It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Breaking Point at the Border

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 2 2019 @ 10:10 PM

originally posted by: JBurns
Threaten drone strikes against any country who doesn't immediately and effectively put a halt to illegal immigration into our country. Start holding these leaders accountable - use sanctions, threat of force, embarrassment or any other means necessary

You have to take off the gloves to defeat a determined enemy. Deploying US troops along international borders for law enforcement support and anti-drug operations is well established and actually fully authorized by Congress. It just so happens these operations go hand in hand.

We also need to summarily hear/evaluate asylum claims vs. letting them come into the country. Those without hard evidence to back up their claim of State persecution (and only state violence) need to be turned away. Put them on a plane (with large groups) and fly them 3,000 miles away. Trust me they will get sick and tired of making the trip only to be assuredly turned away and sent thousands of miles to do it all over again

Demoralize them and eliminate their will to break our laws, defraud the United States, burden our system and violate our sovereignty. Put up signs and leaflets saying "The trip ahead is dangerous, you will not be permitted entry, your asylum fraud will disqualify you for life from every being admitted entry, etc"

Set up a minefield along problem areas, I guarantee nobody tries to cross it. Ask Cuba how well it works. Use layers of defensive emplacements AKA defense in depth. If we have to, go a couple hundred feet into Mexico for the purpose of preventing them from actually reaching our borders. Physically stop them. It isn't an invasion, it is just a security operation they wouldn't be consulted on or have any choice to accept/decline. But not an invasion...

Whatever it takes

Drone glitter-bomb the leaders!

posted on Apr, 3 2019 @ 01:58 AM
I think the answer is to invade Mexico and takeover. Technically the illegal immigrants that are coming over here are still Mexican citizens so if we are footing the bill for Mexican citizens then we should be calling the shots there.
If the mishandling of their country is making it so that their people want to leave and come to this country then I feel that we would be justified to take over.

Unfortunately we haven't gotten our own stuff together .. so I'm not sure if we would be able to fix Mexico or not.
But I think it would be a lot easier to fix Mexico than it would be to fix the US.

It's a much smaller country in many ways and it seems like it would be a lot less complicated to fix .....we could appoint some of the wise Mexican citizens that have fled to our country to run it.

Or maybe we could just give it to the Democrats to run they can turn it into a welfare state and all the citizens would flee back there.

edit on 3-4-2019 by HarryJoy because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 3 2019 @ 07:33 AM
Huh.. immigration spiking since Trump took office, weird! It was going down years prior. But I'm sure ending support for countries that already have issues won't help force even more immigrants across the border. : )

Trump is the antithesis of all the things he is trying to do. He makes the problems worse, not better. He mocks Kim and NK until they are ready to toss missiles towards Hawaii. Then claims victory when South Korea makes steps to end the hostilities. He ends payments to countries that will only increase immigrants, and goes hardline on the border, where immigration was DECREASING for years, and produces the opposite results of his proposed policies.

The dude can't get out of his own way.

posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 09:01 AM
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

The Asylum Filing Deadline Denying Protection to the Persecuted and Undermining Governmental EfficiencyThis definition is based on international law, specifically the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. The U.S. is not a signatory to this Convention, but did sign on to its 1967 Protocol, which incorporates the Convention by reference. The Refugee Convention requires state parties to protect people living within their borders and prohibits them from sending people to other countries where they would be harmed based on their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. With the Refugee Act of 1980, the U.S. brought the refugee definition into our domestic law. The refugee definition is found at section 101(a)(42) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA)

posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 11:42 AM
Quick question - what are all the "hordes" running AWAY from?

Or is it just general mass immigration (better life, stable country Yadda Yadda)?
edit on 5-4-2019 by AnakinWayneII because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 5 2019 @ 04:16 PM

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: TonyS

Change the law to state they can be denied asylum unless they make a claim at a port of entry and not between ports of entry.

Trump did that by EO, it was shot down by a judge...

posted on Apr, 7 2019 @ 04:46 AM
If I was playing a civilization game and wanted the best safety for my civ i would have built city walls years ago.

Play a civilization game and make liberal decisions. the cities go into anarchy and are open to barbarians.

Where is the common sense today

posted on May, 20 2019 @ 08:21 PM
May 20, 2019

Sanctuary City Seattle Washington is now BANNING government planes from bringing ICE-detained migrants.


new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3   >>

log in