Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

The Wall


Sweetpumper

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, aquatus1 said:

The sad part is that, all things being equal, you probably would, and I would likely have to worry a bit more about defending myself.  That is the society we currently live in.

Yes, they should be eating cake instead.

 

Again, the irony deficiency shows.  Good thing you were paying attention, or it might have slipped past you.

 

Yeah, so has politics.  And Republicans.  And Democrats. and traditional nuclear families.  And marriage.  And yadda yadda yadda everythingIdontagreewiththathaslittletonothingtodowiththeOP.

 

Yeah, they should not have been born poor.  Everyone knows the best way to start a business is with a million dollar loan.

That is indeed what it calls itself, right above the part about referring to foreign countries as rats and criminals and pointing out that mutual respect is not necessary as long as you can bully them into doing what you want.

Oh, yes. We want to bully them into obeying our immigration laws which you feel they have a perfect right to break.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, the United States is not (nor should it be) responsible for the citizens of other nations. If someone desires to leave their nation and immigrate to the United States then they need to do so legally. Right now the USA is 20 trillion in debt, we need to focus on fixing that and being able to care for our own citizens. If this makes me a 'bad person' in the eyes of globalists then so be it. I grow tired of being told that people who are non-citizens, who violated the law with illegal entry, who are citizens of another country deserve the exact same rights and privileges as legal citizens. Seriously, can I just up and sneak into other countries then demand full citizen's rights from their governments? I suspect with some countries I'd find myself in a 'not so nice' prison pretty damn quick. Oh, but the United States is 'just terrible' to want to secure its own borders and insist upon legal immigration...give me a break.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lilly said:

The thing is, the United States is not (nor should it be) responsible for the citizens of other nations. If someone desires to leave their nation and immigrate to the United States then they need to do so legally. Right now the USA is 20 trillion in debt, we need to focus on fixing that and being able to care for our own citizens. If this makes me a 'bad person' in the eyes of globalists then so be it. I grow tired of being told that people who are non-citizens, who violated the law with illegal entry, who are citizens of another country deserve the exact same rights and privileges as legal citizens. Seriously, can I just up and sneak into other countries then demand full citizen's rights from their governments? I suspect with some countries I'd find myself in a 'not so nice' prison pretty damn quick. Oh, but the United States is 'just terrible' to want to secure its own borders and insist upon legal immigration...give me a break.

When I post something like this, I get called a racist and certain posters claim I hate Mexicans.  If what you type p***es off people because it's right and morally sound, then keep posting it.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Thorvir said:

When I post something like this, I get called a racist and certain posters claim I hate Mexicans.  If what you type p***es off people because it's right and morally sound, then keep posting it.

I don't hate anyone based on their racial and/or ethnic group. Americans come in all races and from all ethnic origins. All I desire is that the laws of the United States of America be followed.

If following the Constitution of the United States makes me a 'bad person' in the eyes of some...then so be it. Many, many good/brave people have spilled their blood, laid down their very lives for our Democratic Republic. I'll be damned if I'm going to disrespect their great sacrifice and stand by silently while the laws of our country are violated.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/14/2017 at 5:57 AM, aquatus1 said:

Meanwhile, the president elect is threatening companies who are trying to set up in Mexico, thus making it harder for them to prosper and become a place people want to stay in.

Is there a better way to influence US Corporations then threatening? From what I've seen US companies are now lining up to see if Trump will hand out treats if they re-invest in US interests. That looks like the carrot, and not the stick.

Quote

You could have just said a poor mother, or kids that kept coming into your yard, but no, for you, the mother has to be drugged out, and the kids are sent intentionally.  You don't think that is the sort of thing that p***es off Mexican's?  Being called rapists, criminals, and now being compared to drugged out mothers?  Are you surprised that anyone would have a problem negotiating in good faith with a country that talks about them like that?

Fair enough. But the truth is Mexico in many ways is a broken as a drugged out whore. Violence is a pandemic there. Drug lords rule like Feudal Barons. Average US citizens risk their life and finances if they so much as go across the border. They risk being kidnapped, or killed out of hand. It is in the news nearly every week.

They need to get their House in order and doing that shouldn't be the US's chore. 

