Facts About Military on the Border
Comments
-
"Whatever". CM
-
@C_M_ said:
"Whatever". CMYou can say whatever, but it's true. I don't watch Fox News. Why? We don't have cable television.
-
-
@C_M_ said:
...?
-
Where are the mothers and children, now?
Send the military to fight the fires in California; at least, your National Guards. Why America has such poor leadership in such time of a real crisis? I guess some will still try to blame Obama. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
Where are the mothers and children, now?Send the military to fight the fires in California; at least, your National Guards. Why America has such poor leadership in such time of a real crisis? I guess some will still try to blame Obama. CM
The military isn't for fighting fires....
-
@reformed said:
@C_M_ said:
Where are the mothers and children, now?Send the military to fight the fires in California; at least, your National Guards. Why America has such poor leadership in such time of a real crisis? I guess some will still try to blame Obama. CM
The military isn't for fighting fires....
Nor does the American Army is quipped (lawful) to stop Asylum Seekers and Immigrants (harmless women/ children). The military is to fight enemies (Foreign and domestics). I thought you knew American laws and the one pretends to the Army? Disappointed. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
@reformed said:
@C_M_ said:
Where are the mothers and children, now?Send the military to fight the fires in California; at least, your National Guards. Why America has such poor leadership in such time of a real crisis? I guess some will still try to blame Obama. CM
The military isn't for fighting fires....
Nor does the American Army is quipped (lawful) to stop Asylum Seekers and Immigrants (harmless women/ children). The military is to fight enemies (Foreign and domestics). I thought you knew American laws and the one pretends to the Army? Disappointed. CM
Lies again. It is not harmless women and children. They are enemies from a foreign land coming to break into our nation. It is a threat whether your feeble mind thinks so or not.
-
@reformed said:
Lies again. It is not harmless women and children. They are enemies from a foreign land coming to break into our nation. It is a threat whether your feeble mind thinks so or not.
What is the factual basis for your claim that the remnant of those who make it the remaining hundreds of miles to the US border are "enemies" of the United States?
-
@reformed said:
The military isn't for fighting fires....Nor does the American Army is quipped (lawful) to stop Asylum Seekers and Immigrants (harmless women/ children). The military is to fight enemies (Foreign and domestics). I thought you knew American laws and the one pretends to the Army? Disappointed. CM
Lies again. It is not harmless women and children. They are enemies from a foreign land coming to break into our nation. It is a threat whether your feeble mind thinks so or not.
Reformed,
I noticed you conveniently overlooked my point and question...The military is to fight enemies (Foreign and domestics). I thought you knew American laws and the one pretends to the Army? Disappointed. CM
Let's not major in minors. Do you know or not? CM
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
Lies again. It is not harmless women and children. They are enemies from a foreign land coming to break into our nation. It is a threat whether your feeble mind thinks so or not.
What is the factual basis for your claim that the remnant of those who make it the remaining hundreds of miles to the US border are "enemies" of the United States?
en·e·my
/ˈenəmē/Submit
noun
a person who is actively opposed or hostile to someone or something.
synonyms: opponent, adversary, foe, archenemy, rival, antagonist, combatant, challenger, competitor, opposer; More
a hostile nation or its armed forces or citizens, especially in time of war.
noun: the enemy
"the enemy shot down four helicopters"
a thing that harms or weakens something else.
"routine is the enemy of art"@C_M_ said:
@reformed said:
The military isn't for fighting fires....Nor does the American Army is quipped (lawful) to stop Asylum Seekers and Immigrants (harmless women/ children). The military is to fight enemies (Foreign and domestics). I thought you knew American laws and the one pretends to the Army? Disappointed. CM
Lies again. It is not harmless women and children. They are enemies from a foreign land coming to break into our nation. It is a threat whether your feeble mind thinks so or not.
Reformed,
I noticed you conveniently overlooked my point and question...What point did I overlook?
The military is to fight enemies (Foreign and domestics). I thought you knew American laws and the one pretends to the Army? Disappointed. CM
Let's not major in minors. Do you know or not? CM
That's actually not the purpose of the military. Look at the military oath again. If you are going to quote things at least do it right.
