posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 04:52 PM
I didn't have a better place to put an impromptu opinion piece and I don't frequent the swamp, but if any of you want to take a swipe at me it's on.
Bro, suppress your fight or flight reaction for posting about President Trump. You're saying something in support not against, no harm shall come nigh
thee. This is how you get stars and you can multiply them by doing replies in threads like this. I'd like a free ATS tee shirt, black, size large.
His latest move by cutting funding to certain Central and South American countries is spot on. This is the sort of thing he should've been doing long
ago instead of trumping up a border wall and having a dramatic fight with the Democrats about. This approach would get much more results but the
question arises; Could he have done it from the beginning without too much backlash politically? Did he need a mandate, some concrete evidence,
Since he was elected President, ICE and border security funding have been greatly increased. That has been paired with a phenomenal level of public
statements and political posturing. A major part of the agenda center stage. With increased funding, exposure in the media and direct orders, ICE has
detained many more people than in previous years as border security has caught and arrested more illegal immigrants than ever. One could argue that
while the immigrant numbers and illegals in the country has risen on a small but measurable level, increased vigilance, arrests and media exposure
will get the numbers to justify bigger actions being taken, actions that two or three years ago would've seemed almost cruel and sinister met with
vigorous opposition such as cutting funding to countries that the illegals are predominantly coming from.
After all, they can do more and should be. Even a liberal, if not backed into an oppositional, argumentative corner should be able to truthfully say
that those countries should be stopping a majority of these people and aren't because they don't have to. Why would you want to implement the
unpopular, expensive measures in your country to drastically cut down on illegal immigrants leaving your country unless you had to? If your country is
so messed up, poor from Government mismanagement and corruption, why would you want to keep mouths to feed that are contributing nothing to your
economy and worsening your situation?
Implement a way to cut down on this in large numbers and the ramifications for your society and economy might be very bad in the short term. Long term
doesn't always matter so much to politicians and wealthier citizens if it causes problems, expenses, and a loss of quality of life for them and this
is the only life anyone lives. It takes a special person to be selfless enough to take losses or to implement changes that will negatively affect them
and their constituents now but will be better for the nation and a majority of its citizens who live at a lower level than you do in the future that
they might not or will not see.
edit on 3/30/2019 by r0xor because: (no reason given)