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.


Immigration law - Enlist?

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 4 2006 @ 08:31 AM
Please excuse me if I am not very articulate in this post, it's late.

But what if the ultimate resolution to immigration in Amercia, and integrating those already illegally here is through military service?

Serve 2 - 4 years, fight for our cause (or the government's, depending on your veiw point), become an American. This is basically how our country was founded, it would't suprise me if this is how it was defended today.

Bush said they do the jobs most Americans won't. I include the military in that statement. When I was running through basic and tech school, I ran into a few individuals who were here legally, but were serving to gain citizenship. Yes, it is a policy that if you are here legally, but not a citizen, after 4 years (technically two) honorable service, the service member and his/her immediate family automatically become citizen's.

What if that is implemented and advertised wide scale? What if we do a backgound check on all the illegals, and those that do appear to be here out of sheer desire and drive have the opprotunity to become a "red blooded American" in such a manner? I am all for such an approach. What if Buch Co. / the powers that be plan implementing such a thing?

This does jive with prospects for an E.U. assualt on a soon to be hostile Russia, as well as Coalition attacks on Iran and NATO posturing towards China - which is the current game plan (a diff thread). Thoughts?

[edit on 4-4-2006 by crisko]

posted on Apr, 5 2006 @ 07:26 PM
wrong deport them. . . .it was done before during the depression. . . .

Transcript from the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer
PAINFUL PAST: November 27, 2003

Jeffrey Kaye of KCET Los Angeles explores the mass expulsion of people of Mexican descent from the United States during the Depression and new efforts to address it.

JEFFREY KAYE: Maria Ofelia Acosta is a 72-year-old grandmother of three, who lives a tranquil, suburban life of retirement in a Los Angels suburb. But as a young child, Acosta says she and her family were victims of a little-known and little-told chapter in American history: The mass deportation of people, many of them U.S. citizens, to Mexico. Acosta says her family's odyssey began in June 1932. That's when her father, a legal U.S. resident from Mexico, was approached by federal authorities. He was one of many Latino laborers on a public works project in northern California.

MARIA OFELIA ACOSTA: He thought maybe they're going to give us a better job. And then they said, "We decided to send you to Mexico, so line up and come one by one and get your tickets."


. .. . .that would be a good start. . .

[edit on 5-4-2006 by Shamgar]

posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 10:28 AM
I actually wouldn't mind this, in some ways.

It would help the Military in getting more troops to fight, meaning that maybe we can top hearing about any dismal recruitment numbers.

But the problem I have would be this: We let a husband enlist, but the wife stays in here in the US or near the border in Mexico. How many do we allow in for the husband? If we say "Bring the Family." Then there will be instances where "Families" of one or two hundred people would try to get in off the back on one man.

If we are going to do this, then we need to be strict about it. Saying something like "You can bring the Wife, and kids, but everyone else stays there."

I don't want to sound harsh, but if we were to do this, we almost would have to.

An Army of One sounds nice, but doesn't hold up in the practical sense.


log in