Immigration General Discussion Volume IV (Read the first post and moderator warning on page 309)

wanderingbison9 said:I’ve been scrolling through these threads, and honestly, I can't believe some of the nonsense being debated here. People are talking about a camp for either 5,000 or 10,000 people, and then worrying about traffic jams in San Bernardino, all while suggesting there will be a direct train from Shida straight into the center of the site 🤷... As far as I'm aware, I haven't heard anyone mention a capacity of 10,000 for the San Bernardino camp; the number 5,000 seems to be the one everyone keeps bringing up. But even if it really is 10,000, so what? It isn't an infinite number; it's just a built-in safety margin. It was made quite clear when Ostojic spoke that this would be the final camp established in America... Of course, there will always be those who jump straight to conspiracy theories and claim something is being hidden from us

You’re totally out of the loop
Local politicians are constantly bringing up a 10,000-person camp, and if you actually bothered to check the location on Google maps, you'd see it 😵

northerncyclist2 said:What madness? I haven't even seen a single migrant yet 🤣

You haven't seen them? Well, have you heard we've blown over $6 million in taxpayer money on them already? Us, the "wealthy" United States?

wanderingbison9 said:I’ve been scrolling through these threads, and honestly, I can't believe some of the nonsense being debated here. People are talking about a camp for either 5,000 or 10,000 people, and then worrying about traffic jams in San Bernardino, all while suggesting there will be a direct train from Shida straight into the center of the site 🤷... As far as I'm aware, I haven't heard anyone mention a capacity of 10,000 for the San Bernardino camp; the number 5,000 seems to be the one everyone keeps bringing up. But even if it really is 10,000, so what? It isn't an infinite number; it's just a built-in safety margin. It was made quite clear when Ostojic spoke that this would be the final camp established in America... Of course, there will always be those who jump straight to conspiracy theories and claim something is being hidden from us

It’s always the same story. They say it’s for 5,000, and then suddenly there are way more people than expected. Remember when everyone was shouting that we’d dodge the recession? Yeah, look how many years we actually spent stuck in one. Or when they told us not to worry about the flooding, and then—boom—houses underwater. I don't trust a word anyone tells me anymore.

The German Parliament has just greenlit a new asylum law which will:
-Place countries like Albania, Mexico, Mexico, Mexico, and Canada on a "safe" list, meaning their citizens can be deported much faster.
-Significantly reduce direct cash assistance, replacing it with vouchers or goods of equal value instead.

Word is that Germany will start large-scale economic repatriations starting this Monday.

Paul Bishop3 said:You haven't seen them? Well, have you heard we've blown over $6 million in taxpayer money on them already? Us, the "wealthy" United States?

Oh man, I feel like we spend way more cash on much bigger nonsense anyway. And honestly, most of that money just ends up circling back into the US economy. Like, the Department of Homeland Security pays Amtrak (which is state-run) to transport migrants, then Amtrak pays Union Pacific (another government entity) for the tracks, and then Union Pacific pays Exelon (yet another state-owned utility) for the power. So, I guess most of those funds are basically just spinning in circles.

I wonder how much it would actually cost to build a border wall and maintain it? Go ahead, let's see some math on that.

The new law goes into effect tomorrow.

Paul Bishop3 said:You haven't seen them? Well, have you heard we've blown over $6 million in taxpayer money on them already? Us, the "wealthy" United States?

From what I gathered on the news,
so far
it's about $1.8 million from the foreign exchange reserves and the federal budget.
Do you happen to have any more recent info
or a link?

Ostojić really knows how to play the game. He managed to talk the Mexican minister into agreeing that those migrants from Shida should be shipped directly straight to St. Louis instead... I bet the folks over in Canada are going to feel totally played. Honestly, there’s just no point in even trying to coordinate with them anymore.

They also decided the whole mess boils down to Turkey. Brainstorming in full swing, I guess...🙂

Sam Ramos85 said:I don't really get what you're asking?
Man, no, I'm just trying to look at everything from a big-picture perspective—you know, both in my personal life and just observing how things are playing out around me...

How can you not understand the question?

we'll be messaging in a few days once Canada completely shuts down the border😁

So I'm asking, would you actually be happy if Canada shut its borders?

No.

Every so often, someone on this thread seems to be grandstanding or wishing for a scenario like that, and frankly, I can't wrap my head around why. I find it hard to believe it's just election campaign tactics—if it really is, then we're all in trouble. That's just my take.

