Trump complains US troops at border 'can't get a little rough, like they would normally'

apdst said:

About as much as Obama. Whatcha think?

Click to expand...

President Obama didn’t claim to know more than Generals, in fact listened to them and took their advice; unlike general bone spurs.

Irwin Corey said:

President Obama didn’t claim to know more than Generals, in fact listened to them and took their advice; unlike general bone spurs.

Click to expand...

That must be why he cut McChrystal's troop request by more than half.

kitsune said:

Trump seems to disagree with you. And TUC is right, what is more American than shooting people? I suppose we could chuck apple pies at them but I'm not sure it would be as effective as bullets.

Click to expand...

Those migrants would probably be really hungry as well, so that act would likely be seen as a kind gesture.

apdst said:

17 times more? :lamo

Click to expand...

Do you know what the word "proportionately" means?

In ABSOLUTE terms, Canada is already taking in more refugees than the US (58,000 [the maximum estimated for 2019] vs. 30,000 [the MAXIMUM that the US government has said that it will be admitting in 2019]). 58,000 is 1.933 times as many as the US is going to admit.

The US population is larger than the Canadian population (327.2Mn vs 37.06Mn) by a factor of 8.829.

1.933 times 8.829 is 17.066.

If you want to use 50,000 (the average between the high and the low estimates for the number of refugees that will be admitted to Canada in 2019) then that factor is ONLY 14.709.

If you want to use 42,000 (the low estimate for the number of refugees that will be admitted to Canada in 2019) then that factor is an absolutely minuscule 12.361.

I apologize for the finger fumble in the post that used 17 rather than 14.7 and readily admit that Canada is (proportionately) taking in ONLY 14.709 times as many refugees as the US does. Canada will just have to do better.

Maybe you'd like to provide some guidance here.

How many times (proportionately) more than the US should the number of refugees that Canada admits before you will think that Canada is "pulling its weight":

___ 15 times

___ 20 times

___ 25 times

___ 30 times

___ 35 times

___ 40 times

___ 45 times

___ 50 times

___ 60 times

___ 70 times

___ 80 times

___ 90 times

___ 100 times

or should that factor be even higher, and, if so, what do you think it would be fair to expect Canada to admit?

j-mac said:

You are suggesting that America is a country of 'big meanies' if they don't just allow all of these people into the country, while immigration to Canada is exponentially tougher to legally gain than America...

Click to expand...

Not in the least.

I provided data that showed that PROPORTIONATELY Canada is admitting around 14.7 (with the exception of one finger fumble post) times as many times as many refugees as the US does.

The immigration laws and requirements for BOTH Canada and the United States of America are pretty much of a sameness.

j-mac said:

It is just more hypocrisy from you TU.

Click to expand...

Only if you want to believe that things that don't exist are real.

Now while it is true that Canada only accepts around 8% of the refugee claims and the US accepts around 20% of the refugee claims, the percentage of claims that are accepted IF you EXCLUDE those where the refugee comes from a country with which either Canada or the US has a "safe third country" treaty, greatly favours Canada. You see, people coming to Canada from the US and making a refugee claim, are automatically dis-entitled due to the operation of the "safe third country" treaty between Canada and the US (people coming from Canada to the US are similarly dis-entitled).

In fact the requirements for an immigrant to the US and for an immigrant to Canada are pretty similar, aren't they?

TU Curmudgeon said:

Not in the least.

I provided data that showed that PROPORTIONATELY Canada is admitting around 14.7 (with the exception of one finger fumble post) times as many times as many refugees as the US does.

The immigration laws and requirements for BOTH Canada and the United States of America are pretty much of a sameness.



Only if you want to believe that things that don't exist are real.

