Quote:his treatment of illegal immigrants from south of the border,

(01-09-2020 12:57 PM)mrbig Wrote:  I can't think of any foreign affairs issues that I classify as a "win" by the Trump administration so far. The abandoning the Kurds, giving North Korea a photo opp for nothing, his treatment of immigrants from south of the border, and the erosion of relationships with Europe stick out most prominently to me.

(01-09-2020 12:22 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  What has changed is that we have made it known that if you mess with us, we will hit you back, and make it hurt.

(01-09-2020 02:51 PM)Foff Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 12:22 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  What has changed is that we have made it known that if you mess with us, we will hit you back, and make it hurt.

except if you hit our base with MISSILES 2 days after we promise "should Iran strike any U.S. person or target, the United States will quickly & fully strike back, & perhaps in a disproportionate manner."
then we sit back and take it.

good thing you cant trust a WORD out of donnys mouth, or we'd be in another WAR. well,,, unless he meant DISPROPORTIONATELY WEAK.

(01-09-2020 12:57 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 12:27 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Well, the Democrats are working to cut his feet out from under him in any dealings with Iran. Maybe this qualifies as either being for Iran/against Trump?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/house-speaker-nancy-pelosi-announces-vote-to-limit-trumps-war-powers-against-iran/ar-BBYLan7?li=BBnb7Kz

A lot of democrats see Trump as a bull in the china shop. Plus he doesn't seem to have much intellectual curiosity or base of knowledge in foreign affairs. He also has surrounded himself by people without much diversity of thought (or actual diversity). Combined, those are some terrifying qualities to someone like me. Maybe it works out, but until some things actually work out then I remain concerned and skeptical.

I can't think of any foreign affairs issues that I classify as a "win" by the Trump administration so far. The abandoning the Kurds, giving North Korea a photo opp for nothing, his treatment of immigrants from south of the border, and the erosion of relationships with Europe stick out most prominently to me.

(01-09-2020 01:31 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

Quote:his treatment of illegal immigrants from south of the border,

FIFY

(01-09-2020 04:36 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 01:31 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

Quote:his treatment of illegal immigrants from south of the border,

FIFY

Trump cut Temporary Protected Status by 98% which included individuals from El Salvador, Honduras, Haiti, and Nicaragua. Those were legal immigrants that Trump wants removed.

Asylum is legal immigration and Trump is making it harder to seek asylum, particularly at the southern border, but also treating asylum seekers much worse than previous administrations.

DACA granted legal status to more 800,000. Even if you think DACA itself was unconstitutional and/or bad policy by the Obama administration, that is 800,000 people who had legal status that Trump tried to take away.

Trump is also approving far fewer visa and green card applications, both methods of legal immigration. That doesn't quite fit within my earlier description.

So no, I don't think you FIFYed it for me.

(01-09-2020 08:34 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  My position on the immigration issue is very simple.

I favor more LEGAL immigration, based on a merit system. It is absurd for Microsoft to have to create a campus in southern BC because it can't get work visas for the brightest and best IT graduates of places like MIT and CalTech and Rice, because they are foreign.

I favor doing everything possible to end ILLEGAL immigration.

For illegal immigrants already established here, I favor a temporary to permanent work visa status, with no path to citizenship except by going back and doing it right. And anyone, regardless of status, who serves a full hitch in the military with an honorable discharge gets fast tracked.

(01-10-2020 01:53 AM)mrbig Wrote:  This country wasn't founded on immigration through the merit system and I don't think it behooves this country to try and let merit-based immigration engulf other immigration. I am fine with the Statute of Liberty poem for the most part, so long as people are coming here legally. I am fine with more legal immigrants and more refugees. I'd rather have more people in the system than just as many total people with a lot of them trying to stay outside the system.

I do favor legal immigration over illegal immigration. In fact, I don't favor illegal immigration at all. I don't want to build a wall, but I do believe in employing technological means to improve border security and make illegal crossings much more difficult. That said, I also favor increased humanitarian aid in ways that are targeted to reduce the flow of asylum seekers and illegal immigrants.

