Illegal immigrants rebel against state, kill locals and cause war

[Deleted]

Just came back from the US and saw these california republic hoodies, so i googled it and it was an interesting read :

In June 1846, a number of American immigrants in Alta California rebelled against the Mexican department's government. The immigrants had not been allowed to buy or rent land and had been threatened with expulsion from California because they had entered without official permission. Mexican officials were concerned about a coming war with the United States coupled with the growing influx of Americans into California. The rebellion was soon overtaken by the beginning of the Mexican–American War.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Republic

So from what i understand, after they were done with the native americans genocide they decided to steal mexico's land and spark a war ?
I think anyone that hates immigrants should do some reading on this

[Techno-Druid]

Yes, I'm familiar with the Mexican-American War. It's how we gained states like California, New Mexico and Texas. America has always been picking fights or buying up land for the purpose of manifest destiny.

We also went to war with Spain and annexed Puerto Rico and Guam (and the Phillipines which we gave up).

[NED funded]

This was a common tactic back then. Chile pulled the same thing previous to the Pacific war.

[sarahtasher]

Or Walker, the hero of the CSA and likely the alt-right.

[Deleted]

Mexico refused American settlers, and later America got the territory it wanted to settle through war.
What political layering do you want to give it on current events? that not letting immigrants in can trigger an invasion and conquest by the nation they're migrating from.
Wat?

[f3llyn]

We don't hate immigrants. We hate illegal immigrants. Why do people always leave out this important distinction?

Your country sucks and want to come to the US? That's great. Do it the legal way and don't try to bypass the line people have waited years and invested money to get through.

[Deleted]

So your idea to being safe from outrage of illegal immigrants, is to not punish them for illegal actions?

That's some backwards logic. What's next? Do not imprison murderers because you are afraid they are going to murder you in revenge?

[Deleted]

Do not imprison murderers because you are afraid they are going to murder you in revenge?

If you put it out, the fire wins.

[Garnier Fructis]

So your idea to being safe from outrage of illegal immigrants, is to not punish them for illegal actions?

We don't hate immigrants. We hate illegal immigrants. Why do people always leave out this important distinction?

Every person I've met in real life who says that they're only against illegal immigrants and not immigrants in general have this nasty tendency to simply assume that certain people are illegal, to justify their hatred a priori.

So forgive me if I don't believe anyone that makes this distinction.

[Deleted]

So forgive me if I don't believe anyone that makes this distinction.

Why should you be forgiven for your anecdote?. Are bigots to be forgiven because every experience they have with X demographic is negative?
I guess, being skeptical is ok. After all, illegal immigration is encouraged by local policy (like lax control on the business that employ them), so disliking the illegal immigrant is iffy. But from there to not believe anyone... meh.

[Garnier Fructis]

Why should you be forgiven for your anecdote?. Are bigots to be forgiven because every experience they have with X demographic is negative?
I guess, being skeptical is ok. After all, illegal immigration is encouraged by local policy (like lax control on the business that employ them), so disliking the illegal immigrant is iffy. But from there to not believe anyone... meh.

Well yes, unless you have any evidence to the contrary you shouldn't assume any individual is illegal. This is not the same as saying there aren't any. And besides, how does one actually tell the difference in order to make that judgement? That's a rhetorical question, by the way.

[Deleted]

Brilliant clickbait title btw...

[Deleted]

Every person I've met in real life who says that they're only against illegal immigrants and not immigrants in general have this nasty tendency to simply assume that certain people are illegal, to justify their hatred a priori.

So forgive me if I don't believe anyone that makes this distinction.

What a load of rubbish. By your logic anyone who disagrees that illegal immigrants should be allowed in, hates them and assumes stuff about some specific people. That's some mental gymnastics.

I don't hate them. I have no prejudices about any specific people, its for authorities to decide who is and who isn't legal. The only fact here is they are breaking the law. Every country has laws that keeps their borders secure. Those laws are meant to be enforced. If government is not enforcing laws, laws become pointless and government becomes pointless.

