ICE Raids a Hyundai Battery Plant under Construction

[Boges]

43 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well the government is punishing the people who were compliant to those policies.  They no longer support them but the rules haven't been completely changed in practice.

Of course you can sympathize with those caught in the middle.  Who were stationed in the US for work and then jailed due to a gap in between policies.

A good example of this is immigrants with a past criminal record. They were allowed to stay in the country as long as they regularly checked in with ICE. And now when they do that they get deported. 

It's pretty vile. 

[User]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Who were stationed in the US for work and then jailed due to a gap in between policies.

No one was jailed due to a gap between policies. 

These are existing laws that have been in place for years and have also been talked about being enforced heavily since day one of this administration that started 8 months ago. 

 

26 minutes ago, Boges said:

A good example of this is immigrants with a past criminal record. They were allowed to stay in the country as long as they regularly checked in with ICE. And now when they do that they get deported. 

It's pretty vile. 

ILLEGAL immigrants. 

The fact that the last administration ignored them and did not enforce the law is vile. 

[Boges]

2 minutes ago, User said:

ILLEGAL immigrants. 

The fact that the last administration ignored them and did not enforce the law is vile. 

You mean all administrations except this immoral one. These people have been in the US for decades. They're deporting people to meet a quota and not to make anyone safer or improve the workforce. 

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well the government is punishing the people who were compliant to those policies.  They no longer support them but the rules haven't been completely changed in practice.

Of course you can sympathize with those caught in the middle.  Who were stationed in the US for work and then jailed due to a gap in between policies.

They weren't compliant. 

[CdnFox]

59 minutes ago, Boges said:

A good example of this is immigrants with a past criminal record. They were allowed to stay in the country as long as they regularly checked in with ICE. And now when they do that they get deported. 

It's pretty vile. 

no, it's not vile.  They were allowed to break the rules and now they're not. 

They knew the whole time they did not have lawful excuse to be in the country. And that someday someone may tell them to leave. 

So now they are being told to leave, and if they don't they are ushered out.

This would be no different than if somebody refused to pay their taxes and the tax department gave them time to get it corrected, and then eventually ran out of patience and enforce the law and started seizing their assets. They knew they were in violation of the law, they were given a chance and time to resolve it, they are no longer being given that opportunity and they haven't resolved the issue.

They can still apply for permanent residency outside of the country

[Boges]

Just now, CdnFox said:

no, it's not vile.  They were allowed to break the rules and now they're not. 

They knew the whole time they did not have lawful excuse to be in the country. And that someday someone may tell them to leave. 

So now they are being told to leave, and if they don't they are ushered out.

This would be no different than if somebody refused to pay their taxes and the tax department gave them time to get it corrected, and then eventually ran out of patience and enforce the law and started seizing their assets. They knew they were in violation of the law, they were given a chance and time to resolve it, they are no longer being given that opportunity and they haven't resolved the issue.

They can still apply for permanent residency outside of the country

No it's pretty vile. Especially in instance with possession of drugs. These people have families in the US, they've made it their home. 

You're cool with it, fine. But I see what's going on in the US as them putting a big sign out saying. STAY AWAY!!!!

I'm sure that's great for their economy. 

[CdnFox]

32 minutes ago, Boges said:

You mean all administrations except this immoral one. These people have been in the US for decades. They're deporting people to meet a quota and not to make anyone safer or improve the workforce. 

They.  are.  unlawfully.  here. 

If you wanted them to stay you've had a LONG time to lobby to change the law to ALLOW them to stay legally. 

Biden could have pushed through laws if it was that important to him. Obama could have. 
But they both knew that's not what the american public wanted. 

So the law remained in place. 

Again....  NOTHING you can say makes it wrong for a gov't to enforce the law.  If you feel the law is wrong then you should be arguing for a change in the law and spelling out what that should be more or less. 

But your'e just saying you want to go back to allowing criminals to break the law without consequence. That's not ok.  previous gov'ts shouldn't have done it and even if the next one allows it the one after might not. 

So  DEAL with it instead of crybabying that gov'ts are enforcing their laws.  That's just a silly argument. 

[Boges]

Just now, CdnFox said:

So  DEAL with it instead of crybabying that gov'ts are enforcing their laws.  That's just a silly argument. 

