Go Back  British Expats > Living & Moving Abroad > USA
Reload this Page >

American Public "Guarding" Border- What Do You Think?

Wikiposts

American Public "Guarding" Border- What Do You Think?

Thread Tools
 
Old Apr 6th 2005, 2:02 am
  #16  
Lapine Member
 
snowbunny's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Location: Austin, Texas in my own little world
Posts: 21,691
snowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: American Public "Guarding" Border- What Do You Think?

Originally Posted by Manc
Michigan used to be French, but I don't see Pierre making a run for the border at Windsor.
There were numerous land deeds to this entire area recognised by the American government and not willingly ceded by their owners. Much of the southwest was taken through military action and not through a purchase from the country in question like the Louisiana purchase. While it's true that those governments (like France) didn't take a poll of the current citizens in the colonies it sold, there was at least a quasi-legitimate transaction. Not true in the case of the lands in the southwest.

I don't know many Pierres** who live in impoverished countries -- Canada and France have fairly high standards of living and national health care for their citizens. Most Canadian ex-pats I've met do not want American citizenship because they want they right to go home if they become catastrophically ill. Pedro, on the other hand, has a government that must be kept at bay through supporting the party in power and through the offering of "mordidas" or bribes. Maybe Pedro needs to work here in order to have some cash to put in the government's hat next time the local police have a whip-round.

**offer not good in Haiti or the Dominican Republic. But Pierre from there tends to come via boat over the Gulf of Mexico rather than by car over the Ambassador Bridge.
snowbunny is offline  
Old Apr 6th 2005, 2:40 am
  #17  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,578
anotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond reputeanotherlimey has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: American Public "Guarding" Border- What Do You Think?

Originally Posted by snowbunny
There were numerous land deeds to this entire area recognised by the American government and not willingly ceded by their owners. Much of the southwest was taken through military action and not through a purchase from the country in question like the Louisiana purchase. While it's true that those governments (like France) didn't take a poll of the current citizens in the colonies it sold, there was at least a quasi-legitimate transaction. Not true in the case of the lands in the southwest.
Does this mean that if Britain decided the War of Independence was unfair and declared the current land comprising the USA is in fact British, that all us Brits can come over and illegally start working here?

Just because another country owned the land and it was taken from them doesn't mean it's population can cross the border anytime it likes.
anotherlimey is offline  
Old Apr 6th 2005, 3:26 am
  #18  
Concierge
 
Rete's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 46,470
Rete has a reputation beyond reputeRete has a reputation beyond reputeRete has a reputation beyond reputeRete has a reputation beyond reputeRete has a reputation beyond reputeRete has a reputation beyond reputeRete has a reputation beyond reputeRete has a reputation beyond reputeRete has a reputation beyond reputeRete has a reputation beyond reputeRete has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: American Public "Guarding" Border- What Do You Think?

Originally Posted by snowbunny
Most Canadian ex-pats I've met do not want American citizenship because they want they right to go home if they become catastrophically ill.
Why would being a US/Canadian citizen stop a Canadian from returning to Canada if they become catastrophically ill? Depending on the province they would have a few months wait regardless once they are considered a non-resident of Canada to have their healthcare reinstated but holding citizenship from another country would not interfer with that.
Rete is offline  
Old Apr 6th 2005, 3:50 am
  #19  
Blindside Fumbler
 
Tone's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Location: Tampa
Posts: 967
Tone is a glorious beacon of lightTone is a glorious beacon of lightTone is a glorious beacon of lightTone is a glorious beacon of lightTone is a glorious beacon of lightTone is a glorious beacon of lightTone is a glorious beacon of lightTone is a glorious beacon of lightTone is a glorious beacon of lightTone is a glorious beacon of lightTone is a glorious beacon of light
Default Re: American Public "Guarding" Border- What Do You Think?

