(03-06-2018 08:07 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-06-2018 07:58 AM)miko33 Wrote:  Why would the family have to travel all the way to Mexico and then illegally cross if they are refugees? There are a couple of stable African nations already not to mention access to Europe would be a whole lot easier than crossing an ocean to Mexico and then crossing a border illegally.

I hate to be that guy, but you cannot pull personal stories and try to build policy - or change policy - based on them. If we did, then we'd have a mess on our hands regarding policy on a whole slew of issues. Effective policy is driven by statistics - not by personal stories.

Because the Congo is a chithole.

I get it. But a quick list off the top of my head of more stable countries this mom and daughter could have taken asylum in that were MUCH closer. From the Congo to Mexico and illegally crossing into the U.S.??? Hello....Europe??? Seems the former owners of colonies need to step up to the plate...

Check this site out: http://fundforpeace.org/fsi/data/. Sort in ascending order and you'll see who are the most stable countries. You'll see that the U.S. is not the most stable country. For asylum seekers from the Congo, you'd think that they would have a safer journey to the UK, France, Germany, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Austria, Italy, etc...