Why are they so hot and bothered to start a war? — Trump might be an absolute nothingburger, but at least not starting wars is a good nothing; OTOH, the Constitution clearly and explicitly lays on the federal government the non-optional obligation to defend the states from invasion... something that Trump himself has admitted: we *are* being invaded.
Why doesn't Pr. Nothingburger use already existing laws to address this?
>50 USC §21. — Restraint, regulation, and removal > Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being of the age of fourteen years and upward, who shall be within the United States and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies. The President is authorized in any such event, by his proclamation thereof, or other public act, to direct the conduct to be observed on the part of the United States, toward the aliens who become so liable; the manner and degree of the restraint to which they shall be subject and in what cases, and upon what security their residence shall be permitted, and to provide for the removal of those who, not being permitted to reside within the United States, refuse or neglect to depart therefrom; and to establish any other regulations which are found necessary in the premises and for the public safety.
But apparently he's afraid to use these options; it's almost like he's afraid to rock the boat. Oh, sure, he'll get a rise out of democrats and rile up the media, but when it comes to *actual* serious consequences? he's out to lunch and couldn't care less.
I found this meme a while back, just after Trump ended the government shutdown (and gave $38Bn to Israel), and while you could say that it's extreme it does contain one point worth looking at: JUDGES AND LEGISLATORS AIDING THE INVASION *ARE* COMMITTING TREASON.
> 18 USC §2381. — Treason > Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
Absolutely there are several factions, like you list, which do not have the US's best interests at heart.
The more I think about it, something like may be the best way to do things — it would be a sudden, immediate change which places things very much into a black-and-white us-vs-them mentality.
The globalists would, of course, fight back, screaming and rebelling, not ever realizing they're committing actual treason.
>Why don’t we just gun them down Because the US is not a third world dictatorship, and this is extremely important. Do you know why China will never be number one? Because nobody trusts them. China cheats and stiffs trade partners, murders its dissidents and harvests their organs, and brutally oppresses it’s own people. Nobody admires China, and they deal with them only because they have to. The US, however, is admired the world over. People would - and do - kill for a chance to live here, because we are a just, kind, and fair society at heart. Forget the media whining - the vast majority of the world loves America because it always tries to do the right thing, even when it’s misguided. The reason the Dollar is the most stable currency in the world is not only because it’s useful, but because it’s trusted. The US doesn’t pull shady accounting bullshit or devalue its currency like China - it plays fair in its dealings, and as a result, the rest of the world looks to it as a leader. This is the single most invaluable, yet fragile asset we have, as crazy as it sounds. If the US stoops to murdering innocents, it would mean a permanent loss of that trust that would have devastating effects on politics and culture world over. There are better ways to stem the flow, such as removing benefits, building a wall, and cracking down on the lucrative human trafficking and coyotes that are the primary reason these people come here. Simple solutions to complex problems don’t take into account the ripple effects of cutting the Gordian knot, and what you want, what you propose, is both morally and pragmatically unconscionable for the sheer damage it would do to the US on the global stage.
In this vid Tucker Carlson calls out the Trotskyites (Neocons) and their pushing for wars in foreign countries: youtu.be/-c0jMsspE7Y
He says they "blunder into obvious catastrophe again and again, refuse to admit blame and then demand more of the same" — and, honestly, isn't that how the government has been treating border security?
I mean, it's been an issue for more than thirty years —Reagan's amnesty in the `80s was predicated upon a securing of the border which never came— and yet, somehow, the idea that we might have to USE THE MILITARY is repulsive to you?
(But, obviously, it's ok to use it in Iran and Iraqghanistan.)
You can defend your borders from armed invasion by force. You can stop economic migrants coming by stopping gibs, safe third country agreements, and sending them back home with consequences (such as tariffs) for their home country. Shooting defenseless civilians just trying to find a better life is, to anyone with a conscience, completely abhorrent and the resulting backlash would actually *hurt* our ability to deal with the crisis as people overreact - so even if you are a literal NatSoc, you would know it to be an extreme blunder. Literally the only reason to resort to killing refugees would be to placate room temperature IQ extremists that can’t see beyond their own desire for “Happenings” and a small, yet vocal group of blackpilled, narcissistic Accelerationists.
>You can defend your borders from armed invasion by force. Not all invasions are armed:
> webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/Invasion >Invasion > INVA'SION, noun s as z. [Latin invasio, from invado. See Invade.] > >1. A hostile entrance into the possessions of another; particularly, the entrance of a hostile army into a country for the purpose of conquest or plunder, or the attack of a military force. The north of England and south of Scotland were for centuries subject to invasion each from the other. The invasion of England by William the Norman, was in 1066. > > 2. An attack on the rights of another; infringement or violation. > > 3. Attack of a disease; as the invasion of the plague, in Egypt.
