Why should I be upset that our leader told a foreign leader who wanted something from him to go **** himself?

(02-25-2018 12:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Why should I be upset that our leader told a foreign leader who wanted something from him to go **** himself?

Because when you do that to enough countries, they all get together and say **** YOU! I know everyone likes to act like we don't need anyone else, we have the biggest military by far, etc. But trade agreements aren't built and sustained by bullying tactics. If Trump has any hope of having an effective foreign policy (which will require us to have allies), he is going to have to learn to deal with people diplomatically. You can't just tell a foreign leader "I campaigned on that promise, so you have to go along with it" and expect that guy to say "Oh, well. Since you put in that way." Anyone that believed that Trump could "make" Mexico pay for a wall was pretty gullible. But I guess it doesn't matter if you piss off a whole country that you share a 2000 mile border with that has over 15 million of its citizens already within your territory.

(02-25-2018 02:43 PM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 12:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Why should I be upset that our leader told a foreign leader who wanted something from him to go **** himself?

Because when you do that to enough countries, they all get together and say **** YOU! I know everyone likes to act like we don't need anyone else, we have the biggest military by far, etc. But trade agreements aren't built and sustained by bullying tactics. If Trump has any hope of having an effective foreign policy (which will require us to have allies), he is going to have to learn to deal with people diplomatically. You can't just tell a foreign leader "I campaigned on that promise, so you have to go along with it" and expect that guy to say "Oh, well. Since you put in that way." Anyone that believed that Trump could "make" Mexico pay for a wall was pretty gullible. But I guess it doesn't matter if you piss off a whole country that you share a 2000 mile border with that has over 15 million of its citizens already within your territory.

The problem with our foreign policy is that we have worried about what other countries think. They should worry about what we think.

(02-25-2018 02:43 PM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 12:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Why should I be upset that our leader told a foreign leader who wanted something from him to go **** himself?

Because when you do that to enough countries, they all get together and say **** YOU! I know everyone likes to act like we don't need anyone else, we have the biggest military by far, etc. But trade agreements aren't built and sustained by bullying tactics. If Trump has any hope of having an effective foreign policy (which will require us to have allies), he is going to have to learn to deal with people diplomatically. You can't just tell a foreign leader "I campaigned on that promise, so you have to go along with it" and expect that guy to say "Oh, well. Since you put in that way." Anyone that believed that Trump could "make" Mexico pay for a wall was pretty gullible. But I guess it doesn't matter if you piss off a whole country that you share a 2000 mile border with that has over 15 million of its citizens already within your territory.

If the Mexican president or Mexicans are butt hurt that is on them. But are they though?

(02-25-2018 02:43 PM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 12:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Why should I be upset that our leader told a foreign leader who wanted something from him to go **** himself?

Because when you do that to enough countries, they all get together and say **** YOU! I know everyone likes to act like we don't need anyone else, we have the biggest military by far, etc. But trade agreements aren't built and sustained by bullying tactics. If Trump has any hope of having an effective foreign policy (which will require us to have allies), he is going to have to learn to deal with people diplomatically. You can't just tell a foreign leader "I campaigned on that promise, so you have to go along with it" and expect that guy to say "Oh, well. Since you put in that way." Anyone that believed that Trump could "make" Mexico pay for a wall was pretty gullible. But I guess it doesn't matter if you piss off a whole country that you share a 2000 mile border with that has over 15 million of its citizens already within your territory.

Countries have interests, not friends. So....no.....do that to enough countries and they don't all get together and say **** YOU! At the end of the day they do what's in their best interest.

After 8 years of Obama doing apology tours and sending the message to other leaders that they were free to use the US as a doormat, for me it's good to see the way Trump begins any negotiation. Throw down the gauntlet and then negotiate from there.

(02-25-2018 02:43 PM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 12:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Why should I be upset that our leader told a foreign leader who wanted something from him to go **** himself?

Because when you do that to enough countries, they all get together and say **** YOU! I know everyone likes to act like we don't need anyone else, we have the biggest military by far, etc. But trade agreements aren't built and sustained by bullying tactics. If Trump has any hope of having an effective foreign policy (which will require us to have allies), he is going to have to learn to deal with people diplomatically. You can't just tell a foreign leader "I campaigned on that promise, so you have to go along with it" and expect that guy to say "Oh, well. Since you put in that way." Anyone that believed that Trump could "make" Mexico pay for a wall was pretty gullible. But I guess it doesn't matter if you piss off a whole country that you share a 2000 mile border with that has over 15 million of its citizens already within your territory.

...

I'm very worried that Mexico is going to gang up on us because Trump told their President to get lost when he wanted him to make a political pronouncement as a condition precedent to his gracing the White House.

Give me a ******* break!

Narrow world views can cause this kind of thinking. We don't operate in a vacuum. While we have strong-armed allies, China has been forging alliances around the globe, largely through pillaging these countries for their resources, but creating jobs and roads in the process. Mexico is along our border, so it makes a lot of sense from a security standpoint to be as friendly as possible within the scope of our interests.