-
@reformed said:
What is the factual basis for your claim that the remnant of those who make it the remaining hundreds of miles to the US border are "enemies" of the United States?
en·e·my
/ˈenəmē/Submit
noun
a person who is actively opposed or hostile to someone or something.
synonyms: opponent, adversary, foe, archenemy, rival, antagonist, combatant, challenger, competitor, opposer; More
a hostile nation or its armed forces or citizens, especially in time of war.
noun: the enemy
"the enemy shot down four helicopters"
a thing that harms or weakens something else.
"routine is the enemy of art"I asked you for the factual basis for your claim than any participants in the so-called "caravan" who make it to the US border are "enemies" of the United States. You gave me a definition of the word "enemy."
Because I didn't ask you for a definition of the word "enemy," I'll ask my question again: What is the factual basis for your claim that the remnant of those who make it the remaining hundreds of miles to the US border are "enemies" of the United States? [In other words, what is your proof that whoever ends up making it to our border in a month or more will be "actively opposed or hostile" to the United States?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
What is the factual basis for your claim that the remnant of those who make it the remaining hundreds of miles to the US border are "enemies" of the United States?
en·e·my
/ˈenəmē/Submit
noun
a person who is actively opposed or hostile to someone or something.
synonyms: opponent, adversary, foe, archenemy, rival, antagonist, combatant, challenger, competitor, opposer; More
a hostile nation or its armed forces or citizens, especially in time of war.
noun: the enemy
"the enemy shot down four helicopters"
a thing that harms or weakens something else.
"routine is the enemy of art"I asked you for the factual basis for your claim than any participants in the so-called "caravan" who make it to the US border are "enemies" of the United States. You gave me a definition of the word "enemy."
Because I didn't ask you for a definition of the word "enemy," I'll ask my question again: What is the factual basis for your claim that the remnant of those who make it the remaining hundreds of miles to the US border are "enemies" of the United States? [In other words, what is your proof that whoever ends up making it to our border in a month or more will be "actively opposed or hostile" to the United States?
They pose a threat. A physical/economical/criminal threat.
-
@reformed said:
They pose a threat. A physical/economical/criminal threat.
First, you offered a definition instead of proof. Now you offer your opinion rather than proof. So I have to ask you a third time: What is the factual basis for your claim that the remnant of those who make it the remaining hundreds of miles to the US border are "enemies" of the United States? [In other words, what is your proof that whoever ends up making it to our border in a month or more will be "actively opposed or hostile" to the United States?]
-
@Bill_Coley said:
... [In other words, what is your proof that whoever ends up making it to our border in a month or more will be "actively opposed or hostile" to the United States?]_If they endeavor to enter the USA illegally they are actively opposed to the USA ... IF I tried that by getting on a plane and wanting to enter the USA without proper visa etc, I would not be allowed past the "international zone" in the airport and would be put on the next plane back to where I came from (at my own cost) in addition for being fined.
There are simple plain and rather clear laws and rules for entering the USA, be it as a tourist, a visitor, conducting business, a refugee, etc. IF a person does not adhere to these laws and regulations they are "opposed and hostile" to the USA.
-
@Wolfgang said:
If they endeavor to enter the USA illegally they are actively opposed to the USA ... IF I tried that by getting on a plane and wanting to enter the USA without proper visa etc, I would not be allowed past the "international zone" in the airport and would be put on the next plane back to where I came from (at my own cost) in addition for being fined.
There are simple plain and rather clear laws and rules for entering the USA, be it as a tourist, a visitor, conducting business, a refugee, etc. IF a person does not adhere to these laws and regulations they are "opposed and hostile" to the USA.
I asked for proof, Wolfgang, and you've given me your opinion and a hypothetical.
"IF they endeavor to enter the USA illegally...."
