Trump surrenders to Democrats

[Black Red Devil]

13 minutes ago, skliss said:

Why should we always be the ones to shell out to these countries? Let someone else do it for once. Or let them stay home and fix it themselves. I used to think it was our responsibility but years and years of the money we send being stolen by the corrupt govts and people flooding here and acting like we owe them has brought out the cynical in me.

Because they're flooding to your shores and you're already giving billions to countries that don't need the money.

[Big Jim]

1 minute ago, Black Red Devil said:

Because they're flooding to your shores and you're already giving billions to countries that don't need the money.

We also give money to the countries they're coming from.  It hasn't changed a thing.

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, Black Red Devil said:

So Israel is spending 75% of US aid on US military equipment.  So they're basically getting these weapons for free and you don't call that aid? 

Of course, it's aid.  The difference is that we get a lot of R&D benefit from giving it to them.  ALLIES, remember?  Hate on the Jewish state all you like.  No problem for me, man.  I get that their existence causes a lot of people fanatic dyspepsia.  They need to chill.  No way they'll ever get rid of them.  They'll try but all they'll accomplish is to burn down a lot of the region and maybe even the wider areas of the planet.  To what purpose?  Really.  What's it worth to destroy that state?  Millions could die and I think the world would still consider it a bargain.  It's pure insanity.

[Black Red Devil]

1 minute ago, Big Jim said:

We also give money to the countries they're coming from.  It hasn't changed a thing.

Probably not enough or rather not enough control on where, who and what the funds are appropriated for.  Anyway, in fairness it would be naive to believe this aid is a one way direction and Andthen did touch on it.  The US does get many undisclosed benefits out of these aid programs, specially to countries in the Middle East.  Probably aiding countries like Nicaragua, Guatemala etc. would be mostly humanitarian but overall it would probably assist in reducing illegals flooding to your border.  Whether it's cheaper than a full 3,100km, 5.7 billion wall, who knows.  But considering the current stalemate it might be the only alternative.

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, Black Red Devil said:

Mate, the wall is an absolute joke.  If you want to stop the flow, assist the poorer countries and give them an incentive to stay home. 

No, walls are no joke and they work every place they exist so long as there is a will to defend them.  How's that island concentration camp doing that OZ relies on to stop the "undesirables"?  I have no problem with rules that restrict immigration, I just hate hypocrites.

[Black Red Devil]

2 minutes ago, and then said:

Of course, it's aid.  The difference is that we get a lot of R&D benefit from giving it to them.  ALLIES, remember?  Hate on the Jewish state all you like.  No problem for me, man.  I get that their existence causes a lot of people fanatic dyspepsia.  They need to chill.  No way they'll ever get rid of them.  They'll try but all they'll accomplish is to burn down a lot of the region and maybe even the wider areas of the planet.  To what purpose?  Really.  What's it worth to destroy that state?  Millions could die and I think the world would still consider it a bargain.  It's pure insanity.

I actually posted this in my previous post before reading your reply and I agree.  What I don't agree with is this idea that the world must supply, assist and defend Israel at all costs like you do.  Israel is capable of defending themselves and IMO of course, 2.9 billion could be spent better.  Then again, you're paying so who am I to lecture.  Just brain scanning alternative solutions.

[Black Red Devil]

3 minutes ago, and then said:

No, walls are no joke and they work every place they exist so long as there is a will to defend them.  How's that island concentration camp doing that OZ relies on to stop the "undesirables"?  I have no problem with rules that restrict immigration, I just hate hypocrites.

LOL, if you think you've got one on me, think again.  I disagree with the camps.  Unfortunately for your narrative, we're in a thread talking about US illegal immigrants.

[Big Jim]

1 minute ago, Black Red Devil said:

Probably not enough or rather not enough control on where, who and what the funds are appropriated for.  Anyway, in fairness it would be naive to believe this aid is a one way direction and Andthen did touch on it.  The US does get many undisclosed benefits out of these aid programs, specially to countries in the Middle East.  Probably aiding countries like Nicaragua, Guatemala etc. would be mostly humanitarian but overall it would probably assist in reducing illegals flooding to your border.  Whether it's cheaper than a full 3,100km, 5.7 billion wall, who knows.  But considering the current stalemate it might be the only alternative.

We already send aid to these countries.  I read recently that we send 10 billion to Guatemala.  It's not stopping the flow of illegals at all.  This isn't just about money.  We can't compare other expenses to the cost of the wall trying to locate a break even point.  It's fundamentally about the right of all countries to control their borders and provide for their citizens.  The US has traditionally been the most welcoming country in the world.  It's something we pride ourselves on.  But immigration must be on our terms or it's just an invasion.  As diverse as we've always been, there is still a unique American culture that is being altered and eroded by the constant influx of uncontrolled immigration.  If we are to be of help to anyone, whether it be countries or individuals, we must remain the country we have been, the one that is willing and able to help.  As things are now, at some point we will reach the tipping point where we are unable to help ourselves and therefore unable to help anyone.  We've given until it hurts, as they say, and people are starting to feel it.  There's a real sense among many that we are losing our country, our identity as Americans.  That's why this is such a hot button issue and why it can't be argued merely in terms of money.