Quote

International politics are not easy.  They are not simple.  There is no such thing as a miracle pill or a magic bullet that will solve all the problems that exist between any two countries, and no, using schoolyard tactics like snipes and threats will not work; they never have, and no matter how much people like to think it is just because the person making the threats wasn't tough enough, they never will.  The only time they work is when you have a heartless dictator in place, and frankly, those kinds of governments never last more than their leaders lifetime.

Except it does work. Look at what Trump has done with just Twitter? Simple short remarks and Mexico is ready to discuss NAFTA and how it might be changed so they retain some benefit from it, while giving more benefit to the US. Why is that bully? Any negotiation starts with one having more strength/influence, and the other having to settle for less... Unless the stronger party forfeits to them. Trump thinks we shouldn't have forfeited benefit to them. 

Quote

As long as the president-elect keeps making noise that he will not allow companies to set up in Mexico, no one is going to believe there are greater chances in Mexico.  As long as there continue to be jobs in the U.S. that "Americans" won't do, there will still be crowds of Mexicans gathering on the parking lots of Home Depot.  Mexicans aren't competing with the Americans for those jobs; you don't see crowds of Americans waiting in parking lots for those jobs.  If we want Mexicans to stop coming over to the U.S., two things need to happen.  There has to be greater opportunity in Mexico, and there has to be less opportunity in the U.S.  Both have to happen, not just one or the other.

If there were no Mexicans at Home Depot, then those who need workers would pay more, and then you'd see teenagers and others down on their luck doing that work for $12 an hour, and thus benefiting the economy. Sure prices of some things would go up, but it seems they go up anyway. 

On 1/14/2017 at 8:12 PM, Frank Merton said:

Remember this -- Trump will go down in history as the most corrupt US President ever, out pacing even Harding by billions.  Practically every thing he does and says is riddled with corruption.  He won't release his taxes, he won't put his holding in blind trusts, he puts his family in control of his businesses and then puts them in government offices.  The American fools who vote for this sort of corruption just are blind -- for the life of me I don't understand it -- it has to be based on racism and fear of immigrants and things like that -- things of selfishness and small minds.

Most corrupt? That's a bit of a Conclusion made before he's even been sworn in.

Hey, doesn't this happen in Communism all the time? You have said many times that bribes/corruption is understood and allows things to move quicker in Vietnam, right?

True, Trump isn't a communist, but government is government, yes?

On 1/15/2017 at 4:42 PM, Frank Merton said:

It begins to look just possible (although only remotely, and it might happen because of Trump's stupidity rather than disloyalty) that Trump intends to hand the US over to the Russians.  Suddenly nato is "obsolete," suddenly he would exchange sanctions for troop withdrawals (from Poland?)) It also looks that Syria and Ukraine are already in surrender mode.

I think that is entirely laughable. How could the Russians take charge of anything? What would they control?? 

NATO is obsolete, because the situation it was to protect against, the expansion of the Soviet Union, doesn't exist anymore. Sure, Russia might threaten to take over a Baltic state at some point, but just the EU by itself should be able to prevent that. The other point is the NATO sponges up a whole lot of money from the US, while protected states pay little or nothing. The strong should be paid by the weak if they expect protection. That is capitalism.

Quote

Regardless of all that, the insanity I am seeing (and the threats -- don't tell me "we will remember what you say" is not a threat) is that the American patriots aren't all that patriotic, and have been fully flim-flammed by this con artist.  OK -- they set themselves up for this a long time ago with all the talk about loss of American liberty and resisting with guns and of course the racism that is underneath all this.

By the way, call me a "socialist" and you don't get read.  That is just absurd.  I have over and over emphasized that I do not like dogma -- political or otherwise, but am a pragmatist.  Ronald Reagan was my favorite America President -- I've said that several times -- but he was honest and understood Russia.

I'm reading this and still thinking... this is laughable. It is what I would expect of someone who only knew the US through a few selected TV shows.

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/14/2017 at 9:18 AM, aquatus1 said:

The reason the neighbors kids keep coming over is because they get paid to do the chores no one in that household likes to do.

You're neglecting that a bunch of them work and then sleep on the nieghbor's couch, eat their food, use their computer, and have extension cords running out windows and back over to their own house.

