Hot Pink List
Toronto Escorts

Trump announces plan to use lethal force against Caravan

Knuckle Ball

Well-known member
Oct 15, 2017
6,794
2,787
113
Asked if he envisions the US military firing at migrants at the border, President Trump says: "I hope not."

"I will tell you this, anybody throwing stones, rocks ... we will consider that a firearm, because there's not much difference when you get hit in the face with a rock."
https://twitter.com/nbcnews/status/1058101114531389441?s=21


This would, of course, be a direct violation of International Human Rights law:
“the "intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life".”

https://twitter.com/nbcnews/status/1058101114531389441?s=21
 

Smallcock

Active member
Jun 5, 2009
13,703
21
38
Thank God Trump is in office during this fiasco. Enough is enough.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,773
3
0
Yawn, which absolutely nuts country would consider it not a justifiable use of force if a mob were throwing rocks, Molotov Cocktails and explosives at the military or police.
 

toguy5252

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2009
15,978
6,111
113
Fortunately such an order would be illegal under the US Code of Military Conduct. No commander will order his troops to fire. At least not live rounds.
 

Smallcock

Active member
Jun 5, 2009
13,703
21
38
His next target is losers with tiny dicks.
Duck!!!
Your definition of "loser" includes Trump - a billionaire with a model wife, great successful family and kids, and democratically elected President of the US. I'm in great company.

Reorient yourself in the image of the "losers" and you will achieve great things, too.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,714
3,411
113
Considering they won't actually be at the border doing enforcement I think the point(and leading question asked) are moot.

My understanding is they will be there in a support role. My bet is beyond the optics so the migrants think twice it's to set up camps to hold large groups of illegal crossers so they will have food, shelter and medical care and the parents and kids aren't seperated this time.

More specially the comment is about the troops being able to defend themselves and feel the president will have their backs.
 

wigglee

Well-known member
Oct 13, 2010
9,821
1,603
113
Yawn, which absolutely nuts country would consider it not a justifiable use of force if a mob were throwing rocks, Molotov Cocktails and explosives at the military or police.
Thank you for your posthumous opinion, Mr Sharon, but Trump said rocks would be considered rifles.
 

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
69,938
68,452
113
Yawn, which absolutely nuts country would consider it not a justifiable use of force if a mob were throwing rocks, Molotov Cocktails and explosives at the military or police.

Molotov cocktails and exxplosives - Sure.

But Trump said "rocks". He said "rocks". So you weren't honest in your post.

Let's talk about rocks. Throwing rocks does not give an army the excuse to wipe out otherwise unarmed civilians with automatic firearms. You agree with this, right? It's Kent State and Jackson State all over again.

Why do you have 15,000 fucking troops with automatic firearms at the border anyway? Shouldn't that be a job for a couple of thousand properly trained riot police? You know, the guys who are TRAINED to deal with rock throwers? The guys with riot shields and tear gas and rubber bullets? And other gear appropriate for dealing with civilians who throw rocks?

More GOP crap!
 

toguy5252

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2009
15,978
6,111
113

Molotov cocktails and exxplosives - Sure.

But Trump said "rocks". He said "rocks". So you weren't honest in your post.

Let's talk about rocks. Throwing rocks does not give an army the excuse to wipe out otherwise unarmed civilians with automatic firearms. You agree with this, right? It's Kent State and Jackson State all over again.

Why do you have 15,000 fucking troops with automatic firearms at the border anyway? Shouldn't that be a job for a couple of thousand properly trained riot police? You know, the guys who are TRAINED to deal with rock throwers? The guys with riot shields and tear gas and rubber bullets? And other gear appropriate for dealing with civilians who throw rocks?

More GOP crap!
Your right. Much more important to send more troops to border than US troops in Afghanistan because a rag tag group of mothers and babies is much more dangerous than the Taliban or Al Queda.

And these caravans which are an annual event invariably dwindle down to several hundred by the time they reach the border.

This is simply a political stunt with the PGOTUS using the US armed services to try and save the House.
 

