Quantcast

Comments about ‘Thousands of unaccompanied migrant children are at the border — what's the solution?’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, July 10 2014 7:35 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Brio
Alpine, UT

@ GaryO:

I have to admit that much of what you often write seems to be biased political rhetoric, but you do make a valid point this time.

There is no doubt that some of these kids are trying to escape drug war conditions. But it would be a stretch to assume all of them are. It's possible they all are (though very unlikely), but it would be nice to see some sort of evidence so that decisions are not made on "inferences" as you call them. Decisions actually based on established facts always end up with better consequences.

To claim that ALL of these particular people are trying to escape imminant "annihilation" is the result of watching too much MSNBC and reading too many dime-store novels. In truth, those South American drug wars have been going on since the 1980's... over 30 years.

It's also established fact that most of these people have been influenced and encouraged to come here by human smugglers (coyotes) trying to make big profits.
None of these illegals have shown any indication of suffering any physical harm from drug cartels.

It's best to keep active imaginations in check.

Objectified
Richfield, UT

@ GaryO...

At least be smart enough to spell my moniker right, and please quit splitting hairs.

OK... it was the Los Angeles Times instead of the New York Times who said the U.S. government should get involved with South American government affairs and policing things down there. It's still a liberal media source and those things were printed. Either way, it's a dumb idea. So you are thus splitting hairs and consequently wasting both your and my time.

You honestly should start reading these articles before commenting on any of them. In this particular case, it's spelled out and explained in the last 2 paragraphs of the accompanying article.

By reading carefully first, it will help keep you from embarrassing yourself so often, and thus better able to objectively contribute to the ongoing dialog. Keep trying, Gary. I have confidence you can eventually get there.

Brio
Alpine, UT

GaryO...

I asked for verifiable evidence (facts), not the mere assumptions and "inferences" that you explicitly referenced. See the difference and how that works?

The drug wars have been going on in South America for over 30 years. And yes, with some civilian casualties. But to claim that all of sudden all these people now need to run for their lives to escape "annihilation", and especially just after Obama happens to create a loophole in his Executive Power immigration order to let them stay, is a bit far fetched. In fact, a lot far fetched. But on the other hand, it's something far left liberals might fall for. In fact, some obviously have.

This particular group probably suffered more harm during their journey here than they ever have in their home countries. Travel through Mexico often gets dangerous like that... especially for girls and women.

These "refugees" are much more likely to be trying to escape their poverty than any particular physical danger. The United States has a generous welfare plan. That's why they didn't stop and stay in Mexico.

So now do you see how all this works?

Copacetic
Logan, UT

@ GaryO:

Concerning your comment to "Objectified"...

Are you now reducing your comments down to finding minor technical errors in other people's comments? It was actually the LA Times and not the NY Times who flip-flopped and recently wrote that the US government should now be getting involved in the government affairs of South American countries. So what?

Both papers are liberal-based media outlets. So the essence of his comment is still valid. Read the latter part of the article to see for yourself... something you should've done before commenting. There was no "leaping" and no "ridiculous conclusion". It's all taken from easy-to-read print that the rest of us read.

Your last sentence in that particular comment of yours was inappropriate and offensive to Conservatives. In fact, that entire comment of yours added absolutely nothing to the on-line dialog. As such, it's surprising that acerbic based comment was allowed through.

Shaun
Sandy, UT

@Cleetorn and Brio

Remember when the Iraq war was a war of finding weapons of mass destruction and then it morphed into helping those poor Iraqis obtain freedom? We have money for wars and destruction but not to help out kids?

I never said to buy them a Ferrari and send them to Harvard. Apparently the word compassion brings really sets people off.

Say No to BO
Mapleton, UT

This crisis is a microcosm of the illegal alien problem.
Since deportation is a dirty word for Obama there is no deterrent effect. We all know that the government has trouble with enforcement.
So, we really must send these children home immediately or send the message that we are soft on the issue. As a result, more will undoubtedly come.
The bigger picture is the same. Since we are historically unable/unwilling to deport illegals in general, more will come. We have a reputation of non-enforcement.
And the third world will take advantage of it.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments