The Caravan - page 3

"I think what we have seen is we've seen clearly an organization at a higher level than we've seen before. We've seen violence coming out of the caravan and we've seen as they've passed other... Read More

  1. by   SC_RNDude
    Quote from GrumpyRN
    Post #16
    Ok, where's your source that it says the caravan is "largely" women and children?
  2. by   elkpark
    Quote from SC_RNDude
    Comparable or not, neither is relevant to this conversation.

    I'm still waiting for your source that the caravan is mostly women and children.
    Oh, for heaven's sake. Still going with willful blindness, eh? It's not hard to find info; it's all over the news.

    You can just look at the many group photos of the caravan over time and see that large numbers of the participants are women and children. "Mostly"? That might be a little exaggeration. Vox says "half" are "women and girls," and that wouldn't include male children, so that would presumably make the "women and children" percentage >50%. Clearly, there are a lot of men. Cleary, there are also a lot of women and children. But I'm sure you feel you're making some kind of point by quibbling over this.

    If the migrant caravan didn't exist, President Donald Trump might have needed to invent it.

    The existence of a group of thousands Central Americans pushing toward the US without papers - even if they are still hundreds of miles away - seems like something Trump's GOP might create in a lab to unleash on the eve of the midterms.

    But the caravan is real. The migrants in it - mostly Hondurans (with some Guatemalans), half of whom are girls and women, many intending to seek asylum in the US - are real people.
    (bolding mine)

    The migrant caravan, explained - Vox

    This is an emergency! A caravan of unarmed, destitute people, many of them women and children, ...

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.6071ee00b990


    Migrant caravan'''s long journey to U.S. border (slideshow of photos)

    Migrant caravan in pictures: A river of people moving north - BBC News (more photos)

    But I realize you've already decided what you think is true and nothing will change that.
  3. by   Lil Nel
    Keeping you all discussing the caravan that isn't here, is a tactic to keep you all from discussing the dismal show Trump put on in Pittsburgh yesterday.

    He is now reaping, exactly what he sows.

    Ordinary citizens telling him to stay away from their communities.

    Don't fall for the distraction.
  4. by   SC_RNDude
    Quote from elkpark
    Oh, for heaven's sake. Still going with willful blindness, eh? It's not hard to find info; it's all over the news.

    You can just look at the many group photos of the caravan over time and see that large numbers of the participants are women and children. "Mostly"? That might be a little exaggeration. Vox says "half" are "women and girls," and that wouldn't include male children, so that would presumably make the "women and children" percentage >50%. Clearly, there are a lot of men. Cleary, there are also a lot of women and children. But I'm sure you feel you're making some kind of point by quibbling over this.

    If the migrant caravan didn't exist, President Donald Trump might have needed to invent it.

    The existence of a group of thousands Central Americans pushing toward the US without papers - even if they are still hundreds of miles away - seems like something Trump's GOP might create in a lab to unleash on the eve of the midterms.

    But the caravan is real. The migrants in it - mostly Hondurans (with some Guatemalans), half of whom are girls and women, many intending to seek asylum in the US - are real people.
    (bolding mine)

    The migrant caravan, explained - Vox

    This is an emergency! A caravan of unarmed, destitute people, many of them women and children, ...

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.6071ee00b990


    Migrant caravan'''s long journey to U.S. border (slideshow of photos)

    Migrant caravan in pictures: A river of people moving north - BBC News (more photos)

    But I realize you've already decided what you think is true and nothing will change that.
    Grumpy stated the military was being sent to wage battle on unarmed civilians that were mostly women and children. I don't think it's too much to ask to back up that claim.

    Your photos are nice, but I've also seen photos that are groups of almost 100% young men. How do you know what is most representative?

    I don't know.
  5. by   GrumpyRN
    Quote from SC_RNDude
    Grumpy stated the military was being sent to wage battle on unarmed civilians that were mostly women and children. I don't think it's too much to ask to back up that claim.

    Your photos are nice, but I've also seen photos that are groups of almost 100% young men. How do you know what is most representative?

    I don't know.

    Are you being deliberately dense? Or are you just trying desperately to convince yourself that if 50% are women and girls then the rest must all be full grown fighting men - with no male children at all?

    I did not say the military were "being sent to wage battle," I said and I quote, "For a start you don't send the military to fight unarmed civilians most of whom are women and children."
    The British army tried to have a peacekeeping role in Northern Ireland in the last part of the 20th century - ended up with a lot of dead people on both sides.

    Seriously Dude I have tried to have a conversation with you but you keep trying to bog everything down in minutiae because in one post I said mainly when I stated later I should have said largely. Also I have told you BBC

    Unless you change your tack I am going to have to get out of this because I can only say the same things so many times.
    Definition of insanity - saying the same things over and over expecting different results.
  6. by   Lil Nel
    Quote from GrumpyRN
    Are you being deliberately dense? Or are you just trying desperately to convince yourself that if 50% are women and girls then the rest must all be full grown fighting men - with no male children at all?