Paying the neighbor kids $3 an hour to do chores just isn't worth it if they eat $2.5 an hour of your food too. When your own kids would work for $5 an hour, it is actually cheaper. 

AND, I don't know about how you grew up, but most people FORCE their kids to do the chores. If there is no neighbors to do the chores, then, YES, someone will still do them. Clothes don't wash themselves, nor dishes, yet.....

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me the real issue isn't people who want to come into the United States for work and opportunity. I think we need to be honest here, not everyone who enters the US illegally is just looking for work and a better life. I'll give you that the majority are...but criminals do indeed enter into the United States illegally because they can't do it legally. The entire point of legal immigration is to insure that the people looking to work hard and get a better life are the ones we let in. That's the point...that's all.

Control of immigration is not some great big hairy racist conspiracy to 'only let white people in'. The only groups I can see that we want to keep out are criminals and terrorists. Why is this wrong? Why do we have to pretend that everyone entering our country illegally is 'nice' and only 'looking for a better life'? This may be politically correct but it's not reality. In reality all countries have their criminal elements and those criminals will work with our criminals to make everyone's lives worse/miserable. And guess whose lives these criminals really tend to prey upon? If you guessed their own ethnic group you'd be correct.

Bottom line: We need to know exactly who is coming into our country.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

Oh, yes. We want to bully them into obeying our immigration laws which you feel they have a perfect right to break.

Unsurprisingly, your assumption about how others feel has led you to an incorrect conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh...if something is a law then it's not "bullying" when law enforcement goes forth to stop folks from breaking the law....it's just enforcing the law.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Is there a better way to influence US Corporations then threatening? From what I've seen US companies are now lining up to see if Trump will hand out treats if they re-invest in US interests. That looks like the carrot, and not the stick.

That's because you are not a businessman.  If you were, you would understand that it is indeed a stick, and not a carrot.  What you are getting wrong is the part about who is holding the stick.

Quote

Fair enough. But the truth is Mexico in many ways is a broken as a drugged out whore. Violence is a pandemic there. Drug lords rule like Feudal Barons. Average US citizens risk their life and finances if they so much as go across the border. They risk being kidnapped, or killed out of hand. It is in the news nearly every week.

And yet, referring to all of them in general, particularly to the government entities which the subject of this thread would be dealing with, as "drugged out whores" doesn't seem to be helping resolve the conflict.

Quote

They need to get their House in order and doing that shouldn't be the US's chore. 

No, it shouldn't.  But, if you do indeed believe all of Mexico can be adequately described as a "drugged out whore", then it would be foolish to expect it to pick itself up and not act like one.  That is not a thing that drugged out whores do, and complaining that the drugged out whore isn't acting in a wholesome way is silly.

Quote

Except it does work. Look at what Trump has done with just Twitter? Simple short remarks and Mexico is ready to discuss NAFTA and how it might be changed so they retain some benefit from it, while giving more benefit to the US. Why is that bully? Any negotiation starts with one having more strength/influence, and the other having to settle for less... Unless the stronger party forfeits to them. Trump thinks we shouldn't have forfeited benefit to them. 

It is bullying in the same way that poison pen notes and gossip-mongering is bullying.  Actual, respectful, egalitarian, negotiation doesn't start with the bully making smearing remarks.  It begins when both parties are at the table.  Once you are at the table, that is when you begin power plays and p***ing contests.  If you are already pulling out your tiny hands on the playground, all you are doing is bullying.

Quote

If there were no Mexicans at Home Depot, then those who need workers would pay more, and then you'd see teenagers and others down on their luck doing that work for $12 an hour, and thus benefiting the economy. Sure prices of some things would go up, but it seems they go up anyway. 

Then I stand corrected.  I will rephrase: Immigrant workers are willing to do the work Americans don't want to do because they feel the work is beneath them and will not do it unless they get paid more to overcome their feeling of inadequacy regarding that.ugh a few selected TV shows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Lilly said:

For me the real issue isn't people who want to come into the United States for work and opportunity. I think we need to be honest here, not everyone who enters the US illegally is just looking for work and a better life. I'll give you that the majority are...but criminals do indeed enter into the United States illegally because they can't do it legally. The entire point of legal immigration is to insure that the people looking to work hard and get a better life are the ones we let in. That's the point...that's all.

