The Political Discussion Thread

[aretood2]

Gotta disagree with you here. We need that wall, and I hope Trump sticks to his guns on this.

I've made this argument with others here. Certainly, we have the technical ability to control the border. But we do not have the political will to do so. How long have we been "discussing" this problem? Since the 1980's at least, when Reagan did amnesty for those here at the time, in return for securing the border. We got the amnesty, but they never did lock the border down, did they? Politicians of BOTH stripes have been preaching about the need to secure the border for decades. But we haven't done it.

As I mentioned in the other post, the last 18 years seems to disagree with you given that the trend has been a decrease of crime nationally and a decrease of illegal immigration via the southern border.

Democrats dream of millions of illegals that will be eventually offered "a path to citizenship" which is BS for amnesty again, and once they are citizens, they would be expected to be good democratic voters.

This may not be you, but others who champion this theory are basing it on quite a trick. It's a nice trick though. So they devalue groups of people and then turn around and ask why those very same groups of people won't vote for your guys. But instead of saying "Maybe we shouldn't devalue them and ignore them" your response is "they become democrats because of welfare and brownness!!!" which in and of itself is fairly racist if not xenophobic. How? Well it's simple. Democrats aren't "real" americans, they are even anti-American which is why they always make anti-American choices. So foreigners are naturally democrats because they are obviously not American.

It also ignores the 44% of Hispanics who voted for George W. Bush's reelection. Think about that for a second, W. basically neutralized the Hispanic vote....why would Hispanics vote for him? Maybe it was because he literally speaks their language? He gives them the time of day? He listened to Hispanics and Hispanics responded to that in the polls. Had Romney continued that trend he too would have neutralized the Hispanic vote. But this requires ignoring that other group, the "Brown people are scary" group, the particular group that Trumps courts.

You're right about Ocasio-Cortez, though. She is just a child who managed to get out of her playpen. Has no freakin' idea how things work, but like that petulant child, wants what she wants and thinks she can wish it into reality.

You just described Trump to a T.

I too think a wall should be built--

look at how many other nations have more stringent border controls then we do. many of them some Americans hold to be some type of 'standard bearers' for human rights--as in better then the US. Look how so much of europe is NOW handling their borders even within the EU

we spend billions on sending our military to foreign nations to defend their borders yet we do little to nothing to care for our own border

(do you know that post 2003 invasion, the US deployed hundreds of Border Patrol agents to Iraq to train their border patrol on border security? I still find that very strange. Under Saddam, the Iraqi security apparatus was far more capable of controlling their borders then we ever have been with our own )

What countries? There's a correlation between dictatorships and walls....And if you mean to point at Israel, then well...that's a nice magic trick where you compare apples to oranges.

[QUOTE=Gatefan1976;14647485]About 1550 marines, plus support vehicles with the notion to pump it up to 2500 to be used as a rapid response team it anyone who threatens US interests in the area, plus leave to use our airspace and sea lanes for your military vehicles with no regard to Australian interests.
So NO, you have significant troops, material and rights to disrupt our own diplomatic process.

Are you mercenaries?
What if we don't WANT you here?
This deal is predicated on the US getting what IT want's not what WE want, and you can pay for what you want.
It's the US that wants a Asian safe harbour to project military might, and by accepting your troops and ships, we paint a target on ourselves and damage OUR chance to deal economically with China, and you expect US to pay for your protection racket that helps you??

I just started watching "Pine Gap" on Netflix and I never realized just how annoyed Australians are at the US. It makes sense thinking about it though. Australia is hardly an equal partner and as one character on that show said, who would the US pick prioritize in a war, Australia or Japan/S. Korea?

Piss off.

That's no way to talk to your overlords. If you play nice, we'll get the British to send the royals to Australia for a state visit as a reward.

Keep going, and you will have NO allies. Why is this such a hard concept for the US to grasp??