I am dealing with it by actively avoiding the US. Like many Canadians are right now. 

I recently checked, a 9-day vacation in a Florida vacation home for a family of four including car rental and flight was like $5,000 CDN. That is a great deal. Too bad I wouldn't feel safe in Florida right now. 

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Boges said:

No it's pretty vile. Especially in instance with possession of drugs. These people have families in the US, they've made it their home. 

You're cool with it, fine. But I see what's going on in the US as them putting a big sign out saying. STAY AWAY!!!!

I'm sure that's great for their economy. 

It is the opposite of vile. 

Nobody cares where they have family.  Are they in the country legally or not?  If not kick them out. 

It has nothing to do with being "cool" with it,  either the legal system exists or it doesn't. You don't get to pass a law then complain if it's enforced. That's insane. 

Sorry but you're 100 percent legally AND morally in the wrong here.   If you feel that this isn't a desirable situation then you should be pushing for changes in the law that would allow people to stay under some circumstances, and i haven't heard you propose a SINGLE CHANGE. 

If your entire argument is "how dare the gov't enforce the law" you are 100 percent entirely in the wrong, period. 

[CdnFox]

Just now, Boges said:

I am dealing with it by actively avoiding the US. Like many Canadians are right now. 

 

Yeah for the vast majority of people avoiding the states the reason is the tariffs and the insults.

Quote

I recently checked, a 9-day vacation in a Florida vacation home for a family of four including car rental and flight was like $5,000 CDN. That is a great deal. Too bad I wouldn't feel safe in Florida right now. 

Nobody cares. The vast majority of people are choosing somewhere else because they don't want to support america while it's tariffing us. If you have some other reason that's nice for you. I bet I can find a bunch of people knowing that illegals are being forced out of the country.

Again if your big complaint is that a government is enforcing its laws that you have no legal or moral ground to stand on

[Boges]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

If your entire argument is "how dare the gov't enforce the law" you are 100 percent entirely in the wrong, period. 

Governments don't enforce laws all the time.

What's happening here is that Stephen Miller is trying to reach some arbitrary quota. The type of people being rounded up aren't a danger to Americans. 

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

Yeah for the vast majority of people avoiding the states the reason is the tariffs and the insults.

Nobody cares. The vast majority of people are choosing somewhere else because they don't want to support america while it's tariffing us. If you have some other reason that's nice for you. I bet I can find a bunch of people knowing that illegals are being forced out of the country.

Again if your big complaint is that a government is enforcing its laws that you have no legal or moral ground to stand on

Doesn't have to be just one thing. The conduct of 45/47 has multiple objectionable features. 

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Boges said:

A good example of this is immigrants with a past criminal record. They were allowed to stay in the country as long as they regularly checked in with ICE. And now when they do that they get deported. 

It's pretty vile. 

I don't know if you can to apply morality, or even if there's a point to trying to do so. 

 

Pretty much everything is politically tenable now, and so the constraints are what is physically possible.

[CdnFox]

9 minutes ago, Boges said:

Governments don't enforce laws all the time.

But they should, and if they don't it should be for a very short. Of time for a very specific circumstance. If they don't enforce the law then the law should be changed. And we see that frequently.

And nobody should be surprised if they turn around and start to enforce the law.

10 minutes ago, Boges said:

What's happening here is that Stephen Miller is trying to reach some arbitrary quota. The type of people being rounded up aren't a danger to Americans. 

Nobody cares. They're enforcing a law which is in place. They campaigned on enforcing the law which is in place. They received their mandate based in part on that.

If you don't want that law enforce the correct answer is to change the law. It is not moral or legal to suggest that a government is wrong for enforcing a law that is in place that it stated it was going to enforce during an election, especially when the previous government had every opportunity to change that law knowing full well that it may be enforced more aggressively in the future

You just can't argue with this, there is a law in place and they are enforcing it and that is perfectly normal and legal. People should have pushed for a change in the law if they don't want the law enforced. And honestly I'm not even seeing any proposed changes from the democrats, just complaining that the law is being enforced.

This is a joke. In Canada people complained about the marijuana laws being enforced and said it was wrong, some groups rallied and a proposal was put forward to change the law, and even a lot of conservatives supported that and the law got changed. That is the correct way to do business, rather than just sit back and demand that the law be ignored

[CdnFox]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

I don't know if you can to apply morality, or even if there's a point to trying to do so. 

