is very much responsible for the breakdown of society and endemic violence and corruption in the places they're running away from. This is a refugee crisis, not "illegal immigration". Want to end it? That requires two things: decriminalising drugs to end the profit for criminal gangs, and foreign aid to the Latin American countries that've been fucked up by decades of misbegotten US policies. Just shipping them home won't accomplish much of anything, because it doesn't address the underlying reasons they're fleeing in the first place.

Build more immigration detention centres, hire more ICE agents, further militarise the US/Mexico border, spend millions on deporting people who will come back again at the first opportunity. While continuing to call it an "illegal immigrant crisis" rather than a refugee crisis.

The solution, the ONLY solution, is to ship them out -- anywhere will do -- and secure the damn borders. Until we do this we are just encouraging more of the same.

Which are the USA's war on drugs, which creates a very profitable black market in same for Latin American narco gangsters and contributes to political and social instability, endemic violence, and massive government corruption.

Drug exports are just another business. These people would still be oppressed and starving if their only export were beef, or they had no exports at all. The wealthy elite know that people are never so poor that they cannot be oppressed and pillaged further, and even if they can only siphon off a single grain of rice, if they can do so from enough people they can trade that rice into rubies.

We cannot solve poverty and inequality here, let alone there. Therefore the solution is to stop the flood.

The common thread running through most of the accounts of these children and teenagers who've fled their home countries for the USA? Gang violence. Which, again, is directly related to US drug policy.

For example:

http://www.history.com/news/history-lists/7-infamous-gangs-of-new-york

the gang violence in Latin America is very largely drug-related. As gang violence and the growth of organised crime in the 1920's USA were largely due to prohibition of alcohol.

"Inequality appears to be key to explaining violence (in Latin America). Statistical studies have consistently found that income inequality predicts homicide rates better than poverty does. Moreover, other countries with similarly high levels of inequality, such as South Africa, have been found to have comparably high murder rates. We think this relationship exists for at least two reasons. First, large disparities in wealth create greater competition within large youth populations facing high unemployment and limited upward mobility. From an individual perspective, murder might be the consequence of young people driven to extreme measures – people who turn to violent crime or gang involvement as the easiest path for increasing wealth or status."

http://politicalviolenceataglance.org/2012/08/30/explaining-high-murder-rates-in-latin-america-its-not-drugs/

Gang violence existed in American cities long before the 1920s, as I previously pointed out to you. And it has existed in parts of Britain since the 18th century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangs_in_the_United_Kingdom

In reality: "Most of the immigrant families are from Honduras, El Salvador or Guatemala and cannot be immediately repatriated..." So "anywhere" can't do.

Furthermore, the 2012 Republican platform says: "The double-layered fencing on the border that was enacted by Congress in 2006, but never completed, must finally be built." It's so expensive to "secure the damn borders" as the 2006 Secure Fence Act provides it'd blow out the ENTIRE Border Patrol budget and then some.

Also, consider that virtually NO fencing exists at the US/Canada border, yet there is not an influx of illegal Canadian immigrants to America.

Instead of this "build the wall" sideshow, just reduce the economic incentive for Latin Americans to commit illegal border crossings, such as severe punishments of employers who hire undocumented workers. Furthermore, Homeland Security Sec. Jeh Johnson recently stated in response to rumors across Latin America regarding immigration to the US: "This journey is a dangerous one, and at the end of it there is no free pass. There are no permisos for children, for your children, who come to the United States."

Where should we "ship" them then?

BTW, out to where?

You didn't answer the question.

I suspected as much.

We know which border they crossed, return them there. A reasonable person would also ask how so many got here in the first place, but with this administration questions like that are a waste of energy-- no one is accountable for anything.

And stop them from reentering.

They aren't all from Mexico. They are kids.

WHERE are you proposing to ship them?

It is not our job to feed, shelter, clothe, educate, or heal the world's poor. Yes, their countries suck. 95% of the world sucks pretty hard if you live there, but the solution is not to starve with them.