And to address TechRocks point, these other countries may decide that what is in their best interest is a weakened United States. Think it can't happen? We were already weakened through the last administration, with Obama emboldening our enemies. Now Trump gets a turn and he spits at our friends.

(02-25-2018 04:07 PM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  Narrow world views can cause this kind of thinking. We don't operate in a vacuum. While we have strong-armed allies, China has been forging alliances around the globe, largely through pillaging these countries for their resources, but creating jobs and roads in the process. Mexico is along our border, so it makes a lot of sense from a security standpoint to be as friendly as possible within the scope of our interests.

And to address TechRocks point, these other countries may decide that what is in their best interest is a weakened United States. Think it can't happen? We were already weakened through the last administration, with Obama emboldening our enemies. Now Trump gets a turn and he spits at our friends.

IMHO the USA has been a little to nice with our friends to the South. Does the ruling class down there hate mestizos or something. Zombie as far a citizens of other countries go, which countries like the USA the most? Don't google it, just guess as best as you can.

(02-25-2018 04:07 PM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  Narrow world views can cause this kind of thinking. We don't operate in a vacuum. While we have strong-armed allies, China has been forging alliances around the globe, largely through pillaging these countries for their resources, but creating jobs and roads in the process. Mexico is along our border, so it makes a lot of sense from a security standpoint to be as friendly as possible within the scope of our interests.
And to address TechRocks point, these other countries may decide that what is in their best interest is a weakened United States. Think it can't happen? We were already weakened through the last administration, with Obama emboldening our enemies. Now Trump gets a turn and he spits at our friends.

Treat your friends better tan you treat your enemies. Fundamental principle.

(02-25-2018 04:07 PM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  Narrow world views can cause this kind of thinking. We don't operate in a vacuum. While we have strong-armed allies, China has been forging alliances around the globe, largely through pillaging these countries for their resources, but creating jobs and roads in the process. Mexico is along our border, so it makes a lot of sense from a security standpoint to be as friendly as possible within the scope of our interests.

And to address TechRocks point, these other countries may decide that what is in their best interest is a weakened United States. Think it can't happen? We were already weakened through the last administration, with Obama emboldening our enemies. Now Trump gets a turn and he spits at our friends.

How exactly is Mexico our friend?

(02-25-2018 02:52 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 02:43 PM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 12:38 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Why should I be upset that our leader told a foreign leader who wanted something from him to go **** himself?

Because when you do that to enough countries, they all get together and say **** YOU! I know everyone likes to act like we don't need anyone else, we have the biggest military by far, etc. But trade agreements aren't built and sustained by bullying tactics. If Trump has any hope of having an effective foreign policy (which will require us to have allies), he is going to have to learn to deal with people diplomatically. You can't just tell a foreign leader "I campaigned on that promise, so you have to go along with it" and expect that guy to say "Oh, well. Since you put in that way." Anyone that believed that Trump could "make" Mexico pay for a wall was pretty gullible. But I guess it doesn't matter if you piss off a whole country that you share a 2000 mile border with that has over 15 million of its citizens already within your territory.

The problem with our foreign policy is that we have worried about what other countries think. They should worry about what we think.

you can't sum it up any better....well done!

if one hasn't learned why the pussification of the brits lead to the collapse of their empirical stranglehold, they simply don't understand how to keep the crown.....the list of fail from the those that preceded goes on for days.....

we can only harm ourselves at this point....and if so, so go the rest....

the USD is now King.....as long as she's stable, the rest sleep in peace.....

(02-25-2018 09:51 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 09:45 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 08:58 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  Serious question -- do you guys really believe that spending over $25 billion to construct a partial wall along the southern border of the US is the best means of dealing with illegal immigration from Mexico (and Central America)? Do you believe that the best solution to the undocumented non-citizens among us is to "deport them all?" And to those claiming to be conservatives, do you feel those solutions best represent the principles of conservatism?

Yes.
Yes.
Yes.

Anything else?

Sent from my SM-G900R4 using CSNbbs mobile app

Thanks. I now feel enlightened. You can go back to watching cartoons now. :D

You ask 3rd grade questions, you get 3rd grade answers.

(02-25-2018 10:29 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 09:45 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 08:58 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  Serious question -- do you guys really believe that spending over $25 billion to construct a partial wall along the southern border of the US is the best means of dealing with illegal immigration from Mexico (and Central America)? Do you believe that the best solution to the undocumented non-citizens among us is to "deport them all?" And to those claiming to be conservatives, do you feel those solutions best represent the principles of conservatism?

Yes.
Yes.
Yes.

Before you spout off about what you consider a principle of conservatism, understand that when a patient in the ER is bleeding out, first and foremost is stop the bleeding and deal with any consequences of that afterwards.

Spend the money on the wall and deportation. Spend money to enforce US immigration law.