What is your proof that the people of that diminishing group of people "endeavor to enter the USA illegally? I'm NOT asking what you EXPECT them to do, or what you BELIEVE they will do, or what you PREDICT they will do. I'm asking how you KNOW what they will do. In other words, what is your proof?And "IF a person does not adhere to these laws and regulations they are "opposed and hostile" to the USA."
This is clearly your opinion, one to which you are entitled. It is not, however, a fact. -
@Bill_Coley said:
I asked for proof, Wolfgang, and you've given me your opinion and a hypothetical."IF they endeavor to enter the USA illegally...."
What is your proof that the people of that diminishing group of people "endeavor to enter the USA illegally?Some of the various news reports certainly indicate that they are not in possession of valid USA visas, have not applied properly at USA embassy/consulate in their countries of origin, etc ... and thus would definitely be endeavoring to enter the USA illegally ... Now, it seems that Trump has actually begun to take some steps to install some more points of entry along the border where they may apply for asylum and get into a procedure at the end of which they either will be granted asylum status or not.
I'm NOT asking what you EXPECT them to do, or what you BELIEVE they will do, or what you PREDICT they will do. I'm asking how you KNOW what they will do. In other words, what is your proof?
Oh ... news and media reports and some logical thinking.
And "IF a person does not adhere to these laws and regulations they are "opposed and hostile" to the USA."
This is clearly your opinion, one to which you are entitled. It is not, however, a fact.Hmn ... I see, you do not regard persons who are involved in illegal matters as being hostile to the USA ... now, whose opinion might that be?
-
@Wolfgang said:
Some of the various news reports certainly indicate that they are not in possession of valid USA visas, have not applied properly at USA embassy/consulate in their countries of origin, etc ... and thus would definitely be endeavoring to enter the USA illegally...As is clear from THIS U.S. GOVERNMENT SITE, persons who seek asylum in the US do NOT need to apply at the US embassy/consulate in their countries of origin. In fact, requiring such applications would seem to be unwise and contrary to the very nature of a person's search for asylum. Such persons, almost by definition, don't have the time or circumstances to process applications in the nations from which they seek to flee. Hence, your claim here is both inaccurate and immaterial.
Now, it seems that Trump has actually begun to take some steps to install some more points of entry along the border where they may apply for asylum and get into a procedure at the end of which they either will be granted asylum status or not.
This too is not accurate. The Trump administration recently announced a rule that would funnel all asylum seekers to ports of entry, thereby severely limiting, NOT expanding, opportunities to apply. To my knowledge, the Trump administration has made NO effort to increase the number of ports of entry along the border. I am open to correction, however. Please provide a link to the facts upon which you base your claim.
Oh ... news and media reports and some logical thinking.
I know of no media reports that objectively detail the intentions of those who are moving toward the border in the diminishing so-called "caravan." Please provide links.
Absent supporting facts, "logical thinking" sounds like a synonym for your own opinion.
This is clearly your opinion, one to which you are entitled. It is not, however, a fact.
Hmn ... I see, you do not regard persons who are involved in illegal matters as being hostile to the USA ... now, whose opinion might that be?
Your characterization of my opinion is more caricature than correct, but YES, I certainly acknowledge that my opinions are opinions, not facts. I hope my opinions are grounded in facts, and in my posts often provide links to those facts, but I readily confess that my opinions are opinions.
Speaking of facts upon which opinions are based, I look forward to the links I've requested from you in this post that will back up what I believe are your inaccurate assertions of fact.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@Wolfgang said:
If they endeavor to enter the USA illegally they are actively opposed to the USA ... IF I tried that by getting on a plane and wanting to enter the USA without proper visa etc, I would not be allowed past the "international zone" in the airport and would be put on the next plane back to where I came from (at my own cost) in addition for being fined.
There are simple plain and rather clear laws and rules for entering the USA, be it as a tourist, a visitor, conducting business, a refugee, etc. IF a person does not adhere to these laws and regulations they are "opposed and hostile" to the USA.
I asked for proof, Wolfgang, and you've given me your opinion and a hypothetical.
"IF they endeavor to enter the USA illegally...."
