• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What SHOULD be done with caravan migrants?

S

Slavister

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 8, 2018
Messages
11,216
Reaction score
8,269
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I think I understand Trump's / right position that they should not be allowed to enter the US just because they got here. Some would get asylum / refugee status. Others won't. Somehow someone decides this based on what they believe about the arriving person standing in front of them.

What is the left position on what to do with people approaching US borders with intent or desire to settle in the US?

According to this page there is an annual ceiling on number of accepted refugees. For 2018, they (President?) set it to 1500 for those from Latin America for example. What is supposed to be done with the rest?
 
I tend to lean left, but I think we have no choice but to stop them from entering the US. To go down this road continually overwhelms an immigration system not designed to deal with this, that is aside from a social safety net system not in any condition to support them.
 
Those that need asylum have had it offered to them in Mexico. Refusing that and insisting on the US makes one an economic migrant, not a refugee.

If you can't go back to Honduras because your son refused to sell drugs for a cartel and they'll kill your family. Don't put us in the position where we're forced to send you back. Stay in Mexico.

As a legal immigrant, who waited in line for 5 years, I cannot support amnesty/asylum for these line cutters who, "miss Buffalo Wild Wings and my PS4."
 
Process them per the Law and act accordingly.
 
Slavister said:
I think I understand Trump's / right position that they should not be allowed to enter the US just because they got here. Some would get asylum / refugee status. Others won't. Somehow someone decides this based on what they believe about the arriving person standing in front of them.

What is the left position on what to do with people approaching US borders with intent or desire to settle in the US?

According to this page there is an annual ceiling on number of accepted refugees. For 2018, they (President?) set it to 1500 for those from Latin America for example. What is supposed to be done with the rest?
Click to expand...

It would be foolish to think that this is a one time deal. If it was I wouldn't mind letting them in. But its not. Accept these people in and more caravans will be organized and sent here. Despite the rhetoric the US cannot handle endless influxes of refugee's. We're already short on doctors, police, teachers. Will these people become these things? Possible. Eventually. In the mean time we're short on people in those positions and are in no position to properly help them.

Like my folks used to tell me. "It's great to help people. But if you help people when you cannot even properly take care of yourself you're going to end up in the same situation that the person you're trying to help is in." I didn't listen to them at the time and ended up on the streets because of it. Now I follow that mantra.
 
Spartacus FPV said:
Those that need asylum have had it offered to them in Mexico. Refusing that and insisting on the US makes one an economic migrant, not a refugee.

If you can't go back to Honduras because your son refused to sell drugs for a cartel and they'll kill your family. Don't put us in the position where we're forced to send you back. Stay in Mexico.

As a legal immigrant, who waited in line for 5 years, I cannot support amnesty/asylum for these line cutters who, "miss Buffalo Wild Wings and my PS4."
Click to expand...

:lol: Did someone really say that?
 
Kal'Stang said:
It would be foolish to think that this is a one time deal. If it was I wouldn't mind letting them in. But its not. Accept these people in and more caravans will be organized and sent here. Despite the rhetoric the US cannot handle endless influxes of refugee's. We're already short on doctors, police, teachers. Will these people become these things? Possible. Eventually. In the mean time we're short on people in those positions and are in no position to properly help them.

Like my folks used to tell me. "It's great to help people. But if you help people when you cannot even properly take care of yourself you're going to end up in the same situation that the person you're trying to help is in." I didn't listen to them at the time and ended up on the streets because of it. Now I follow that mantra.
Click to expand...

Since it is estimated that 300,000 immigrants sneak in each year @ 821 per day, I don't see this caravan as anything different the ups and down of the status quo. It does make a political timely MSM tool during an election phase. Our contemporary political/economic system does not develop localized support infrastructure/jobs at the lower levels, but feeds the 1% at the expense of the 99%. That doesn't leave room for charitable endeavors to the benefit of immigrants or the poor. That and the immigrants are a defenseless target of MSM and political rhetoric.
/
 
Slavister said:
I think I understand Trump's / right position that they should not be allowed to enter the US just because they got here. Some would get asylum / refugee status. Others won't. Somehow someone decides this based on what they believe about the arriving person standing in front of them.

What is the left position on what to do with people approaching US borders with intent or desire to settle in the US?

According to this page there is an annual ceiling on number of accepted refugees. For 2018, they (President?) set it to 1500 for those from Latin America for example. What is supposed to be done with the rest?
Click to expand...

Refugees are a different classification than Asylums.
The former can be limited, the latter cannot.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuart...oversial-new-limits-on-refugees/#f2a6a2f410ab

Rights of Refugees in the U.S.
Refugees have the right to remain in the U.S. indefinitely (at least until conditions in their home country return to normal). They receive a work permit, and various forms of government support during their first months in the United States. After a year of entry, they can apply for U.S. permanent resident status (a green card). Four years after that, they can apply for U.S. citizenship.

Rights of Asylees in the U.S.
Asylees have the right to remain in the U.S. indefinitely (at least until conditions in their home country return to normal). They can apply for a work permit as soon as their asylum is approved -- but not while they're still in the asylum application process, except in rare circumstances where their case takes too long to process.

