There is no way to round up and deport 12 million people.

[Swede]

Cannot be done.

[soothsayer]

1. The Nazis were able to round up 6 million or more. And that was way back then.

on edit: so if the gov finds a way to villify illegals, you can have good right-thinking 'muricans turning them in, etc., couldn't you? People are not nice to other people, as history proves over and over again.

[maveric]

2. Thats what scares me.

I have visions of people being squeezed into freight trains and then to........????

[soothsayer]

5. All those FEMA camps around the country that halliburton has been building?

I just read something about a warehouse in Ft. Meade, MD with FEMA on the doors in big letters that is being filled with all kinds of brand new bicycles (hung up on metro bike racks) and oddly labeled June, July, etc.

What on earth could THOSE be for, if the story is true...???

[baldguy]

3. Just 6 million were Jews.

They also rounded up & deported (then killed) Gypsies, Slavs, homosexuals and many other undesirable minorities.

The total came to about 12 million.

[soothsayer]

10. Ah, you're right, had forgotten how many Romanians, gypsies, homosexuals, handicapped, elderly...

And I'm sure the Bush family kept the 'how to' manual.

[Rick Myers]

17. The Bush-Prescotts were early supporters of the Eugenics program

And I'm sure they discussed it with their Nazi business partners.

Since the Civil War, anywhere there is DEATH and WAR, there is a Bush-Prescott.

[DBoon]

6. Someone actually made this very argument

a few months back. The guy was seriously arguing the feasability of deprting 11 million immigrants, based on the fact the Germans managed to do the same.

I really wish I had a reference - I'll try Google

[Alexander]

79. In Denmark, the populace made it very difficult.

I think the king or whoever ordered everyone in Denmark to wear the yellow Star of David, so the Nazis would have to round up the whole country.

Not every American is a goose-stepper.

[OwnedByFerrets]

4. NO, but if you begin punishing

the corporations who hire them, they will go home by themselves. I think.

[Rage for Order]

32. I'm curious how that would work

If tomorrow all illegal immigrants were fired by the companies they worked for, would they decide to voluntarily migrate back to their countries of origin? Since they would no longer have jobs, how would they get there with little or no money? It would be easier for the vast majority of illegals - those who have come here from Mexico and Central & South America - but what about those from Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australia? When I hear people say that illegals would self-deport if there were no jobs, I question the practicality of that position just as much as I question the practicality of forcibly deporting 12 million people.

[pampango]

38. If they were all fired tomorrow, there would be at least two options.

1. There would be a massive trek back over the border of Hispanic families, many with American children. That would be a wonderful image. I hope we could stick the blame for that on the Repubs.

2. They would stay for months thinking that things would get better for them here as they always have in the past. Assuming they couldn't find jobs they would get poorer until they decided that life in the country they ran away from is better than life here. The sight of politicians standing around while a group of people sinks deeper into poverty and just saying "Serves you right." would be an interesting sight to say the least.

If millions of Muslim immigrants into Europe suddenly started filling the highways, ships and planes heading back home, it would not be the best endorsement of life in Europe. Millions of Hispanics doing the same here, would be perceived the same way.

[treestar]

49. And the companies would suffer, and shrink, and have to lay off

Americans workers, due to shrinkage of the company!

I wish people would get Basic Economics into their heads. Trying to run a small business should be required before you can graduate high school. Honestly, that smart people think stuff like this is scary. To think like this you have to have a (relatively) secure job at a huge corporation and never have had to try to make your way yourself. It's the same mentality that thinks making a law making the employers do a status check on each employee is going to work. No experience with the government except for the most minimal. For huge corporation, it will, yeah. They'll end up being the only employers, and what will that do? Give them even more power.

After that, the huge corporations will be threatening to pack up and leave if they don't get the minimum wage and the anti-discrimination laws repealed.

[OwnedByFerrets]

66. Look, I'm as liberal (progressive) as they come......

but I DO have a problem with illegal immigrants. They should have to go thru the same hoops that the legal immigrants have to go thru. Also, there is a limited amount of jobs here to be taken. Each one that is taken by someone here illegally knocks out an American or a legal immigrant who would be getting a paycheck and supporting THEIR family.
If YOU were unable to find work because an illegal was taking your position and your family was going hungry, I suspect you might have a different perspective. But, then again, maybe not.
I don't know what the correct answer is. But, I do know that turning a blind eye to corporations who are knowingly hiring illegals is WRONG.

