[nathanbedford]

supersede

soo͞″pər-sēd′

transitive verb

To take the place of; replace or supplant.

Obviously, the millions of illegals who have, and are, being brought here without the consent or permission of legal American citizens supersedes concerns about foreign countries (emphasis supplied)

As important as maintaining our southern border is for the reasons you expressed and more, why should concern for our southern border "replace" our interest in defending Ukraine's sovereignty which certainly includes defending Ukraine's border?

Are we incapable of doing both at the same time? Does the failure to enforce our own border mean that it is not desirable to defend Ukraine's ? Does it mean we do not have the capacity? Would a commitment to defend our own border compel us to defend Ukraine's border? If we were to defend our own border with that furnish the capability to defend Ukraine's?

These are foolish and illogical false choices. The decision on one does not "replace" the other. Each stands on its own.

[AndyJackson]

not at all inconsistent. Ukraine is not a vital national interest. What goes on on our souther border is.

[mountainfolk]

America first. Ukraine second. Of course they could be taken care of simultaneously. However, before Ukraine, our govt, RINOs and commie dems, were not inclined to effectively defend our own boarders. Thus, if we forced our govt to defend our American borders, then we could consider helping another country to defend theirs. Our American borders would be secured with the same weaponry that is being sent to Ukarine and our military could enforce the requirements for legal entry of aliens. If America will not defend our own borders, it is blatantly treasonous to use the resources provided by our taxpayers for participation in a foreign war.