1) You don't deport them, you don't ignore them, you document them. Then you let them live their lives. They're people, not a mold outgrowth that needs culling.

2) Check those stats a bit more closely. The vast majority of "deportations" were people turned away at the border.

Would you support deporting people who are criminals? Or have no intention of ever working and just want to live off various welfare programs? Trying to find some common ground here.

Nope. Access to food, water, shelter, and freedom of movement are fundamental human rights. I'm not a proponent of executing useless eaters. If you commit a crime with a prison sentence then you serve that sentence where you committed the crime.

Thanks for taking the time to clarify your position.

So if China or some other country decided to send 10 million people here for whatever reason, you think our official policy should be to welcome then in and provide them food, shelter, etc...?

What about 100 million people?

Should they also be given citizenship and right to vote in addition to food/shelter?

The only issue would be logistics. Getting supporting infrastructure and housing set up. But yeah, ultimately. More hands, more consumers. Why wouldn't we want as many citizens as possible, we certainly have the land for it.

I wonder in such a case if more populous countries like India or China could in theory send over 100 million+ people to our country over the course of a decade, and then once those people are citizens, legally vote for the US to be annexed by China, etc..

You could conquer a country without a single shot fired.

Yeah, sure, if Chinese people were ants in a hivemind that strategy might work.

Putting aside the blatant unconstitutionality of the question, how often does "should the US be legally annexed by China" come up on the ballot?

Another hypothetical is what if those 100 million turn out to be right wing radicals.

Godwin's Law invoked in record time. Such hyperbole is not conductive to real discussion.

Literal Nazi stuff

"These people are akin the mold growing upon a rotting city-state economy. They have to be removed." --our poster

"humanity suffers today under Jewish parasitism" --Adolf Hitler

It is this fake injury or mis-assignment of blame for real harm that serves as justification for actual crimes against humanity be they at CEDOT or Dachau

Immigrants aren't hurting us by existing.

I bet houses in your suburb are a million a pop

City and yes they are expensive because houses in a city are

This is disgusting hyperbole. Nazis killed millions of innocent people; a nation enforcing border laws by asking illegals to leave or removing them when they don't is not that.

We sent people who committed no crimes to a foreign concentration camp in a country that they aren't from and have killed several including citizens.

Our present admin holds that it can detain anyone it merely asserts is illegal without trial or any due process and ship them to such camps or hold them domestically indefinitely in fetid slums that if we fill with the millions they want picked up will become death camps due to illness, climate, privation, lack of medical care.

They have variously called for imprisoning and even executing law makers who speak up, shooting protesters, killing them and shutting down journalists who run negative press.

They did commit a crime by crossing the border illegally. Illegals are free to leave the country on their own and not deal with any of this, in fact they are paid to do so. The idea that removing people who entered America illegally and sending them back is the same as systematically exterminating an entire race of humans is so dangerous and makes any discussion with people who think like you such a waste of time. It's rhetoric like yours that encourage people like the Tyler Robinsons or that sniper who attacked the ice facility.

> They did commit a crime

What was the reasoning Hitler used to deport Jews and other "undesirables" to Polish concentration camps? Was it legal?

If so, maybe we shouldn't try to equate "What is legal/possible" with "what is moral/good". It can be legal and possible, and still very inhumane and evil. The Nazis prove that, don't they?

> and sending them back

We didn't "send them back". We sent them to a third place. A very bad place. Why are you ignoring that when the person you are replying to was specifically mentioning it?

> It's rhetoric like yours that encourage people like the Tyler Robinsons or that sniper who attacked the ice facility.

There is absolutely zero evidence of this. Tyler could have a very specific grievance with Charlie Kirk's rhetoric without being motivated by other people calling Trump and MAGA Nazis or Facists.

A crime against the citizens like robbery not a civil wrong like overstaying their visa. We have a different interest in enforcing one vs the other which I think you know.

You are suggesting we can't call out what is actually happening in case the proud boys running around kidnapping and murdering people get hurt as if people will be inspired to hurt them because of online rhetoric and not because of the kidnapping and murder.

Want to keep ICE from getting hurt? Roll back enforcement to 2010 norms and start rolling in greater penalties from hurtful to ruinous for employee illegals with 5 years in jail for all management/HR/accounting who lie about it.

Start at 10% of payroll paid to illegal labor increasing to 1000% over whatever timeline would allow companies to transition from illegal labor.

Making it economical to hire illegal labor with a slap on the wrist or no penalty then punishing laborers for adapting over decades to this situation is insane.

> 1) You don't deport them, you don't ignore them, you document them. Then you let them live their lives. They're people, not a mold outgrowth that needs culling.

I don't think that's a policy that would get majoritarian support in the US. The only people who can and should get deported are those who are not already not authorized to be here. If you don't deport them, it's functionally equivalent to an open-borders policy. Do you want more MAGA? Because open-borders is how you get more MAGA.

