| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 14:42 - Oct 26 with 2248 views | J2BLUE |
Seems like you and the Guardian were happy to spin this one. I'll take it back if you can provide direct quotes but reading that it seems Nielson has said they won't be shooting at people but for the safety of the border guards and soldiers he can't completely rule out any incidents. |  |
|  |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 14:47 - Oct 26 with 2223 views | giant_stow |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 14:42 - Oct 26 by J2BLUE |
Seems like you and the Guardian were happy to spin this one. I'll take it back if you can provide direct quotes but reading that it seems Nielson has said they won't be shooting at people but for the safety of the border guards and soldiers he can't completely rule out any incidents. |
Don't you think sending troops to the border like this is a little agro in itself? |  |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 14:53 - Oct 26 with 2219 views | King_of_Portman_Rd |
they are over 1000 miles away and it will take months and months for any of them to make it to Northern Mexico, let alone the exorbitant numbers they are seemingly making up each day |  | | |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 14:53 - Oct 26 with 2216 views | J2BLUE |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 14:47 - Oct 26 by giant_stow |
Don't you think sending troops to the border like this is a little agro in itself? |
Yes but what else can he do? In an ideal world a country of 350m+ would welcome 2000 migrants without the baseless insults along the way but if they do they'll have thousands more heading towards their country. Perhaps we shouldn't judge considering our rather pathetic intake of refugees from the Syria conflict.
EG has made it sound as if Trump has directly said they won't shoot them for now. That isn't correct. | |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 14:55 - Oct 26 with 2203 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 14:47 - Oct 26 by giant_stow |
Don't you think sending troops to the border like this is a little agro in itself? |
Not really. It's America's borders. They have to secure them in a manner that they see fit with the prime directive of keeping their own citizens safe.
I don't doubt for a minute that the majority of people who are making their way to the States are genuine refugees who are escaping persecution. Any civilised country should welcome them in.
But if the borders aren't manned with troops there is nothing to stop any number of terrorists, drug smugglers etc infiltrating their ranks and waltzing straight into the USA. |  |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:05 - Oct 26 with 2164 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 14:42 - Oct 26 by J2BLUE |
Seems like you and the Guardian were happy to spin this one. I'll take it back if you can provide direct quotes but reading that it seems Nielson has said they won't be shooting at people but for the safety of the border guards and soldiers he can't completely rule out any incidents. |
No spin. Nielsen’s exact words. Quoted below again
In the interview, Nielsen was asked whether U.S. personnel would ever open fire if people "force their way" through.
"We do not have any intention right now to shoot at people. They will be apprehended, however," she said. "But I also take my officer and agents, their own personal safety, extraordinarily seriously. They do have the ability of course to defend themselves."
So they have a ‘pass’ to shoot anyone if they feel threatened. Given the rhetoric with this administration to make out these are all bad hombres and Pence saying the caravan is likely to contain terrorists from the Middle East, how do you think some might react. Shoot first, ask later? |  | | |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:05 - Oct 26 with 2165 views | giant_stow |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 14:55 - Oct 26 by GlasgowBlue |
Not really. It's America's borders. They have to secure them in a manner that they see fit with the prime directive of keeping their own citizens safe.
I don't doubt for a minute that the majority of people who are making their way to the States are genuine refugees who are escaping persecution. Any civilised country should welcome them in.
But if the borders aren't manned with troops there is nothing to stop any number of terrorists, drug smugglers etc infiltrating their ranks and waltzing straight into the USA. |
These are special active troops though - not the normal border security guards who are already there. And they're been sent to meet this caravan of people, basically portraying it as an invading army that needs to be repelled. There's no defending this - just another ratchet up of hate designed to appeal to his far right supporters. | |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:07 - Oct 26 with 2156 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 14:53 - Oct 26 by J2BLUE |
Yes but what else can he do? In an ideal world a country of 350m+ would welcome 2000 migrants without the baseless insults along the way but if they do they'll have thousands more heading towards their country. Perhaps we shouldn't judge considering our rather pathetic intake of refugees from the Syria conflict.
