Human caravan

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by DZ

I don't believe they are true refugees - they are not fleeing a war torn country. Trump administrations problem is they can't "legally" mobilize active duty troops into law enforcement action (Posse Comitatus) UNLESS they can cite a danger to national security which is where this report I keep seeing referenced of 100 terrorists comes into play. That may allow his administration to place troops at the border in states (California) that will not mobilize their National Guard units.

A little Central American history knowledge would benefit this discussion greatly.
Everyone of these countries has gone thru economic, political and civil turmoil in the last 50 years. It is not getting better.
Nicaragua, Guatamala and El Salvador had long civil wars and various forms of ineffective governments. We, the US government, were tangled up in all of them. Honduras was the training base used by the US to train rebels that fought in all the other countries.

The 1951 Geneva Convention is the main international instrument of refugee law. The Convention clearly spells out who a refugee is and the kind of legal protection, other assistance and social rights he or she should receive from the countries who have signed the document. The Convention also defines a refugee’s obligations to host governments and certain categories or people, such as war criminals, who do not qualify for refugee status. The Convention was limited to protecting mainly European refugees in the aftermath of World War II, but another document, the 1967 Protocol, expanded the scope of the Convention as the problem of displacement spread around the world.

Article 1 of the Convention defines a refugee as a person who is outside his/her country of nationality or habitual residence; has a well-founded fear of persecution because of his/her race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion; and is unable or unwilling to avail himself/herself of the protection of that country, or to return there, for fear of persecution.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

A little Central American history knowledge would benefit this discussion greatly.
Everyone of these countries has gone thru economic, political and civil turmoil in the last 50 years. It is not getting better.
Nicaragua, Guatamala and El Salvador had long civil wars and various forms of ineffective governments. We, the US government, were tangled up in all of them. Honduras was the training base used by the US to train rebels that fought in all the other countries.

The 1951 Geneva Convention is the main international instrument of refugee law. The Convention clearly spells out who a refugee is and the kind of legal protection, other assistance and social rights he or she should receive from the countries who have signed the document. The Convention also defines a refugee’s obligations to host governments and certain categories or people, such as war criminals, who do not qualify for refugee status. The Convention was limited to protecting mainly European refugees in the aftermath of World War II, but another document, the 1967 Protocol, expanded the scope of the Convention as the problem of displacement spread around the world.

Article 1 of the Convention defines a refugee as a person who is outside his/her country of nationality or habitual residence; has a well-founded fear of persecution because of his/her race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion; and is unable or unwilling to avail himself/herself of the protection of that country, or to return there, for fear of persecution.

What is the U.N.'s responsibility regarding nations that cannot protect their own people when they are under the conditions that you describe central America? Is it sending any U.N. troops there? Is it sanctioning those countries in any meaningful way? Are those countries members of the U.N.?

Is Mexico fulfilling its obligation by accepting the caravan's as refugees or returning them. Does the U.N. say that a country can refuse such refugees if its the first place they enter. That it can just ship them on to another country without that country's agreement to accept them?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

What is the U.N.'s responsibility regarding nations that cannot protect their own people when they are under the conditions that you describe central America? Is it sending any U.N. troops there? Is it sanctioning those countries in any meaningful way? Are those countries members of the U.N.?

Is Mexico fulfilling its obligation by accepting the caravan's as refugees or returning them. Does the U.N. say that a country can refuse such refugees if its the first place they enter. That it can just ship them on to another country without that country's agreement to accept them?

You have a lot of questions there for someone who only wants statements as replies
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

You have a lot of questions there for someone who only wants statements as replies
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I prefer statements that specifically reply to specific questions. You didn't ask a question. I was posing questions that arose from your statement. As usual, you deflected, and didn't answer them.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

As usual, you deflected, and didn't answer them.

yep

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

I prefer statements that specifically reply to specific questions. You didn't ask a question. I was posing questions that arose from your statement. As usual, you deflected, and didn't answer them.

I have seen good examples lately in Trump and Kavanaugh in how to do that
Do you like beer?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I have seen good examples lately in Trump and Kavanaugh in how to do that
Do you like beer?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You have something in common with them.