Is U.S. Sovereignty Important to You?

U.S. Sovereignty: Yes, No, Who Cares?

  • No. I hate the thought of not being a part of something bigger

    Votes: 1 16.7%

  • No. When I say I'm ready for change, I mean I'm REALLY ready for it.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Not nearly as important as other issues we're facing.

    Votes: 1 16.7%

  • Yes. It's one of our defining characteristics

    Votes: 2 33.3%

  • Yes. Because we're destined to be the greatest nation on earth

    Votes: 2 33.3%

  • I like sovereignty, but only if it means loosening our borders

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Oh, Granule. Why must you worry, so?

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    6
Patrick Pearse said:
No...they don't. Like I said in the beginning, you don't know what sovereignty is or how it applies to a nation. Quit using words you don't know the meaning of.
Click to expand...
Dude! I'm sorry. It's not my fault if the thread escapes your comprehension. But then, I don't think that's the case at all. I think you know exactly what I'm talking about. Are you still pissed about the shots I take at Detroit? If that's the case then I apologize, but it can't be helped. Detroit's problems are just too useful right now.
 
Granule said:
Dude! I'm sorry. It's not my fault if the thread escapes your comprehension. But then, I don't think that's the case at all. I think you know exactly what I'm talking about. Are you still pissed about the shots I take at Detroit? If that's the case then I apologize, but it can't be helped. Detroit's problems are just too useful right now.
Click to expand...

So far no one in this thread knows what the hell you're talking about. Sovereignty isn't related to anything you've discussed in this thread. I'm going to offer you some education in just what sovereignty is, but I know that in doing so my efforts are still futile. You are, and have been since the moment you joined, a chronic retard, most likely the result of a mother who drank bleach during pregnancy. But anyways...

National sovereignty, as a concept, emerged with the Treaty of Westphalia that ended the 30 Years War in 1648. Among its tenants are the idea that a nation is free to determine it's own laws, religion, government, Etc. and is free to conduct business within its own borders however it may please.

So please, tell me, how do gays threaten our ability as a nation to do what we want within our own borders? How does abortion? Or morality? Sovereignty is the basis of our international relations system, not a moral foundation.
 
Thanks for the history lesson, professor, but much like your presence here, it was pointless.

What prompted this thread was the ongoing problem of illegal immigration. And anyone who isn't a complete shill for the DNC can appreciate that this is a problem. Are you still with me? Now take that problem, and plug it into each option on the poll. Is that computing for ya, or would you like me to use each option as an example?

Anyways, as I was reading through your verbal flatulence, I started to think about why we were experiencing this crazy influx of "Fuck you America" foreigners. And then it occurred to me that these assholes are learning their disrespect for our laws from even bigger assholes from within. Can you guess who those assholes are? Wrong. It's our very own Democrat party. These are the same pricks who are not only crying their support for illegal immigrants, but they're also crying for across the board bad behavior in general. There's a direct link between democrats, RINO's too, and the compromise of our sovereignty, and that's the support of illegal immigration. The rest of the Left's bullshit are also contributing factors, and it all points to the core problem: Total disdain for this country's traditions. The same traditions that have kept this country on top for most of its existence. And now that is under attack. Our sovereignty from the traditional sense is, and has been, under attack.

Again, back to the poll. Thinking about the two major sides of the political spectrum, can you see the purpose behind each option on that poll? If you can't, well, then there's nothing more I can do for you except call the State Hospital and have your fat ass physically removed from that chair.
 
Last edited:
Granule said:
Thanks for the history lesson, professor, but much like your presence here, it was pointless.

What prompted this thread was the ongoing problem of illegal immigration. And anyone who isn't a complete shill for the DNC can appreciate that this is a problem. Are you still with me? Now take that problem, and plug it into each option on the poll. Is that computing for ya, or would you like me to use each option as an example?

Anyways, as I was reading through your verbal flatulence, I started to think about why we were experiencing this crazy influx of "Fuck you America" foreigners. And then it occurred to me that these assholes are learning their disrespect for our laws from even bigger assholes from within. Can you guess who those assholes are? Wrong. It's our very own Democrat party. These are the same pricks who are not only crying their support for illegal immigrants, but they're also crying for across the board bad behavior in general. There's a direct link between democrats, RINO's too, and the compromise of our sovereignty, and that's the support of illegal immigration. The rest of the Left's bullshit are also contributing factors, and it all points to the core problem: Total disdain for this country's traditions. The same traditions that have kept this country on top for most of its existence. And now that is under attack. Our sovereignty from the traditional sense is, and has been, under attack.