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
69,938
68,452
113
WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has left no doubt that his top priority as leader of the military is making it more "lethal" — better at war and more prepared for it — and yet nothing about the military's new mission at the US-Mexico border advances that goal. Some argue it detracts from it.
The troops going to the border areas of Texas, Arizona and California are a small fraction of the military's roughly 1.3 million active-duty members, and the mission is set to last only 45 days. But many question the wisdom of drawing even several thousand away from training for their key purpose: to win wars.
James Stavridis, a retired Navy admiral and former head of the US Southern Command, said the troops should be preparing for combat and other missions, "not monitoring a peaceful border" for the arrival of a migrant caravan of several thousand people on foot, still about 900 miles (1,450 kilometers) away.
"It sends a terrible signal to Latin America and the Caribbean as we unnecessarily militarize our border," Stavridis, who also served as the top NATO commander, said Thursday. "It places US troops who are fundamentally untrained for the mission of border security and border enforcement into an area of operations, which could cause incidents of a negative character. If we need more border patrol agents, hire them."
The first 100 or so active duty troops arrived at the border on Thursday, making initial assessment at the McAllen, Texas, crossing. Overall, there are about 2,600 troops at staging bases in the region.
David Lapan, a retired Marine colonel who is a former spokesman for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Department of Homeland Security, said that taking troops away from training and from their families to play a supporting role in border security is unwise.
"It just doesn't make any sense," said Lapan, now a vice president of communications at the Bipartisan Policy Center. "This caravan, this group of poor people, including a lot of women and children, doesn't pose a threat — not a national security threat."
In line with the Pentagon's national security strategy, Mattis has been focused on improving the combat readiness of a military worn down by the recent years of congressionally imposed budget cuts and the grind of 17 years of war in Afghanistan. This includes reorienting training from that required for the smaller wars the US has fought since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to a "great power" struggle with Russia and China.
That context may explain why the Pentagon itself seemed caught off-guard by President Donald Trump's abrupt order to dispatch active-duty troops; the Customs and Border Patrol, which requested Pentagon help, has struggled to define details of the mission and explain its scope.
"That this is a security threat is preposterous and not supported by the evidence," said Derek Chollet, former senior policy adviser at the Pentagon. "If you're sitting in the Pentagon and worried about implementation of the national defense strategy and worried about the threats from China and Russia, this is not at the top of your list."
"This is another version of the parade," Chollet said, referring to Trump's demand earlier this year — eventually withdrawn — that the military spend millions to stage a parade in Washington D.C. "This is not a good use of US military resources at this moment. Trump was frustrated in his effort to build a physical wall on the border, now he's trying to build a human wall by using the US military."
Mattis has rejected assertions that the military is being leveraged by the White House as a political stunt in advance of the midterm elections. "We don't do stunts," he said Wednesday, but neither has he argued that sending thousands of active-duty soldiers to help secure the border is his preference.
Gen. Terrence O'Shaughnessy, who as head of US Northern Command is commanding the military operation, dubbed "Operation Faithful Patriot," has argued that the caravan is a potential threat, although he has not fully defined that.
"I think what we have seen is we've seen clearly an organization at a higher level than we've seen before," O'Shaughnessy said. "We've seen violence coming out of the caravan and we've seen as they've passed other international borders, we've seen them behave in a nature that has not been what we've seen in the past."
One concern raised by other defense officials is that the caravans are largely male-dominated, and that one of them used violence when crossing the border into Mexico. But Associated Press journalists traveling with the largest group say it includes many families, including hundreds of children, and it has been orderly and peaceful, with no sign of any danger.
The military says it is deploying 7,000 troops to Texas, Arizona and California, and while it has left open the possibility that the number could grow by another thousand under current plans, the scope of the mission has grown in recent days. On Wednesday, President Donald Trump said he would send as many as 15,000 troops.
Sen. Jack Reed, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in a letter to Trump on Thursday that his administration has given the committee no evidence that migrant caravans pose a direct security threat to the US.
"This is not a military problem; it does not warrant a military solution," Reed wrote. He said the administration should disclose the cost of the military's border mission "and what impacts it will have on military readiness and the overall budget."
With his eyes squarely on Tuesday's election contests, Trump has rushed a series of immigration declarations, promises and actions as he tries to mobilize supporters to retain Republican control of Congress. His own campaign in 2016 concentrated on border fears, and that's his focus in the final days of the midterm fight.
Trump has railed against illegal immigration, focusing on the migrant caravans that have been going on for several years but received little attention until now. The largest at the moment consists of about 4,000, down from a high of about 7,000, and is still in southern Mexico. Several smaller groups, estimated at a combined 1,200 people, are farther away.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/worl...ssion-for-military/ar-BBPfMl5?ocid=spartandhp
 

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
69,938
68,452
113
5 reasons Trump’s ‘immigration crisis’ is a made-up one

Aaron Blake 2 hrs ago

President Trump delivered a speech Thursday that the White House billed as his plan to address the nation’s “immigration crisis." The speech detailed a plan to make it harder for migrants to claim asylum, and marked the latest escalation in a clearly concerted effort to make the 2018 midterm elections about fear of undocumented immigrants.
The peak of that effort came Wednesday night in the form of a racially charged, Willie Horton-style ad. Trump has labeled the caravan headed to the Southern border an “invasion” and sent thousands of troops to deal with it. He’s talked about sending as many as 15,000 troops — more than the people in the caravan — and also (rather unseriously) revoking birthright citizenship via executive action.
Subscribe to the Post Most newsletter: Today’s most popular stories on The Washington Post
The problem? No matter what definition you use for “crisis,” the current situation on our border struggles to meet it.
Let’s count the ways.

1. Illegal border crossings
Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection show illegal border crossings have risen slightly in recent months and are greater than last year. The administration has repeatedly emphasized this — reportedly spurred by Trump’s anger about the situation.
But the number of apprehensions and people deemed inadmissible over the past year — and even now — is unremarkable when you compare it to the past five fiscal years. This year is the red line:

What’s more, even the estimates of 50,000 monthly border apprehensions we’ve seen in a few months this year is a fraction of where that number has been for most of this century. And the current number of annual apprehensions is also lower than at any point since about 1970, according to FactCheck.org.