Tanq - I don't practice immigration law at all. I have heard things like what you suggest and I think the asylum system is not functioning well. Too many applicants that take too long in the system. I don't have the expertise to make suggestions on how to improve the system. I do think there are plenty of legitimate asylum requests. I also believe in improving our border situation in a way that treats asylum seekers and even people seeking to cross illegally who are caught in a humane and compassionate way.

I am sympathetic to the dreamers as it is no fault of theirs that they were brought here as children and largely consider themselves americans, so I favor something that legalizes their presence and gives them a quick path to citizenship. I agree that dreamers in particular who serve in the military should be fast-tracked even more.

But while a discussion on immigration is fine and dandy (and is something we have done before on this board), that doesn't change the way the current administration has handled immigrants from the south. And this discussion of what the USA's immigration policy completely ignores what the current administration has done. My point was merely that I consider this administration's handling of immigrants from the south to be a foreign policy failure.

(01-10-2020 10:17 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  True, this country had open immigration for a long time. At the same time, they had no income tax. So if we must return to the 1840's, let's do it on both issues.

(01-10-2020 10:17 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Emma Lazurus was a poet. should we also take the writings of Whiman, Frost, and Sandburgs as policy guides? There is a great poem about the postal service - neither rain nor snow, etc. Should we codify that as policy?

(01-10-2020 10:17 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I have extensive experience with the border and Mexico, and am part Hispanic myself.

(01-10-2020 10:17 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  If this country has a need a for uneducated and unskilled workers, then the ones wading the river will do just fine.

(01-10-2020 10:17 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  I think during the latest crises, they have been. I think the media representations - and Democratic representations - of ICE agents as heartless Nazis who love mistreating children are both false and overblown. They are a bunch of people who were caught between competing directives and using overwhelmed facilities. I have broken bread with them - they are people just like you and me. About half are Hispanic themselves.

(01-10-2020 10:17 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Yet any desire to stem illegal immigration is cast by one side as racist, and any action to do so is cast by that same side as nazi-like.

(01-10-2020 10:31 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  This country is not being founded anymore. It is time for merit-based immigration, just like virtually every other country in the world.

I find it somewhat hypocritical that the left likes to parade around this platitude about how we are the only developed country without universal health care, but utterly ignores other things that we are the only, or virtually the only, country without.

(01-10-2020 12:11 PM)mrbig Wrote:  Before responding to the particulars, a few extremely quick points. (1) Do either of you think Trump's handling of immigration policy along the southern border has been a foreign policy win? Because that is the only point I made initially. (2) We have discussed border policy on this board before and I'm not sure it is worth rehashing unless someone has changed their position. https://csnbbs.com/thread-881363-post-16274509.html#pid16274509

(01-10-2020 10:31 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  This country is not being founded anymore. It is time for merit-based immigration, just like virtually every other country in the world.
I find it somewhat hypocritical that the left likes to parade around this platitude about how we are the only developed country without universal health care, but utterly ignores other things that we are the only, or virtually the only, country without.

(01-10-2020 01:58 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  There is one issue that was brought up earlier, but bears repeating.
In the era of 'everyone come over', there was no New Deal in place, no welfare state. If circumstances change and the United States reverted to such a 'lesser of a safety net' type place, I might not have such the issue with a more open or lesser criteria for immigration.
The issue is that we do have such a 'social welfare safety net' society in place. Regardless of one's stance on that in general, that fact alone (at least for me) cuts against the looser, more open immigration policies espoused by the progressives in our society.
In many facets, if such a 'social welfare safety net' is the order of the day, and it is, then having some sort of merit based seems to make utter and absolute sense.
As for 'foreign policy', I cant see anything but a Pyrrhic victory if victory is counted in terms of 'gee let me take everyone from your country who wants to hoof it here.'