Now while it is true that Canada only accepts around 8% of the refugee claims and the US accepts around 20% of the refugee claims, the percentage of claims that are accepted IF you EXCLUDE those where the refugee comes from a country with which either Canada or the US has a "safe third country" treaty, greatly favours Canada. You see, people coming to Canada from the US and making a refugee claim, are automatically dis-entitled due to the operation of the "safe third country" treaty between Canada and the US (people coming from Canada to the US are similarly dis-entitled).

In fact the requirements for an immigrant to the US and for an immigrant to Canada are pretty similar, aren't they?

Click to expand...

You are obfuscating the point here...Trudeau virtue signaled last year when he took to twitter, and since has been back tracking politically in Canada....

Canada's Generous Welcome for Illegal Southern Border Arrivals Wears Thin | Center for Immigration Studies

Yet, you come in here, not unlike other subjects you snark at us American's over, have much the same concerns, and problems in your own country....You don't live here, and don't have to put up with the flood of illegal immigration flowing through our neighbor to the south...I just wonder how your opinion of superiority would change if we simply put them all on buses, and drove them to YOUR doorstep.

Your tarnishing of the concept of Canadians being Americas polite neighbor is wearing thin.

ElChupacabra said:

Those migrants would probably be really hungry as well, so that act would likely be seen as a kind gesture.

Click to expand...

See? We can be nice about it. And hunger, or the fear of it, does seem to be one of the driving forces behind the problem.

kitsune said:

See? We can be nice about it. And hunger, or the fear of it, does seem to be one of the driving forces behind the problem.

Click to expand...

From a practical perspective it's one where there's a demand for cheap labor, and an obvious supply of it which keeps the people coming. The idea of migrants being "lazy" is ironically enough lazy thinking. Many folks come from rural parts of their respective countries and have a strong work ethic because many have been subsistence farmers or laborers. I think its more a matter of what we do about the demand than it is dealing with the supply. As we've learned from the abject failure that is the War on Drugs, it makes more sense to understand the demand and respond to that before you put your eggs in the basket of stopping the supply.

MTAtech said:

Thank you for displaying for all to see that the GOP/Trumpian model of government completely rejects traditional American values. Instead it hails the model of a totalitarian police state, that roughs up the poor and the weak just to show’em who’s boss and makes sure those who are arrested get their heads banged against the police car roof. Forget about the presumption of innocence.

Click to expand...

???

What on earth are you babbling about?

Mycroft said:

I'd like to see our military be able to use this on the border:

Click to expand...

1. You don't understand the military.

2. You don't understand the vastness of the border.

3. I'm not surprised.

Risky Thicket said:

1. You don't understand the military.

2. You don't understand the vastness of the border.

3. I'm not surprised.

Click to expand...

1 - 3. You make a lot of unsupported assumptions and contentions.

MTAtech said:

Thank you for displaying for all to see that the GOP/Trumpian model of government completely rejects traditional American values. Instead it hails the model of a totalitarian police state, that roughs up the poor and the weak just to show’em who’s boss and makes sure those who are arrested get their heads banged against the police car roof. Forget about the presumption of innocence.

Mycroft said:

???

What on earth are you babbling about?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

As if what I wrote isn't obvious. America has never resorted to the cruelty, meanness and barbarism that Trump spews and his cult support. Never.

notquiteright said:

Trump seems to prefer a more 'traditional' approach that leans more toward violent area defense systems and not pricey point defense systems.... I wonder how much your solution would cost to do in more than a Pentagon Parking lot... eace

Click to expand...

Trump of course is an idiot and a fool. President Bone Spurs and many of his cult followers would like nothing more than to designate so many meters along the border as a free fire zone. Some people would be fine with having Americans beat the **** out of non-violent people, children and women. Some sadistic dickwits who simply enjoy the violence gladly support Trump just because he often advocates violence.

The vast majority of American troops are not trained to be border security, do not have the authority to act as border security people and do not want to "rough up" people at the border. That is not part of their training. But, honestly, Trump really has little to no understanding of the military.

TU Curmudgeon said:

Not in the least.