[BlooInBloo]

69. A dollar fine. Doubled for each additional illegal immigrant.

[Common Sense Party]

76. What makes you think they have little or no money? n/t

[treestar]

47. The 1986 law didn't work - just attracted even more illegals

and caused them to go further underground (before that, illegals literally filed tax returns - that's why they could produce them to prove their case under the amnesty of 1986!).

The 1986 law just had them go under the table and be unable to pay taxes. That law is apparently unenforceable - it is 21 years old and the only case law under it that developed has to do with unions - illegals who joined unions and had to be given their jobs back under labor law, but the defendant corporation was able to argue it "couldn't" comply with its penalty!

This kind of things needs thinking through. It sounds like it will work, but try to put it into practice and it doesn't.

[Robson]

7. There is no need to "round" anybody up.

All that needs done is to inform, sanction and prosecute those greedy employers who use illegal workers. When there are no more jobs and no free services, they will leave and go back home where they belong.

Then real citizens have a chance at getting ahead and much further than the minimum wage law that is nothing but a travesty.

Sorry but I do find "Democrats" that support giving illegal workers advantages over US workers in OUR own country as significantly less than disgusting.

[KAT119]

36. Require 9 years military service w/ citizenship after honorable

discharge for every man/woman over 18--there will be rush for the border back to their homes in Mexico!!

We need another National Guard--w/ our homeland security in Iraq....

[undeterred]

8. Newt Gingrich came to Wisconsin and said we could use Fed Ex and UPS

I guess first we send them all packages, and then we forward ship them all home. Simple, yet elegant.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

24. brilliant! Just issue a Call Tag, slap it on their forehead, and off they go!

:rofl:

[Hippo_Tron]

63. Newt proposed the same idea when I saw him speak

He has a lot of other ideas that he hasn't fully through through.

[VP505]

9. And just

exactly what Gov official is advocating doing that ??? That (rounding up and deporting) is another one of those phony arguments being used in the either or argument to support amnesty, i.e we can't round up and deport them all so lets give them amnesty. Reality is its just not feasible to do that, nor is it something that should be done.

[Hippo_Tron]

64. The alternative is to just let them keep coming here illegally and ignore the problem

Personally I think that's the worst possible thing for wages because then they can work for less than minimum wage. I also think that the guest worker program is bad for wages because while they will be legal, they won't have American citizenship and be less likely to want to bargain for higher wages.

[pampango]

67. That does seem to be the choice presented here quite often.

(Not saying you are.) Either we round up the 12 million and get 'em out of here or we ignore the problem and let the flow continue.

There has to be some middle ground, but that involves the "C" word (compromise), one of the worst words one can speak at DU. Most of us can agree that nothing will change unless there is better border enforcement. That could come by just deciding to do it or by making it a part of a larger compromise. If one accomplishes some control over the flow, then you can face the questions of legalizing those who are already here or send them back, paths to citizenship, and other choices. Again those choices can be done after border enforcement is done or as a part of a larger compromise.

[Selatius]

11. Sure we can. We won't, though.

The US government rounded up several hundred thousand Japanese-Americans during the last world war.

Germany rounded up millions of Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, socialists, unionists, communists, and various "enemies of the state" and liquidated them all in six years until Germany surrendered.

Eisenhower launched a crackdown on illegal immigrants called "Operation Wetback" where he swept through the Southwest and especially Texas and smashed employers who hired illegal immigrants and arrested upwards of 50,000 immigrants who jumped the border. They estimated the dragnet probably drove several tens of thousands of other illegal immigrants who weren't arrested into Mexico as a result.

I bet you if there is more than enough resources in the United States to fine and/or arrest 6,000,000 employers.

[Swede]

12. Then what do you do with 12 million unemployed people?

Add them to the dole?

[Selatius]

Give them citizenship and clamp the borders, seaports, and airports down.

Nobody gets into the US unless they get in line for citizenship like everybody else from that point forward.

