Guest
Due to ridiculous loop holes in the laws, they are elligible for public schools, emergency room visits, etc. They are a drain on our systems and don't pay any income taxes. I say throw them out and make them come in legally like everyone else.
Lord Bane
Lord Bane
W
Wardog
Guest
Roger that.
M
mfred
Guest
Read the article. Checked the place on the wiki. Too many Spanish names of cities to know if I was reading about Mexico or the USA. Clicked a lot of links. Clicked one to the Texas Annexation. That only made the whole lot look very sus. Decided not to worry about it anymore. Still don't know if the US is being invaded . . .
P
PoorOldSpike
Guest
Why don't the American people vote for politicians and a Party who promise to put an end to it once and for all? Or don't most people and politicians care?
We've got the same problem in England, most people and most politicians don't seem to care about immigrants coming in here.
We've got the same problem in England, most people and most politicians don't seem to care about immigrants coming in here.
J
Jonny
Guest
We have a vastly different immigration system to the US however, i don't know the figures off hand but i think 90% of the immigrants who come to the UK do so legally from the EU (and after all net migration with EU countries is about 0).
After all i think "invaded" is a very strong word, makes it sound like they're coming over the border with the intention of toppling the US government and making it a state of mexico, I think you have to be pretty damn paranoid to believe that.
After all i think "invaded" is a very strong word, makes it sound like they're coming over the border with the intention of toppling the US government and making it a state of mexico, I think you have to be pretty damn paranoid to believe that.
J
Johnsy
Guest
We have the same problem over here in Australia too. It's not that they'll take our jobs, because here if you are fair dinkum and want to have a go, there's more jobs here then you could poke a stick at. The problem is that they que jump and cost the tax payer billions in food, accommodation, and medical. If they what to come here the right way and be Aussies, then come on over.
C
Christian Soldier
Guest
Illegal immigrants take $1.6 billion from Arizona's education system, $694.8 million from health care services, $339.7 million in law enforcement and court costs, $85.5 million in welfare costs and $155.4 million in other general costs.
P
PoorOldSpike
Guest
Why do Arizona's citizens put up with it?
Why don't they organise mass demonstrations and publicly refuse to vote for politicians who are soft on the problem?
Can't a high barbed-wire fence be built along the Arizona-Mexico border and patrolled?
And why can't the people who hire illegals be jailed?
Why don't they organise mass demonstrations and publicly refuse to vote for politicians who are soft on the problem?
Can't a high barbed-wire fence be built along the Arizona-Mexico border and patrolled?
And why can't the people who hire illegals be jailed?
C
Christian Soldier
Guest
Invade definitely works. You think maybe I should us a wimpy word like visit.
in•vade
v. in•vad•ed, in•vad•ing, in•vades
v.tr.
1. To enter by force in order to conquer or pillage.
2. To encroach or intrude on; violate: "The principal of the trusts could not be invaded without trustee approval" (Barbara Goldsmith).
3. To overrun as if by invading; infest: "About 1917 the shipworm invaded the harbor of San Francisco" (Rachel Carson).
4. To enter and permeate, especially harmfully
J
Johnsy
Guest
In Australia, our Prime Minister Keven Rudd will be very lucky to get voted back in to power for a 2nd term, because he went soft on 'boat people' and the outcry here is deafening. Before he changed the laws, we would get 5 to 8 boat a year. Since he changed the laws just over 2 years ago, we have had 160 boats come in to Australia, Aussies are pretty p*ssed off.
J
Johnsy
Guest
Invade is the perfect word for it.
C
Christian Soldier
Guest
We have federal laws in place that address your questions. Our constitution states that it is the federal government that is responsible for controlling the borders but they are not enforcing their own laws. Washington D.C. has their panties in a bunch now because Arizona passed a mirror of the federal law for a state and local level enforcement.
M
mfred
Guest
Well, after finding this: http://history.state.gov/milestones/1830-1860/TexasAnnexation
U.S. Troops in Mexico
"In July, 1845, Polk, who had been elected on a platform of expansionism, ordered the commander of the U.S. Army in Texas, Zachary Taylor, to move his forces into the disputed lands that lay between the Nueces and Rio Grande rivers. In November, Polk dispatched Congressman John Slidell to Mexico with instructions to negotiate the purchase of the disputed areas along the Texas-Mexican border, and the territory comprising the present-day states of New Mexico and California.
Following the failure of Slidell’s mission in May 1846, Polk used news of skirmishes between Mexican troops and Taylor’s army to gain Congressional support for a declaration of war against Mexico. The President neglected to inform Congress, however, that the Mexicans had used force only after Taylor’s troops had positioned themselves on the banks of the Rio Grande River, which was effectively Mexican territory. On May 13, 1846, the United States declared war on Mexico."
I am even less convinced that these Mexicans can be called "invaders". :suspicious:
U.S. Troops in Mexico
"In July, 1845, Polk, who had been elected on a platform of expansionism, ordered the commander of the U.S. Army in Texas, Zachary Taylor, to move his forces into the disputed lands that lay between the Nueces and Rio Grande rivers. In November, Polk dispatched Congressman John Slidell to Mexico with instructions to negotiate the purchase of the disputed areas along the Texas-Mexican border, and the territory comprising the present-day states of New Mexico and California.
Following the failure of Slidell’s mission in May 1846, Polk used news of skirmishes between Mexican troops and Taylor’s army to gain Congressional support for a declaration of war against Mexico. The President neglected to inform Congress, however, that the Mexicans had used force only after Taylor’s troops had positioned themselves on the banks of the Rio Grande River, which was effectively Mexican territory. On May 13, 1846, the United States declared war on Mexico."
I am even less convinced that these Mexicans can be called "invaders". :suspicious:
P
PoorOldSpike
Guest
Good, so it would seem that the ball is now in the Arizona politicians court to seal off the border. But if they're all hot air the voters can vote them out as soon as possible, that's how democracy works..
Incidentally to briefly summarise Britains immigration policy, it's-
Labour Party- "Keep on coming in unlimited numbers"
Conservative Party- "Keep on coming but only in tens of thousands"
Libdem Party- "An amnesty for all illegal immigrants and let 'em stay"
British National Party- "Not one more immigrant on British soil, and deport all illegals already here"
C
Christian Soldier
Guest
Mfred, you are skipping what happened before your post. Texas won its independence from Mexico in 1836 and treaties were signed. Mexico broke the treaty because they never recognized The Republic of Texas. In that same year The Republic of Texas requested annexation by the United States. U.S. President Martin Van Buren refuses to consider it, however, citing fear of war with an already defeated Mexico. In 1837 The Republic of Texas is officially recognized by the United States, and later by France, England, the Netherlands and Belgium.
So as you can see Mexico had no right to have troops in Texas to prevent the annexation by the United States. Mexico has only itself to blame that it lost even more land (spoils of war) by trying to prevent the annexation of Texas.
But if we follow your logic then Mexico really belongs to Spain as does Florida and California. The east coast of the U.S. belongs to Great Britain and Canada belongs to France.
C
Christian Soldier
Guest
Thank you Cargol...being here illegally is enough for me.
For those of you that don’t get that it means AGAINST THE LAW. It doesn’t matter if you think it is a stupid law it is still the law and should be enforced. Some people think it is a stupid law that it is illegal to beat your wife but it is a law and should be enforced.