Thousands of Hondurans heading toward the US

[Greater Miami Shores]

It shows that other Presidents have felt a need to do it too, I wonder how other future Democrat Presidents would deal with an organized or semi organized Caravan of thousands of persons trying to cross the border, will they just let them all in, I think not. Will they use certain methods to try to not let them in, I think so. Future Democrat Presidents and future Republican Presidents.

Yes, but what does that actually contribute to the discussion? Like I said, just popping up to say "but X did Y too!" doesn't really work as an argument so much as a deflection.

I think I have proven my point without you having to agree with me: "It shows that other Presidents have felt a need to do it too, I wonder how other future Democrat Presidents would deal with an organized or semi organized Caravan of thousands of persons trying to cross the border, will they just let them all in, I think not. Will they use certain methods to try to not let them in, I think so."

This post above is the point I tried to make.

But thank you for the"yes" Part, I now move on to other threads and posts. PS, sorry I switched nations without realizing it, lol.

[Vassenor]

Yes, but what does that actually contribute to the discussion? Like I said, just popping up to say "but X did Y too!" doesn't really work as an argument so much as a deflection.

I think I have proven my point without you having to agree with me: "It shows that other Presidents have felt a need to do it too, I wonder how other future Democrat Presidents would deal with an organized or semi organized Caravan of thousands of persons trying to cross the border, will they just let them all in, I think not. Will they use certain methods to try to not let them in, I think so."

This post above is the point I tried to make.

But thank you for the"yes" Part, I now move on to other threads and post.

So you're not actually listening to what I say and am just assuming I agree with you. Got it. The "yes" part was that I get what you're saying, but still don't understand what the hell it has to do beyond trying to deflect and justify.

[Trumptonium1]

lol, it I an excellent related argument, it shows other US Presidents have done it too, it is related to the thread and does contribute to the thread.

"Obama did it so that makes it right" is not a good argument.

Oh but I thought everything Obama touched turned to gold?

[Page]

"Obama did it so that makes it right" is not a good argument.

Oh but I thought everything Obama touched turned to gold?

Says who, your strawman?

[Kaggeceria]

I love the smell of tear gas in the morning.

[The Black Forrest]

"Obama did it so that makes it right" is not a good argument.

Oh but I thought everything Obama touched turned to gold?

Pssst. He isn't President anymore.

[The Black Forrest]

I love the smell of tear gas in the morning.

Head down to the border. They have plenty.

[Ifreann]

You can take care of your own citizens. Your government simply refuses to do so.

Refuses? Do you know how much goes into our welfare program? about 235 billion US Dollars. thats quite a bit. they don't refuse to help our citizens, they just don't know how. We need a serious reform in the welfare program before we just let in a whole caravan of people.

*EDIT* We spend 462 billion US Dollars on welfare.

Yes, refuses. Republicans, generally, don't want to help other people. You can tell because they're tear gassing children for fear that those children might ask them for help.

[Tobleste]

Refuses? Do you know how much goes into our welfare program? about 235 billion US Dollars. thats quite a bit. they don't refuse to help our citizens, they just don't know how. We need a serious reform in the welfare program before we just let in a whole caravan of people.

*EDIT* We spend 462 billion US Dollars on welfare.

Yes, refuses. Republicans, generally, don't want to help other people. You can tell because they're tear gassing children for fear that those children might ask them for help.

Look at it from their point of view; there's already millions of children in the US they already refuse to help.

[Novus America]

Refuses? Do you know how much goes into our welfare program? about 235 billion US Dollars. thats quite a bit. they don't refuse to help our citizens, they just don't know how. We need a serious reform in the welfare program before we just let in a whole caravan of people.

*EDIT* We spend 462 billion US Dollars on welfare.

Yes, refuses. Republicans, generally, don't want to help other people. You can tell because they're tear gassing children for fear that those children might ask them for help.

The Border Patrol using tear gas to break up a riot is not “Republicans tear gassing children”.

[Petrasylvania]

A government saying something is not evidence that what the government is saying is true, and if the government doesn't need to provide evidence that what they are saying is true, then I do not need to provide evidence that what they are saying is not true.

Are you seriously going to try to hold me to a higher standard than the US government?

Yes, obviously. The US government is a legitimate source of information.
You are not.
The US government is not infallible, and if you have any contrary evidence from a source other than yourself I will be glad to hear it.

But you seem to struggle with the concept of preponderance of the evidence. I recommend you stay out of civil court.

If one side has one witness, and the other side has none, and the other side does nothing to refute said witness, they are almost certainly going to lose.

Besides if you are alleging some conspiracy on the part of the US and Mexican governments, you definitely need evidence to support you claims.

The Mexican government has supported the US government the US government’s response.

Funny how the government is a legitimate source of information until suddenly it's not.
"Russia interfered in the 2016 election."
"LOL WMDs."

[Northern Davincia]

Giving people food and home is way different than funding a war. Giving poor people housing and food costs way less than it does to do all that. But, the fact that you didn't argue that we don't refuse to help our citizens means you must agree, right? Thus we need to work on welfare reform before we overload it.

There's space between the ideal welfare system and doing nothing. Just because America spends money on welfare, doesn't mean it's enough.

Doing nothing is the ideal welfare system.

[Petrasylvania]

lol, it I an excellent related argument, it shows other US Presidents have done it too, it is related to the thread and does contribute to the thread.

"Obama did it so that makes it right" is not a good argument.

Funny how Republicans suddenly want to follow Obama's examples when it suits their convenience.

[Northern Davincia]

"Obama did it so that makes it right" is not a good argument.

Funny how Republicans suddenly want to follow Obama's examples when it suits their convenience.

Fewer people complained when Obama did wrong.

[Petrasylvania]

I love the smell of tear gas in the morning.

A Jew advocating for people getting gassed. Ironic.

[Petrasylvania]

Funny how Republicans suddenly want to follow Obama's examples when it suits their convenience.

Fewer people complained when Obama did wrong.

So how come Republicans didn't complain about Obama's deportation policies if they were supposedly wrong?

[Frostnia]

I love the smell of tear gas in the morning.

A Jew advocating for people getting gassed. Ironic.

You should probably read his sig

[Northern Davincia]

Fewer people complained when Obama did wrong.

So how come Republicans didn't complain about Obama's deportation policies if they were supposedly wrong?

Why would the GOP complain about deportations? They're just pointing out that the media was more silent back then.

[Novus America]

Yes, obviously. The US government is a legitimate source of information.
You are not.
The US government is not infallible, and if you have any contrary evidence from a source other than yourself I will be glad to hear it.

But you seem to struggle with the concept of preponderance of the evidence. I recommend you stay out of civil court.

If one side has one witness, and the other side has none, and the other side does nothing to refute said witness, they are almost certainly going to lose.

Besides if you are alleging some conspiracy on the part of the US and Mexican governments, you definitely need evidence to support you claims.

The Mexican government has supported the US government the US government’s response.

Funny how the government is a legitimate source of information until suddenly it's not.
"Russia interfered in the 2016 election."
"LOL WMDs."

Are you strawmanning? I never denied Russia interfered with the elections.
Never used the “but WMDs” argument either.

The US government is a legitimate source of information but like any source is far from perfect.

What is so controversial about that?

[Liriena]

I love the smell of tear gas in the morning.

Attacking children with chemical weapons. Very healthy stuff to love. Very moral, very level-headed.

[Liriena]

"Obama did it so that makes it right" is not a good argument.

Oh but I thought everything Obama touched turned to gold?

I see you've got an unemployed black man living rent-free in your head.

[Liriena]

Yes, refuses. Republicans, generally, don't want to help other people. You can tell because they're tear gassing children for fear that those children might ask them for help.

The Border Patrol using tear gas to break up a riot is not “Republicans tear gassing children”.

They did, however, tear gas children. And IIRC, using chemical weapons is a war crime. Says a lot about the state of human rights and the complacency towards authoritarianism in the United States that a bunch of you fully endorse this.

[Liriena]

I love the smell of tear gas in the morning.

Head down to the border. They have plenty.

Hell, put it on your nachos. The smooth-brains of Fox News say it's cool.

[Costa Fierro]

The Border Patrol using tear gas to break up a riot is not “Republicans tear gassing children”.

They did, however, tear gas children. And IIRC, using chemical weapons is a war crime. Says a lot about the state of human rights and the complacency towards authoritarianism in the United States that a bunch of you fully endorse this.

It is if you use chemical weapons on soldiers. There's no international law regarding the use of tear gas by civilian agencies, hence why police and other security forces often employ tear gas to disperse crowds.

[Liriena]

They did, however, tear gas children. And IIRC, using chemical weapons is a war crime. Says a lot about the state of human rights and the complacency towards authoritarianism in the United States that a bunch of you fully endorse this.

It is if you use chemical weapons on soldiers. There's no international law regarding the use of tear gas by civilian agencies, hence why police and other security forces often employ tear gas to disperse crowds.

[ACAB intensifies]