Is there a procedure to become legal citizen? Yes, there is. Nothing stops those people from following those procedures, except for their own laziness or maybe criminal records.

[Garnier Fructis]

What a load of rubbish. By your logic anyone who disagrees that illegal immigrants should be allowed in, hates them and assumes stuff about some specific people. That's some mental gymnastics.

What's rubbish is your inability to understand my point. Nothing I wrote implied everyone thinks that, but instead that I'm skeptical of the motives of anyone who feels the need to make a distinction. Nuance is hard, I guess.

Is there a procedure to become legal citizen? Yes, there is. Nothing stops those people from following those procedures, except for their own laziness or maybe criminal records.

And ludicrously long wait times.

[Deleted]

Distinction is made by law, its not some imaginary distinction that people who disagree with liberal bullshit made up.

[Deleted]

We don't hate immigrants. We hate illegal immigrants. Why do people always leave out this important distinction?

Your country sucks and want to come to the US? That's great. Do it the legal way and don't try to bypass the line people have waited years and invested money to get through.

Americans came to Mexico illegally and declared war when the local government didn't let them rent land.

That's way more scummy than just looking for tomato picking jobs in my book

Also i find it funny that you exclude yourselves from the "countries that suck" list

I found more parallels between Brooklyn and Dakar than with any other city i've visited

[Thagrynor]

What's rubbish is your inability to understand my point. Nothing I wrote implied everyone thinks that, but instead that I'm skeptical of the motives of anyone who feels the need to make a distinction. Nuance is hard, I guess.



And ludicrously long wait times.

So, do you feel it is scummy to make a distinction between someone taking an item they purchased from a store vs someone who has stolen the same item from the same store? I mean, by your logic here (that making a distinction based on legality is ridiculous), they are the same and both are either OK (which seems to be the side you fall to with regards to the immigration issue) or not ok.

Legality of a situation is a very valid distinction to make. That is the nuance about this situation YOU seem to find hard to grasp.

[Rooflesstoofless]

So from what i understand, after they were done with the native americans genocide they decided to steal mexico's land and spark a war ?
I think anyone that hates immigrants should do some reading on this

Done by the 1840's? Not even close.

[CrittenMitten]

Just came back from the US and saw these california republic hoodies, so i googled it and it was an interesting read :


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Republic

So from what i understand, after they were done with the native americans genocide they decided to steal mexico's land and spark a war ?
I think anyone that hates immigrants should do some reading on this

Funny I was reading into American-Mexican relations a few days ago. Southerners man...

During the Mexican-American War and his service in it, Grant started to formulate his own beliefs and judgments about warfare. He judged the actions of high officers (though not out loud at the time, obviously) and decided that this war was immoral. He disagreed with actions taken by superiors, and believed the entire premise of the war to be a front for acquiring more land that was unopposed to slavery. In his best-selling memoirs written at the end of his life, Grant reflected on his experience in the war, saying, "I was bitterly opposed to the measure, and to this day, regard the war, which resulted, as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation." He also stated, "I do not think there was ever a more wicked war...I thought so at the time...only I had not moral courage enough to resign."

It may seem odd to us that a great general like Grant would be opposed to wars as "immoral" or "unjust." To him, however, he saw nothing in the Mexican-American war except a big bully provoking a puny child to respond, and beating him to a pulp (and taking his lunch money) when he did inevitably retaliate. His experience in this war helped him formulate his ideas, ethics, and beliefs that would characterize his command of the U.S. Civil War.

http://generalgrant.weebly.com/mexic...rican-war.html

http://www.smithsoniansource.org/dis...ySourceId=1047

[Deleted]

Funny I was reading into American-Mexican relations a few days ago. Southerners man...


http://generalgrant.weebly.com/mexic...rican-war.html

http://www.smithsoniansource.org/dis...ySourceId=1047

Thanks for the quote

Mind opening indeed