@AverageJoe1 saidMost of them will still have brown skin.
Let us all stipulate that immigrants contribute to our economy. Think of the posting that that will save.
It won't save you from knee-jerk posting AT ALL.
@Suzianne saidOf course it does. But as usual, you miss the issue. It was the definition of Invade. Note that Marauder tried to inject 'why (the invaders) came here' when we were speaking of the def of invade.
Again, like ICE?
And, hey stupid, 'why' DOES matter.
Show me one word in the dictionary that has 'why' as part of the definition.
If you look up car, it does not go into why we need a car. Geez.
Follow me here.
@AverageJoe1 saidYOUR own quoted definition did!
Of course it does. But as usual, you miss the issue. It was the definition of Invade. Note that Marauder tried to inject 'why (the invaders) came here' when we were speaking of the def of invade.
Show me one word in the dictionary that has 'why' as part of the definition.
If you look up car, it does not go into why we need a car. Geez.
Follow me here.
How stupid are you?
"To "invade" means to enter a place, space, or state forcefully, intrusively, or in unwanted numbers, typically with hostile intent or disruptive effects."
@AverageJoe1 saidOf course it does.
I dont get your first sentence
ICE was put in cities by govt. Does not fit def of invade
Trump invaded blue states with ICE with hostile intent.
Do you ever read your own posts?
Trump has corrupted our government. Then he has the balls to talk about the "greatness" of America this past weekend after corrupting the government so completely. This country is much like 1938 Germany. Corrupted to the roots by one man. Our only saving grace is that the courts haven't allowed him to see his worst wet dreams come to fruition.
@no1marauder saidNo, it would have said to enter a place specifically to find a new life. (to wit, friendly) The basis of the def is for nefarious purposes. Geez.
YOUR own quoted definition did!
How stupid are you?
"To "invade" means to enter a place, space, or state forcefully, intrusively, or in unwanted numbers, typically with hostile intent or disruptive effects."
@Suzianne saidTDS does not serve posters well. Ad hominem attacks do not help when trying to make a point, I find 'Dr'. (i am a doctor) Biden to be vile, you find Trump to be a lot of bad things, all irrelevant. Write thoughtful posts. My 2 cents
Of course it does.
Trump invaded blue states with ICE with hostile intent.
Do you ever read your own posts?
Trump has corrupted our government. Then he has the balls to talk about the "greatness" of America this past weekend after corrupting the government so completely. This country is much like 1938 Germany. Corrupted to the roots by one man. Our ...[text shortened]... ly saving grace is that the courts haven't allowed him to see his worst wet dreams come to fruition.
You find the ICE activity to be hostile. It is no different than Marauder calling the police to remove trespassers from his lawn, or from trying to slip in his kitchen door.
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. O(oop,s accidentall hit cap key), fat finnngers))
@Suzianne saidNo sue we’re not making it just fine with many types of stressors on the country from illegal immigration. The fact that you overlook and don’t mention any shows your dishonesty and that you’re a mindless sheep. Is our head above water sue with all of these things flowing just below the surface, yes. Now open the gates again and watch it all grow to where it is out of control and devastating, just one of the stabs it would take to destroy our country and how it functions. The liberal party is directionally spreading out leading this charge each with their own knife.
Are we not making it just fine NOW?
Except for Trump's 'disruptive effects', I mean.
Are you glad Trump lost his manufactured war?
Care to break down an average of how much that has cost/will cost the average American?
@AverageJoe1 saidThat's exactly the point; the definition doesn't apply to undocumented immigrants who are just here working and raising their families; those aren't "nefarious purposes".
No, it would have said to enter a place specifically to find a new life. (to wit, friendly) The basis of the def is for nefarious purposes. Geez.
@no1marauder saidThe def of invade certainly does apply to aliens who Break Our Laws and break into our country. I know you like to call them undocumented, but that word was invented a long time after the constitution was written. The constitution only knew that if someone crossed our border illegally, then they were illegal aliens. They did not call them undocumented. That is a Marsuder word😆Could you rewrite your post and all the rest of them that use the word undocumented and use the phrase illegal alien, which is correct..
That's exactly the point; the definition doesn't apply to undocumented immigrants who are just here working and raising their families; those aren't "nefarious purposes".
Further, your constant continuing to say, “raising their families and working here” indeed came after the fact of their breaking the law. You have boomerang into something else, we are certainly discussing breaking the law and entering this country, and we are discussing whether that is an invasion or not.
Tell me, why do you keep mentioning the family and working. These are after the fact concepts.
This is a great example of how difficult you are.
1 edit
@AverageJoe1 saidQuote me where in the Constitution it says "illegal aliens".
The def of invade certainly does apply to aliens who Break Our Laws and break into our country. I know you like to call them undocumented, but that word was invented a long time after the constitution was written. The constitution only knew that if someone crossed our border illegally, then they were illegal aliens. They did not call them undocumented. That is a Marsuder ...[text shortened]... d working. These are after the fact concepts.
This is a great example of how difficult you are.
Don't use a word, define it and then argue against your own definition. A mere violation of a petty offense does not show "hostile intent"; Jean Valjean stole a loaf of bread to feed his sister's starving children - was that a "nefarious purpose"?
Your claim of invasion miserably fails your own definition which takes intent into account.
@no1marauder saidYou’re changing the subject angain. Illegal alienan immigration law term, not a constitutional phrase. For decades, federal law and government agencies commonly referred to people who entered or remained unlawfully as “illegal aliens.” More recently, terms like “undocumented immigrant” or “undocumented migrant” have become more common. Hey…..sounds better on nightly news , carts rolls off the tongue. A nicer moniker. Yeeeesah.That’s a change in language, NOT CHANGE IN UNDERLYING LAW.
Quote me where in the Constitution it says "illegal aliens".
Don't use a word, define it and then argue against your own definition. A mere violation of a petty offense does not show "hostile intent"; Jean Valjean stole a loaf of bread to feed his sister's starving children - was that a "nefarious purpose"?
Your claim of invasion miserably fails your own definition which takes intent into account.
As for “invasion,” you’re reading more into the definition than I am. The definition says “typically with hostile intent or disruptive effects.” “Typically” does not mean “always.” Nor does it require that every individual have malicious motives. A large unauthorized entry into a country’s territory can be disruptive regardless of whether each person is seeking a better life. Geez, yeah, the old better life gambit. Everyone not i this country would probably rather have a better life in this country, so just let us know when you’re gonna close that door..
Jean Valjean is a poor analogy. He was one individual stealing bread. We’re discussing millions of people entering a sovereign nation’s territory without permission. The questionn isn’t whether each person is morally bad; it’s whether a nation has the right to regard a large-scale unlawful crossing of its border as an invasion of its sovereignty. Those are different issues.
Hey marauder, tell us what you think about sovereignty. You think a lot less of it than I do . Vome come on do it it would make for fun reading.