What you're proposing is also roughly analogous to a policy of not evicting squatters. If someone breaks into your house and decides to start living in one of your bedrooms, are you going to want them out or give them a key? The squatter is a person too, not a mold outgrowth that needs culling.

> Because open-borders is how you get more MAGA.

Pretending that immigrants are the underlying cause of every societal failure is how you get MAGA. Enabling that big lie bolsters it.

And I don't think I can enumerate the ways in which an occupied house are different from a country and unsuitable for the metaphor you're trying.

> Pretending that immigrants are the underlying cause of every societal failure is how you get MAGA. Enabling that big lie bolsters it.

What are you going to do, win elections by lecturing everyone about how they're wrong and they need to think just like you? People thought the Biden administration's immigration policy was too lax, and that was a major contributing cause to the second Trump term.

Deporting people who are in the country illegally is a no brainer. If you don't want that, get the law changed. Until then, it's not wrong to deport them.

Now, that doesn't mean deportation should be the only or even the main method of immigration enforcement (personally, I like the idea of putting more burden on employers).

> And I don't think I can enumerate the ways in which an occupied house are different from a country and unsuitable for the metaphor you're trying.

Oh of course, it's always too different if you want it to be. That way, you can continue to feel righteous.

> What are you going to do, win elections by lecturing everyone about how they're wrong and they need to think just like you?

I'm partial to the strategy of selling voters on a set of policies that will improve their lives and address their problems. Unfortunately neither party in my country is keen on that idea.

> People thought the Biden administration's immigration policy was too lax, and that was a major contributing cause to the second Trump term.

People thought that once they were told to think that. It's an easy sell to blame everything wrong on the scary dirty foreigners. When people are dissatisfied populism wins, regardless of whether the talking points are rooted in reality. The responsible thing to do is try to get people on board with populist ideas that help rather than hurt.

> I'm partial to the strategy of selling voters on a set of policies that will improve their lives and address their problems.

It's a seductive idea, but it's the attitude of an authoritarian technocrat. However, the US is supposed to be a representative democracy, which requires being sensitive to the problems voters have, as voters see them. And that's probably a big part of Trump's actual appeal. My understanding is at his rallies and in his rhetoric, he gave the appearance of being responsive to many concerns that had been willfully ignored or denied for a long time (for instance: free trade dogma, which destroyed a lot of things and insisted people be satisfied with the easily-quantified cheap junk they were being given).

> People thought that once they were told to think that.

Don't pretend your thoughts are any more independent than those of the people you're othering.

> Deporting people who are in the country illegally is a no brainer. If you don't want that, get the law changed. Until then, it's not wrong to deport them.

Enjoy this little cognitive dissonance:

You could also change the law make them legals eg. after X years of work, no criminal record and citizenship tests.

This would completely disable the current ICE gestapo and would have prevent soo much suffering. But i can imagine what you must be thinking now: But they came here illegally, this is harm to our society enough.

There is broad support for Dreamers. It's not as simple as deport everyone here illegally and the public seems to understand that.

> There is broad support for Dreamers. It's not as simple as deport everyone here illegally and the public seems to understand that.

What the GGP was advocating was much broader than that. What's sympathetic about the Dreamers is the non-consensual nature of their position (their parents took them here) and many of them have little to no connection to the country they'd be deported to.

That logic doesn't apply to, say, the 3.5 million illegal immigrants that arrived between 2021 and 2023 (https://www.pewresearch.org/race-and-ethnicity/2025/08/21/u-...), but those are people the GGP would "document not deport."

Cute.

1. Entering a country without proper documentation is a crime. Therefore all "undocumented immigration" is by definition criminal.

2. Removing criminals is paramount to a safe society and a justice system that is respected.

3. "Documenting them and letting them live" undermines legal immigrants who likely worked very hard to integrate culturally, establish themselves, and do the proper LEGAL paperwork. These legal immigrants have stringent reporting requirements, need to be careful about even minor crimes (excessive speeding tickets even!) etc. How is your proposal remotely fair to them?

I don't understand why this is a controversial opinion at all. I have yet to meet a legal immigrant that isn't okay with booting anyone that isn't legal out. A country without border control is NOT a country.

> "Documenting them and letting them live" undermines legal immigrants who likely worked very hard to integrate culturally, establish themselves, and do the proper LEGAL paperwork.

It's a shame those people had to work so hard to be treated like their neighbors. That's not a reason to deny others that treatment though.

> I have yet to meet a legal immigrant that isn't okay with booting anyone that isn't legal out.

Yeah they tend to skew pretty reactionary. That tends to sort itself out after a generation or two.

> A country without border control is NOT a country.

I didn't say we shouldn't have border security. In what universe is a goon squad going door to door checking for undesirables "border control"?