[Swede]

16. Good answer.

Sounds fair to me.

[Selatius]

20. So they said in 1986 when it was first enacted.

But nothing happened after the '86 amnesty, and now we're doing the same thing again except this time I honestly don't think the borders will be clamped down, and I suspect in 2027 we're going to do the same thing again with amnesty and no enforcement.

[Cleita]

15. If we rounded them up then we too would have to liquidate them.

Even though we have gone down a dark road, with the acceptance of torture and all, I don't think Americans are ready to sanction this yet.

[L. Coyote]

23. SB 1348 Immigration Reform: construct "at least 20 detention facilities in the United States..."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1132179

[Cleita]

13. Nobody is going to do that. It's just a red herring thrown out

for the election to get the xenophobic vote. I don't believe a fence is going to be built on the border either. Both sides know what a stupid, nearly impossible and ecologically destructive thing that would be. Remember that much of the border is along the Rio Grande, an area that both sides depend on mutual cooperation in order to maintain it and the benefits both sides receive from it's management, one being electricity.

[EFerrari]

14. True. And rounding up 12-20 million people that OUR POLICY

forced north would be especially distasteful.

Christ.

[murloc]

22. How did our policy

force people out of mexico and then to steal their way into America?

Wouldnt that be Mexican policy?

[EFerrari]

25. No. The US has a long history of interfering in Latin America

to make sure our corporations get the governments that will play ball with them.

BushCo, for example, was a major force in stealing the last election in Mexico. The progressive was elected but BushCo made sure he wasn't seated. Not that I let the elite in Mexico off the hook but they couldn't pull it off without BushCo backing. How many folks do you think that will force north?

Here's a thread I'm developing, not complete, but if you cruise it, you'll get the idea. :(

http://www.democraticundergrouund.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=379&topic_id=798&mesg_id=798

[emilyg]

28. Yes.

[EFerrari]

33. Ah, no. Just as Mexico didn't put out death squads in Central America

overturn democracy in Chile or foment a coup lately in Venezuela. That was us.

[Lasher]

39. That doesn't give Latin Americans a right to legal status in the US

Your argument is bogus.

[Orsino]

40. Haven't seen that argument here yet.

Straw man. I think most DUers, though, could concede that America bears some responsibility for the current state of affairs, whether or not that should result in legal rights.

Personally, I think diversity strengthens us, and that draconian anti-immigrant laws should be discarded. I'm in favor of waving a magic wand and making citizens out of most or all immigrants. Sign 'em up, I say, and let 'em vote and pay taxes.

[Lasher]

41. I agree diversity strengthens us

That's one reason I think we should control our borders. Our total foreign-born population in 2000, legal and illegal, consisted of 31 million. Of that number 16 million were from Latin America. 5 million were from Europe, 8 million from Asia, and just 0.8 million from Africa.

If you really cared about diversity in the US you would be interested in giving others, particularly Africans, a chance. But instead you endorse a policy that would certainly ensure an even higher percentage of Latin American immigrants when they already comprise fully half the US foreign-born population. So go ahead and claim there is plenty of room in the US for every single person in the world who wants to live here. It won't make you look any more ridiculous than you already do.

And your straw man charge is fallacious. It is clear that US interference in Latin America is being cited in this thread to promote more favored immigration policy toward residents of the region.

[EFerrari]

43. No, Lasher. The point is, you can deport away and imprison

employers and build a great big wall but things won't change until American policy towards Latin America changes.

That's the point. Most of those 16 million did not want to come here in the first place and would not have come here were it not that our policy made them economic refugees.

/oops

[Lasher]

44. Sure, that must be what you meant. I thought you favored a more lenient US immigration policy

Why is it that American foreign policy toward Latin America has to change first? Is all of Latin America powerless to do anything for themselves? You've told me before that you don't think all of Latin America's woes are the USA's fault but that's sure not the way your message reads.

Changing US foreign policy is not the only possible solution. If the jobs dry up, as they mostly would with meaningful penalties and enforcement against employers, most of the 12 million illegal aliens in the US would leave.

[EFerrari]

48. Did you ever check out that thread we're developing in the Latino forum?

Here's the link again, if you'd like to.