Control of immigration is not some great big hairy racist conspiracy to 'only let white people in'. The only groups I can see that we want to keep out are criminals and terrorists. Why is this wrong? Why do we have to pretend that everyone entering our country illegally is 'nice' and only 'looking for a better life'? This may be politically correct but it's not reality. In reality all countries have their criminal elements and those criminals will work with our criminals to make everyone's lives worse/miserable. And guess whose lives these criminals really tend to prey upon? If you guessed their own ethnic group you'd be correct.

Bottom line: We need to know exactly who is coming into our country.

I think the assumption seems to be that if He starts deporting illegal immigrants, then He won't be satisfied with that and then He'll go on to deporting all Mexicans and all Muslims and all so on, and then probably move on to the Jews, and the LGBTQ community, and so on, and so on, because that's what megalomaniacs always do. It's exactly the same with V. V. Poot'n; people just seem to assume that He'll naturally want to invade Europe and eventually rule the world because that;s just what megalomaniacs always do, goddammit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, DieChecker said:

You're neglecting that a bunch of them work and then sleep on the nieghbor's couch, eat their food, use their computer, and have extension cords running out windows and back over to their own house.

I think the metaphor has been tortured beyond usefulness.

Quote

Paying the neighbor kids $3 an hour to do chores just isn't worth it if they eat $2.5 an hour of your food too. When your own kids would work for $5 an hour, it is actually cheaper. 

Because most Americans are perfectly happy paying others to do work they consider beneath them.

Quote

AND, I don't know about how you grew up, but most people FORCE their kids to do the chores. If there is no neighbors to do the chores, then, YES, someone will still do them. Clothes don't wash themselves, nor dishes, yet...

I actually don't know very many people who forced their kids to do chores.  Then again, I don't consider loading clothes into a washing machine to be all that much of a chore either.  Chores were done by whomever was willing to do them, and if the kids wanted to earn some pocket money by doing them, they would.  "Allowance" was also something I never saw parents gave their kids growing up.  Any chores you did, you got money for.  Anything you didn't, you didn't get money for; someone else who did it got the money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

I think the assumption seems to be that if He starts deporting illegal immigrants, then He won't be satisfied with that and then He'll go on to deporting all Mexicans and all Muslims and all so on, and then probably move on to the Jews, and the LGBTQ community, and so on, and so on, because that's what megalomaniacs always do. It's exactly the same with V. V. Poot'n; people just seem to assume that He'll naturally want to invade Europe and eventually rule the world because that;s just what megalomaniacs always do, goddammit. 

That's a lot of assumptions some folks are making then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Lilly said:

Uh...if something is a law then it's not "bullying" when law enforcement goes forth to stop folks from breaking the law....it's just enforcing the law.

There is no law regarding the descriptive comments Trump is making towards other people.

At least, not at his level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lilly said:

That's a lot of assumptions some folks are making then.

Well...in all fairness, it is a pattern that has occurred before, and in this particular case, there are some rather on-the-nose textbook signs.

Now, that said, the First World is a much different place than it was 80 years ago.  The growth of global communication has made the pattern much clearer and much more obvious to discern.  We have indeed, hard as it is to believe, learned from our history.  The question is whether we can put that learning to use, or whether we will simply fall back into the habits of old and follow the pattern to its usual conclusion.  And the answer to that is a resounding "Maybe".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem is exactly who the "descriptive comments" are supposed to be about. If one is talking about actual criminals and terrorists it's one thing. However, if said comments are about basically innocent folks who pose no real problems and have only violated the law to obtain work and opportunity then it's another thing entirely. Remember I said: "not everyone who enters the US illegally is just looking for work and a better life. I'll give you that the majority are...but criminals do indeed enter into the United States illegally because they can't do it legally."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's all well and good, however the context wasn't about the immigrants in the U.S., but rather about improvement in the Mexican infrastructure that would prevent such immigration, illegal or otherwise.  If one is calling someone all sorts of denigrating terms, then where is the logic in then complaining that they don't fix themselves?  What is the purpose in claiming that they need to do so.