    I did not say the military were "being sent to wage battle," I said and I quote, "For a start you don't send the military to fight unarmed civilians most of whom are women and children."
    The British army tried to have a peacekeeping role in Northern Ireland in the last part of the 20th century - ended up with a lot of dead people on both sides.

    Seriously Dude I have tried to have a conversation with you but you keep trying to bog everything down in minutiae because in one post I said mainly when I stated later I should have said largely. Also I have told you BBC

    Unless you change your tack I am going to have to get out of this because I can only say the same things so many times.
    Definition of insanity - saying the same things over and over expecting different results.
    Your last sentence pretty much sums up many of these so-called discussions, Grumpy.

    Don't play the game.
  7. by   toomuchbaloney
    Quote from Tweety
    Best to say they are criminals "invading" America. If America is under "invasion" then the President has powers on his own.

    What is 'habeas corpus' and can President Trump suspend it to arrest caravan migrants? - abcactionnews.com WFTS-TV. I can't help but think that with all these troops, equipment and air power the White House is thinking something. Maybe they just want to show some power and discourage future caravans, but I'm afraid for this one.

    It's easy to spin a negative light and surely there are some bad seeds, but it's not like this is an invading Army out to destroy America.

    The states on the border don't seem to be sounding an alarm. But there was some people in Iowa that were having a big issue with this being interviewed, sorry I don't remember the station or have a link, as if it's the most important issue we are facing as a nation....stopping evil illegal immigrants. They are loving Trump's stance.

    In Iowa this is a big deal.

    In Iowa.

    In the meantime white people are shooting up people. *Shaking my head*
    Those Iowa voters have a nice history of electing men with tendencies toward white supremacy. King is the most well known.
    'He's so openly racist': why does Iowa keep electing Steve King to Congress? | US news | The Guardian
  8. by   toomuchbaloney
    Pedantic and trivial arguments are the best that is available to support this hysteria over a band of brown people fleeing their violent homelands.

    Isn't it interesting that the people advocating for 5000+ military to the border don't have to provide evidence that the caravan is populated by an invasion force? They just accept that call to fear.
  9. by   nursej22
    This article from Reuters reports that the actual number of people in the caravan is unknown, some have already returned to their home, some have accepted asylum in Mexico.

    Central American caravan moves on in spite of Mexico jobs offer | Reuters

    But the president is ordering thousands of troops to do who knows what, to the southern border, for people who may arrive in a month or more. Not only will the president not visit troops in combat zones as past presidents have, but he is going to assure more families will be away for Thanksgiving and possible December holidays.

    Nice work.
  10. by   macawake
    Good grief. An entire thread devoted to the fake "threat" du jour.

    Do you remember how Trump was banging on about the April 2018 caravan?? Tweeting up a storm about how Congress MUST ACT NOW! and NEED WALL! because of the grave peril y'all were in

    Trump's Fearmongering about Migrant Caravan | Human Rights Watch

    Trump says '''caravans''' of immigrants are headed for the U.S. What'''s he talking about?

    Trump Transforms Immigrant Caravans in Mexico Into Cause Celebre - The New York Times

    So what became of that scary threatening situation?

    Central American migrant caravans - Wikipedia

    It appears eleven individuals were charged with crossing the border illegally after the "caravan" of April this year, arrived at your border. Yeah, that sure warranted a series of fear-mongering tweets full of CAPS and exclamation points!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Not that I have any reason to believe it will, but let's say that the number were to for example quadruple, I'm convinced that the regular border agents are more than capable of handling that. Sending 5,000+ military is hardly necessary.

    And calling this an invasion is both ridiculous and a blatant dog whistle.

    Quote from SC_RNDude
    "I think what we have seen is we've seen clearly an organization at a higher level than we've seen before. We've seen violence coming out of the caravan and we've seen as they've passed other international borders, we've seen them behave in a nature that has not been what we've seen in the past. So I think we'll see further understanding and -- and discussion of this from CBP." -General O'Shaughnessy, Commander of U.S. Northern Command

    General O'Shaughnessy, Commander of U.S. Northern Command, Press Gaggle > U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE > Transcript View
    (my bold)

    Did you/your source really quote this accurately? To me the sentence I bolded is about as clear and logical as most of Trump's disjointed blatherings.

    Quote from SC_RNDude
    A 5000 US troops in addition to is already there will hopefully prove out to be way more than what was necessary.
    Of course it will be much more than necessary. Do you seriously think that there's evidence that shows that these migrants and refugees are armed with the kind of weapons that would make it necessary to deploy the military at your border to defend it?

    This is so ridiculous. I don't know why anyone is willing to entertain this latest foolishness, A.K.A. DISTRACTION.

    Quote from SC_RNDude
    However, consider what happens if these caravans get to the border in the present numbers or if they swell in number, and we haven't sent in additional resources to manage it. Our resources to process them as asylum seekers may be overwhelmed, including where to house them, and likely a certain number of the migrants are going to be unruly and some will make attempts at illegally crossing. In other words, a s***show at the border is a likely possibility. Likely at some point in the future, a illegal immigrant somewhere will commit a crime and it will come out he was in the caravan.
    The risk of a s***show at the border of a magnitude that requires 5,000 troops and weaponry being caused by this "caravan" is astronomically LESS than nonexistent.