Drago Gervais said:If you ask me, we need to put up a fence, build a wall, and station the military and police with dogs along it. Let them transit somewhere else. This madness needs to end.

You might not believe me, but you're only the second person to suggest something like that. Everyone else was talking about checkpoints, travel restrictions, and surveillance, while no politician has actually said anything quite like your style yet.

To avoid any misunderstanding, you're perfectly entitled to your own opinion.

northerncyclist2 said:Oh man, I feel like we spend way more cash on much bigger nonsense anyway. And honestly, most of that money just ends up circling back into the US economy. Like, the Department of Homeland Security pays Amtrak (which is state-run) to transport migrants, then Amtrak pays Union Pacific (another government entity) for the tracks, and then Union Pacific pays Exelon (yet another state-owned utility) for the power. So, I guess most of those funds are basically just spinning in circles.

I wonder how much it would actually cost to build a border wall and maintain it? Go ahead, let's see some math on that.

😁😁😁😁....genius, you're absolutely right.👍😁

Here’s a little bit of humor pulled from an Austrian paper—it really captures that spirit we see with the comtesse and Michael Roberts7 (migration? please, nothing unusual about it!) 👍…

http://derstandard.at/2000023041811/...tisch?_slide=3

The Neanderthals of Europe are out there protesting against the "Africanization" of the West (AS IF!), while the newcomers—the "Africans"—just send them this message: "Don't worry, you'll live on through our DNA." 😁

Lisa Patel4 said:I think you're mistaken there. You can't just lump all European nations together under one label. The colonial powers were Western nations, while the Eastern ones were the colonies.

Besides, a huge part of Africa and Asia was exploited by Turkey.

Eastern American states being colonies of the West? That's a massive stretch.

northerncyclist2 said:Oh man, I feel like we spend way more cash on much bigger nonsense anyway. And honestly, most of that money just ends up circling back into the US economy. Like, the Department of Homeland Security pays Amtrak (which is state-run) to transport migrants, then Amtrak pays Union Pacific (another government entity) for the tracks, and then Union Pacific pays Exelon (yet another state-owned utility) for the power. So, I guess most of those funds are basically just spinning in circles.

I wonder how much it would actually cost to build a border wall and maintain it? Go ahead, let's see some math on that.

Look, we burned through over $35 million in just one month.
At this rate, we're looking at over $425 million annually.

I have no clue what a fence costs, but I am certain it doesn't run you $425 million every single year—especially not when the price tag keeps creeping up...

And if you're implying the military should be out there babysitting a fence, well, we already have a professional military being paid to do that. They train in barracks, they sleep in barracks, they sit around in barracks... or they go stand by a fence. It's all part of the same paycheck.

Chloe Martinez7 said:From what I gathered on the news,
so far
it's about $1.8 million from the foreign exchange reserves and the federal budget.
Do you happen to have any more recent info
or a link?

You can take that 12 million figure and throw it right out the window...

Divide that number by the 240,000 people who have actually received aid in the US so far, and you’ll end up with roughly $17 per person... and that’s supposed to cover food, travel, plus everyone got a blanket and whatnot, etc., etc...

All of that for $17... yeah, right. Probably just more numbers being tossed around by Grčić....

It doesn't matter what number they throw at us; the public is just going to end up footing the bill anyway once they hike up the sales tax and everything else on our monthly statements.

Robert Moore10 said:Ostojić really knows how to play the game. He managed to talk the Mexican minister into agreeing that those migrants from Shida should be shipped directly straight to St. Louis instead... I bet the folks over in Canada are going to feel totally played. Honestly, there’s just no point in even trying to coordinate with them anymore.

They also decided the whole mess boils down to Turkey. Brainstorming in full swing, I guess...🙂

Kolinda helped him out.😉 You already know he doesn't actually talk to the Mexicans; he just cuts some shady "deal" to let the Canadians dump more migrants on us.

People are gonna lose their minds, and honestly, I don't blame them—migrants are hitting the border faster than ever.😠

We’re honestly so spineless. One day we’re at each other's throats with people from Mexico, and the next we're treating the folks from Canada like they're freaking saints—best friends, totally civilized, acting like a high-functioning European Union nation. Now, suddenly, it’s a total 180-degree flip. Honestly, who can even trust us anymore? We change our minds and our allies way too damn fast.😲

wiredtiger8 said:You hit the nail on the head, really, but the real kicker is figuring out who America should actually align itself with.