Either you (the general "you", not you personally) honestly believe that someone is worthless to the point of insulting them on the public (arguably, international) stage, then you need to acknowledge that if you want something done, you will need to get involved, because worthless people don't generally fix their own problems.

Alternatively, if you do believe they could actually fix themselves, then what are you doing calling them all as a society "rapists", "criminals", and "drugged out whores"?  Are you trying to improve them?  Are you trying to motivate them?  In the same way the courts refer to as "abusive tactics" when talking about parents or significant others", perhaps.  Insulting people when you don't actually believe the insults is bullying.  It's a childish power play.  Yes, there is a place for power play in all negotiations, but that place is not before the negotiations even take place.  Power is best used in disciplined and measured amounts for specific gains.  That is the difference between a tactician and a bully, between a wise ruler, and king Joffrey.  When rulers get in the habit of using power indiscriminately for any situation, especially in situations where negotiation has not even started yet, that's when you get dictators.  That is when you get people who believe their power supersedes the wishes of anyone else.  That is the sign of a rising tyrant.  These are the things we have learned from the history of humanity.

Whether or not we, as a society, have advanced enough to the point that we will not tolerate it is a different question.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my personal opinion: If one is specifically referencing drug cartels, gangsters, thieves, rapists as specific sub-group of any society (keep in mind such a sub-groups exist in all nations and ethnic groups) then I don't have any problem with using governmental power to shut them down, incarcerate them, deport them (if non-citizens) and so forth. This is simply not the same thing as saying all people of any nation, ethnic group, religious affiliation, race are by definition 'criminals'.. That type of reasoning is indeed bigotry and racism...and that is utterly despicable.

 

Edited by Lilly
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aquatus1 said:

Well...in all fairness, it is a pattern that has occurred before, and in this particular case, there are some rather on-the-nose textbook signs.

Now, that said, the First World is a much different place than it was 80 years ago.  The growth of global communication has made the pattern much clearer and much more obvious to discern.  We have indeed, hard as it is to believe, learned from our history.  The question is whether we can put that learning to use, or whether we will simply fall back into the habits of old and follow the pattern to its usual conclusion.  And the answer to that is a resounding "Maybe".

And there it is again, ladies 'n' gentlemen, another sighting of the New Hitler analogy. Where's Mr. Trump's Mein Kampf in the bestseller list now? 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

And there it is again, ladies 'n' gentlemen, another sighting of the New Hitler analogy. Where's Mr. Trump's Mein Kampf in the bestseller list now? 

You are mistaken.  I am not using Hitler as an analogy or a metaphor.  I am using him as a precedent.

If you have a problem with Godwin's Law, I would be more than happy to use any of the other dictators throughout history to prove the exact same point.  Hitler was hardly unique.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, aquatus1 said:

You are mistaken.  I am not using Hitler as an analogy or a metaphor.  I am using him as a precedent.

If you have a problem with Godwin's Law, I would be more than happy to use any of the other dictators throughout history to prove the exact same point.  Hitler was hardly unique.

Why not Mao or Pol Pot? dare to be different! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, since you obviously know the definition of "analogy", aquatus, you thereby are saying that you are not comparing Hitler to Trump at all?

If there is no comparison between them, then there is no point in bringing it up. So you're either bringing the reference in for no reason, or you're obfuscating with your use of language in saying there is no intended analogy.

Huh. No good choice there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

Why not Mao or Pol Pot? dare to be different! 

I just offered to use anyone you wanted...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Socks Junior said:

Okay, since you obviously know the definition of "analogy", aquatus, you thereby are saying that you are not comparing Hitler to Trump at all?

If there is no comparison between them, then there is no point in bringing it up. So you're either bringing the reference in for no reason, or you're obfuscating with your use of language in saying there is no intended analogy.

Huh. No good choice there.

I'm not comparing the people.  I'm comparing the behaviors.  All the famous dictators all behave in the same way.  I am not saying that Trump is like Hitler.  I am saying that Trump, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, all have specific behaviors actions that are common to authoritarian dictators.

Basically, trying to dismiss this just by hand-waving the Godwin flag is missing the point.  This isn't about Hitler.  It's about behavioralism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.