What does it even mean to say return them to Mexico? These are kids. Are you saying leave them in the border desert? In a crime riddled city? WHERE???

You want to drop them in the desert or a dangerous city?


I just want you to be clear on your position. You are advocating a death sentence for children who come to our country in desperation.

Think about that. These are children. Kids. You are wanting to sentence them to death because they had the audacity to risk their lives in the first instance to better their lives. That is one fucked up position you have taken.

I said nothing of the sort. Yes, the entire situation sucks, including my solution, but it's the only solution on the table. Rather than sitting back and crying about what we are currently doing (warehousing them), or what I am suggesting (stop warehousing them and deport them), why not offer YOUR solution instead.

That is is a death sentence for these children in many cases. Others may survive, may be forced into child prostitution or enslaved.

That is what you just said you would prefer to happen. You think that is what they deserve rather than us providing humanitarian aid.

I suggested you hadn't thought your position through, and perhaps you still haven't. So please, by all means, if you are changing your position let me know. If you are backtracking to save face due to shame and embarrassment of your sickening opinion, I would understand that too.

You made clear, very clear, that you want them out of this country even to the point of dropping them in a desert. Children, mind you. Children.

In any case YOU and those like you have no solution to offer beyond infinite compassion and generosity funded by infinite magic money. The point of the article and the "outrage" is that we are not doing enough now, you want to do more, and for everyone. That's sweet, but we can't.

but unless YOU have a better solution than just dumping a bunch of kids

off "anywhere", I don't think you should be calling yourself a democrat,

as you sound like a redneck more concerned about "magic money"

than you are about the most vulnerable children.

You can't just willy nilly drop individuals off in any old country.

Wow. Are you freaking serious? Might as well give the Statue of Liberty back to France.

Also. Bringing up American poverty isn't an argument against immigration.

Total strawman in your first sentence.

I'm sorry, but we have to deal with these kids in the most humane way we can manage. We don't know where to ship them, in the first place. We have no way to ship them there, in the second place. We can't just dump them back across the border with Mexico. They don't come from Mexico.

We don't treat people that way here. Instead, we're trying to find some sort of way to house them, feed them, and figure out how to handle them in a way that keeps them safe during the process.

This is an unanticipated influx of underaged kids. We don't have a system or any infrastructure designed to deal with these numbers.

Your solution, and your additional answers in this thread are cold-hearted and inhumane. Please think for a moment before making such statements. Thanks.

out how to deal with these numbers.

Just sayin..

Are you sure you don't have a Republic to Free somewhere?

Both countries are looked fondly by Americans.....

The ship-em-home crew should come live how these kids live. They wouldn't last a day. I'm in Latin America now. The poverty is astonishing and these kids have no hope.

if they are willing to face such risks to get here.

The wealthy class is astonishing, also.

http://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/pressrelease/2014-04-02/annual-income-113-richest-people-latin-america-could-bring-25-million-out-of-poverty
Annual income of the 113 richest people in Latin America could lift 25 million out of poverty
Published: 2 April 2014
Oxfam warns that in spite of the advances made in the last decade, Latin America and the Caribbean remains the region of highest wealth inequality in the world. Its elites continue to accumulate extreme wealth and excessive power.

http://www.ibtimes.com/latin-america-wealth-gap-climbing-despite-progress-against-poverty-un-752885
The UN suggests that South American leaders take advantage of the current economic stability to upgrade the quality of life for the urban poor by improving infrastructure, among other measures.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ricardogeromel/2013/03/06/all-you-ever-wanted-to-know-about-latin-americas-billionaires/

Are they all entitled to live in the US?

Remember when Castro "flushed the toilets" as he so wittingly put it? The migrants now are mostly fatherless teenaged boys, ie troublemakers. I suspect a combination of knowing the magic words to get asylum and being told bluntly by their local cops to get out has led to this wave.

From start to finish.

We help them. Do you think we should do otherwise? Really?

Most of us are from immigrant stock. Maybe you're an exception. Maybe your ancestors have lived here as far back as you can determine. I doubt it, though.