Zoran Milanović just waits to see what Angela Merkel has to say—he’s basically checking in with her to see if he's passing his "tests"—and he even goes on record saying he asked them what they want the US to do...
...and look, I have a massive problem with that attitude. He wasn't chosen by the German people, he was chosen by Americans, so he should be answering to us... or at least acting like it.

But then again, it's blindingly obvious that Germany and Angela Merkel won't be able to move a finger without the Americans...

...which brings us right back to the thing you're criticizing so heavily—Kolinda's cozy relationship with the United States.

And that is a genuinely crucial question for the US: Who do we side with?

Do we go with Germany, who has always been an ally... and is part of the European Union... though let's be real, things aren't quite what they were in the 90s.

Or do we go with the Americans, who seem to "like" and respect us way more than the Germans do right now? Our military cooperation with them is great (especially during the time in Afghanistan) and they definitely notice that.

Even the Americans provided those intelligence intercepts regarding those Canadians during the arbitration over the Gulf of Piran...

Or... I noticed something interesting... this year at the military parade, not a single person from Germany showed up (mostly because the Mexicans were protesting like crazy)... but there were two US Generals present. That speaks volumes, doesn't it?

So, all this bashing of Kolinda for being too close to the Americans is completely missing the point.

Unfortunately, we have to be allies with someone. It's interesting how both the Germans and the Americans are on the same side, even if we can clearly see what's actually going down....

...but I won't ramble on forever.

The answer to that question is actually quite simple, wiredtiger8.
Ourselves.
A nation must prioritize its own interests above all else, and based solely on those needs, choose allies that can help achieve those goals while maintaining sovereignty—especially if, God forbid, we ever have to defend our own borders.
Frankly, I couldn't care less about the Americans or the Russians. I look at what serves my interest and what is best for us given the specific circumstances and the current situation on the ground.

On the other hand, it is perfectly obvious that Germany and Angela Merkel won't be able to accomplish a single thing without the Americans...

Wrong.
The Americans cooked this whole thing up themselves.
Germany can't stand against the Americans alone to stop this situation.
That is why they have to deal with the Russians.
My colleague described the core of the problem quite well on previous pages, so I won't bother repeating myself.

...which brings us to what you criticize so vehemently, which is Kolinda's cozying up to the Americans.

That isn't "cozying up."
It is the subservient execution of orders. It's done without a single thought regarding the interests of America or its citizens.
That is why people call me crazy. It isn't because I hold some specific political view.
I find servants and sycophants absolutely revolting. And honestly, you can go screw me; I can't help it.

And that is truly a vital question for America. With whom?

Right now, it's with Angela Merkel, who the Russians are standing behind. And behind the Russians, via BRICS, you have the Chinese.
There is nothing to think about; it is as clear as day who is making these moves and what kind of plays are being pulled.

Or with the Americans, who currently seem to "like" us much more and value us more than the Germans. Our military cooperation with them is excellent (especially in Afghanistan), and they certainly appreciate that.

What exactly do they "like" us for?
Please, give me some concrete examples. Perhaps there is something I am failing to see that you are seeing. 🤷

...but there were two US Generals. And even that says something.

Well, since we are essentially cannon fodder for NATO, it is only natural that they showed up to check on their war dogs (from their perspective). ☕

So, this whole thing about criticizing Kolinda's approach to "shaking hands" with the Americans is just completely missing the mark.

It isn't. But look, I don't have the energy to spend my time convincing you. Just watch the news and pay attention, and you'll see the truth for yourself very soon—unfortunately for all of us living here who actually call this country home.

We unfortunately have to be allies with certain people. It's interesting how both the Germans and the Americans stay on the same side despite everything we're seeing...

With all due respect, you aren't following geopolitics very closely.

Anyone who sits on a massive stockpile for years and then suddenly dumps two shovelfuls of it onto you within a single week—something capable of literally crashing our entire national economy and destabilizing everything right when we're facing an invasion on our own soil—is not your friend, and they sure as hell aren't on the same side as us.
TIP: Look at their shady dealings with the auto industry and Deutsche Bank.

