Cracking down on legal immigrants, skilled immigrants makes no sense. That’s what built America. Cracking down on illegal immigration makes plenty of sense. I hope the administration can see the difference.
replies(3):
It makes sense when thy engage in political activism or become dissidents. Just because they're skilled doesn't mean they can't be legally causing troubles at the same time.
No country tolerates foreigners moving in and acting against the country that took them in. Well, maybe Germany does.
When you emigrate somewhere on a visa, you're a guest in the country who's tolerated as long as you follow the rules and contribute to society, the moment you start causing trouble with protests or become a nuisance, you're out. Simple.
And I'll let you in a secret: the legal definition of what is terrorism and what is not, is the one the government and courts decide, not you as a non-citizen. To me what Busch did equates to terrorism, but that's not what the courts decided, so there we are.
That's not your government to protest against because you can't vote as your not a citizen of that country, so that country's leadership is not accountable to you, it's accountable only to its citizens.
Leave that protesting to the citizens, or move to your country and protest in front of the US/Israel embassy from your own country's soil, that's the legal way to do it.
I doubt you would be ok with hardworking moral cowards becoming the teachers, CEOs and experts for america.
It’s a bit sad, because some of the strongest moral leaders in america, have also been the ones who stood up for rights and freedoms. It’s… I mean what would be more American?
Capitulation? Would you respect that?
Most people today are driven by self interest and self preservation, not morality. Anything you see publicly resembling morality is virtue signaling for the sake of optics. Everyone quickly stops wanting to be a martyr when their livelihood is on the line. It's easy to be generous with other people's lives/money.
>Capitulation? Would you respect that?
Capitulation against who? What results did their so called fight give? Other than causing public nuisance. Why don't they go to Gaza and pick up arms if they want to fight? Putting tents in university campuses and shouting from the safety of US public spaces is not fighting, it's virtue signaling.
Do you respect foreigners to treat your country as a battle ground for their ideologies? I assume yes only when their ideologies match yours, but what about when they don't?
> Do you respect foreigners to treat your country as a battle ground for their ideologies? I assume yes only when their ideologies match yours, but what about when they don't?
I respect a good, fair match. I suspect you do too. A good opponent, who puts their money where their mouth is, is someone who pushes you to do the same.
This is also why I framed my question the way I did. I didn’t say which country was a terrorist, I gave it the option of being someone who argued for a position you agreed with. (For example, they could well be protesting in front of the Chinese embassy, being Uighur, or Tibetan.) Should this option only be open to American citizens?
> Capitulation against who? What results did their so called fight give?
Capitulating to whomever is in power.
Contrast the ease of saying stuff online, vs people who physically show up to protests, or say things that are risky and have consequences.
I respect people who actually put themselves at risk. They can be entirely wrong, their cause riddled with flaws. But then I didn’t find it in me to show up and engage in debate.
I guess, to each their due.