I provided data that showed that PROPORTIONATELY Canada is admitting around 14.7 (with the exception of one finger fumble post) times as many times as many refugees as the US does.

The immigration laws and requirements for BOTH Canada and the United States of America are pretty much of a sameness.



Only if you want to believe that things that don't exist are real.

Now while it is true that Canada only accepts around 8% of the refugee claims and the US accepts around 20% of the refugee claims, the percentage of claims that are accepted IF you EXCLUDE those where the refugee comes from a country with which either Canada or the US has a "safe third country" treaty, greatly favours Canada. You see, people coming to Canada from the US and making a refugee claim, are automatically dis-entitled due to the operation of the "safe third country" treaty between Canada and the US (people coming from Canada to the US are similarly dis-entitled).

In fact the requirements for an immigrant to the US and for an immigrant to Canada are pretty similar, aren't they?

Click to expand...

I think you should just go ahead and admit that you wear plaid pants and a white patent leather belt. We won't make fun of you for it. Promise.

MTAtech said:

As if what I wrote isn't obvious. America has never resorted to the cruelty, meanness and barbarism that Trump spews and his cult support. Never.

Click to expand...

Being raised by a criminal and doing business as a matter of course with mafia and organized crime Trump see himself as the national enforcer because that is a role he actually understands.

ElChupacabra said:

From a practical perspective it's one where there's a demand for cheap labor, and an obvious supply of it which keeps the people coming. The idea of migrants being "lazy" is ironically enough lazy thinking. Many folks come from rural parts of their respective countries and have a strong work ethic because many have been subsistence farmers or laborers. I think its more a matter of what we do about the demand than it is dealing with the supply. As we've learned from the abject failure that is the War on Drugs, it makes more sense to understand the demand and respond to that before you put your eggs in the basket of stopping the supply.

Click to expand...

Well, yes. If we are going to veer off into a more serious vein, what you lay out here is something I've always understood to be true. When demand appears, supply is rarely far behind. And, as you say, it applies to both the immigration issue and the drug problem.

apdst said:

That must be why he cut McChrystal's troop request by more than half.

Click to expand...

There was a lot more to it than your simple criticism suggests, and you know it.

j-mac said:

You are obfuscating the point here...Trudeau virtue signaled last year when he took to twitter, and since has been back tracking politically in Canada....

Click to expand...

Just as you are not responsible for what Mr. Trump does (albeit you might have had a bigger say in having him as your head of government than I did with respect to Mr. Trudeau) I am not responsible for what Mr. Trudeau does.

j-mac said:

Canada's Generous Welcome for Illegal Southern Border Arrivals Wears Thin | Center for Immigration Studies

Click to expand...

Indeed, actually complying with and enforcing the laws of the country is completely despicable - isn't it? Aren't you glad that Mr. Trump is only "administering" the United States of America so that it is only doing ONE of those two things? I mean, Mr. Trudeau is obviously twice as bad because he is doing both.

j-mac said:

Yet, you come in here, not unlike other subjects you snark at us American's over, have much the same concerns, and problems in your own country....

Click to expand...

Did I miss the announcement that Mr. Trudeau was wanting to send Canadian troops to the Canada/US border in order to "protect Canada from a flood of illegal aliens"?

j-mac said:

You don't live here, and don't have to put up with the flood of illegal immigration flowing through our neighbor to the south...

Click to expand...

No I don't. I just happen to be aware of both "the problem" (hyper-inflated and massively distorted as some people make it out to be) and the law (which some people posting on this issue would be well advised to learn).

j-mac said:

I just wonder how your opinion of superiority would change if we simply put them all on buses, and drove them to YOUR doorstep.

Click to expand...

Well, since Canada would be bound by the "Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America for cooperation in the examination of refugee status claims from nationals of third countries" that is the law in both Canada and the United States of America, the Canadian border personnel would just comply with its terms. I would agree with that action - wouldn't you if the situation were reversed?

j-mac said:

Your tarnishing of the concept of Canadians being Americas polite neighbor is wearing thin.

Click to expand...

Curmudgeons do not normally rate very high on the "Polite Scale".

MTAtech said:

As if what I wrote isn't obvious. America has never resorted to the cruelty, meanness and barbarism that Trump spews and his cult support. Never.

Click to expand...

Tell that to the people who were on the SS St. Louis, or who were impacted by the several "oriental exclusion" acts. Have you forgotten Senator J. McCarthy? Do the initials "KKK" have any meaning to you? Have you asked any "American Indians" about that?

Isn't "never" just a wee tiny bit too strong?

humbolt said:

I think you should just go ahead and admit that you wear plaid pants and a white patent leather belt. We won't make fun of you for it. Promise.

Click to expand...

In short "I'm going to make some totally vacuous statement because I don't want to admit that you are citing facts.".

TU Curmudgeon said:

In short "I'm going to make some totally vacuous statement because I don't want to admit that you are citing facts.".

Click to expand...

Ah, no. In short, I think you're full of crap.

TU Curmudgeon said:

Just as you are not responsible for what Mr. Trump does (albeit you might have had a bigger say in having him as your head of government than I did with respect to Mr. Trudeau) I am not responsible for what Mr. Trudeau does.

Click to expand...

Well, isn't that convenient for you, seeing as, though I won't do a search, I am pretty sure that you have at least offered a few "likes" for people in here disparaging Trump supporters as "complicit....

Indeed, actually complying with and enforcing the laws of the country is completely despicable - isn't it? Aren't you glad that Mr. Trump is only "administering" the United States of America so that it is only doing ONE of those two things? I mean, Mr. Trudeau is obviously twice as bad because he is doing both.

Click to expand...

Great! Now that you are for "the law", then you should have no objection to our border security turning away illegal entrants to our country, or internal enforcement removing them....Right?

Did I miss the announcement that Mr. Trudeau was wanting to send Canadian troops to the Canada/US border in order to "protect Canada from a flood of illegal aliens"?

Click to expand...

No, but you are conveniently avoiding the strife over immigration in your own country by refusing to acknowledge that your own leader thought he was being cute by poking Trump in the eye on the subject, then having to walk back his nonsense...In short your usual dishonest, and too clever by half nonsense.

No I don't. I just happen to be aware of both "the problem" (hyper-inflated and massively distorted as some people make it out to be) and the law (which some people posting on this issue would be well advised to learn).

Click to expand...

Real easy to make that stupid "hyper inflated" comment when your country doesn't have to deal with level of pressure due to illegal immigration isn't it....You should be thanking your lucky Labatt's that you have America as a buffer.

Well, since Canada would be bound by the "Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America for cooperation in the examination of refugee status claims from nationals of third countries" that is the law in both Canada and the United States of America, the Canadian border personnel would just comply with its terms. I would agree with that action - wouldn't you if the situation were reversed?

Click to expand...

I don't buy that line of BS for one moment from you....Again you should be thanking us for not making it YOUR problem....

Curmudgeons do not normally rate very high on the "Polite Scale".

Click to expand...

I knew a guy like you, who relished in the self described title of "asshole".... He thought that made him special from everyone else....In the end he wasn't either, it was all a facade....And he ended up being basically friendless, and lonely.....I see much the same here.

j-mac said:

Well, isn't that convenient for you, seeing as, though I won't do a search, I am pretty sure that you have at least offered a few "likes" for people in here disparaging Trump supporters as "complicit....

Click to expand...

The search should be fairly easy as there are only 13 of them to "research".

Of course, your comment has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with what I said, but you knew that when you wrote it - didn't you?

j-mac said:

Great! Now that you are for "the law", then you should have no objection to our border security turning away illegal entrants to our country, or internal enforcement removing them....Right?

Click to expand...

Absolutely none.

On the other hand since,

1. a person who crossed the US border and applies for "refugee" or "asylee" status is NOT an "illegal entrant"
2. a person who crossed the US border and has been in the US for LESS THAN one year without applying for either "refugee" or "asylee" status is still NOT an "illegal entrant"; and
3. it is NOT a crime under US law to enter the US at a point other than an "official point of entry", so doing that does not make a person an "illegal immigrant" either;

I probably have a different definition of what "following the law" is than someone who thinks that:

• a person who crossed the US border and applies for "refugee" or "asylee" status IS an "illegal entrant"
• a person who crossed the US border and has been in the US for even one second without applying for either "refugee" or "asylee" status IS an "illegal entrant"; and
• it IS a crime under US law to enter the US at a point other than an "official point of entry";

as you appear to.

j-mac said:

No, but you are conveniently avoiding the strife over immigration in your own country by refusing to acknowledge that your own leader thought he was being cute by poking Trump in the eye on the subject, then having to walk back his nonsense...In short your usual dishonest, and too clever by half nonsense.

Click to expand...

I see, so the fact that Mr. Trudeau is a jerk means that Mr. Trump is NOT one too?

Yeah, right, sure!

j-mac said:

Real easy to make that stupid "hyper inflated" comment when your country doesn't have to deal with level of pressure due to illegal immigration isn't it....You should be thanking your lucky Labatt's that you have America as a buffer.

Click to expand...

I make the "hyper inflated" comment based on what the American media and politicians say the level of "the problem" is in comparison to the data actually available.

If the US doesn't want to be a "buffer" that's too bad because it happens to sit squarely astride the Mexico/Canada migration path.

j-mac said:

I don't buy that line of BS for one moment from you....Again you should be thanking us for not making it YOUR problem....

Click to expand...

Strange as it may seem to you, the laws of the United States of America actually ARE the laws of the United States of America. If you consider that the laws of the United States of America are BS, that isn't my problem.

j-mac said:

I knew a guy like you, who relished in the self described title of "asshole".... He thought that made him special from everyone else....In the end he wasn't either, it was all a facade....And he ended up being basically friendless, and lonely.....I see much the same here.

Click to expand...

Your problem, not mine.

TU Curmudgeon said:

The search should be fairly easy as there are only 13 of them to "research".

Of course, your comment has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with what I said, but you knew that when you wrote it - didn't you?



Absolutely none.

On the other hand since,

1. a person who crossed the US border and applies for "refugee" or "asylee" status is NOT an "illegal entrant"
2. a person who crossed the US border and has been in the US for LESS THAN one year without applying for either "refugee" or "asylee" status is still NOT an "illegal entrant"; and
3. it is NOT a crime under US law to enter the US at a point other than an "official point of entry", so doing that does not make a person an "illegal immigrant" either;

I probably have a different definition of what "following the law" is than someone who thinks that:

• a person who crossed the US border and applies for "refugee" or "asylee" status IS an "illegal entrant"
• a person who crossed the US border and has been in the US for even one second without applying for either "refugee" or "asylee" status IS an "illegal entrant"; and
• it IS a crime under US law to enter the US at a point other than an "official point of entry";

as you appear to.



I see, so the fact that Mr. Trudeau is a jerk means that Mr. Trump is NOT one too?

Yeah, right, sure!



I make the "hyper inflated" comment based on what the American media and politicians say the level of "the problem" is in comparison to the data actually available.

If the US doesn't want to be a "buffer" that's too bad because it happens to sit squarely astride the Mexico/Canada migration path.



Strange as it may seem to you, the laws of the United States of America actually ARE the laws of the United States of America. If you consider that the laws of the United States of America are BS, that isn't my problem.



Your problem, not mine.

Click to expand...

:lol: Not my problem pal....I don't describe myself as some sort of anti social pain in the ass....

j-mac said:

:lol: Not my problem pal....I don't describe myself as some sort of anti social pain in the ass....

Click to expand...

Do you leave that to those you encounter on the internet?