So quit spreading the shit-tier argument that just because they aren't armed we have to "play nice".
>Shooting defenseless civilians just trying to find a better life is, to anyone with a conscience, completely abhorrent and the resulting backlash would actually *hurt* our ability to deal with the crisis as people overreact - so even if you are a literal NatSoc, you would know it to be an extreme blunder. Literally the only reason to resort to killing refugees would be to placate room temperature IQ extremists that can’t see beyond their own desire for “Happenings” and a small, yet vocal group of blackpilled, narcissistic Accelerationists.
Look, here's the literal truth: Either we have the ability AND will to defend our country with lethal force, or we do not / will not have a country.
Summerfag US kills more innocents than anyone. Get the fuck out of the matrix.
Jeremiah Cox
None of what you say refutes any of my arguments. >not all invasions are armed By your own definition, an invasion is a deliberate attack. People seeking a better life in a great country is not an attack, full stop. You could make the argument that they are here to plunder, but that is only because we make gibs programs they can take advantage of. It’s like leaving food out on your lawn with a sign saying “PLEASE EAT ME”, and then shooting people when they show up to do so. >we have to play nice We don’t “have” to do anything, user. We choose to make the decision that preserves the current US-centric power structure while we sort the issue out. Haven’t you ever taken a geopolitics class? >either we have the ability At no point did I state we don’t have the ability, and certainly we do want to preserve our borders. But, there is a responsible time to react with extreme force, and you haven’t yet managed to prove that this is appropriate. Honestly user, you shouldn’t take Jow Forums very seriously when it advocates for such things. It’s about 99% people LARPing for laughs.
> People seeking a better life in a great country is not an attack, full stop. See the above, idiot.
> You could make the argument that they are here to plunder, but that is only because we make gibs programs they can take advantage of. It’s like leaving food out on your lawn with a sign saying “PLEASE EAT ME”, and then shooting people when they show up to do so. You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you? Those "gibs" have been an issue of contention for as long as I can remember, *at least* as far back as `90s; and the issue of financial responsibility *IS* a superset of all this: you can't spend money you don't have and be responsible. (See $20 Trillion debt.)
> At no point did I state we don’t have the ability, and certainly we do want to preserve our borders. No. By your assertion that we cannot repel foreigners from out country by force of arms you HAVE admitted that YOU do *NOT* want to preserve our country.
"As long as they replace us LEGALLY!" is what you will scream, as (((AOC))) and such pass ever more laws to flood the country with foreigners.
>But apparently he's afraid to use these options; it's almost like he's afraid to rock the boat. corporations won't have any employees if he does that, Americans won't work for those shitheads and they have to import people who are willing, doing what you suggest exposes the GDP for the fraud it is
Colton Perry
>corporations won't have any employees if he does that, I don't give a shit — pretty much all of the big tech companies ought to be RICO'ed, hit with the espionage laws, and anti-trust for the biggest ones (apple, Google, MS, FB, etc).
> Americans won't work for those shitheads and they have to import people who are willing, doing what you suggest exposes the GDP for the fraud it is And? I'm tired of looking for a job and seeing "Entry-level job 10 years experience required!"-type ads.
If the GOP isn't for the US Citizen, then the GOP can go screw itself; same with the Democrat Party.
Christopher Davis
>''wall'' of text pretending the illegal problem is as simple as rounding them up and deporting them
There so many layer of bureaucracy involved you can't just get in the place with a sledgehammer and call it demolition work, notwithstanding the fact that you can't expect the government as it is to possibly go forward with the application of such a ruling unless the legal grounds are extremely clearly defined, which is kind of a problem because all the laws that pertain to such things tend to be made voluntarily vague as to allow discrepancies and abuse of technicalities, lets you want Jews to twist it around and make it a precedent, like (((they))) did in Canada with how they now count the time lost during legal procedures (regardless of wether or not the defendant did so with the clear intent to drag on the procedures as long as possible) as prison time, so all those white and blue collar criminal get off with joke sentences of a few years in prison, which actually translate to 3-5 month of jail time (during week end) which they can leave out of at half time because they aren't ''dangerous'' criminal that supposedly aren't prone to recidivism.
honestly, to dispose of them require tactic and patience, lest you also throw out the baby with the bath water.
Elijah Kelly
You are so stupid your ideas are impracticable, you have a fetish to vote for the most fucked up candidates you can find and if anyone proposes either restricting the damage of mob rule or implementating any change to idiot-proof and jew-proof democracy, you ignore it. Kikes and psychos are shit but they live in symbiosis with you stupid fucks.
Ayden Ortiz
>Reddit spacing Suspicious. Look, the notion that the SA governments are sending people north on purpose is a tantalizing conspiracy theory, but one that lacks any hard evidence. Even if it were true, it’s not as if the migrants themselves are anything but witless pawns, right? What you’re saying is that we should shoot unarmed people coming across the border on the suspicion that they are part of an as-of-yet unproven conspiracy theory... which means you’re still shooting innocent people. At no point have I said we shouldn’t have, or use lethal force - but it must be justified because of the incredible loss of US influence and ripple effects that would follow. >debt None of this passage refutes anything that I said, and bringing up the debt just seems like flailing. If you want people to stop coming, vote for politicians that will cut welfare programs and fight the chamber of commerce. Run for office yourself. We have a system to deal with these things user. >muh replacement! user, I don’t think you actually understand the reasons why so many immigrants are being let into the country. It’s not a conspiracy theory to “replace the white race”, it’s purely economic - whites aren’t having kids, and social security, the shitheap of a program that it is, needs people to pay into it to stay online for just a little while longer, for one. Big corporations love cheap labor, because it’s the single biggest cost of doing business for them. The more people compete for a job, the less they can pay them - this is why the COC pays big money to politicians to incentivize migration. It’s all about the money, in the end. So that being said, if we can easily find nonviolent solutions that don’t make us into an enemy of the rest of the world, isn’t that the preferable solution?
>>''wall'' of text pretending the illegal problem is > >honestly, to dispose of them require tactic and patience, lest you also throw out the baby with the bath water. No, you misunderstand — the Constitution literally lays the obligation to protect the states from invasion (Art 4, Sec 4). Moreover, the Constitution literally lays the responsibility for repelling invasions on the military:
>To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
Roll out to the borders and start blasting assholes who think they can enter the country; then besiege the "sanctuary cities", letting the citizens out and putting the foreigners on planes to another content.
>it’s not as if the migrants themselves are anything but witless pawns, right? I don't care, they need to go back, or be put six feet under.
>At no point have I said we shouldn’t have, or use lethal force - but it must be justified because of the incredible loss of US influence and ripple effects that would follow. I don't fucking care — I want the foreigners out of my country. I'm tired of "press 1 for english", I'm tired of assholes waiving their fucking foreign flags with pride. I'm tired of the "it's not really a problem BS" spouted by you and the politicians.
Robert Hernandez
Yes, but since then (((they))) have made sure to write a hundred loopholes to allow bullshit to happens, so while they can cite the constitution for that, you'll have Jews playing around what is and isn't traitor using semantics and pilpul so unless you want to be fucked by Jews, you'll have to made it clear black on white without the shadow of a doubt what is and isn't an illegal alien.
Hell just look into who they love referring to them as ''illegal citizen'', as if the act of being a citizen wasn't inherently tied with its legal status. Also the ''solution'' you propose is completely retarded, inefficient and would only be useful as legal ground for corrupt entities like the UN to cause trouble here.
Logan Edwards
>Why can't our own government act in our own interests?
>I don’t care reeeee This is a bad LARP, a leftist pretending to be a right wing caricature. user for future reference, a real right winger, even a NatSoc or an AnCap, has enough of a grip on reality to understand why what you’re proposing doesn’t work. The telltale sign of a shill is lack of nuance, pretending to be extreme in order to “fit in”, but this falls apart incredibly fast when faced with arguments that are based on logic and realpolitik. A shill cannot diverge from his position, or cede any ground, because he’s not interested in talking to people, only talking AT them. Basically, you don’t understand politics in the slightest. Go back to wherever you came from, and reflect on your shameful degrading of political discourse.
Actually I have a grip, I understand that we are quickly headed to a point where bloodshed will be unavoidable. — Trump is likely the last chance for a "you have to go back" to work.
The real problem is that our leaders have kicked the can EVERY TIME, for at least forty years, every time the issue has come up — so, with multiple decades of observation, can you honestly say that there will EVER be deportations?
*THAT* is the reason that Trumps "I'm going to deport millions!" [...] "Oh, wait, not really!" tweets are so angering — either we have the ability and will to defend our country or we do not have a country.
Yes, when I see my city flooded with negroes and indians, arabs and chinks, all manners of 3rd world trash, i feel my ancestors calling to me.
How can we be letting this happen?
The hammer will drop soon and society is going in the shitter.
Liam Moore
>moves goalposts from “we should Gun everyone down” to “why aren’t they being deported” user, if you read the news, you would know that Mexico has its national guard out sending SAs back, a big roundup of illegal families is starting literally tomorrow, worker visas are at record lows and the requirements being changed, and we’ve reached a safe third country agreement to allow us to send immigrants back to Guatemala - meaning they can claim asylum here anymore. But, you’re not a real right winger, so you don’t actually get any news besides “orange man bad”, right? Basically, your arguments are entirely based on your adopted persona, and how you supposedly feel. How you personally feel isn’t important in politics. Everyone who studies it understands this. It doesn’t matter, not in the slightest. This is why acting all outraged doesn’t work - nobody cares that you’re supposedly mad, because what is being discussed is more important than just you, it affects the lives of billions of human beings. Decisions cannot, and should never be made on the basis of emotion. Politics is, at the end of the day, a game of chess with the world as the board.
Migration is actually the result of years of US invasions in the Latin American countries. Take responsibility for once. We're still being invaded by your companies. Pull out your companies first and we'll talk.
Joshua Sullivan
And? Did you miss the part where I don't care that getting rid of foreigners would hurt "American" businesses?
Robert Smith
Can you elaborate more for us? If your government is letting outside corporations exploit your citizens, then you should really get on them to do something about it.
You miss the point. It's not simply about just kicking out the migrants in your country, but cutting off the reason why they come in first place. Foreign corporations own the methods of production of the country. All the wealth the country produces is quickly siphoned into the USA. A great amount of agricultural lands are owned by these foreigners, who plant coffee and palm oil while ignoring every single law in existence. No surprise most people are starving, they barely get paid, they can't produce their own food, they can't go to another company because they are all allied to enslave the population. Same goes for the mines, and for the electrical companies... You name it, it's either owned by a "national" oligarch (born in the country but lives in the USA) or a full-on foreigner. The government IS NOT GOING TO solve ANY problem. Not even if the population goes and rises up in arms (36 years of civil war and NOT a single thing changed). All this goes back to the 1954 coup, where the last patriot who had the power took the decision to push a land reform, giving the people the ability to better themselves for once. This struck deep at the Eisenhower administration, especially the Dulles brothers, both of whom were involved with the UFCO, biggest landowner of all time (87% of the lands ALONE). After the coup, the CIA backed governments basically gave it all away to the US in the name of freedom and capitalism. The military was bought out and warped, assuring that the situation remained the same ever and forever. I actually supported the anti-government guerrillas when I could, but they eventually got tired of fighting and sold themselves out.
Honestly user, this just sounds like your government using the press to deflect taking any responsibility. Demand your elected representatives stand up to the US. Enforce the laws on the books. Don’t just sell out to the US, work on making your own country great. You’ll find that many of us completely support you in that endeavor. Globalists are a scourge to all.
Austin Jackson
Because universal suffrage ruined America.
Caleb Jackson
When were you planning on responding to my points, LARPanon? Maybe acting like what you think a right wing extremist is has outed you as someone who doesn’t actually know anything about what he claims to be?
Nolan Brown
What points? You basically gave a "shooting them is bad!" with "If you expel them businesses will get hurt!"
These are answered by the question: Who is supposed to benefit from the US, from Citizenship, the Citizen or the foreigner?
Well, if you would look up from all your clearly labeled and organized shill images, you might be able to respond to them. I said the US global reputation would be hurt. Business is a part of that, but so is politics, morality, and global leadership. The answer to your question is, ideally: both - but it’s completely nonsensical, and has no bearing on your original point. You need to prove that your solution of killing people at the border is what’s best for America, that it is worth the ensuing domino effect. I have explained why what you want won’t work, and offered practical, low risk, nonviolent solutions. Your response was literally “I don’t care”, a petulant table flip. This means you have no actual argument, you aren’t even going to try and convince anyone, you just want to roll on the ground and tantrum. Do you see why nobody is taking you seriously? Just drop the act and be honest about what you really think, instead of what you’re pretending to think, and maybe we could have an actual conversation about real solutions.
>I said the US global reputation would be hurt. "Global reputation" vs "actual existence" — But what about the reputation that the US goes in where it has no business and forces other countries to do what it wants? > Business is a part of that, but so is politics, morality, and global leadership. I call bullshit: the US is rapidly gaining a reputation for injustice. >You need to prove that your solution of killing people at the border is what’s best for America, Because we have more than three-decades of proof that the government has ZERO intent for deportation and border security. > I have explained why what you want won’t work, and offered practical, low risk, nonviolent solutions. No; your "solutions" are "ignore the pain, don't notice that we're replacing you." >Your response was literally “I don’t care”, a petulant table flip. And I don't care— it's obvious that the corporations DON'T CARE, and neither do the political caste— appealing to ridiculous "we can all get along!" even as it is observably untrue. >Just drop the act and be honest about what you really think, instead of what you’re pretending to think, and maybe we could have an actual conversation about real solutions. I think that we should use the military to enforce the border, and to besiege sanctuary cities rounding up the foreigners and expelling them— I also think that the politicians and judges opposing this should be tried for treason.
I'm not excluding our government from any responsibility either. The enterprise and military complexes have played no small part in our suffering. The only way to get any change is by armed struggle. People are waking up. Things may change by the next elections. We'll see.
You’re dedicated to staying in character, at least. >”actual existence” What is this supposed to mean? Do you mean white people? Explain further. >reputation for injustice With whom? The US is the most admired country in the world. If it wasn’t, why would all the illegals even be coming here? >ZERO intent This doesn’t refute my point. I gave you plenty of examples how border security and immigration control is tightening - why are you ignoring those? >”ignore that we are replacing you” You haven’t disproven my above explanation about why immigrants are being imported. The onus is on you to prove your conspiracy theory is stronger than my economic fact. >the corporations and political caste don’t care This is true user, at least we agree on that. The would be ruling class of elite globalists only cares about one thing - money. They don’t care about borders, or citizenship, or anything like that - thankfully, Donald Trump, Nigel Farage, and others have triggered a worldwide backlash against those scum. Even the leftists have realized they’re getting played, but they refuse to get onboard the train for fear of social retaliation. It’s all going to work out, but only if we change the laws that allow the globalists to exploit both our citizens and foreign countries by electing officials who will do so. Can I count on you to help us?
You have my full support user, I hope things get better for you. Raise awareness on social media, get it into the American public’s consciousness. Every country deserves to be great!
Brody Gray
>>”actual existence” >What is this supposed to mean? Do you mean white people? Explain further. It means everything. The globalists, which control most of the political caste & much of the Bureaucratic-leadership, wish to destroy everything that makes America American.
They wish to destroy its culture — just look at how deeply American things are belittled and/or demonized: gun-culture, militia, comic-books, etc. — Everything that could be considered a "rallying point" is under attack: from churches, to "geek-culture".
If you want proof: look at LA and SF. In less than 25 years, they went from American cities to poop-and-litter streets. That's NOT normal, but that is the consequence [and their desire] of replacing real Americans with fake americans. See pic: .
Globalists want to create a world order with themselves at the top, dissolving the concept of the nation stats - this is well established. So, why do you want to help them? Look what happened with Tarrant. Did he accomplish what he wanted? Did his accelerationist plan work? No - countries embraced Islam even closer in the aftermath, because he had made them into victims of extreme aggression. What about Patrick Little? He pulled no punches and talked exactly like he took all his proposals from Jow Forums. Is he now President? No, he’s a laughingstock nobody who only managed to embarrass himself and undermine the ideals he claimed to represent with his complete, autistic lack of tact Extremism is the enemy of pragmatism. Perfect is the enemy of good. Globalism can only be undone incrementally, in steps, and with great care - what you believe, what you propose, will only give them the moral high ground to impose even further restrictions on their subjects unopposed.
>Extremism is the enemy of pragmatism. And your "pragmatism" is going to leave us with nothing. >Perfect is the enemy of good. LOL -- The point is that we're given a shit-sandwich and told to eat. We're not getting 'good', we're getting "shut up and die" — your pragmatic compromise would be to lie in bed as an invalid as ever more foreigners come in until, eventually, you die... natural causes, neglect, whatever, it doesn't matter because the "you" in that bed was the US as a nation, as a culture, as a people.
Elijah Ross
Did you miss my point about extremists coming away with nothing? You want all or nothing, and refuse to budge - then you will be Patrick Little, the nobody, the narcissist who accomplished nothing but a smug sense of ideological purity. It’s all about you, and fuck America, fuck society, the world, and everyone else, because if you don’t get what you want right now, you’ll... what? Do nothing. Nothing but sit and whine endlessly on Jow Forums about nothing ever being good enough. Compromise is the root of politics. Civilization is the product of decades, centuries of careful planning and incremental improvement. Politics is merely a substitute for war. If you sincerely believe what you say, then I look forward to seeing you on the news soon, carrying out your beliefs to the letter like your hero Tarrant. There’s no point in continuing this conversation.
>Did you miss my point about extremists coming away with nothing? And you miss my point about being given NOTHING. For more than thirty years border-security and immigration have been issues — name a MAJOR concession to either of those.
There aren't any, and it's increasingly obvious there never will be — fuck off with you're "I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today." bullshit, because guess what: I'm all out of faith in ever getting paid. (ie "Fuck you, pay me.")