EG has made it sound as if Trump has directly said they won't shoot them for now. That isn't correct. |
“We do not have any intention right now to shoot at people”
Right now.
It’s a call to arms and a hostile and dangerous position to take | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:10 - Oct 26 with 2138 views | J2BLUE |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:05 - Oct 26 by ElderGrizzly |
No spin. Nielsen’s exact words. Quoted below again
In the interview, Nielsen was asked whether U.S. personnel would ever open fire if people "force their way" through.
"We do not have any intention right now to shoot at people. They will be apprehended, however," she said. "But I also take my officer and agents, their own personal safety, extraordinarily seriously. They do have the ability of course to defend themselves."
So they have a ‘pass’ to shoot anyone if they feel threatened. Given the rhetoric with this administration to make out these are all bad hombres and Pence saying the caravan is likely to contain terrorists from the Middle East, how do you think some might react. Shoot first, ask later? |
Trump hits a new low according to your thread title. Now you're quoting someone else who has quite reasonably said force can be used in self defence. You are so desperate to spin everything that you don't even care about the facts. You're happy to jump to conclusions to get your digs in. Perhaps it's best to stick to the Twitter echo chamber for your likes and retweet needs?
These people have said they won't be stopped. Can you imagine if the US completely ruled out any use of force? | |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:14 - Oct 26 with 2117 views | giant_stow |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:10 - Oct 26 by J2BLUE |
Trump hits a new low according to your thread title. Now you're quoting someone else who has quite reasonably said force can be used in self defence. You are so desperate to spin everything that you don't even care about the facts. You're happy to jump to conclusions to get your digs in. Perhaps it's best to stick to the Twitter echo chamber for your likes and retweet needs?
These people have said they won't be stopped. Can you imagine if the US completely ruled out any use of force? |
People can be stopped without shooting them. talk of these fighting troops defending themselves again just pushes up the temperature and appeases right wing voters as they're about to vote. | |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:14 - Oct 26 with 2115 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:10 - Oct 26 by J2BLUE |
Trump hits a new low according to your thread title. Now you're quoting someone else who has quite reasonably said force can be used in self defence. You are so desperate to spin everything that you don't even care about the facts. You're happy to jump to conclusions to get your digs in. Perhaps it's best to stick to the Twitter echo chamber for your likes and retweet needs?
These people have said they won't be stopped. Can you imagine if the US completely ruled out any use of force? |
It’s an executive order coming from the White House. Only one man can sign those....
I referred to Nielsen in the OP if you read the article. Nielsen will just be carrying out the order from Trump and Mattis.
Google it. It’s not the Guardian and me spinning it. It is every news outlet in the US, apart from Fox News, carrying the same story and the same “not for now” story.
Thanks for the advice on where I should be allowed to post and where I should be allowed to debate. I’ll bear it in mind | | | |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:15 - Oct 26 with 2110 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:10 - Oct 26 by J2BLUE |
Trump hits a new low according to your thread title. Now you're quoting someone else who has quite reasonably said force can be used in self defence. You are so desperate to spin everything that you don't even care about the facts. You're happy to jump to conclusions to get your digs in. Perhaps it's best to stick to the Twitter echo chamber for your likes and retweet needs?
These people have said they won't be stopped. Can you imagine if the US completely ruled out any use of force? |
It's not as if law enforcement in the US have any record of shooting to kill because they felt threatened. |  |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:17 - Oct 26 with 2105 views | J2BLUE |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:14 - Oct 26 by giant_stow |
People can be stopped without shooting them. talk of these fighting troops defending themselves again just pushes up the temperature and appeases right wing voters as they're about to vote. |
You don't think it was in response to a direct question? It's hardly unprecedented to allow force in self defence situations. In the real world it would have been idiotic to rule out anything. No one knows how this is going to go. | |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:19 - Oct 26 with 2094 views | J2BLUE |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:14 - Oct 26 by ElderGrizzly |
It’s an executive order coming from the White House. Only one man can sign those....