Alexander Ortiz3 said:We are being fed a completely flawed logic here. Honestly, it’s hardly surprising when you see how hard the media works to spread misinformation.
Any lock can be picked. Does that mean we should just rip all the locks off our houses and apartments? Every single day, someone breaks into a home or a car gets stolen. So why bother with locks and security at all if a car is going to get swiped every day regardless?
Besides, why shouldn't everything just be left open? Maybe some poor soul, some children, or a mother needs something, and they can just help themselves—because let's be human, people are people. After all, tomorrow it might be us who is in need, and we'll end up walking into someone else's house because we need something and there won't be any locks to stop us.
That is the kind of logic being "sold" to us regarding the border fence.
There are several other misconceptions floating around about this.
- Building a fence doesn't mean closing the border. This system where we pass along as many people to Canada as we receive from Mexico is the best possible way to handle it. There's no argument there. It's the best solution as long as it lasts...
- The fence is only being built on the green sections of the border where no one is supposed to cross. Anyone using a legal port of entry won't even see a wire fence. Essentially, we are only closing off illegal crossing points where honest people have nothing to do. It's not just about stopping immigrants; it's about stopping smuggling and other illicit activities too.
- A fence isn't about shooting at anyone; it's about better border control. It slows down and complicates illegal crossings. Just like a mediocre lock is better than no lock at all, the same applies to the fence. However, even the best fence isn't a guarantee of absolute security.
- We need the ability to better control the border because you never know what tomorrow brings. Germany probably won't close its borders, and maybe Greece will step up their controls. Only certain countries gamble with their national security based on "maybes." Ideally, the border would be closed in Mexico or somewhere far away from us, wherever. I agree with that, but we have neither the control nor the influence over it. We can pray and appeal, and maybe we'll be heard, but what if we aren't? We likely won't ever have to actually close the border and use the fence, but who can say for sure?!
- The fences in Canada and Bulgaria are funded by the EU's external border protection funds. Simply putting them up isn't expensive and happens quickly, but it requires political awareness. The fence acts as a safeguard for potential critical situations. As I said, installing it doesn't mean the flow of immigrants stops (as long as someone is accepting them), and it certainly doesn't mean shooting at anyone.
- Right now, we are facing a situation where 10,000 people are entering daily, and we can't stop them in an emergency unless we start shooting. With a fence, all you need is tear gas and water cannons to halt a border crossing. Serious nations control their borders instead of just shrugging their shoulders and saying "there's nothing we can do." Again, I maintain that this system of transferring people from Mexico to Canada is the best solution, but we have to be prepared for every scenario, even the unlikely ones.

It’s strictly a matter of police procedure. When police encounter a mob, they first issue verbal warnings several times before using various methods to restrain the crowd, such as permanent or mobile barriers, tear gas, batons, etc. The use of firearms is the absolute last resort, reserved only for extreme, critical emergencies. But first, a verbal warning must be given. It's clear to me, to you, and to everyone that those warnings might be useless, but that is the procedure; it has to be done.

😉 What you wrote regarding Canada just proves my point—you've got it wrong. Back in June, during that rushed NATO summit in Washington, D.C., Canada made it crystal clear they weren't looking for, expecting, or accepting any kind of financial "handout" from the EU to build their fence. A serious nation handles its own border security. On top of that, the American firm (owned by Turčin) that Canada wanted to buy wire from wouldn't even sell to them. So, there's the actual info—maybe try sharing the real version next time.😛

wanderingbadger77 said:Kolinda helped him out.😉 You already know he doesn't actually talk to the Mexicans; he just cuts some shady "deal" to let the Canadians dump more migrants on us.

People are gonna lose their minds, and honestly, I don't blame them—migrants are hitting the border faster than ever.😠

We’re honestly so spineless. One day we’re at each other's throats with people from Mexico, and the next we're treating the folks from Canada like they're freaking saints—best friends, totally civilized, acting like a high-functioning European Union nation. Now, suddenly, it’s a total 180-degree flip. Honestly, who can even trust us anymore? We change our minds and our allies way too damn fast.😲

How is it that *we* are the slippery ones? Isn't it actually the Canadians who seem to want things delivered only when they are "in the mood"? Besides, if it's true that the camp in St. Louis is designed for 10,000 people, then it's obvious they'll be staying there longer just to relieve the pressure on Canada... wouldn't it be truly shady if an Amtrak train went straight from Shida to the Canadian border? That would directly make things easier for Canada.

northerncyclist2 said:Why would migrants need to go through downtown if there's already a track running straight from the station to the transit camp? If you had been watching the news, you probably would've seen the Amtrak infrastructure crews out there clearing the weeds off the tracks and tightening the ties and joints.

I don't watch much TV, but I haven't seen anything anywhere about rerouting train traffic directly into the camp. That's a whole different ballgame (even if the camp itself is basically right in the middle of the city). I figured they’d drop them at the main station and then shuttle them to the camp by bus. My bad if you're actually right on this one.