Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

sactowndog

Illegal Immigration a Felony?

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, happycamper said:

Oh I'm not confused and I generally agree with you and half an on this.  I think a lot of immigration hardliners conveniently ignore the fact that this mess is 90 percent caused by our interventionist foreign policies

This mess is caused 99% by the general corruption of leaders of catholic founded countries.  It isn't the U.S.'s fault that all these countries in central and south america can't run a legal system which would allow their economies  to boom.  It isn't the U.S.'s fault that the leaders of these Catholic countries are corrupt and create governments who steal from the populations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

This mess is caused 99% by the general corruption of leaders of catholic founded countries.  It isn't the U.S.'s fault that all these countries in central and south america can't run a legal system which would allow their economies  to boom.  It isn't the U.S.'s fault that the leaders of these Catholic countries are corrupt and create governments who steal from the populations.

No, we went out of our way to support the most corrupt and religious regimes. They had more professional governments that we systemically eradicated.  If the US had had a neighbor as much larger and meddling as we are than guatemala wed be Where Mexico is now.

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, wolfpack1 said:

No but they have in the past and haven't taken it on. I am just saying that neither side is really interested at all to take the issue on seriously except when it is time to campaign on it. Then when campaigns are over they put it on the back burner until something they need to take it up again. 

At this point in time, I think they only thing that can save things is a new moderate party comes about which who knows could come part when the Democrat and Republican inside wars are over.

I agree with this post.  Both sides are owned by their extremes.   It’s a result of the Hastert Rule.   A Rule as vile as the pedofile it was named after.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Akkula said:

What exactly does it mean, though?  I think it is just another right wing buzzword that is a dog whistle devoid of meaning....no?  Who are these people and what are they advocating exactly?

Nah it’s stupity on the far left that’s equally as dumb as Thomas and his ilk on the far right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, happycamper said:

No, we went out of our way to support the most corrupt and religious regimes. They had more professional governments that we systemically eradicated.  If the US had had a neighbor as much larger and meddling as we are than guatemala wed be Where Mexico is now.

Anything we did do was decades if not more than a century ago.  Noriega and the Sandinistas were not professional governments that were working for the people.  

Plus there are a dozen countries we have not touched for more than a century and they are all corrupt shitholes from Brazil to Venezuela, Ecuador to Argentina with Bolivia, paraguay and uruguay in between.

By far the most stable countries are Chile and Columbia one of which we are completely responsible for.

The U.S. is their excuse, they are there own problem.

The U.S. did have a much larger country fucking with it for the first 5 decades of its existence.  We dealt with it and now they are our little friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

Anything we did do was decades if not more than a century ago.  Noriega and the Sandinistas were not professional governments that were working for the people.  

Plus there are a dozen countries we have not touched for more than a century and they are all corrupt shitholes from Brazil to Venezuela, Ecuador to Argentina with Bolivia, paraguay and uruguay in between.

By far the most stable countries are Chile and Columbia one of which we are completely responsible for.

The U.S. is their excuse, they are there own problem.

The U.S. did have a much larger country fucking with it for the first 5 decades of its existence.  We dealt with it and now they are our little friend.

Your knowledge of this hemisphere is lacking. For one,  effects do last centuries. Iraq and Russia still have not recovered from ghengis Khan. The South still lags behind the rest of the country.  There are numerous other examples.  Furthermore, while Brazil and venezuela are not our fault,  we have interfered with Argentina.  Furthermore. Argentina is wealthier and more stable than Columbia and uruguay is the wealthiest,  most stable, least corrupt nation on the continent.  It makes Chile look crappy. 

You know about a lot of stuff... South America is not one of them.  Your 2 weeks in valparaiso is not a continental survey.

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, happycamper said:

Your knowledge of this hemisphere is lacking. For one,  effects do last centuries. Iraq and Russia still have not recovered from ghengis Khan. The South still lags behind the rest of the country.  There are numerous other examples.  Furthermore, while Brazil and venezuela are not our fault,  we have interfered with Argentina.  Furthermore. Argentina is wealthier and more stable than Columbia and uruguay is the wealthiest,  most stable, least corrupt nation on the continent.  It makes Chile look crappy. 