Sent from my SM-G900R4 using CSNbbs mobile app

Since I rarely spout, I will just say that your suggestion that as a nation we should act without consideration for long term consequences is very much not a conservative attitude. To be clear, I also believe that we should enforce US immigration law, but it makes little sense to me that for the better part of the last 30 years we have done a very poor job of it, but today we will draw a line in the sand and apply the law like a hammer to squash an ant in some cases. IMHO, there should be an intelligent response to the porous border to the south, the rampant overstaying of people on HB-1 visas and we need a long term plan for dealing with the 14-25 million undocumented people who are already here, including deportations and a rational permanent resident/citizenship path.

I have never suggested that we act without consideration for long term consequences. Acting without consideration for long term consequences is exactly what has been taking place since the amnesty granted in 1986. We've seen first hand what happens when upwards of 3 million people were granted amnesty without cracking down on illegal immigration and securing the border.

How can any intelligent response to a 'porous border to the south' not include securing said border? The Obama admin handicapped ICE, sent ambiguous messaging regarding illegal immigrants, and illegally enacted DACA knowing that once it was in effect it would be nearly impossible to do away with. Liberals everywhere that supported amnesty nearly wet themselves with excitement knowing that "Deferred Action" would most certainly become "No Action". Most simple solution to a "porous border"? Build a wall, increase patrols, increase penalties for illegals caught in the US and their employers. Amnesty, 'deferred action', or any other liberal policy that lets those that broke the law stay here is directly contradictory of any Conservative approach to border security and immigration.

Build a wall and it doesn't matter if Mexico becomes a failed state. The only reason they aren't a failed state right now is the 12-15 million illegals in the US.

HB-1 Visas should be a relatively easy fix. We know who those people are. We know where they are supposed to be, and know what business they were tending to in the US. Overstay a HB-1 and get deported in 24-36 hours and become ineligible for another HB-1 for themselves or family members for the next 10 years.

Lastly and most importantly, there can be NO CITIZENSHIP PATH for those that broke the law to come here. IF and ONLY IF they complete a lengthy application process with pre-defined and concrete criteria, can they attain some sort of resident status, but under no circumstance should they be allowed to receive the ability to vote, or receive full access to welfare programs. In cases where it's possible to verify that a kid came here under the age of 12, let's figure out a way to create a path to citizenship for them. A zero tolerance policy for criminal behavior, mandatory completion of high school or GED program, graduation from a trade school or apprenticeship program, proficient in english, and/or 6-10 years of mandatory military or civil service.

(02-26-2018 08:25 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 09:51 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 09:45 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(02-25-2018 08:58 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  Serious question -- do you guys really believe that spending over $25 billion to construct a partial wall along the southern border of the US is the best means of dealing with illegal immigration from Mexico (and Central America)? Do you believe that the best solution to the undocumented non-citizens among us is to "deport them all?" And to those claiming to be conservatives, do you feel those solutions best represent the principles of conservatism?

Yes.
Yes.
Yes.

Anything else?

Sent from my SM-G900R4 using CSNbbs mobile app

Thanks. I now feel enlightened. You can go back to watching cartoons now. :D

You ask 3rd grade questions, you get 3rd grade answers.

I actually think he's one of the highest IQ liberals yet to post......

he sometimes asks decent questions while also trolling within the context.....

the boy's got chops with some fair questions littered within.....

In today's world, any country that won't bother to protect its borders won't be a country for very long.

(02-26-2018 09:26 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  In today's world, any country that won't bother to protect its borders won't be a country for very long.

apparently, some like prison sex......the 'why' still mystifies my arse......

Ohhh nooooo! The Mexican president doesn't like Trump?

Cancun is CLOSED.

No more Senor Frogs for ANYBODY.

*Sad, slow Mexican Hat Dance plays in the distance*

Since when does M,exico get to decide US policy. I thought the liberals were wetting thier pants because the feared Russia was attempting to influence our government. Now they are cool with Mexico telling us we must take thier citizenss “like it or not”? Odd.

(02-26-2018 11:08 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Since when does M,exico get to decide US policy. I thought the liberals were wetting thier pants because the feared Russia was attempting to influence our government. Now they are cool with Mexico telling us we must take thier citizenss “like it or not”? Odd.

You think libs want to stem the flow of their future voters?

(02-26-2018 11:15 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(02-26-2018 11:08 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Since when does M,exico get to decide US policy. I thought the liberals were wetting thier pants because the feared Russia was attempting to influence our government. Now they are cool with Mexico telling us we must take thier citizenss “like it or not”? Odd.

You think libs want to stem the flow of their future voters?

It's not only that. There is a rather large financial reason for the Mexicans not supporting the Wall. Mexicans in the US send back to Mexico approximately $28 Billion in remittances each year. From what I've read that's basically the second largest US export to Mexico, behind only machinery. So, it's easy to see why the Mexican govt does not want anything limiting illegal immigration between the two nations. As always, follow the money.