We help refugees. Let's continue to do that, OK?

http://gbgm-umc.org/response/articles/haiti.html

My friend Mryna's imediate family just got lucky. And they had to go to Italy first - this was back in the 80's.

We turned a boat full of Jewish refugees away.

We haven't always helped refugees.

And then thinking of the "narrative" of our media during the aftermath of Katrina - we couldn't even help our "supposed" internal "refugees".

We truly are talking about mass orphanages here. A radical expansion of our public schools. When it hits the average Republican's property taxes (our prop taxes go towards education in NJ) - they are going to flip. So what other services are we going to have cut?

It would be immoral to keep these kids permanently detained. They are going to need orphanages that can handle their needs and give them some kind of normalcy. And adoption is out of the question. I consider the foster to adoption "product" a part of the fertility industrial complex . . . Having seen three couples go through that and who have warned my husband and me to avoid it at all costs and adoption in general at all costs - the families that can afford it without state help are probably going to hesitate.

Those aren't abandoned, neglected and abused kids. Their parents loved them soooo much they put them on this path. They are going to want their children back the first chance they get.

propose?

That we build huge orphanages?

I'm having a hard enough time feeding my own kids.

What's different now? This country deals with refugees humanely, generally. I suggest that we continue to do just that. These are kids who have fled unlivable conditions. Let's treat them like the kids in danger they are and help them. What do you say?

What's different now? Umm, the story itself. It is easy to make the appeal to emotion, especially since we are talking children in this case.

After a while it becomes a simple math equation. I would prefer to help the people who are already here legally.

It is the story of this country. In one way or another, we are almost all of us descendants of refugees. That is who we are. When does it end? It never ends. Somewhere, people are always being oppressed or in fear of their lives. As we have done in the past, we have provided refuge.

We do not instantly turn away children who are fleeing danger. We should not start now.

What's your ancestry? How long ago did your ancestors come here?

For me, it was my great-great-grandfather, who came here from Ireland. Did he do it legally? I have no idea, but he came. How about you?

Letting absolutely everyone in for any reason because "it's always been that way" isn't a very good one.

We do not summarily deport children here. There is a process, which is being followed, as we speak. The safety of those who have fled into this country is taken seriously, especially for children. That you do not know the policy does not mean there isn't one.

I have his naturalization workpapers.

This is a tough issue. I will give money to a homeless person. If one saw this and three more came over, I would help them out. If 30 more saw it and came over, I would have to turn them away. I don't have enough money for that.

Same logic applies here. We should do what we can, but we also need to recognize there is a line that is flat out impossible.

refugees isn't really a problem, especially when they are children. We can help them. We needn't just dump them back across the boarder and shift the burden on Mexico. They didn't come from Mexico in the first place.

They are children. Let's protect them, help them, and find ways to deal with this that are in keeping with our principles.

Every single day I'm approached by children- little children- who have to sell whatever they can to help their families. They don't go to school, which means this vicious cycle will be repeated again and again.

Their parents- and the children themselves- are desperate.
It's really tragic.

attitudes I'm seeing from some about this. To me, these youngsters are clearly in real distress and need help, not rejection. When I try to put myself in their position, it's frightening.

I think we can afford to provide humanitarian and emergency aid to our most desperate children on our border.

With comments like this. Decades of Heritage Foundation/Fox News/talk radio propaganda have convinced middle class people that the working class are evil leechers, the working class that immigrants are evil leechers...it never ends, this sideshow to distract from the misdeeds of POLITICIANS and Big Business...

Chinese, and all the other despised new arrivals.

Before long we'll be eating pizza, and knishes, and bratwurst, and egg rolls, and listening to strange music and learning new languages and (horror of horrors!) intermarrying and diluting our American Race.

Not to mention stealing our jobs. Just like my grandmother did after she stole Brit jobs after fleeing Ireland and Canadian jobs before crossing the border with 4 of her 6 kids who stole American jobs.

We can say minors can just avoid them? Open borders to minors? It'd be better to open them to adults. At least they can work.