Again, back to the poll. Thinking about the two major sides of the political spectrum, can you see the purpose behind each option on that poll? If you can't, well, then there's nothing more I can do for you except call the State Hospital and have your fat ass physically removed from that chair.
Click to expand...

So if it's about illegal immigration, why didn't you just say that when I asked 20 some posts ago fuck nuts?
 
If you want to solve the illegal immigration problem, do two things. Make it easier to come into the country legally, and hang anyone who refuses to do so afterwards. Or deport them to North Korea.
 
I just want to know how many "amnesties" are enough or how many more "immigration reforms" are we supposed to consider.
America was never intended to have an open border policy and if someone wants to complain about how those from Mexico are treated, here in the US; then you should read about how Mexico treats those who illegally enter from the countries south of it's borders.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
I just want to know how many "amnesties" are enough or how many more "immigration reforms" are we supposed to consider.
America was never intended to have an open border policy and if someone wants to complain about how those from Mexico are treated, here in the US; then you should read about how Mexico treats those who illegally enter from the countries south of it's borders.
Click to expand...

In the early days of the US, we more or less did have an open border policy. You could pretty much just come to America as you pleased, and after a few years you'd get citizenship. The concept of placing quotas and such came much later.
 
Patrick Pearse said:
If you want to solve the illegal immigration problem, do two things. Make it easier to come into the country legally, and hang anyone who refuses to do so afterwards. Or deport them to North Korea.
Click to expand...

Even white people who accidentally overstay their visa? No, I don't think the death penalty will apply to them.
 
So the people of the United States are starting to decide that they don't want to discriminate against people based on sexual orientation, and that's related to sovereignty how?
 
Illegal immigration actually isn't necessarily related to sovereignty either. Our current level of immigration law enforcement is not being forced upon us by another power, nor would any other power intervene if we changed it. It's a result of our own, sovereign, decision making process. It might come into play if we started violating human rights (theoretically, it may violate some principles or international treaties and give another power cause for intervention; realistically, I doubt anyone would have the balls to actually do anything), or if we started violating the sovereignty of others to do so (like unilaterally sending our police/military into Mexican territory to preemptively shut down immigration), or if the entrants were somehow acting as agents of a foreign government (like when Americans immigrated to Texas only to declare independence and annex themselves back to America at the first opportunity).

But it's not the responsibility of other countries or individual citizens to enforce your laws for you, should their citizens emigrate to your country of their own accord; it is, in fact, their sovereign right to not give a fuck. Nor are those citizens violating your countries sovereignty; the enforcement of the written word of your own laws, against citizens and non-citizens alike, within your own border is entirely within your the sphere of your own sovereignty. If a country, in its own sovereign capacity, decides not to enforce it, or enforces it insufficiently, that's just it's sovereign decision. If it wants it enforced better, that's its own, sovereign, responsibility. After all, the law doesn't enforce itself, a law that's not enforced is not a law in a realistic sense, and a law that's only enforced intermittently is inevitably going to be violated a lot by people seeking to test it. That's just how things work.

Sovereignty is not necessarily a nice thing, either, it's ideologically and value neutral; in an authoritarian state like China, I could be jailed for my speech (even though the Chinese constitution theoretically protects free speech), and any trial's verdict can easily be reversed with one simple call from the local Party boss, as, in their strange system, the State is subordinate to the Communist party, and so internal party decision effectively have precedence over the law. And that's all well and good, according to the principle of sovereignty. At the same time, if I went to China and evaded their Great Firewall with a VPN, it's technically against the law, but, at the same time, the government doesn't really care enough to go through the headache of squashing out this practice, as 97% of Chinese citizens don't bother to jump the wall anyway. And they especially couldn't care less about foreigners doing it, so as long as they keep their mouths shut. And, again, sovereignty would be perfectly fine with this.
 
Oliver Cromwell said:
In the early days of the US, we more or less did have an open border policy. You could pretty much just come to America as you pleased, and after a few years you'd get citizenship. The concept of placing quotas and such came much later.
Click to expand...

And that's where we're at now.
We're no longer looking for settlers to move into unexplored lands and settle them, so I reiterate:

I just want to know how many "amnesties" are enough or how many more "immigration reforms" are we supposed to consider.
America was never intended to have an open border policy and if someone wants to complain about how those from Mexico are treated, here in the US; then you should read about how Mexico treats those who illegally enter from the countries south of it's borders.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top