[Black Red Devil]

5 minutes ago, Big Jim said:

We already send aid to these countries.  I read recently that we send 10 billion to Guatemala.  It's not stopping the flow of illegals at all.  This isn't just about money.  We can't compare other expenses to the cost of the wall trying to locate a break even point.  It's fundamentally about the right of all countries to control their borders and provide for their citizens.  The US has traditionally been the most welcoming country in the world.  It's something we pride ourselves on.  But immigration must be on our terms or it's just an invasion.  As diverse as we've always been, there is still a unique American culture that is being altered and eroded by the constant influx of uncontrolled immigration.  If we are to be of help to anyone, whether it be countries or individuals, we must remain the country we have been, the one that is willing and able to help.  As things are now, at some point we will reach the tipping point where we are unable to help ourselves and therefore unable to help anyone.  We've given until it hurts, as they say, and people are starting to feel it.  There's a real sense among many that we are losing our country, our identity as Americans.  That's why this is such a hot button issue and why it can't be argued merely in terms of money.

No, 10 billion to Guatemala is incorrect.  Israel gets 2.9 billion and is the second most highest recipient.  Only Afghanistan gets more.  Stopping the flow to the border means less illegals, whether its aid or a wall although I believe a wall would be less efficient because criminals will always find a way to get people in.  I agree with controlled immigration and if you stop illegal human trafficking you stop the criminals and you stop the flood but this has to happen back in their countries in cooperation with their Govts.

[Aquila King]

20 minutes ago, Black Red Devil said:

I actually posted this in my previous post before reading your reply and I agree.  What I don't agree with is this idea that the world must supply, assist and defend Israel at all costs like you do.  Israel is capable of defending themselves and IMO of course, 2.9 billion could be spent better.  Then again, you're paying so who am I to lecture.  Just brain scanning alternative solutions.

Most of the 'defend Israel no matter what' bunch only do so for religious reasons. To fulfill end time prophecy and whatnot. 

So yeah, good luck getting them to change their mind there.

[Big Jim]

1 minute ago, Black Red Devil said:

No, 10 billion to Guatemala is incorrect.  Israel gets 2.9 billion and is the second most highest recipient.  Only Afghanistan gets more.  Stopping the flow to the border means less illegals, whether its aid or a wall although I believe a wall would be less efficient because criminals will always find a way to get people in.  I agree with controlled immigration and if you stop illegal human trafficking you stop the criminals and you stop the flood but this has to happen back in their countries in cooperation with their Govts.

Ok, so it might be 10 million.  But I still hold that the wall is necessary.  Thinking that we can stop all of the evils associated with open borders by convincing people to just stay home is like thinking we can end other crimes by the same method.  Give all potential burglars free TVs and they'll stop being burglars.  It won't work.  But walls and doors, alarms, cops and diligence seem to be pretty effective.

[Hankenhunter]

1 hour ago, and then said:

Of course, it's aid.  The difference is that we get a lot of R&D benefit from giving it to them.  ALLIES, remember?  Hate on the Jewish state all you like.  No problem for me, man.  I get that their existence causes a lot of people fanatic dyspepsia.  They need to chill.  No way they'll ever get rid of them.  They'll try but all they'll accomplish is to burn down a lot of the region and maybe even the wider areas of the planet.  To what purpose?  Really.  What's it worth to destroy that state?  Millions could die and I think the world would still consider it a bargain.  It's pure insanity.

Another post with no links for corroboration. Love the way you make light all of Isreals illegal acts. And I'm way ahead you asking for proof. I have about two dozen proven links queued up. Would you like me to post links of Isreals past crimes? Not that you'd read them, but others would. Your call.

 

Edited January 29, 2019 by Hankenhunter

[Black Red Devil]

2 hours ago, Big Jim said:

Ok, so it might be 10 million.  But I still hold that the wall is necessary.  Thinking that we can stop all of the evils associated with open borders by convincing people to just stay home is like thinking we can end other crimes by the same method.  Give all potential burglars free TVs and they'll stop being burglars.  It won't work.  But walls and doors, alarms, cops and diligence seem to be pretty effective.

So if you get no wall what's plan B?

[Inversion5]

On 1/25/2019 at 4:03 PM, Captain Risky said:

Trump surrenders...

So the people that make the money, that run government systems to pay for citizens' food stamps, that protect the nation, etc..., are not getting job security over some "lego" wall I can throw a rope over and have fun climbing up and enjoy the view up top?... So shouldn't the people making the money just simply bring their consciousness to move that arm, grab the money and give it to those in need? What?! The people protecting this nation with no pay will arrest them while providing a good deed to the country? To them? Example: Here you go Mr. Officer, I am the guy that makes the money at the Federal Reserve. Come back next Friday. 2nd Example: People running government systems should do the same, right? Here you go Mr. Officer, I am working one week for free to help process your food stamps.  Mr. Trump is going to tell the cops he is not paying to go arrest the people that are giving them money etc. (etc. lol ) We dont need a piece of paper from Trump or whomever to tell us to devise a subsystem ourselves (meaning trustworthy people in government). Get all of us in a room and devise a simple breakdown of funds to the appropriate locations. This is a unforced change in government. Totally legal right? I mean, Trump did that with his goons when he went in there, right? So...? We dont need Donald Trump as el presidento (lol). You dont need to impeach, you just need to abandon. He is just a man with no proper trust worthy support. Nothing official about that. No paper needed for that. So do the same. Maybe ask a former U.S. President if they dont mind stepping in for awhile while we sort "this" out?

Edited January 29, 2019 by Inversion5

[Big Jim]

1 hour ago, Black Red Devil said:

So if you get no wall what's plan B?

Beats me.  I don't even have a plan A.  While I may have opinions on plans on the table or in motion I have no plans of my own regarding the matter.  Someone more deeply involved in this than I will ever be will have a plan B.  Then I might have opinions on that.  But I hope that the need for border security is not abandoned.  

[Guyver]

9 hours ago, DieChecker said:

TsIsn't that an argument in favor of gun control? "If even one person dies, this needs to be fixed". I guess not, if it is your teams Sacred Cow.

Democrats = Hypocrites 

Yes....I suppose you have a point here.  

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

4 hours ago, Big Jim said:

4 hours ago, Black Red Devil said:

 

We already send aid to these countries.  I read recently that we send 10 billion to Guatemala.  It's not stopping the flow of illegals at all.

Of course not.  Our "aid" to Guatemala is Democrat bribe money to get Guatemala to organize and send up the caravans of undocumented people. 

[Black Red Devil]

20 minutes ago, Big Jim said:

Beats me.  I don't even have a plan A.  While I may have opinions on plans on the table or in motion I have no plans of my own regarding the matter.  Someone more deeply involved in this than I will ever be will have a plan B.  Then I might have opinions on that.  But I hope that the need for border security is not abandoned.  

It's obvious this is all for argument sake and all are just opinions. It'd be a serious forum if decisions WERE truly made here and God help us all, if so.

[+DieChecker]

7 hours ago, Michelle said:

It is figured the shutdown costed the US 11 billion. Trump is asking for roughly 5 billion. Who is cutting their nose off to spite their face?

I was wondering about that. Supposedly it was mainly loss due to spending. But that's over 13,000 dollars per each of the 800k people laid off. Over one month. HOW much are these people being paid? Holy Moly.

[+DieChecker]

1 hour ago, Black Red Devil said:

So if you get no wall what's plan B?

Call it a fence. And then a "migratory obstacle ".

[+DieChecker]

4 hours ago, Big Jim said:

We already send aid to these countries.  I read recently that we send 10 billion to Guatemala.

Trump also sent several billion to Mexico for southern Mexico relief, because many in the famous caravan were just Mexicans from the south.

Not going to hear that on news sites where it doesn't fit their narrative.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

21 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Trump also sent several billion to Mexico for southern Mexico relief, because many in the famous caravan were just Mexicans from the south.

Not going to hear that on news sites where it doesn't fit their narrative.

The US sent Mexico $5 in aid.  O, the irony!   We get about as much cooperation from Mexico as we do Iran. We should have spent that on the wall.

[+DieChecker]

11 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

The US sent Mexico $5 in aid.  O, the irony!   We get about as much cooperation from Mexico as we do Iran. We should have spent that on the wall.

Yeah, I think the "emergency relief" was 5 billion. Didn't hear Dems busting anyone on that though. The wall is "too expensive", but just giving the same amount away to a country that's probably not going to use it wisely is A-OK.

[Tatetopa]

8 hours ago, Big Jim said:

We've been assisting other countries for decades and it hasn't worked.

Of course it hasn't worked.  Most of the money goes to helping rich guys in those countries get richer and stay in power.

 

8 hours ago, and then said:

I realize this will be ignored because it doesn't fit the "narrative" you guys push but here goes, for the open-minded among UM:

Foreign aid creates jobs in the United States and boosts our economy. By law, nearly all U.S. assistance must be spent on American-produced goods. Israel spends nearly 75% of U.S. aid in the U.S. to purchase military equipment.  

If that aid is a welfare program, it's welfare for U.S. defense contractors.

Well good for you and then.  Too many people just get irate because they think  we give that money away with no strings attached.    We may be generous people, but we are not the suckers President Trump says.  The money going out gets a return.   Not only to defense contractors, but all kinds of corporations.   Oil concessions, banana plantations and a guarantee of no labor unrest,  one way or another we get the investment to pay.

[Setton]

8 hours ago, Michelle said:

It is figured the shutdown costed the US 11 billion. Trump is asking for roughly 5 billion. Who is cutting their nose off to spite their face?

Probably the one who caused the shutdown. You know, the one who said he'd be proud of it.