After a year of approval for asylee status, they can apply for U.S. permanent resident status (a green card). Four years after that, they can apply for U.S. citizenship.
Click to expand...

https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nol...fugee-application-procedural-differences.html
 
Also worth noting that there is no legal requirement for asylum seekers to claim asylum in the first safe country they reach.
 
I'd support preventing them from entering. I'm sorry, I feel for them, but we can't just let that many people in without vetting them first. If they want to get into the US, then they need to go the legal route.
 
Last edited:
Slavister said:
I think I understand Trump's / right position that they should not be allowed to enter the US just because they got here. Some would get asylum / refugee status. Others won't. Somehow someone decides this based on what they believe about the arriving person standing in front of them.

What is the left position on what to do with people approaching US borders with intent or desire to settle in the US?

According to this page there is an annual ceiling on number of accepted refugees. For 2018, they (President?) set it to 1500 for those from Latin America for example. What is supposed to be done with the rest?
Click to expand...

They should just be stopped in their tracks at the border. No need to arrest anyone if you don't let them in. Force them back to Mexico. Mexico can deal with them.
 
Slavister said:
I think I understand Trump's / right position that they should not be allowed to enter the US just because they got here. Some would get asylum / refugee status. Others won't. Somehow someone decides this based on what they believe about the arriving person standing in front of them.

What is the left position on what to do with people approaching US borders with intent or desire to settle in the US?

According to this page there is an annual ceiling on number of accepted refugees. For 2018, they (President?) set it to 1500 for those from Latin America for example. What is supposed to be done with the rest?
Click to expand...
Don't solve problems that don't exist before you've solved all of the problems that actually matter. Don't arrest people for crimes they haven't committed. Don't scare people to win votes.

The refugee caravan is currently more than 1000 miles away. In the last weeks it has dwindled to a fraction of it's largest size. If it continues at it's current rate it'll reach the US in two months as a family of four. They have a right under international and US law to apply for refugee status. We have a right to accept or reject them.
 
TheGoverness said:
I'd support preventing them from entering. I'm sorry, I feel for them, but we can't just let that many people in without vetting them first. If they want to get into the US, then they need to go the legal route.
Click to expand...
And they're not doing that?
 
Spartacus FPV said:
Those that need asylum have had it offered to them in Mexico. Refusing that and insisting on the US makes one an economic migrant, not a refugee.

If you can't go back to Honduras because your son refused to sell drugs for a cartel and they'll kill your family. Don't put us in the position where we're forced to send you back. Stay in Mexico.

As a legal immigrant, who waited in line for 5 years, I cannot support amnesty/asylum for these line cutters who, "miss Buffalo Wild Wings and my PS4."
Click to expand...

Mexico is a borderline failed state, making it almost as bad as some of the places they are fleeing. Asylum means jack ****.
 
TheGoverness said:
I'd support preventing them from entering. I'm sorry, I feel for them, but we can't just let that many people in without vetting them first. If they want to get into the US, then they need to go the legal route.
Click to expand...

The ONLY legal route for these people is to arrive at a LEGAL port of entry and claim asylum. That is how they should be processed. Now it is entirely possible for said asylum claim to be rejected, in which case they will be deported.
 
StillBallin75 said:
The ONLY legal route for these people is to arrive at a LEGAL port of entry and claim asylum. That is how they should be processed. Now it is entirely possible for said asylum claim to be rejected, in which case they will be deported.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Thread moved from B/N
 
OrphanSlug said:
I tend to lean left, but I think we have no choice but to stop them from entering the US. To go down this road continually overwhelms an immigration system not designed to deal with this, that is aside from a social safety net system not in any condition to support them.
Click to expand...

Of course we stop them. Isn't that what we have always done?

Trump is just making a mountain out of a yearly mole hill. And, of course, all the noise has increased the size of the caravan, which in years past had fewer than 100 people arriving at our doorstep, mostly requesting asylum--legally.
 
Mithros said:
That's a good trick.... breaking US law more than a thousand miles from the US border.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter where you are if you haven't started the legal process, you're not a citizen immigrating legally.

I started my naturalization process several thousand miles away on a damned island.
 
StillBallin75 said:
The ONLY legal route for these people is to arrive at a LEGAL port of entry and claim asylum. That is how they should be processed. Now it is entirely possible for said asylum claim to be rejected, in which case they will be deported.
Click to expand...

Its not the only legal route.
 
Slavister said:
I think I understand Trump's / right position that they should not be allowed to enter the US just because they got here. Some would get asylum / refugee status. Others won't. Somehow someone decides this based on what they believe about the arriving person standing in front of them.

What is the left position on what to do with people approaching US borders with intent or desire to settle in the US?

According to this page there is an annual ceiling on number of accepted refugees. For 2018, they (President?) set it to 1500 for those from Latin America for example. What is supposed to be done with the rest?
Click to expand...

BLU the entire hoard. One should do the job rather well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom