Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lord Shonus]

Alternatively, we could end illegal Mexican immigration forever by annexing Mexico. That's only slightly less feasible than mass deportation, and probably more humane.

I'd like to point out that most border hopping immigrants do not come from Mexico.  It is further south ya gotta look.

I was starting to get afraid that nobody would miss the sarcasm there. It is always disappointing when everybody realizes that you're using hyperbole to illustrate just how stupid a situation is, and wants to nitpick the details instead of getting the point.

[uber pye]

Alternatively, we could end illegal Mexican immigration forever by annexing Mexico. That's only slightly less feasible than mass deportation, and probably more humane.

I'd like to point out that most border hopping immigrants do not come from Mexico.  It is further south ya gotta look.

I was starting to get afraid that nobody would miss the sarcasm there. It is always disappointing when everybody realizes that you're using hyperbole to illustrate just how stupid a situation is, and wants to nitpick the details instead of getting the point.

it would result in a smaller southern border though (easyer to build a wall  )

[alway]

Alternatively, we could end illegal Mexican immigration forever by annexing Mexico. That's only slightly less feasible than mass deportation, and probably more humane.

I'd like to point out that most border hopping immigrants do not come from Mexico.  It is further south ya gotta look.

I was starting to get afraid that nobody would miss the sarcasm there. It is always disappointing when everybody realizes that you're using hyperbole to illustrate just how stupid a situation is, and wants to nitpick the details instead of getting the point.

it would result in a smaller southern border though (easyer to build a wall  )

Why stop there though? Annex all of North and South America. And let's be honest, climate change is going to result in massive population movement from parts of Asia and Africa too in the near future; so may as well annex them too. Europeans and Australians may feel a bit left out at that point, not to mention the expense and management issues with enforcing passport and visa issues; so bring them in.

Now, obviously we're going to need to devolve powers a bit; someone in Washington certainly won't be very good at managing India after all. So we'll keep all the national governing bodies around; call them nations or something, I dunno. Allow freedom of movement and get rid of borders within the United States (perhaps United Nations would be a more accurate name for it, since states is only a term used by one of the regional governing bodies?) and there ya have it, we've solved immigration!

[TheDarkStar]

How to solve immigration:

1. Annex the world.
2. Force everyone to move to North America.
3. Convert the rest of Earth's surface into a wall.
4. No more immigration issues because everyone lives in the supernation.

[Frumple]

Probably be easier to just lower NA by some few hundred feet, then strap barbed wire or somethin' over the resulting hole after you throw everyone inside it. The wall can be a sea wall keeping the place from getting ocean'd.

[Descan]

Speaking seriously, it's true that I regard immigration in general as a net positive, but if we really want to be comprehensive, fixing some shit south of the border is probably a good idea. Mexico in particular, since everything going on there affects our immigration issues and policies; both in the general sense of being a source for migrants, but even more immediately in the sense of being the border. Curtailing the cartels could do more to strengthen the US border than a wall ever could.

The problem with that is that Mexico is a sovereign nation. The US could cut off some income to the drug cartels via legalization (probably would hurt, but they sell to many drugs that nobody sane wants legalized for it to be fatal), and that's about it. Trying to strike at the cartels directly would be a military action on the soil of a foreign power, better known as an act of war. Funneling aid money into the country will just cause that money to get sucked into the same black holes that are already sucking up cash via corruption. The ability of the US to fix any of Mexico's underlying problems is very, very small.

MSH I don't think anybody actually read your list. Like, "offer mexico the aid of the US military to deal with the cartels" was on there, right? It's not an act of war if you're invited in, bruh.

[wierd]

Trying to remove the drug cartels from Mexico, would be like trying to remove the historic mafia (Al Capone, and pals) back in the 20s and 30s. Only with things much more aggressive than tommy guns.

It would require substantive law reform, and substantive assistance (for many decades!) to law enforcement for that to happen, and likely, would also require substantive upset of government to remove corrupt/compromised politicians.

It's not some "Hey, this is an easy thing to do, yo!" type scenario.

[Antioch]

Trying to remove the drug cartels from Mexico, would be like trying to remove the historic mafia (Al Capone, and pals) back in the 20s and 30s. Only with things much more aggressive than tommy guns.

It would require substantive law reform, and substantive assistance (for many decades!) to law enforcement for that to happen, and likely, would also require substantive upset of government to remove corrupt/compromised politicians.

It's not some "Hey, this is an easy thing to do, yo!" type scenario.

legalize all drugs except for the most harmful ones.

No more drug cartels

[Blaze]

Alternatively, mandatory death sentences for drug related crimes ala Singapore.

No more drug cartels.

[Frumple]

It'd certainly deal with a lot of the country's problems, since it would mean having to murder somewhere over half the total stateside population just for weed related ones.

Might as well carpet bomb mexico into a smouldering wreck, you'd be killing less people than the number of folks in the US that have broke drug laws. C'mon folks, let's go genocide those cartels into nonexistence! Can't make an omelet without slaughtering tens of millions of unrelated civilians :V

[Helgoland]

That's why it's actually a good thing when dictators eat babies. Less people killed than with the alternative.

[Karnewarrior]

Would the best thing to do be to join with Mexico and put serious military pressure on the Cartels, and then blindside them by legalizing some of the more lucrative drugs and cutting their funding just as their expenses skyrocket?

That's what came to me. The major difficulty would be coordinating militarily with Mexico without signalling the cartels what we're doing, since they keep politicians in their pocket. The only alternative is to actually invade and replace the entire Mexican government with people known to be clean, but that has a lot of points for potential failure...

[Lord Shonus]

I read "Cartels" as "Canada" and was very confused for a second.

[Draignean]

Canada. The true enemy.  It lurks above us with its mighty oil reserves. It's like a cold Mexico, a french Russia, or a really laid back Iraq.

[RedKing]

I read "Cartels" as "Canada" and was very confused for a second.

Until you've seen someone ready to knife a baby cause he needs to get his poutine fix.