U.S. military may house immigrant children as Trump policy beset by confusion

a reply to: projectvxn

j

DAMN! Remind me never to piss you off. You kill with words and facts.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Kharron

Hopefully we'll start jailing the people responsible for creating this cluster#.

I agree with you there, 100%. Where should we start, right at the top?

a reply to: Kharron

I see you conveniently ignored the rest of my post so you could make an asinine poke at Trump for a mess Obama created.

originally posted by: Kharron

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Kharron

Hopefully we'll start jailing the people responsible for creating this cluster#.

I agree with you there, 100%. Where should we start, right at the top?

With the one's who made the law and the administration that it happened under?

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Kharron

It seems the government is getting ready for a ramp up the detention of children, despite the rhetoric that it is against it.

Explain why the military, which is extremely good at this kind of logistical nightmare, is a ramp-up of child detention?

The ramp up is 2,300 to 20,000. That is considered a huge increase by any standards.

As I wrote in the OP, the military stepping in is not an issue, we're very good at it, the need for it is.

I choose my words carefully, so they are not misinterpreted, as that is a big source of entertainment for people here; I have to refrain from humor as it is often twisted and used against, I have to stay more serious and more careful with my words and my sources -- I really wish everyone would take time to read all the words before commenting in anger.

a reply to: Kharron

Kharron, it's very clear that in this particular case the request to the Pentagon was made for children who come here unaccompanied as in without their parents.

Unaccompanied doesn't mean they are separated from their parents in detention facilties. I realize the article glossed over that and spun it back to Trump hate but it spun you right with it. I promise I'm telling you right. Please read it again. Especially the part where HHS makes the request.

Your Friend,
T. Gut

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Kharron

I see you conveniently ignored the rest of my post so you could make an asinine poke at Trump for a mess Obama created.

I'm trying to piece it together, bud, and replying in sections. It's angry, riddled with profanities and disorganized. I'm doing my best, give me a break -- don't hit me.

a reply to: Kharron

Since you're so good at written communication maybe you can explain what this means:

It seems the government is getting ready for a ramp up the detention of children, despite the rhetoric that it is against it.

This sentence says that the government (meaning Trump) is going to us the military to put children in detention, as in, incarcerate them.

You certainly do choose your words carefully don't you?

Matter of fact, you did that throughout your accusatory post and have since tried to place the blame at the feet of an administration that I have demonstrated was not the cause of this mess, but the solution to it.

a reply to: Kharron

I'm trying to piece it together, bud, and replying in sections. It's angry, riddled with

I broke down YOUR words and YOUR sources in a piece by piece reply.

Don't play stupid with me.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Kharron

I'm trying to piece it together, bud, and replying in sections. It's angry, riddled with

I broke down YOUR words and YOUR sources in a piece by piece reply.

Don't play stupid with me.

Maybe he's not playing?

originally posted by: The GUT
a reply to: Kharron

Kharron, it's very clear that in this particular case the request to the Pentagon was made for children who come here unaccompanied as in without their parents.

Unaccompanied doesn't mean they are separated from their parents in detention facilties. I realize the article glossed over that and spun it back to Trump hate but it spun you right with it. I promise I'm telling you right. Please read it again. Especially the part where HHS makes the request.

Your Friend,
T. Gut

GUT, it absolutely does not say that in this article and I don't know why you're trying to make it sounds like it does. I know that we can assume where the kids come from but the article does not cover it, and I don't want to assume.

Here is the very closest it gets to stating anything:

She said HHS had asked the Pentagon “to determine its capabilities to provide up to 20,000 temporary beds for unaccompanied alien children” at military installations.”

White did not give further details and it was not clear how many of the children who could be sent to the bases are already being detained at other facilities.

I'm not sure where you're finding this information that we know where they come from, but it is certainly not in the article I linked in the OP; and I don't want to make stuff up, I just wanted to report what I read.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Kharron

I'm trying to piece it together, bud, and replying in sections. It's angry, riddled with

I broke down YOUR words and YOUR sources in a piece by piece reply.

Don't play stupid with me.

I'm replying to other people. Then I was going to reply to you, but your class act reply changed my mind. Take care.

a reply to: Kharron

You seem to have a problem when someone REALLY challenges you on this BS post you just made.

No wonder you changed your mind.

Intellectually cowardly.

originally posted by: highvein

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Kharron

I'm trying to piece it together, bud, and replying in sections. It's angry, riddled with

I broke down YOUR words and YOUR sources in a piece by piece reply.

Don't play stupid with me.

Maybe he's not playing?

Lol. That's the conclusion I finally and literally came to and struck "disingenuous" off the two choices.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Kharron

You seem to have a problem when someone REALLY challenges you on this BS post you just made.

No wonder you changed your mind.

I'm always up for a good debate. The older I get though, the less tolerance I have for disrespect. I know we're all anonymous here but that does not mean we have to call each other names. You're disrespectful and if I don't think I would put up with your venom in person, so I don't have to on here either.

Respect is earned. Have a good night, project.

Mods, I am not asking for this thread to be closed, that would be what is intended by these tactics. I will ignore the disrespect and please leave the thread open.

Watch this Kharron. Turn off sound it is brutal.

a reply to: Kharron

You showed up to a race thinking you'd win. Now you wanna play the victim.

The older I get the less tolerance I have for bull#.

a reply to: SailorJerry

If do this we must, and frankly, I'd rather we didn't...but they're here, and for the foreseeable future will remain so...that's just the facts of the matter.

I see no reason they can't live exactly as you described. It beats the Hell out of the streets, or being tossed back to the tender mercies of the Coyotes, or worse...

a reply to: Kharron

Seems like par for the course. Back in 2014, 3 shelters at military bases provided housing (or in bad faith, “detention”) for 7700 children.

www.nytimes.com...

a reply to: Kharron

They have to be kept somewhere.

Sending them back could mean sending them into the arms of rapist and killers.

We can't keep them in the temp chain link fenced areas.

I was just talking with theredneck about housing being our best option at this point and I see nothing wrong with keeping them at a military base while everything is sorted out.

This is an even better option than the one I came up with. I said we should build temp houses. Theredneck made a good point about the cost. Housing them at a base brings that cost way way down.

What do you think we should do with them?