You know about a lot of stuff... South America is not one of them.  Your 2 weeks in valparaiso is not a continental survey.

Iraq has not recovered from religion.   Russia has not recovered from the Tsars.   The mongols modernized everything they touched.  Every place they conquered they made better with some of the first scientific agricultural pamphlets, communication systems and a very predictable legal system.

Central and South America are not our fault.  Whatever we have done to hurt them, we have by far earned back with massive amounts of aide and assistance.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

Iraq has not recovered from religion. 

Blues, baghdad was the intellectual capital of the world. If you'd murdered every secular mind in Europe in the 1600s, the enlightenment would have never happened.  

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

 Russia has not recovered from the Tsars.   

The mongols predate the czars by hundreds of years. Shoot the existence of czars can be traced to the mongols. 

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

 

The mongols modernized everything they touched.  Every place they conquered they made better with some of the first scientific agricultural pamphlets, communication systems and a very predictable legal system.

Blues they filled in all agricultural works,  killed all the intellectuals, killed all the merchants, killed all of the beasts of burden, and through so my books in the river that it ran black.  The agricultural capacity of that area is still lower. 

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

Central and South America are not our fault.  Whatever we have done to hurt them, we have by far earned back with massive amounts of aide and assistance.

Lol. Just no, blues. Installing awful governance and supporting them is not made up by buying some copper. 

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, happycamper said:

Blues, baghdad was the intellectual capital of the world. If you'd murdered every secular mind in Europe in the 1600s, the enlightenment would have never happened.   

Religion is the reason Bagdad went from the intellectual capital of the world to become stagnant for the last 1000 years.

The Mongols were the main reason they were so highly developed.

3 hours ago, happycamper said:

The mongols predate the czars by hundreds of years. Shoot the existence of czars can be traced to the mongols. 

The evidence of the Czars can be traced to the Vikings.   Tzar is a bastardized version of the title caesar which obviously came from the mediterranean.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar_(title)

The mongols never had much influence over Russia because they weren't there very long.  If they had they would have been there the Russians would have been better off.

3 hours ago, happycamper said:

Blues they filled in all agricultural works,  killed all the intellectuals, killed all the merchants, killed all of the beasts of burden, and through so my books in the river that it ran black.  The agricultural capacity of that area is still lower.  

If a city opposed them they certainly wrecked it.  If a city opened its gates the mongols left a tax collector behind and put the original rulers in charge and everyone was happy.  Until that city refused to pay taxes then they would be destroyed.   Overall though they were very benign rulers, just very vicious conquerors.

3 hours ago, happycamper said:

Lol. Just no, blues. Installing awful governance and supporting them is not made up by buying some copper. 

We do a whole lot more than buying copper. We freed them from colonial rule with the monroe doctrine.  Many of them were able to fight off their european rulers and keep their independence because of it.   We send humanitarian aid, economic aid, we allow them to use the dollar as their official or co-official currency including ecuador, el salvador, costa rica, Panama which stabilizes inflation in those countries.  We have defense agreements with several countries in the region guaranteeing their borders.

Without the U.S. those countries would all be worse off.   In fact the politicized fear of the U.S. is used by the politicians to steal from their citizens.   At this point there is little central and south america can complain about the u.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

Religion is the reason Bagdad went from the intellectual capital of the world to become stagnant for the last 1000 years.

The Mongols were the main reason they were so highly developed.

No. Blues this is exactly opposite. Lying about history does not make your point.

9 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

The evidence of the Czars can be traced to the Vikings.   Tzar is a bastardized version of the title caesar which obviously came from the mediterranean.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar_(title)

The mongols never had much influence over Russia because they weren't there very long.  If they had they would have been there the Russians would have been better off.

Convert, the russians aquiesed to having such a powerful autocracy to protect from future mongols.

9 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

If a city opposed them they certainly wrecked it.  If a city opened its gates the mongols left a tax collector behind and put the original rulers in charge and everyone was happy.  Until that city refused to pay taxes then they would be destroyed.   Overall though they were very benign rulers, just very vicious conquerors.

Cant rule the dead. While the mongols did have the rule you mention in some areas,  in others they annihilated civil societies. They annihilated iraq and russia and thought about doing worse to China. 

9 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

We do a whole lot more than buying copper. We freed them from colonial rule with the monroe doctrine. 

No, we did not. The British did for their own reasons. 

9 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

 

Many of them were able to fight off their european rulers and keep their independence because of it.

Yes, because of the British.

9 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

   We send humanitarian aid, economic aid,

Lol

9 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

we allow them to use the dollar as their official or co-official currency including ecuador, el salvador, costa rica, Panama which stabilizes inflation in those countries. 

How would we stop that in the first place?

9 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

We have defense agreements with several countries in the region guaranteeing their borders.

Lol. It is us they needed to worry about,  not each other. 

9 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

Without the U.S. those countries would all be worse off.   In fact the politicized fear of the U.S. is used by the politicians to steal from their citizens.   At this point there is little central and south america can complain about the u.S.

No blues.  Without us they would have been self deterministic.

Your history in this isnt revisionist, it is just wrong. Stop lying over history you know nothing about and crack a book instead.

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, happycamper said:

No. Blues this is exactly opposite. Lying about history does not make your point.

Convert, the russians aquiesed to having such a powerful autocracy to protect from future mongols.

Cant rule the dead. While the mongols did have the rule you mention in some areas,  in others they annihilated civil societies. They annihilated iraq and russia and thought about doing worse to China. 

No, we did not. The British did for their own reasons. 

Yes, because of the British.

Lol

How would we stop that in the first place?

Lol. It is us they needed to worry about,  not each other. 

No blues.  Without us they would have been self deterministic.

Your history in this isnt revisionist, it is just wrong. Stop lying over history you know nothing about and crack a book instead.

I think you are over estimating the mongol impact on Baghdad. Sure they may have killed up to 200,000 and destroyed some agricultural infrastructure with the canals but that dynasty was already in decline due to poor management. It only took a couple centuries to recover the population and agriculture. By 1500 baghdad had recovered, not to the level of the Islamic golden age but much of that had more to do with the other Islamic empires power than the mongol aftermath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, HR_Poke said:

I think you are over estimating the mongol impact on Baghdad. Sure they may have killed up to 200,000 and destroyed some agricultural infrastructure with the canals but that dynasty was already in decline due to poor management. It only took a couple centuries to recover the population and agriculture. By 1500 baghdad had recovered, not to the level of the Islamic golden age but much of that had more to do with the other Islamic empires power than the mongol aftermath.

Iirc the agricultural works did not recover until the 20th century and while baghdad was re inhabited, it was effectively a different city. Same location, vastly different culture. 

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, happycamper said:

Iirc the agricultural works did not recover until the 20th century and while baghdad was re inhabited, it was effectively a different city. Same location, vastly different culture. 

It was an economy based on trade at that point. Of course there was a cultural shift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

Religion is the reason Bagdad went from the intellectual capital of the world to become stagnant for the last 1000 years.

The Mongols were the main reason they were so highly developed.

The evidence of the Czars can be traced to the Vikings.   Tzar is a bastardized version of the title caesar which obviously came from the mediterranean.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar_(title)

The mongols never had much influence over Russia because they weren't there very long.  If they had they would have been there the Russians would have been better off.

If a city opposed them they certainly wrecked it.  If a city opened its gates the mongols left a tax collector behind and put the original rulers in charge and everyone was happy.  Until that city refused to pay taxes then they would be destroyed.   Overall though they were very benign rulers, just very vicious conquerors.

