Numbers do not define invasions.
An invasion is a coordinated military action undertaken for the purpose of seizing and holding territory for a foreign power.
Describing the mass immigration of Mexicans into the US as an "invasion" is pure sensationalism that is meant to inflame passions, and not very nice ones at that.
The fact is that our immigration laws are broken and our border enforcement is broken.
Our immigration laws are predicated on stupid concepts like "family reunification" - not rationality.
The most rational thing for the US to do is to police its border effectively while welcoming millions of valuable Mexican immigrants.
The current "system" (for lack of a better word) is useless, and almost every propsed solution - from blanket amnesty to mass deportation - is emotionally-based futility.
Like most analogies, they break down. We are witnessing a slow motion "invasion" of our soil. Call it an illegal "migration" if it makes you feel better. It doesn't change the numbers.
Describing the mass immigration of Mexicans into the US as an "invasion" is pure sensationalism that is meant to inflame passions, and not very nice ones at that.
I find the numbers 12 to 20 million illegal aliens as far more sensationalistic than the word invasion. They are not guests nor are they coming here legally. They are entering our space or home. On definition of invasion is "An intrusion or encroachment." We should be upset.n Our borders are not secure. It is not only Mexicans that are entering illegally.
The fact is that our immigration laws are broken and our border enforcement is broken.
Many of our immigration laws are "broken" because they have not been enforced. The 2006 Senate Comprehensive Immigration reform bill contained much of the same language as Simpson-Mazolli. The border remains unsecure, almost 6 years after 9/11. Where does the buck stop? Who is responsible? Are we a nation of laws or not? Whom do we hold accountable?
Our immigration laws are predicated on stupid concepts like "family reunification" - not rationality.
Agreed, but who is advocating changing them except for Tancredo? Chain migration has increased the number of legal immigrants and reduced diversity. Today, 43% of legal immigrants come from Mexico. We can't continue to take in the poor and undeducated of Latin America. We need people who are going to help us be competitive in the global ecnomomy.
The most rational thing for the US to do is to police its border effectively while welcoming millions of valuable Mexican immigrants.
No, we need to review our entire immigration policies including such things as anchor babies and chain migration. According to the 2000 Census there were about 9.2 million Mexican-born residents of the US compared to 4.2 million in 1990, i.e., we have added at least 5 million Mexican-born residents in the 1990s. They are part of the 7 million increase in numbers of new residents from Latin American during that period.
From a public policy standpoint, the question is what is the optimum number of immigrants we can take in each year and assimilate them. Since 2000, we have increased our population by 20 million or the equivalent of our seven largest cities. We have added 100 million people since 1970, with 3/4 of the increase attribvuted to immigration, legal and illegal. Do we want to be a nation of 364 million by 2030 [just 23 years from now] and over 400 million by 2050? How does this impact on our infrastructure, schools, social welfare systems, hospitals, prison system, energy consumption, etc.?
The current "system" (for lack of a better word) is useless, and almost every propsed solution - from blanket amnesty to mass deportation - is emotionally-based futility.
False choices/strawmen. If you have a water pipe break in the basement, the first thing you do is shut off the water. Until we can shut off the supply of 500,000 to 1 million people entering our country every year, we will never solve the problem. The current system doesn't work because we are not enforcing the laws on the books. We need to approach the problem logically. The Dems and the comprehensive immigration reform types are the ones demagoging the issue and using emotion. They have changed the lexicon. Illegal aliens are "undocumented workers." Amnesty is "getting to the back of the line in a path to citizenhship." Anyone who speaks out about the need to curb illegal immigration is called a "nativist" or a "racist."
In the end, it really doesn't matter what people say. The reality on the ground will be obvious to everyone. The illegal alien problem is metastasizing around the country. In 1990, 18 states had Mexican-born residents as its largest foreign born resident population. In 2000, that number increased to 30 states. Like the proverbial frog slowly being boiled alive, we may find out how pervasive and widespread the problem is too late to really do anything about it. The world's lifeboat [the US] will be swamped making Man's future on this planet a little bleaker and with less hope. We will fade beneath the waves like so many great civilizations before us.
“Numbers do not define invasions.
An invasion is a coordinated military action undertaken for the purpose of seizing and holding territory for a foreign power.”
in·va·sion
n.
1. The act of invading, especially the entrance of an armed force into a territory to conquer.
2. A large-scale onset of something injurious or harmful, such as a disease.
3. An intrusion or encroachment.
invasion
IN BRIEF: Encroachment or entrance without being asked or wanted.
pronunciation An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not the invasion of ideas. — Victor Hugo (1802-1885), French poet, dramatist, novelist.