I don't favor illegal immmigration. It's dangerous. And, I'm not sure that penalizing employers would work because that system invites corruption. I strongly favor the US keeping its hands off of Latin America so people can stay home, feed their families and build their country.

To the extent that it has since BushCo has been obsessed with the Middle East, there has been a big wave of progressives elected and democracy in the region is doing MUCH better than when we were more active there. :shrug:



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=379&topic_id=798&mesg_id=798


/oops

[Lasher]

52. OK, I'll check in on it.

But I can't do that right now. Mrs. Lasher has other plans for me at the moment.

[EFerrari]

58. It's by no means complete because of our own time constraints

and because the situation is ongoing.

[Lasher]

70. OK I checked in.

Just wondering, why are you going to all that trouble when google lists a wealth of information on the subject?

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=US+intervention+in+Latin+America&btnG=Google+Search

[EFerrari]

72. Lol! Maybe because I'm from the Dewey Decimal school of research..

But, thanks, I'll use your link. :)

[Lasher]

73. You know, the Monroe Doctrine had its good points.

We'd be better off if we minded our own business. So would others.

[EFerrari]

74. When corporations were given the rights of a person

working people got screwed. I'll never forget when my single mom said, "I paid more income tax this year than Goodyear." This was a 5" tall little brown lady that was working her remote off to support her two kids and her aging mom and trying to plan for the future.

They're running our foreign policy. Undocumented workers are so far down the food chain. :shrug:

[Lasher]

75. No corporation has a soul

But every one of them has a character. Most, if not all, are evil organizations that need to be tightly controlled. This belief is one reason I'm a Democrat.

I've gotta tell ya, I am enjoying the Republican split in the immigration debate. Their leaders had to pick between corporations and their fundie base. As always, they picked the corporations - or the richest 1% who own them. It's the same thing. Now some of the fundie base is starting to realize what fools they have been. Today's Republican leadership is not conservative. They are corporatists.

Of course, we in the Democratic party have our differences on the issue too. But it's nothing like the division the Republicans are going through.

[EFerrari]

77. I'm enjoying that, too. The Thuggery is now between

their corporate masters and their nutwing racist base. Delicious. :)

[Lasher]

78. We've had our fights but I might even get to like you.

You are more complicated than I first thought. I get annoyed when others don't exercise their listening skills. I hold myself to the same standard but sometimes fail.

[EFerrari]

80. I've been really cranky, Lasher and apologize.

It's been a long six years.

[Orsino]

45. Straw man charge stands.

Recognizing American responsibility and favoring more open immigration is not the same thing claiming that a legal right to immigration already exists. That's fallacious.

As is your invocation of Africa. I didn't exclude them from my wish for more American citizenship, and I don't see any evidence that open immigration must increase Latino immigration.

[Lasher]

51. Charge away, I've made my point.

And pretending you don't believe open immigration would increase the number of Latinos is just dishonest.

[Orsino]

53. I don't believe it.

It could be. I'm certainly willing to be convinced...though I don't see what it has to do with your point or mine. More immigration means more diversity; I don't see a reason to be concerned over certain kinds of diversity.

[EFerrari]

42. That isn't the argument I'm making. n/t

[QC]

54. Does the fabulously wealthy oligarchy that owns Mexico

bear any responsibility for the situation there, or is it just Uncle Sam's fault?

[EFerrari]

59. They work together. One couldn't pull it off without the other.

So, workers there are screwed as are workers here.

:shrug:

[QC]

61. Very true.

When it comes to screwing everyone else, the rich do tend to stick together, don't they?

[EFerrari]

65. That's all I've been trying to say and maybe, I've been saying it badly.

There's no use getting mad at working people when the policymakers/corporate @ssholes are doing their very best to rip ALL of us off.

Whether you are an American citizen whose wages are being undercut or a farmer in Mexico that NAFTA has impoverished. :shrug:

Not every family is like mine. Mine did it legally and did very well and most of them went back. Many people come here because they were trying to simply avoid starvation after we f%cked with their economy. And of the undocumented workers I've had contact with, very few of them felt good about leaving their homes

Think about it. You have to pay to sneak into this country. You work for slave wages. You are separated from your spouse and your children. You have no idea when it will all be over. You just keep working.

