Lets keep Our Wars at Home

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Thanks for adding to the Strawmen.

I think that's twice you've had a go at me rather than at my argument. Disagree with what I say? No problem ,but please have the courtesy to explain the mistakes in my reasoning so I can learn.

Your response (above) is unhelpful,and amounts to an ad hominem attack.

[reverendjeremiah]

Thanks for adding to the Strawmen.

I think that's twice you've had a go at me rather than at my argument. Disagree with what I say? No problem ,but please have the courtesy to explain the mistakes in my reasoning so I can learn.

Your response (above) is unhelpful,and amounts to an ad hominem attack.

My original explanation was:

Because everyone who sneaks across our borders are poor bastards hoping for a better life.

That is a straw man. You have made it seem that everyone who sneaks across our border is nothing more than a poor bastard that is hoping for a better life.

In reality SOME of the people who illegally cross our border are like that. Some are doing quite well and sneaking drugs across for more money. Some are taking huge amounts of money from those wanting a better life to sneak them across, only to force them into labor, or as sex slaves. Some merely cross to visit relatives for a few days....etc....etc...etc...

You made a strawman and used it against me and the others on this topic

Your response (above) is unhelpful,and amounts to an ad hominem attack.

No. I was merely pointing out your strawman. Pointing out a fallacy is NOT an ad-hominem attack.

An ad-hominem attack would be me calling you "a race traitor, and that you are obviously leaning towards illegals because I suspect your mother is one, and that is why you support illegals so much." [/example]

I am doing no such thing against you.

[Cinjin]

I'm an uninvolved outsider,and really don't care a whole lot about US domestic issues, unless they effect my country.

Seems to me the arguments in this thread about open borders is a strawman. The murders mentioned seem to be about the drug cartels (professional criminals) getting their panties in a bunch. I don't see what that has to with the poor bastards sneaking across the borders hoping for a better life.

I do not support open borders between countries*,but I do support realistic and humane policies. Seems to be hard balance,and one the US has not yet mastered. (neither has Australia)

*the impression I get is the open border policy in the EU has been an unmitigated disaster.

I will attempt to only address this once since I am inadvertently at fault in the strawman issue. What I meant in my original post which was clear in my mind but not at all on the page, is that it is my belief that if we (the US govenrment) had properly secured the southern border years ago when we should have - we would have been able to quash both issues ... well at least quell them to a manageable level.
#1 We would have had a much stronger show of power at the border and been MUCH better equipped to handle the new insurgance of the drug cartels bringing war to our backdoor. And #2, this additional security would have then and now helped to dissuade illegals from walking into our country uninvited. Since our borders were not given the proper attention - an already weak system became a haven for criminals and the like. Thus, my opinion to bring our soldiers back home and defend the homeland.

I guess in the end, it's a two part grievance on my part and the lack of proper border control helped to exacerbate both.

As for your concern for everyone having the right to a better life. I'm all for everyone on earth having a better life, but a line has to be drawn somewhere, and America isn't the one holding the Mexican people down. Like most countries ... that would be their own government.
Let me be very very clear. I don't want anyone shot and killed simply for trying to find that better life. But they DO have to be apprehended and sent home.

As for the drug cartels ... thats who I was originally talking about. Imagine how quickly we could get rid of the criminal element if we treated them like a a mini terrorist army. I don't want our military out sticking its nose in other countries' business. If we're going to make war - lets at LEAST fight at home against an enemy that is actually ours and not somebody elses.

[Autumnlicious]

Seems to me the arguments in this thread about open borders is a strawman.

- VS -

I don't see what that has to with the poor bastards sneaking across the borders hoping for a better life.

Because everyone who sneaks across our borders are poor bastards hoping for a better life.

Thanks for adding to the Strawmen.

I don't see where Padraic made a straw man - unless you wish to count offhand comments that are accurate to a degree as a straw man. Ironically, he agreed partially with the act of securing the border.

Here, let's deconstruct his post, as it seems certain individuals would rather "call out" others while not actually responding to their arguments.

I'm an uninvolved outsider,and really don't care a whole lot about US domestic issues, unless they effect my country.

Neutral statement here.

Seems to me the arguments in this thread about open borders is a strawman.

Observation/opinion. Not much to attack or defend here.

The murders mentioned seem to be about the drug cartels (professional criminals) getting their panties in a bunch.

Possibly true. I don't see where this observation could be false.

I don't see what that has to with the poor bastards sneaking across the borders hoping for a better life.

Observation - unless one has information to the contrary that shows a significant link between said poor bastards and cartels and/or the poor bastards are an insignificant factor in dealing with the border question.

I do not support open borders between countries*,but I do support realistic and humane policies. Seems to be hard balance,and one the US has not yet mastered. (neither has Australia)

Opinion once again. Nothing to defend or attack.

*the impression I get is the open border policy in the EU has been an unmitigated disaster.

Appears to agree that open borders is a disaster, ergo we can see that he in some way supports securing a border, to which degree may or may not be determined.

Conclusion:

Your (reverendjeremiah) claims of a strawman are rather weak in this thread and context.

[Jaysyn]

Has anyone heard of this Operation: Gunrunner scandal that is brewing because of the agents deaths?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/02/2...5609.shtml

Sources tell CBS News several gun shops wanted to stop the questionable sales, but ATF encouraged them to continue.

Jaime Avila was one of the suspicious buyers. ATF put him in its suspect database in January of 2010. For the next year, ATF watched as Avila and other suspects bought huge quantities of weapons supposedly for "personal use." They included 575 AK-47 type semi-automatic rifles.

ATF managers allegedly made a controversial decision: allow most of the weapons on the streets. The idea, they said, was to gather intelligence and see where the guns ended up. Insiders say it's a dangerous tactic called letting the guns, "walk."

One agent called the strategy "insane." Another said: "We were fully aware the guns would probably be moved across the border to drug cartels where they could be used to kill."

What it seems to boil down to is the ATF is putting guns in these drug cartels hands. Why would they do that? Some groups think they want to create a bit of hysteria to do an end run around the 2nd Amendment.