We do a whole lot more than buying copper. We freed them from colonial rule with the monroe doctrine.  Many of them were able to fight off their european rulers and keep their independence because of it.   We send humanitarian aid, economic aid, we allow them to use the dollar as their official or co-official currency including ecuador, el salvador, costa rica, Panama which stabilizes inflation in those countries.  We have defense agreements with several countries in the region guaranteeing their borders.

Without the U.S. those countries would all be worse off.   In fact the politicized fear of the U.S. is used by the politicians to steal from their citizens.   At this point there is little central and south america can complain about the u.S.

Dude, you have never heard of how the CIA conspired in a coup to overthrow democratically elected Salvador Allende in Chile that resulted in many "disappeared."  What about the USA backed coup in Argentina where dissenters were literally dropped from airplanes alive into the oceans.  What about our support for the brutal Samoza dictatorship in Nicaragua?  The USA created Pablo Escobar with our scorched earth drug war.  Panama and Cuba were essentially USA colonies.  Our corporate interests have had numerous human rights abuses through Latin America killing union members,  journalists, and community leaders. 

If Russia meddled as much in the Baltic as we have in Latin America we would be rightfully pissed.

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Akkula said:

Dude, you have never heard of how the CIA conspired in a coup to overthrow democratically elected Salvador Allende in Chile that resulted in many "disappeared."  What about the USA backed coup in Argentina where dissenters were literally dropped from airplanes alive into the oceans.  What about our support for the brutal Samoza dictatorship in Nicaragua?  The USA created Pablo Escobar with our scorched earth drug war.  Panama and Cuba were essentially USA colonies.  Our corporate interests have had numerous human rights abuses through Latin America killing union members,  journalists, and community leaders. 

If Russia meddled as much in the Baltic as we have in Latin America we would be rightfully pissed.

(Looks at what was happening in the Baltic’s when all these coup’s took place)

red-forman-gif-13.gif

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

(Looks at what was happening in the Baltic’s when all these coup’s took place)

red-forman-gif-13.gif

Yeah way to blow up your entire argument with the last sentence there buddy

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, happycamper said:

Yeah way to blow up your entire argument with the last sentence there buddy

No shit, Russian puppet governments run by the KGB and NKVD since 1945. Yeah they didnt meddle any where near as much as we did....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, happycamper said:

No. Blues this is exactly opposite. Lying about history does not make your point.

 

Lying or ignorance does not make your point.  It is no coincidence the minute the Mongols left Iraq the religion took over and they never did another thing of consequence.

5 hours ago, happycamper said:

 

Convert, the russians aquiesed to having such a powerful autocracy to protect from future mongols.

Cant rule the dead. While the mongols did have the rule you mention in some areas,  in others they annihilated civil societies. They annihilated iraq and russia and thought about doing worse to China. 

They did not annihilate Iraq and Russia, many cities survived without a scratch.  You are buying into the brainwashing of the time.

5 hours ago, happycamper said:

No, we did not. The British did for their own reasons. 

Yes, because of the British.

The British obviously were fighting wars and had economic reasons to hurt spain, France and portugal but the Monroe doctrine was a major factor in keeping them out.  It also kept the British from taking over colonies on the continent.

6 hours ago, happycamper said:

 

How would we stop that in the first place?

You can't have a currency without a supply.  None of those countries would be able to use our currency without the cooperation of our federal reserve sending them dollars to keep their economies moving.    We would stop them by not helping them.

6 hours ago, happycamper said:

Lol. It is us they needed to worry about,  not each other. 

 

They haven't needed to worry about us since Teddy Roosevelt.   Everything we have done since then was to governments that were hurting their own people.

They don't need to worry about each other because of us.

6 hours ago, happycamper said:

 

No blues.  Without us they would have been self deterministic.

Your history in this isnt revisionist, it is just wrong. Stop lying over history you know nothing about and crack a book instead.