You have to be vigilant every hour of the day and night, 24/7, because police contact means you may be held for months while your family back home goes hungry.

You can't report any crime against you.

You pay into SS when you know you will never be able to make a claim.

It goes on and on and on.

:(

[QC]

68. Believe me, I have sympathy here,

particularly after having done some work with a migrant ed program.

What bothers me, though, is how those whose wages have been undercut get left out of the discussion about 90% of the time. One good blue-collar job after another has been transformed into one of those "jobs Americans won't do" by the use of illegal labor, but few seem to care about that.

The system is rotten, top to bottom, and tinkering with bits of it here and there will solve nothing.

[EFerrari]

71. When my first son was a baby and my husband and I both worked

blue collar jobs, we just about exploded from happiness when I got a union job -- because that meant the baby could get health care. That job doesn't exist any more. It's been partly mechanized and partly out-sourced.

Job conditions have deteriorated. This is the first generation in the history of this nation that is making less than their fathers did. That is a very real concern, I agree.

[murloc]

18. Do things right and its unnecessary

Make it impossible for an illegal to get a job, rent an apartment, buy a house, wire money, cash a check, and they'll beat a path back home.

Essentially the illegals will do what they always do, go to wherever things are better for them.

As long as employers welcome the criminal/illegal community to work for slave wages, the problem will continue (and no amount of deportation will be enough)

[Wiley50]

19. There's no way to imprison 50 million potsmokers either

butit doesn't stop them from trying

[EFerrari]

60. That comparison came up for me, too.

:)

[L. Coyote]

21. DIA SPYING: NGIA collecting data, 133 U.S. cities, ID everyone, nationality, political affiliations

Guess again.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x983282

[tanyev]

26. This gang couldn't even get thousands out of NOLA that desperately wanted to leave.

[EFerrari]

35. "This posse couldn't find itself -- if it wanted to."

-- The Milagro Bean Field War

[tanyev]

37. LOL! I love that movie!

:toast:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

27. Hell, they can't even get 160,000 troops out of Iraq. And, that's only 344 miles.

[sendero]

29. Ridiculous...

... you don't have to round up anyone.

Enforce the laws that make it illegal to hire them, dish out a few high profile penalties and watch the jobs dry up.

When the jobs are gone, they will leave.

It's really as simple as that but our corporate government likes the slave labor so nothing is going to happen except a lot of lip service.

And Americans have gotten so used to nothing happening, they won't even care.

[High Plains]

56. Simple solutions for complex phenomena...

...rarely work.

[High Plains]

57. Simple solutions for complex phenomena...

...rarely work.

[Jim Warren]

62. No

It's fucking ridiculous.

And you're right.

[LiberalFighter]

30. Let the Asgards beam them to another galaxy - Colonel Jack O'Neill is a friend of them

[Madspirit]

31. k&r

...and I don't want it done. I like my illegal friends.
Lee

[DaveJ]

34. Why can't we all have a little respect for our neighbors?

n/t

[treestar]

46. Agreed, and there is also no way to "seal" a border and coastline

the size of the U.S.

The history of immigration to the U.S. is essentially the same thing as the history of the U.S. (including the forced migration of slavery).

Give them visas and ID cards so we can feel "secure" about who is here, and no one can work for less than minimum wage in conditions substandard under law, and the job market problem will take care of itself.

[Rosemary2205]

50. BWWWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

The feds refuse to deport the illegals who are currently sitting in American jails convicted of violent crimes. Anyone who thinks the gov't is going to round up 12 million people who's only crime is trying to EAT is more than a little touched in the head!

Freepers! ------ snicker.

[thegreatcause2]

55. JUDICIAL SOVEREIGNTY

politicians are writing laws that makes no one happy and thus the issue is being punted to the courts. where you live and who your judges may be shall decide this immigration issue. in that way, if you are not happy, move to an area of the country where the resident judge's decrees are compatible with your personal views.

[moondust]

81. "They're criminals!"

Pat Buchanan was on MTP today stirring the cauldron. :eyes:

[dysfunctional press]

82. what if you deputize legions of good god-fearing gun-totin' patriots to do the job voluntarily...?

nt