I don't understand

the "system" of American self governance is far more stuffed with crazy glue then ever before

i give the example pf 2 outliers to the system- Trump and Ocasio-Cortez

hopefully one of them, or someone, can crack off the crazy glue and expose the workings of pay to play bureaucracy, the lobbyist system and so many other things wrong with our representative democracy today

it wold take a whole page of text to even list everything that is wrong

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

you tell me what is the US getting from Israel? There is nothing we have there or take from the place (which has about zero for natural resources by the way. We have no military bases there and anytime we wanted to fly over either strike packages or even supply planes, we had to get flyover permission...that is not how the "US greatest ally" should be acting

the thing is,Israel is nothing more then European colony imposed on the mid east. So repressive towards the native ppl's the colonists have been over time that even the actual hebrews who were native to the Palestine of the British Occupation, were treated by them nearly as bad as the arabs were,

Long standing business co owned by palestinian hebrews and arab christian and muslims, were destroyed by the colonists

The main reason for the US and the west's support of Israel is not rational as it appears the only reason that can be fathomed for the support is one of religion. No leader wants to be seen as being that 'world leader' who turns their back on Israel. the 'chosen people'.

It is a bunch of religious bumpkiss.

look up a googles search, type in something like "why do american Evangelicals support the US governments position on Israel?"

What have the Romans Israelis ever done for us?

Forgive him, he's Australian, it's in his blood..

If your country lost a war to the Emu's you'd be just as uppity.

[QUOTE=Annoyed;14647622]Nice try at revising history.[/QUOE]

You seem to like revisionist history a lot though...

Much of Europe was physically destroyed at the end of the war. So was Japan. We had no obligation whatsoever to assist them with rebuilding. We did so as a kindness. If we hadn't, it would have taken decades longer for them to recover from the destruction of the war. And in point of fact, we were the only nation in a position to help them, as we had been spared the physical destruction of our industrial capability due to our being out of range of axis weapons.

The US didn't do that out of the kindness of its heart. We did it to keep the Russians from doing it. Otherwise they would have steamrolled over Europe provoking devastating war with the US. Sure in hindsight we know that it would have ended badly for the USSR, but back then there were still plenty of uncertainties. But that also won us some strong allies in Western Europe. Another reason for that is that it made Europe a nice little market for American industries/exports. As it turns out, the Marshall plan paid off rather well.

I should also point out that helping someone or some nation out does not obligate the entity providing the help to take care of the entity receiving the help forever. If I help an old lady across the street, does that obligate me to tend to her needs for the rest of her life?

You would if that old lady had connections that would set you up for the rest of your life. Once again, a word you need to learn. Reciprocity.

[mad_gater]

[QUOTE=aretood2;14647679]As I mentioned in the other post, the last 18 years seems to disagree with you given that the trend has been a decrease of crime nationally and a decrease of illegal immigration via the southern border.




This may not be you, but others who champion this theory are basing it on quite a trick. It's a nice trick though. So they devalue groups of people and then turn around and ask why those very same groups of people won't vote for your guys. But instead of saying "Maybe we shouldn't devalue them and ignore them" your response is "they become democrats because of welfare and brownness!!!" which in and of itself is fairly racist if not xenophobic. How? Well it's simple. Democrats aren't "real" americans, they are even anti-American which is why they always make anti-American choices. So foreigners are naturally democrats because they are obviously not American.

It also ignores the 44% of Hispanics who voted for George W. Bush's reelection. Think about that for a second, W. basically neutralized the Hispanic vote....why would Hispanics vote for him? Maybe it was because he literally speaks their language? He gives them the time of day? He listened to Hispanics and Hispanics responded to that in the polls. Had Romney continued that trend he too would have neutralized the Hispanic vote. But this requires ignoring that other group, the "Brown people are scary" group, the particular group that Trumps courts.



You just described Trump to a T.



What countries? There's a correlation between dictatorships and walls....And if you mean to point at Israel, then well...that's a nice magic trick where you compare apples to oranges.