What is your proof that the people of that diminishing group of people "endeavor to enter the USA illegally? I'm NOT asking what you EXPECT them to do, or what you BELIEVE they will do, or what you PREDICT they will do. I'm asking how you KNOW what they will do. In other words, what is your proof?And "IF a person does not adhere to these laws and regulations they are "opposed and hostile" to the USA."
This is clearly your opinion, one to which you are entitled. It is not, however, a fact.Considering what we have seen them do already at border crossings of other nations......tearing down walls, throwing things at guards.....
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@Wolfgang said:
Some of the various news reports certainly indicate that they are not in possession of valid USA visas, have not applied properly at USA embassy/consulate in their countries of origin, etc ... and thus would definitely be endeavoring to enter the USA illegally...As is clear from THIS U.S. GOVERNMENT SITE, persons who seek asylum in the US do NOT need to apply at the US embassy/consulate in their countries of origin. In fact, requiring such applications would seem to be unwise and contrary to the very nature of a person's search for asylum. Such persons, almost by definition, don't have the time or circumstances to process applications in the nations from which they seek to flee. Hence, your claim here is both inaccurate and immaterial.
You provide nice indications which rather obviously lead to the fact that the folks currently being transported through Mexico to the USA have NO REASON WHATEVER to apply for asylum in the USA .... from what danger for their lives are they fleeing? what makes their flight so urgent that they are traveling (are being transported) in large crowds and not in a hurry at all? Is there a war going on in the countries from which they "flee"? Are they all in danger of persecution and threat for their life that they don't have time to apply for green card or proper work visa (in the case it is really their desire to emigrate to the USA and establish a new home there)?
IF they indeed were fleeing from a danger in their country they surely would not do as they are doing. The folks in this "multitude" by no means give the impression of being real refugees, of being real asylum candidates ... one only needs to look at the TV coverage showing a few scenes of what is going on, then learn from which countries they are coming and take a look at a map to see through which countries they are traveling (or more accurately, "are being transported") ... evidence is right in front of one's eyes for all to see (except for blind folks who can't see)
-
@Wolfgang said:
You provide nice indications which rather obviously lead to the fact that the folks currently being transported through Mexico to the USA have NO REASON WHATEVER to apply for asylum in the USA ....Here you make another suspect claim of fact. I know of no widespread effort to "transport" people in that group to the border. I am aware that a plan to bus them fell apart early this month, but I am not aware that any significant proportion of the group is being transported. Please provide a link to the factual basis for your claim.
from what danger for their lives are they fleeing? what makes their flight so urgent that they are traveling (are being transported) in large crowds and not in a hurry at all? Is there a war going on in the countries from which they "flee"? Are they all in danger of persecution and threat for their life that they don't have time to apply for green card or proper work visa (in the case it is really their desire to emigrate to the USA and establish a new home there)?
The danger and hardship of life in Honduras and Guatemala are easily discovered in a Google search, but it doesn't matter for our discussion. The purpose of the asylum application process is to decide whether applicants have the necessary credentials. It is NOT illegal to seek asylum! A person might get turned down, but it is NOT illegal to apply.
IF they indeed were fleeing from a danger in their country they surely would not do as they are doing. The folks in this "multitude" by no means give the impression of being real refugees, of being real asylum candidates ... one only needs to look at the TV coverage showing a few scenes of what is going on, then learn from which countries they are coming and take a look at a map to see through which countries they are traveling (or more accurately, "are being transported") ... evidence is right in front of one's eyes for all to see (except for blind folks who can't see)
You seem to believe that those who disagree with you are among the "blind folks," so it might not mean much for me to tell you I disagree. Your interpretation of the "evidence... right in front of one's eyes" is different from mine.
In my last post, I asked you for evidence to support your claim that the Trump administration is taking action to increase the number of port of entry along the border. I renew that request.
In that post, I also asked for links to information that served as the factual basis for your claim of the existence of media reports that prove the nefarious intentions of those still headed toward our border. I renew that request as well.
-
IF they indeed were fleeing from a danger in their country they surely would not do as they are doing. The folks in this "multitude" by no means give the impression of being real refugees, of being real asylum candidates ... one only needs to look at the TV coverage showing a few scenes of what is going on, then learn from which countries they are coming and take a look at a map to see through which countries they are traveling (or more accurately, "are being transported") ... evidence is right in front of one's eyes for all to see (except for blind folks who can't see)
In both posts, the sights are fake news -- propaganda. Staged scenes to persuade opinions.
Wolfgang,
Look back on Germany's history. CM -
@C_M_ said:
IF they indeed were fleeing from a danger in their country they surely would not do as they are doing. The folks in this "multitude" by no means give the impression of being real refugees, of being real asylum candidates ... one only needs to look at the TV coverage showing a few scenes of what is going on, then learn from which countries they are coming and take a look at a map to see through which countries they are traveling (or more accurately, "are being transported") ... evidence is right in front of one's eyes for all to see (except for blind folks who can't see)
In both posts, the sights are fake news -- propaganda. Staged scenes to persuade opinions.
Wolfgang,
Look back on Germany's history. CMWhat is your proof that these are staged scenes?
-
Wasting of America's treasure. "Mad Dog", Mattis, said the Army will not come in contact with the migrants (innocent, harmless mothers and children). The political show continues. Sad.
CM -
The US Military can't collect information or detain people on American soil. They will have no contact with the migrants and Asylum Seekers. The traveling group of unarmed and harmless women and children arrived in Tijuana, Mexico. Don't "freak out" America! CM
-
@C_M_ said:
In both posts, the sights are fake news -- propaganda. Staged scenes to persuade opinions.Could you tell us who faked the videos and used them to propagate fake news? For what purpose?
-
I don't know. It's too good to believe. Come on, Wolfgang! Can you prove it's not fake news? There is no non-reporting documentation. IMOP, "Fake News".
The purpose: Who benefits most? Who used it the most before the mid-term.
Who were the good people on both sides in Charlottesville, VA.? CM -
When you do not know, then just keep silent. It's better ... for you and everybody else
Come on, Wolfgang! Can you prove it's not fake news?
The burden of proof is on you who claims it is fake news! One can not prove something that is not ...
The purpose: Who benefits most? Who used it the most before the mid-term.
Seems like the Democrats and liberals and powers behind them instigated the matter to influence the mid-term elections in their favor and as a hindrance for Trump's party. The timing ended up to be somewhat off, and in addition, Trump seems to not have fallen for the trap and took steps unexpected by his opponents.
Who were the good people on both sides in Charlottesville, VA.? CM
Well, who were the good people? what made them to be good while the others were bad?
-
@Wolfgang said:
When you do not know, then just keep silent. It's better ... for you and everybody else
Come on, Wolfgang! Can you prove it's not fake news?
The burden of proof is on you who claims it is fake news! One can not prove something that is not ...
The purpose: Who benefits most? Who used it the most before the mid-term.
Seems like the Democrats and liberals and powers behind them instigated the matter to influence the mid-term elections in their favor and as a hindrance for Trump's party. The timing ended up to be somewhat off, and in addition, Trump seems to not have fallen for the trap and took steps unexpected by his opponents.
Who were the good people on both sides in Charlottesville, VA.? CM
Well, who were the good people? what made them to be good while the others were bad?
All of it is nonsense and vexation of spirits. Period! The American system is a mess right now. You should thank God for Germany. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
All of it is nonsense and vexation of spirits. Period!A big fat claim from you ... why don't you simply answer questions you were asked? why don't you admit that your point perhaps was wrong or invalid if the questions you were asked point in that direction?
The American system is a mess right now. You should thank God for Germany.
Well, let me tell you that Germany is in just as bad a mess or in a worse mess due to what has been imposed on the country by its Merkel regime.
The American system is in the state in which it is in because of various presidents and their regimes which over several decades now have served the deep state and Zionist controlled empire and have taken away what previously were somewhat cherished values ... such as liberty, constitutional rights, etc .... Just to put it bluntly to you => Trump has only been in office for less than two years and entered into the mess which previous "president actors" set up.
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)