    This isn't about protecting the border.

    I think it's about motivating the Trump base.

    Two things on this planet excite them.

    Hillary's emails and various iterations of the build the wall theme.

    And it's because there's somewhere else they DON't want you all to look and focus on.

    Trying to scare people with an external threat is a tactic we have seen many examples of in history. None of them were done by good, democratic leaders.

    Best case scenario. This could merely be another one of the HABITUAL deflections and distractions we've grown accustomed to seeing.

    Worst case scenario. Deploying military in anticipation of the arrival of migrants and possible asylum seekers, could be the harbinger of something truly vile.

    Quote from SC_RNDude
    As far as the posts on white people shooting up people, what does that have to do with this is beyond me.
    I assume it means that in terms of return on investment, your time and energy would be better spent on worrying about and addressing the very real internal threat against life and the pursuit of happiness that you as a people face, rather than the made up external one.

    Quote from SC_RNDude
    Why are you repeating your question. The troops are there as a deterrent, a resource to manage people, and to keep the peace and protect the border.
    Quote from SC_RNDude
    Did you miss my first answer both times? Deterrent.
    Oh trust me, we're all very much aware.

    Quote from Lil Nel
    Don't play the game.
    But, but, but... I'm actually kind of amused by it.

    I was even hoping we'd get into the ridiculousness of smallpox and leprosy, but I guess that as a nurse OP realized that one was a non-starter.


    Quote from GrumpyRN
    Oh FFS!!! 1770....?
    Im going to end this post the same way I started it.

    Good grief.

    Last edit by macawake on Oct 31 : Reason: deleted a stray word :) I'm sure there are more where that one came from :p
  11. by   Lil Nel
    Quote from macawake
    Good grief. An entire thread devoted to the fake "threat" du jour.

    Do you remember how Trump was banging on about the April 2018 caravan?? Tweeting up a storm about how Congress MUST ACT NOW! and NEED WALL! because of the grave peril y'all were in

    Trump's Fearmongering about Migrant Caravan | Human Rights Watch

    Trump says '''caravans''' of immigrants are headed for the U.S. What'''s he talking about?

    Trump Transforms Immigrant Caravans in Mexico Into Cause Celebre - The New York Times

    So what became of that scary threatening situation?

    Central American migrant caravans - Wikipedia

    It appears eleven individuals were charged with crossing the border illegally after the "caravan" of April this year, arrived at your border. Yeah, that was sure warranted a series of fear-mongering tweets full of CAPS and exclamation points!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Not that I have any reason to believe it will, but let's say that the number were for example to quadruple, I'm convinced that the regular border agents are more than capable of handling that. Sending 5,000+ military is hardly necessary.

    And calling this an invasion is both ridiculous and a blatant dog whistle.



    (my bold)

    Did you/your source really quote this accurately? To me the sentence I bolded is about as clear and logical as most of Trump's disjointed blatherings.



    Of course it will be much more than necessary. Do you seriously think that there's evidence that shows that these migrants and refugees are armed with the kind of weapons that would make it necessary to deploy the military at your border to defend it?

    This is so ridiculous. I don't know why anyone is willing to entertain this latest foolishness, A.K.A. DISTRACTION.



    The risk of a s***show at the border of a magnitude that requires 5,000 troops and weaponry being caused by this "caravan" is astronomically LESS than nonexistent.

    This isn't about protecting the border.

    I think it's about motivating the Trump base.

    Two things on this planet excite them.

    Hillary's emails and various iterations of the build the wall theme.

    And it's because there's somewhere else they DON't want you all to look and focus on.

    Trying to scare people with an external threat is a tactic we have seen many examples of in history. None of them were done by good, democratic leaders.

    Best case scenario. This could merely another one of the HABITUAL deflections and distractions we've grown accustomed to seeing.

    Worst case scenario. Deploying military in anticipation of the arrival of migrants and possible asylum seekers, could be the harbinger of something truly vile.



    I assume it means that in terms of return on investment, your time and energy would be better spent on worrying about and addressing the very real internal threat against life and the pursuit of happiness that you as a people face, rather than the made up external one.





    Oh trust me, we're all very much aware.



    But, but, but... I'm actually kind of amused by it.

    I was even hoping we'd get into the ridiculousness of smallpox and leprosy, but I guess that as a nurse OP realized that one was a non-starter.




    Im going to end this post the same way I started it.

    Good grief.

    Seriously, macawake, do any of these rants surprise you?
  12. by   toomuchbaloney
    I was waiting for dude to sound the nursing alarm about the communicable diseases that the invading army is (reportedly) bringing to the border. I continue to wonder why that specific fear drumming is being ignored. Is it too obviously a conspiracy theory upon which to waste time? Or do conservatives not want to talk about using military force against sick people seeking asylum?
  13. by   macawake
    Quote from Lil Nel
    Seriously, macawake, do any of these rants surprise you?
    Nope

    The good griefs are for dramatic effect

close