| sundin13 said: According to that link, "The Pacific Solution" was a means of dealing with asylum seekers. Asylum is a legal process and is not the same as illegal immigration. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem if we had adequately funded holding centers and a quick process that was able to handle asylum claims. Such a thing does not exist in the US, and the Republican party does not seem to have any interest in any step of the process (Accepting asylum seekers, holding asylum seekers and processing asylum claims). |
These specific asylum seekers were seeking Asylum in our country via non legal means.
They have every right to seek Asylum, but they do not have the right to illegally cross our borders and take up residence and bypass all our checks and balances that keeps us safe and secure.
| sundin13 said: As for the wall, the claim that it would "absolutely help" is dubious. The reason most of these areas are lacking walls is because they have natural borders are are generally considered low traffic areas (in some areas, we would literally have to build a wall over a mountain). We already have walls in the areas that need walls. |
Look, I haven't claimed the wall is going to solve every single migratory issue in the United States, it simply cannot and will not.
But it is "part of the puzzle".
These kinds of issues need multiple vectors of attack to solve.
Again, cost shouldn't be an issue, the USA is supposed to be the greatest economy on Earth... And infrastructure projects tend to be stimulating for an economy anyway.
If you already have enough walls, then great, start doing an assessment on weak points and bolster those.
| sundin13 said: It would be like in Australia if you built a big wall in the ocean. Sure, it might stop someone, but it wouldn't really provide much value for the cost, and the movement of people shouldn't be considered a high priority, because it doesn't really cause much harm. The main criticism of the wall is that it is burning money that could be spent elsewhere just so the Republicans can feel good. There is also the environmental cost to consider. |
We intercept those out at sea and turn them around.
However we have built the worlds longest fence for bio-security reasons. Why? Because it works. Was it cheap? No. But, neither is security in general, like all infrastructure it's the long term you need to look towards, rather than the short term political issues.
| sundin13 said: Overall, the Repubicans never presented anything demonstrating that the wall would do literally anything to help, and neither have you. |
The thing with your "do nothing" approach, is it's not proactive, it's not going to change the status quo.
That is ultimately the difference here.
Neither have I asserted that the wall is going to cure all migratory issues in the USA, it's just one tool that is needed to compliment other approaches to have a systemic and effective, long-term solution.
| Machiavellian said: I am not sure you get it. Trying to compare Australia to the US seems far fetched. Your country does not even come close to the amount of traffic that goes through the US within one hour compared to one year in your country. Saying you secured your boarder when you are in the middle of nowhere where you catch the occasional boat full of people seems unrealistic. Just the port of entry alone between the 2 nations and scale is totally different. Let not act as if securing Australia boarder is the same as securing any mainland country. |
On the contrary. YOU are not getting it.
The differences between the USA and Australia is irrelevant.
| Machiavellian said: You solving an issue that really not an issue because you are in the middle of the ocean is nothing to proclaim. The volume just not there to make an apples to apples comparison. Its as if you were a nation on the moon and saying we solved illegal immigration because you see a ship every 2 years. |
People dying trying to illegally come here is a big fucking issue. We are talking thousands dead.
Again, you are missing the point of an "all hazards approach".
We stopped illegal immigration in our country. - The scales we are talking about are absolutely different, but again, are also absolutely irrelevant to the point at hand.
We went from 800~ boats a year down to 20~ boats a year due to change of border policy.
I probably do not need to mention that I am-in fact on the front lines of this issue in my nation due to my particular roles in deep-sea marine rescue, I have seen this first hand.
| Machiavellian said: Well of course its better than the US when you have the population the size of one state in the middle of the ocean. At the end of the day, if you have an issue does it really matter if you are better than your neighbor. You still have an issue. The way you made your previous statement you basically asserted that you solved drug issues but that doesn't seem to be the case. |
*Sigh* you really don't understand the mathematical point of per-capita statistics do you?
Overall population size is thus irrelevant, that's just an argument that someone enjoys using because they don't wish to extrapolate comparative statistics.
In the end...
We solved gun-related crime in this country.
We have reduced our drug-related crime in this country, with more work being done on this front.
We solved illegal immigration in this country.
But you know, apparently it's all irrelevant? Give me a break, the USA needs to start looking towards successful models and start scaling it up instead of incessant complaining in order to retain the status quo, whilst complaining about the status quo. It's toxic circular rhetoric.
| Machiavellian said: You should be thankful you are in the middle of nowhere. Be happy you do not have mainland problems. Just do not have this smug attitude as if you accomplish something because there is no challenge to your boarders. You are basically a nation the size of one state in the US hopefully for you it remains that way. I am happy you secured your boarders from the wayward boat that attempts to cross the sea to get to your island. |
I am absolutely thankful to be living in one of the greatest, freedom loving, equal, countries on Earth which seems to be able to competently solve more issues than the largest economy on earth. (Universal Healthcare, Gun Control, Border control, etc'.)
It wasn't that hard.
Know how we did it? We don't shut off "ideas" simply because they are right wing or left wing aka. Republican vs Democrat. - We weigh policy based on it's individual merits for the benefit of the entire nation.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