 

Pretty much everything is politically tenable now, and so the constraints are what is physically possible.

You can.  "is it the law, and is the law constitutional?".  If so, enforcing it is morally correct.  If we don't like a law then you change the law. 

It's that simple.  What is considered moral often changes over time and if the law in existence has now been seen as being immoral then we change it. America's history is full of examples where overtime people's opinions change and what was considered moral changed and the law changed with it.

So if the democrats and the left felt this law was completely immoral, why didn't they seem to change it? The simple answer is they knew that the general public did not agree with that. Which is why it was a successful platform for trump to run on. I didn't hear kammi running on a promise to change the law to avoid this

[Michael Hardner]

Protest in Korea...

My guess on this hasn't changed:

-Immigration policy is complicated, and ICE was dispatched for quick effectiveness and shock not attention to detail, so this isn't surprising
-It's also not worrying: I doubt anyone is going to change their onshoring policy as a result

People in the middle will not defend ICE against their sloppy methods, nor will they overstate the impact of these screw-ups.

Immigration is difficult (as is healthcare)...

[Aristides]

Considering that the US  now considers China to be the biggest threat, why in gods name would Trump go out of his way to p!ss off his most powerful ally in the region. They went after a company that is bringing manufacturing the US for crap sake. 

ICE is on a power trip and doing real damage. It needs to be reigned in.

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2025/sep/12/south-korean-outrage-at-us-detention-ordeal-as-300-workers-return-home

 

[User]

57 minutes ago, Aristides said:

ICE is on a power trip and doing real damage. It needs to be reigned in.

ICE is enforcing the law, you just don't like that and support open borders madness and illegal immigration. 

[Aristides]

Just now, User said:

ICE is enforcing the law, you just don't like that and support open borders madness and illegal immigration. 

Carry on stupid then. They are investing billions in your country and this is what you do.

[User]

5 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Carry on stupid then. They are investing billions in your country and this is what you do.

They can invest billions without subcontracting to companies that are breaking the law. 

 

[Aristides]

5 minutes ago, User said:

They can invest billions without subcontracting to companies that are breaking the law. 

 

They were setting up a plant that will employ Americans.They tried to get visas but you won't issue them. No worries, some other country will benefit.

[User]

18 minutes ago, Aristides said:

They were setting up a plant that will employ Americans.They tried to get visas but you won't issue them. No worries, some other country will benefit.

We issue visas, but that happens BEFORE, not after you are already here unlawfully. 

Once again, you support this lawlessness and illegal immigration, regardless of this particular example. Its just your latest excuse to oppose enforcing the immigration laws. 

[Aristides]

17 minutes ago, User said:

We issue visas, but that happens BEFORE, not after you are already here unlawfully. 

Once again, you support this lawlessness and illegal immigration, regardless of this particular example. Its just your latest excuse to oppose enforcing the immigration laws. 

So tell the companies that they have to remove their people and give them a deadline. Instead you send in a bunch of masked goons and lead them out in chains. It's a miracle that even one of them elected to stay and train Americans to do the job. If they did something like that to me, you couldn't get me out of the  country fast enough.

[User]

21 minutes ago, Aristides said:

So tell the companies that they have to remove their people and give them a deadline. Instead you send in a bunch of masked goons and lead them out in chains. It's a miracle that even one of them elected to stay and train Americans to do the job. If they did something like that to me, you couldn't get me out of the  country fast enough.

The law already told them what to do and they ignored it. 

We have already established you support this lawlessness. 

[gatomontes99]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

Carry on stupid then. They are investing billions in your country and this is what you do.

Am I understanding you? You think it's ok for foreign investors and businesses to break our law, so long as they have sufficient money? 

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, User said:

The law already told them what to do and they ignored it. 

We have already established you support this lawlessness. 

Did they? Were they given an ultimatum? Was the  Korean government informed?

It may be fun to play the tough guy  but it will have consequences. All you have really done is royally p!ss off the most powerful ally you have in the Pacific.

Charlie Kirk said he didn't believe in empathy and it seems this administration agrees with him. Problem is, if you can't put yourself in some else's shoes, you will never understand the real consequences of your actions.