I referred to Nielsen in the OP if you read the article. Nielsen will just be carrying out the order from Trump and Mattis.
Google it. It’s not the Guardian and me spinning it. It is every news outlet in the US, apart from Fox News, carrying the same story and the same “not for now” story.
Thanks for the advice on where I should be allowed to post and where I should be allowed to debate. I’ll bear it in mind |
Trump still hasn't said they won't shoot anyone for now. There's so much legit criticism I wonder why you lot try and spin these things.
No one mentioned anything about being 'allowed'. | |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:21 - Oct 26 with 2084 views | giant_stow |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:17 - Oct 26 by J2BLUE |
You don't think it was in response to a direct question? It's hardly unprecedented to allow force in self defence situations. In the real world it would have been idiotic to rule out anything. No one knows how this is going to go. |
I've no idea if it was a response to a question tbh.
Trump: "I am bringing out the military for this National Emergency."
If they weren't there, they wouldn't need to defend themselves - you've got to wonder if hes trying to create a situation here. | |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:21 - Oct 26 with 2081 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:19 - Oct 26 by J2BLUE |
Trump still hasn't said they won't shoot anyone for now. There's so much legit criticism I wonder why you lot try and spin these things.
No one mentioned anything about being 'allowed'. |
They are carrying out Trump’s order. Defacto, he has ordered it and told them to take this course of action.
If you’re happy with that, then that is your choice. [Post edited 26 Oct 2018 15:22]
| | | |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:22 - Oct 26 with 2072 views | baxterbasics |
If you have no enforceable border, you have no country. |  |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:24 - Oct 26 with 2063 views | giant_stow |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:22 - Oct 26 by baxterbasics |
If you have no enforceable border, you have no country. |
There are border troops in place. | |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:26 - Oct 26 with 2051 views | J2BLUE |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:21 - Oct 26 by giant_stow |
I've no idea if it was a response to a question tbh.
Trump: "I am bringing out the military for this National Emergency."
If they weren't there, they wouldn't need to defend themselves - you've got to wonder if hes trying to create a situation here. |
What is the alternative? Open the border? Leave the usual border guards to be overrun?
One of the big debates in this country at the moment is how important it is or isn't to have complete control over our borders. Even with the refugees from Syria the UK hasn't stepped up and taken anywhere near enough so how can we judge America? | |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:27 - Oct 26 with 2043 views | J2BLUE |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:24 - Oct 26 by giant_stow |
There are border troops in place. |
Not enough to deal with this. | |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:30 - Oct 26 with 2029 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:24 - Oct 26 by J2BLUE |
Apart from this is an actual group who have openly said they won't be stopped by any means. The US then refuse to rule out lethal force in self defence. It's not a nice situation but it's hardly an unfair stance.
If you want to talk about the baseless insults towards this caravan and the rhetoric used about them by Trump and others then that's a completely different debate. It's awful that these people are going through this. I hope something gets worked out before they end up t the US border. |
That is a different debate and one i’ve discussed at length elsewhere and as part of my work.
However, I was picking up on what is being perceived in the US media right now as a direct threat to the immigrants. The language used is deliberate. “For now” is deliberate.
If an immigrant pulls a knife or gun on a border agent, then of course they have the right to defend themselves. It’s all about proporionate response. The language used here from the outset doesn’t seem to be that.
But there is an election coming and the Republicans need to appeal to their base and this is the perfect story to do so. [Post edited 26 Oct 2018 15:31]
| | | |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:31 - Oct 26 with 2021 views | giant_stow |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:27 - Oct 26 by J2BLUE |
Not enough to deal with this. |
Who says?! Im no expert but a few thousand knackered refugees who've walked for weeks don't sound particularly formidable as a foe. | |
| |
| Trump hits a new low: Not shooting immigrants “for now” on 15:31 - Oct 26 with 2021 views | bluewein |
Trump hits a new low...
Trump:- Hold my beer...
Who'd have thought sending out messages of hate and violence would make this "bomb" stuff such an issue...? [Post edited 26 Oct 2018 15:32]
|  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
