Replies

It would also give them a military ID (soldier and dependents) and then really don't need a 'Z' Visa. Also it would require full data and identification on dependents and medical info (to include DNA) on the soldier. Plus many may actually end up living in base housing or in locations registered with the Branch of Service/Unit, to be able to find the service member. Kinda give the government a bit more control over what INS actually has on those in the system.

I use soldier for all: Soldier, Sailor, Marine, Airman, Guardsman and Coast Guardsman.

I do agree that after their commitment is fulfilled then they would be eligible for naturalized citizenship. One thing that might be interesting is if the commitment (6 years for most on initial enlistment) would equal the time for others (non-enlistees) to reach naturalization status. Parallel tracks so to speak.

Being a member of the military entitles you to certain benefits (a cot, 4 squares/day, Tricare). That said I don't know if you could exclude the enlistee or dependents, if the individual has them when he/she enlists, even if they are immigrants (illegal or legal), from Tricare. I wonder if it would mean lengthening Basic Training and Advanced Training to longer periods (like it use to be) to handle the influx of non-English speaking troops? Logically I would think yes, but bureaucratic thinking isn't logical.

I'm not sure this would be the chosen path for a large number here anyway. From what I've read many don't want eventual citizenship anyway. They just want the money. I wonder if they just want the money, do they want their family here. Possibly not.

I would be more inclined to support an illegal joining the military and working toward full status than this cockamamie AMNESTY plan. Good post, thought provoking ... it has it's bumps to work out.