Beats the UK border guards

Tone is offline  
Old Apr 6th 2005, 3:55 am
  #20  
@matthewb76
 
Manc's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Location: Missouri
Posts: 21,886
Manc has a reputation beyond reputeManc has a reputation beyond reputeManc has a reputation beyond reputeManc has a reputation beyond reputeManc has a reputation beyond reputeManc has a reputation beyond reputeManc has a reputation beyond reputeManc has a reputation beyond reputeManc has a reputation beyond reputeManc has a reputation beyond reputeManc has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: American Public "Guarding" Border- What Do You Think?

How does one become a Chelsea Pensioner?

will Kerry Dixon be allowed to become one upon retirement age?
Manc is offline  
Old Apr 6th 2005, 12:09 pm
  #21  
Lapine Member
 
snowbunny's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Location: Austin, Texas in my own little world
Posts: 21,691
snowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: American Public "Guarding" Border- What Do You Think?

Originally Posted by anotherlimey
Does this mean that if Britain decided the War of Independence was unfair and declared the current land comprising the USA is in fact British, that all us Brits can come over and illegally start working here?
Come over, there are actually a fair few Brits (and Irish) here working illegally. Our immigration policy is a complete farce.

You're right, to the victor go the reconstruction contracts. Same as is going down in Iraq.

A nation's credibility is judged on its interactions between other "civilised" governments. Having begun appropriating land and oil through force, and backing out of several key international treaties, the US has undone any credibility and good will it earned as a result of WWII.

We used to be taught in school that yes, the US did take lands away from other nations, especially Native American nations with whom they'd signed treaties, but then the spacious and beautiful Indian reservations were always hastily mentioned. We were taught that that was a different time, when the US was young and definitely not politically correct, and was still clawing out an existence. "Manifest destiny" was to stop at the Pacific Ocean, and it did. But no one mentioned that Hawaii had been taken from a sovereign power in a revolutionary coup by Americans.

So -- the US historically takes the land it wants and gives the citizens and existing government the big middle finger. That trend is now accelerating and the leadership is now unabashedly backing out of treaty after treaty. We now cannot blame any other country for similarly deciding not to honour any treaties with us, and the ones who "honour" them either want our money or don't want to piss us off. There is no longer any credible international law. All illegal immigrants bring it on, though remember, your government will not be able to help you if you are imprisoned. You may be denied consular access and an attorney, even sentenced to die, but if you're willing to run those risks, come on over.
snowbunny is offline  
Old Apr 6th 2005, 12:25 pm
  #22  
Not living a 9 to 5 life
Thread Starter
 
NC Penguin's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 11,061
NC Penguin has a reputation beyond reputeNC Penguin has a reputation beyond reputeNC Penguin has a reputation beyond reputeNC Penguin has a reputation beyond reputeNC Penguin has a reputation beyond reputeNC Penguin has a reputation beyond reputeNC Penguin has a reputation beyond reputeNC Penguin has a reputation beyond reputeNC Penguin has a reputation beyond reputeNC Penguin has a reputation beyond reputeNC Penguin has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: American Public "Guarding" Border- What Do You Think?

Originally Posted by snowbunny
<<snip>>

We used to be taught in school that yes, the US did take lands away from other nations, especially Native American nations with whom they'd signed treaties, but then the spacious and beautiful Indian reservations were always hastily mentioned. We were taught that that was a different time, when the US was young and definitely not politically correct, and was still clawing out an existence. "Manifest destiny" was to stop at the Pacific Ocean, and it did. But no one mentioned that Hawaii had been taken from a sovereign power in a revolutionary coup by Americans.<<snip>>
Your comments above reminded me of a 10,000 Maniacs song about the treatment of Native Americans. The song is "Among the Americans" and the link is to the lyrics.




NC Penguin
NC Penguin is offline  
Old Apr 6th 2005, 12:34 pm
  #23  
Lapine Member
 
snowbunny's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Location: Austin, Texas in my own little world
Posts: 21,691
snowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: American Public "Guarding" Border- What Do You Think?

Love the Maniacs Natalie Merchant is a very talented woman.

I am obviously in the Wrong Place. I desperately need EU citizenship.
snowbunny is offline  
Old Apr 7th 2005, 2:54 am
  #24  
Just Joined
 
grapefruit&milk's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Location: Philadelphia, soon New Orleans
Posts: 18
grapefruit&milk is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Re: American Public "Guarding" Border- What Do You Think?