[QUOTE=Gatefan1976;14647485]About 1550 marines, plus support vehicles with the notion to pump it up to 2500 to be used as a rapid response team it anyone who threatens US interests in the area, plus leave to use our airspace and sea lanes for your military vehicles with no regard to Australian interests.
So NO, you have significant troops, material and rights to disrupt our own diplomatic process.



I just started watching "Pine Gap" on Netflix and I never realized just how annoyed Australians are at the US. It makes sense thinking about it though. Australia is hardly an equal partner and as one character on that show said, who would the US pick prioritize in a war, Australia or Japan/S. Korea?



That's no way to talk to your overlords. If you play nice, we'll get the British to send the royals to Australia for a state visit as a reward.



I don't understand




What have the Romans Israelis ever done for us?



If your country lost a war to the Emu's you'd be just as uppity.

Nice try at revising history.[/QUOE]

You seem to like revisionist history a lot though...



The US didn't do that out of the kindness of its heart. We did it to keep the Russians from doing it. Otherwise they would have steamrolled over Europe provoking devastating war with the US. Sure in hindsight we know that it would have ended badly for the USSR, but back then there were still plenty of uncertainties. But that also won us some strong allies in Western Europe. Another reason for that is that it made Europe a nice little market for American industries/exports. As it turns out, the Marshall plan paid off rather well.




You would if that old lady had connections that would set you up for the rest of your life. Once again, a word you need to learn. Reciprocity.

not to mention Japan probably could've had us brought up on war crimes charges and rightfully so after we murdered a good chunk of their non-combatant population with prototype thermonuclear weapons if we hadn't helped them rebuild

[magi877]

There is no other military forces strong enough to oppose those two. Russia and China already made a bunch of country their b!tch, the only thing that prevents them to complete their plan is the US influence and strategic bases all over the world.



That's wishful thinking I'm sorry.

too many non americans want to both ***** about our presence everywhere (i say the same thing) AND then say we have to stay everywhere

cannot have both positions!

----------------------------------------------
i still see no reasons given why it has to be the US to be the bulk of any challenge to any threat whether that be russia, china, iran, whomever

why doesn't the UK form a "commonwealth military force" to help defend itself and former territories?

as i posted before, nothing holding back Aust and its neighbors from forming their own south asian/oceania defense block either


------------
PINE GAP was mentioned above. and yes, i had then same thought (also watched SECOND CITY similar theme so different circumstances) of "well, i did not know the Australian public opinion on the US was so low"

but then, we get (in this thread and in other arenas) "you can't leave us, we need you" from them

you have far too many people, it would seem,to interested in serving themselves rather then serving their nation

the need to serve seems to supplanted by the very notion that if something goes wrong the americans will show up and "save us"

SCREW THAT!!! a person-a a nation should do all it can to help itself before it asks for help from others

its no wonder that a few years back, the AUst military was actively recruiting former,even retired US, Canadian and UK officers and NCO's in certain military occupations

they offered high pay and citizenship for the soldiers and their families as enticement. so, someone on here asked it the US were 'mercenaries'? Well looked who asked us to be for them?

"Overseas recruits
Overseas or ‘Lateral’ recruits are military personnel who have gained entry to the Australian Defence Force based on prior experience in foreign defence forces.

The ADF lateral recruitment program addresses capability shortfalls that cannot otherwise be filled using Australian personnel. Visit the Defence Recruitment website for eligibility criteria."

from: https://www.defencejobs.gov.au/joini...in/citizenship

-----------
the american people, and the american soldier, is exhausted from going everywhere and being everything for far too long!

the world is scr#wed!! you all need to sort it out without the US helping for once

[Annoyed]

This may not be you, but others who champion this theory are basing it on quite a trick. It's a nice trick though. So they devalue groups of people and then turn around and ask why those very same groups of people won't vote for your guys. But instead of saying "Maybe we shouldn't devalue them and ignore them" your response is "they become democrats because of welfare and brownness!!!" which in and of itself is fairly racist if not xenophobic. How? Well it's simple. Democrats aren't "real" americans, they are even anti-American which is why they always make anti-American choices. So foreigners are naturally democrats because they are obviously not American.

No, I'm really simple. I don't care where you come from or what color you are. If you wish to migrate to this country, do so by the established procedures and come in through the front door. If you try to sneak in, or overstay a temp. visa, the only thing I'm willing to grant you is free transportation to the point where you entered the country. You can rot there for all I care. I'm just trying to explain the most logical explanation for why someone would not want to defend the border.

I should also point out that helping someone or some nation out does not obligate the entity providing the help to take care of the entity receiving the help forever. If I help an old lady across the street, does that obligate me to tend to her needs for the rest of her life?

I should also point out that helping someone or some nation out does not obligate the entity providing the help to take care of the entity receiving the help forever. If I help an old lady across the street, does that obligate me to tend to her needs for the rest of her life?

You would if that old lady had connections that would set you up for the rest of your life. Once again, a word you need to learn. Reciprocity.

You'll notice I used the word "obligate". If we wish to provide aid in the future, we are certainly able to do so. But many people seem to believe that if we help some nation once, we are obligated to provide assistance in the future. That is not the case.

[Annoyed]

not to mention Japan probably could've had us brought up on war crimes charges and rightfully so after we murdered a good chunk of their non-combatant population with prototype thermonuclear weapons if we hadn't helped them rebuild

Hardly. We were the victims of a sneak attack which drew us into the war to begin with, and while by 1945, the outcome was already set in stone, Hirohito was too damned stubborn to realize he had lost. He wouldn't have surrendered otherwise, and we would have had to engage in an even more bloody ground assault upon the Island of Japan.

[Chaka-Z0]

Hardly. We were the victims of a sneak attack which drew us into the war to begin with, and while by 1945, the outcome was already set in stone, Hirohito was too damned stubborn to realize he had lost. He wouldn't have surrendered otherwise, and we would have had to engage in an even more bloody ground assault upon the Island of Japan.

I agree with you. (Mark it on your calendar, a 2019 first!)

The only aspect I differ is that Hirohito was Japan's Emperor, yes, but Hideki Tojo was the head of the military and called the shots military wise. He was a clever man, this surprise attack on Pearl Harbor was an absolute success, but his biggest mistake was not to push on and bomb the oil factories and actual ships that mattered.

not to mention Japan probably could've had us brought up on war crimes charges and rightfully so after we murdered a good chunk of their non-combatant population with prototype thermonuclear weapons if we hadn't helped them rebuild

Japan's tactics were nothing short of terrorism / kamikaze attacks. They literally strapped soldiers on top of torpedoes to steer them towards US ships during the Pacific War and of course suicide runs in planes. The Imperial Army brainwashed kids and teenagers into kamikaze runs, using the Bushido Samurai mindset. During the Philipinnes war, many charged US soldiers in the fashion of WW1, bayonette charges, which got them all killed by one well-positioned machine-gun man.

Japan jumped in the war for purely selfish reason, wanting recognition in the international community. The US gave the Japs many occasions to surrender, but they would have none of that. They had lost the war but kept fighting. People were sick and tired of the war, Germany was defeated. Truman had no choice but to use the bomb, nothing else would've put the Japenese on their knees.

[mad_gater]

I agree with you. (Mark it on your calendar, a 2019 first!)

The only aspect I differ is that Hirohito was Japan's Emperor, yes, but Hideki Tojo was the head of the military and called the shots military wise. He was a clever man, this surprise attack on Pearl Harbor was an absolute success, but his biggest mistake was not to push on and bomb the oil factories and actual ships that mattered.



Japan's tactics were nothing short of terrorism / kamikaze attacks. They literally strapped soldiers on top of torpedoes to steer them towards US ships during the Pacific War and of course suicide runs in planes. The Imperial Army brainwashed kids and teenagers into kamikaze runs, using the Bushido Samurai mindset. During the Philipinnes war, many charged US soldiers in the fashion of WW1, bayonette charges, which got them all killed by one well-positioned machine-gun man.