They have been self deterministic for a century, that is the problem.  They swing from left to right depending on the dictator and the times.  That isn't because of us, that is because of their catholic roots.  Catholics want strong men dictators, same as in Russia with the orthodox.  Corruption is part of the bargain.  None of that is because of us it is the fabric of their society.   Even the catholic parts of the United States and Canada like Louisiana, Quebec, Puerto Rico are all the most corrupt and inefficient with graft and bribery common.

 

You are the only one with the revisionist history. Or in many  cases the invented history of the times that claimed the mongols were the devil just because they were tougher than the western world.  The mongols advanced tech and communication as well as agriculture and learning.  When they left places like Iraq, the religion was the reason they never recovered not any actions of the mongols.  Actions like destroying infrastructure that could have been fixed easily in a generation at most if it wasn't for religion and its poison.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Akkula said:

Dude, you have never heard of how the CIA conspired in a coup to overthrow democratically elected Salvador Allende in Chile that resulted in many "disappeared."  What about the USA backed coup in Argentina where dissenters were literally dropped from airplanes alive into the oceans.  What about our support for the brutal Samoza dictatorship in Nicaragua?  The USA created Pablo Escobar with our scorched earth drug war.  Panama and Cuba were essentially USA colonies.  Our corporate interests have had numerous human rights abuses through Latin America killing union members,  journalists, and community leaders. 

If Russia meddled as much in the Baltic as we have in Latin America we would be rightfully pissed.

Nothing that should affect them at this point.  Unless they weren't already crippled by the social fabric of catholic society.

Good excuses though if you want to wallow in your poverty and corruption.   10 centuries from now it will be just as relevant and just as much an excuse i suspect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

Lying or ignorance does not make your point.  It is no coincidence the minute the Mongols left Iraq the religion took over and they never did another thing of consequence.

Yeah... because the mongols murdered the entire intellectual culture. 

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

They did not annihilate Iraq and Russia, many cities survived without a scratch.  You are buying into the brainwashing of the time.

Blues, they annihilated the secular culture of mesopotamia and the trading culture of the russian area. 

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

The British obviously were fighting wars and had economic reasons to hurt spain, France and portugal but the Monroe doctrine was a major factor in keeping them out.  It also kept the British from taking over colonies on the continent.

No blues. The british enforced the monroe doctrine for their own benefit.

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

You can't have a currency without a supply.  None of those countries would be able to use our currency without the cooperation of our federal reserve sending them dollars to keep their economies moving.    We would stop them by not helping them.

Blues they peg their currency to the dollar.

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

They haven't needed to worry about us since Teddy Roosevelt.   Everything we have done since then was to governments that were hurting their own people.

Lol. Just no. The first administration they didn't need to worry about was ghwb.

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

They don't need to worry about each other because of us.

And the enormous geographical obstacles between nations. 

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

They have been self deterministic for a century, that is the problem. 

No.  They've been self deterministic since about 86. And not coincidentally, the economy of the area, venezuela excluded, has boomed.

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

They swing from left to right depending on the dictator and the times.  That isn't because of us, that is because of their catholic roots.  Catholics want strong men dictators, same as in Russia with the orthodox. 

Yeah, like the difference between Germany and France right?

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

 

Corruption is part of the bargain.  None of that is because of us it is the fabric of their society.   Even the catholic parts of the United States and Canada like Louisiana, Quebec, Puerto Rico are all the most corrupt and inefficient with graft and bribery common.

Or maryland, the wealthiest state?

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

 

You are the only one with the revisionist history. Or in many  cases the invented history of the times that claimed the mongols were the devil just because they were tougher than the western world.  The mongols advanced tech and communication as well as agriculture and learning.  When they left places like Iraq, the religion was the reason they never recovered not any actions of the mongols. 

Blues they ruined over a thousand years worth of water works, killed anyone who could read, and annihilated all stored knowledge. Your lionization of the mongols is akin to saying hitler was great because of the autobahn. The mongols were the biggest mass murderers in history.

1 hour ago, bluerules009 said:

Actions like destroying infrastructure that could have been fixed easily in a generation at most if it wasn't for religion and its poison.

Blues the infrastructure took thousands of years to build. 

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...