Originally Posted by snowbunny
Come over, there are actually a fair few Brits (and Irish) here working illegally. Our immigration policy is a complete farce.

You're right, to the victor go the reconstruction contracts. Same as is going down in Iraq.

A nation's credibility is judged on its interactions between other "civilised" governments. Having begun appropriating land and oil through force, and backing out of several key international treaties, the US has undone any credibility and good will it earned as a result of WWII.

We used to be taught in school that yes, the US did take lands away from other nations, especially Native American nations with whom they'd signed treaties, but then the spacious and beautiful Indian reservations were always hastily mentioned. We were taught that that was a different time, when the US was young and definitely not politically correct, and was still clawing out an existence. "Manifest destiny" was to stop at the Pacific Ocean, and it did. But no one mentioned that Hawaii had been taken from a sovereign power in a revolutionary coup by Americans.

So -- the US historically takes the land it wants and gives the citizens and existing government the big middle finger. That trend is now accelerating and the leadership is now unabashedly backing out of treaty after treaty. We now cannot blame any other country for similarly deciding not to honour any treaties with us, and the ones who "honour" them either want our money or don't want to piss us off. There is no longer any credible international law. All illegal immigrants bring it on, though remember, your government will not be able to help you if you are imprisoned. You may be denied consular access and an attorney, even sentenced to die, but if you're willing to run those risks, come on over.
Aiaiai---if that's really how you perceive the situation, than you probably should skip on over to Europe. (You've already got the British spelling down pat.) But is the grass always greener on the other side of the fence? Clearly, for the thousands risking life and limb to get here, grass really is greener here, despite their ostensible hatred of our government's "imperialist" tendencies. My own encounters with international media sources suggest that the old colonialist powers of Europe are just as guilty for oppressing the citizens of much poorer nations, sometimes under the guise of "liberating" them from poverty/totalitariasm, just as we claim to do. Or conversely, they reveal spineless "pacifist" tendencies by refusing to intervene in situations where obvious atrocities are taking place (often in former colonies) that they could easily eliminate through military action. US and EU share the blame. Yet the EU member countries get less press for their imperialist acts because they are the dominant global force like the US is, but we can hardly exculpate them for their own corrupt actions.

This might seem a little reductionist, but ultimately doesn't it come down to personal taste--which gestures in foreign diplomacy do we actually prefer? Neither EU nor US nor Mexico nor Sierra Leone have a monopoly on morality--made obvious by the fact that there is so much dissention in global events.
grapefruit&milk is offline  
Old Apr 7th 2005, 8:25 am
  #25  
Lapine Member
 
snowbunny's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2004
Location: Austin, Texas in my own little world
Posts: 21,691
snowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond reputesnowbunny has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: American Public "Guarding" Border- What Do You Think?

Originally Posted by grapefruit&milk
Aiaiai---if that's really how you perceive the situation, than you probably should skip on over to Europe. My own encounters with international media sources suggest that the old colonialist powers of Europe are just as guilty for oppressing the citizens of much poorer nations, sometimes under the guise of "liberating" them from poverty/totalitariasm, just as we claim to do.
You're a junior member, so: I am leaving for the UK as soon as I can, but I share custody of my two kids and for now cannot even leave Texas, speaking of poverty and totalitarianism.

And I wouldn't trust international media sources any more than I would trust domestic sources. It's better to travel or to talk to people who live in other countries. Also, FDR pressured the colonial powers in Europe into giving up their colonies as a pre-condition to aid during and after WWII. The forced and sudden switch of power has a lot to do with the difficulties in transitioning from a colony to a "democracy" run by the "natives."

The Mexican border will never truly be closed because people on both sides want it to be porous. The flow of people, money, and goods, especially illegal drugs, is too important to people on both sides of the border; they don't want it hampered more than in the token way that currently exists.
snowbunny is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Manage Preferences Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Your Privacy Choices -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.