Japan jumped in the war for purely selfish reason, wanting recognition in the international community. The US gave the Japs many occasions to surrender, but they would have none of that. They had lost the war but kept fighting. People were sick and tired of the war, Germany was defeated. Truman had no choice but to use the bomb, nothing else would've put the Japenese on their knees.

even if you knowingly murder non-combatants in the process? that's not the way the basic principles of just warfare works

[Annoyed]

even if you knowingly murder non-combatants in the process? that's not the way the basic principles of just warfare works

Collateral Damage.

[Chaka-Z0]

Collateral Damage.

Sad bud true. The worst of it though was the standard bombings of other cities by the US air force. Nagasaki and Hiroshima were selected because they had the most military assets and the fewer civilians. Truman was advised that a massive invasion of Japan would result in major American casualties, and the fact that the US demonstrated their nuclear power served as a deterrent to the ambitions of the Soviets. Had they gone with standard warfare the war would've lasted even longer, possibly a couple years. The US Airforce also air-dropped thousands of leaflets to warn the people of the upcoming doom.

If anything blame the Emperor, he NEVER ordered his people to take refuge or hide even when defeat was more than inevitable. He did not budge after the first nuke. He condemned his own people to a certain death for the sake of honor.

[Annoyed]

Sad bud true. The worst of it though was the standard bombings of other cities by the US air force. Nagasaki and Hiroshima were selected because they had the most military assets and the fewer civilians. Truman was advised that a massive invasion of Japan would result in major American casualties, and the fact that the US demonstrated their nuclear power served as a deterrent to the ambitions of the Soviets. Had they gone with standard warfare the war would've lasted even longer, possibly a couple years. The US Airforce also air-dropped thousands of leaflets to warn the people of the upcoming doom.

If anything blame the Emperor, he NEVER ordered his people to take refuge or hide even when defeat was more than inevitable. He did not budge after the first nuke. He condemned his own people to a certain death for the sake of honor.

A ground assault of Japan would also have cost more Japanese lives than the two A-Bombs did.
And by that time, it wasn't "Honor", it was stupidity.

He was damned stupid to strike at us @ Pearl to begin with, nothing he could have done could have aroused our determination more than that sneak attack.

But I do admit that the entire world was damned lucky our 3 Pacific fleet carriers were not in Pearl on Dec. 7th, 1941.

[Coco Pops]

I don't know why the Aussies don't kick the yanks out and dismantle pine gap

[aretood2]

No, I'm really simple. I don't care where you come from or what color you are. If you wish to migrate to this country, do so by the established procedures and come in through the front door. If you try to sneak in, or overstay a temp. visa, the only thing I'm willing to grant you is free transportation to the point where you entered the country. You can rot there for all I care. I'm just trying to explain the most logical explanation for why someone would not want to defend the border.

The Canadian border is practically unguarded and a transit point for illicit goods and confirmed entry points of terrorists and suspected terrorists (unlike the Mexican border) and an increase of illegal immigration (also unlike the Mexican border). Yet for some reason a wall is to be built on the Mexican border but not the Canadian one. Put your money where your mouth is and start advocating for a wall with Canada or admit that race plays a role in this.

[Gatefan1976]

I don't know why the Aussies don't kick the yanks out and dismantle pine gap

The same reason we allow the operations in Darwin as well, it's a political trade-off. I don't like it, but I understand it.

[Gatefan1976]

The Canadian border is practically unguarded and a transit point for illicit goods and confirmed entry points of terrorists and suspected terrorists (unlike the Mexican border) and an increase of illegal immigration (also unlike the Mexican border). Yet for some reason a wall is to be built on the Mexican border but not the Canadian one. Put your money where your mouth is and start advocating for a wall with Canada or admit that race plays a role in this.

Your face will go as blue as your text waiting Tood.

[Gatefan1976]

even if you knowingly murder non-combatants in the process? that's not the way the basic principles of just warfare works

If you are referring to the old tenants of "just warfare" as defined by Aqiunas and Augustine (which I am sure you are), neither WW was fought under such a doctrine. Here is one area where you and I definitely agree MG.