2. The number of undocumented immigrants
The numbers above are only for those apprehended at the border. So the logic follows: What about those who aren’t being apprehended? Those are the ones most likely to reside illegally in the United States, after all.
Well, a combination of border apprehensions, deportations and people returning to their countries of their own volition in recent years has actually meant the number of undocumented immigrants in the United States has dropped in most recent years. The estimated number dropped from 12.2 million in 2007 to 11.3 million in 2016, according to the Pew Research Center.

Some recent years featured a slight uptick, and we don’t yet have data for 2017 and 2018. But the border-apprehension data above suggest the number of undocumented immigrants living in the United States can’t be rising much, if at all.

3. The recently immigrated
Not only has the number of undocumented immigrants been dropping, but they are increasingly not the newly arriving criminals that Trump warns of. Pew data showed, as of 2014, just 14 percent of them had been in the United States fewer than five years.

In other words, the undocumented population is increasingly a well-established one which, while not living in the United States legally, aren’t the people supposedly sent by Mexico and Central American governments to unleash crime, rape and other mayhem. Recent arrivals are declining both as a percentage of the undocumented population and in real numbers.

4. Crime
Any undocumented immigrant regardless of longevity, of course, could commit such crimes. But data suggest they don’t — at least not at the same rates as native-born Americans.
While violent gangs such as MS-13 do exist, the violent crime rate for undocumented immigrants is lower than for the population as a whole, as many, including The Post’s Christopher Ingraham, have written.

The data also showed that places with higher percentages of undocumented immigrants tended to have lower crime rates.
In addition, as The Post’s Philip Bump has written, the percentage of noncitizens in federal prisons has been dropping in recent years, and only about 1 percent of federal prisoners are noncitizens convicted of non-immigration-related offenses.

5. The caravan
Okay, even if you set aside ALL of the above, what about the caravan? Trump has been calling it an “invasion” of the United States for a while now. He’s even sending thousands of troops to the border, ostensibly to protect the homeland. Regardless of what preceded it, couldn’t that be considered a “crisis?”
Well, there is very little reason it will be an invasion, even if it aspired to be.

The first problem is that these people are traveling for weeks from Honduras, at which point it would be very difficult for them to invade anyone. The second is that most of them probably won’t even make it that far, given that caravans like this tend to peter out along a long and arduous journey.
And the last reason is that this caravan, like previous ones, is almost definitely intended not to immigrate illegally, but to request asylum. The last time we had one of these earlier this year, 1,500 people started the journey from Southern Mexico, about 400 requested asylum, and just 122 were apprehended trying to cross the border illegally.
This caravan is bigger, and it may turn out differently, but there’s little reason to believe those troops will truly be needed to repel an “invasion.”

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/news...’-is-a-made-up-one/ar-BBPfLAP?ocid=spartandhp
 

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
69,938
68,452
113
Your right. Much more important to send more troops to border than US troops in Afghanistan because a rag tag group of mothers and babies is much more dangerous than the Taliban or Al Queda.

And these caravans which are an annual event invariably dwindle down to several hundred by the time they reach the border.

This is simply a political stunt with the PGOTUS using the US armed services to try and save the House.

Of course, what Aardy is obfuscating as well is that the "caravan" simply wants to claim asylum in the US. To do that, they just have to reach a border control point between Mexico and the US and wave their hands and say "I have a refugee claim, Mr Border Control Agent! Give me temporary asylum in your country and a refugee hearing date to consider permanent asylum for me and my kids!"

So why would anyone throw rocks? Has ANY asylum claimant thrown rocks at a border control agent in recorded history?!
 

essguy_

Active member
Nov 1, 2001
4,432
16
38
Trump's putting his military in a very awkward position - that of a police action with what will undoubtedly be ambiguous rules of engagement. It's like a tragic accident waiting to happen and a waste of a highly trained volunteer military.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,353
4,776
113
It is a political stunt. Talk about hyperbole.
 

Knuckle Ball

Well-known member
Oct 15, 2017
6,794
2,787
113
I just don’t get the Alt Righties on this site- If Trump launched a nuclear strike against the Caravan they’d be cheering him on.

Fuck me...I don’t understand these people and I hope I never do.
 

essguy_

Active member
Nov 1, 2001
4,432
16
38
I just don’t get the Alt Righties on this site- If Trump launched a nuclear strike against the Caravan they’d be cheering him on.

Fuck me...I don’t understand these people and I hope I never do.

You need to join them as I have just done moments ago... It.... is..... much...... better......and..... will... all...... make..... sense..... when ...... you ....... join...... them. MUST......STOP......CARAVAN..... that nuclear option is not a bad idea pilgrim. Think of all the Mexican rapists who will be eliminated at the same time. Are you sure you're not a Terb rightie?
 
Toronto Escorts