 | VirileVagabond (37)
10/15/2006 | Any way one looks at this argument, it appears to be complete nonsense to me even if one presumes that the underlying premise (i.e. Mexico would collapse) is true. For starters, allowing immigration in order to prevent the collapse of a foreign nationstate would be an enabling act. A foreign state should be responsible for the welfare of its own citizens and legal residents, and those citizens are responsible for the actions of its government. Second, any assistance should be given in the form of financial and humanitarian aid (with strings attached), not by allowing a free pass out. Lastly, this claim only strengthens the argument for a physical and military barrier at the border.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | CanadaSucks (50)
05/03/2006 | America cannot (and will not) be held hostage to real, false, or veiled threats by any kind of lawbreakers.
(4 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | DrEntropy (40)
05/03/2006 | I don't know enough about Mexico to say whether this is true of not. Either way, it sounds like blackmail. If Mexico is really such a basket-case that it needs to export millions of people to the US just in order to avoid collapse, we really should build a wall on the border, before it's too late.
(5 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