You're assuming deportations work, but the evidence doesn't suggest that. Huge numbers of deportations have happened, with some people deported multiple times. Do you feel the problem is solved?

Ultimately, you have to fix the incentives. Fine the people hiring them, making it uneconomical, and you will remove the main incentive for people to enter the US illegally.

Our politicians have simply seemed fairly uninterested in holding business owners accountable.

They didn't attract the same publicity because

* They didn't jack up the budget to a size larger than most countries' militaries

* They didn't target primarily Republican cities and states out of vengeance for how those cities and states voted

* They didn't explicitly target people here legally

* They didn't send bands of masked men house to house to kick in doors without warrants

* They didn't implement Kavanaugh Stops, which makes racial profiling legal

* They didn't implement a "Papers, please" policy

* They didn't crow about their cruelty on social media or make funny memes about immigrant families being destroyed

* They didn't broadcast that agents had "absolute immunity" even if their agents killed people

* They didn't use fascist iconography and phrasing in their press releases and design systems

* They didn't create a situation in which businesses and schools had to shut down because their employees and students were afraid to leave their houses because even though they were U.S. citizens, they had darker colored skin or spoke with an accent

* They didn't try to end birthright citizenship

I mean the list goes on and on. It's not the same at all. That's why they didn't attract the same publicity.

Since you're only getting blowback, I think taking tough action on immigration was a long time coming. I don't agree with the violent tactics, but exactly those people who couldn't settle on some sensible solution are the ones that fostered the current situation where the (anti-)immigration pendulum swings back hard.

That's where I'm stuck on this. When you have certain cities (or even entire states) saying "we will resist _any_ deportation effort", what choice does a deportation officer have than what they're doing right now?

To me it seems like a universal, almost spiritual law of human nature and balance. If you have people being extreme about X, you will generate people being extreme about not X. So interesting to see how this plays out and always swings back and forth.

>How do you deport with millions of illegal immigrants?

Make E-verify the federal minimum standard for ALL employers nationwide.

Fine the shit out of all businesses that don't comply. Fine the shit out of employers that hire illegal labor. We know who they are.

You don't deport them, you give them no reason to stay here because there'd be no work for them.

How about we treat people humanely? How about we focus on the criminals and dangerous people first instead of getting people that have pending citizenship appointments. How about we don't grab people from hospitals, schools, and places of worship? How about we try to get citizenship easier access for these folks who are clearly living and contributing successfully to our society? How about we don't have masked thugs grabbing anyone of color off the street?

Its extremely easy to do better than they are. Biden and Obama did in fact do this and successfully. They are not trying to do it well, they are trying to do it cruelly. The cruelty is the point.

> focus on the criminals and dangerous people first

That's what they say they are doing? Every time I read about them arresting somebody who was "just picking their kids up from school", it turns out to be some professional agitator who was trying to get arrested in exchange for a photo op.

If that were true, they'd be showing up with real warrants (super easy if these are convicted felon illegal immigrants as they claim! But of course there are nowhere near as many of those as, say, the "thousands" they claim exist in Minneapolis) and mostly dressing in much more ordinary federal agent clothes and it'd all be boring and uneventful and legal enough that most of what they're doing would hardly even be noticed.

Going several thousand(!) strong into a US city and rolling around town in paramilitary convoys questioning people who don't "look American", to... "support fraud investigations" apparently, LOL, WTF... among other things, is why they're a hot topic right now. If they were doing what they claim to be doing, this would all be boring stuff.

Frankly I don't feel like I should be having to explain why guys in SUVs wearing plate carriers and comically overloaded with blinged out Call of Duty gear driving around a US city and sometimes jumping out literally going "papers, please" to people who "look foreign", all while universally masking up to hide their identities, is extremely fucking bad, to the point that I think that language is way too mild, but here we are I guess.

> Every time I read about them arresting somebody...

You're clearly not reading enough and are a part of the problem if you believe what you're saying to be true.

I'm not 100% sure what to believe, but I have been around long enough to take everything I read with a grain of salt.

Gonna need more than a grain these days.

> That's what they say they are doing?

Hardly with president convicted of sexual assault (among other things).

See, this is exactly why I don't believe the things I read - his only actual conviction was for falsifying business records. (He is a convicted felon, though, that's indisputable).

Must be why he is doing everything to not release the Epstein files. We have a critical thinker here.

And he may well be tried and convicted for something that comes out of those, but he hasn't been yet.

How does one become to be a professional agitator? Indeed.com comes up with no results. I have a friend who's bored with their job.

They can self deport and get paid doing so, it doesn't get any more humane than that really.

Cost-free travel back home, a $1,000 exit bonus, and forgiveness of any "failure to depart" fines. Quite generous.

Over the Holidays they even increased the exit bonus to $3000: https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/12/22/increased-incentives-dhs...

Yet another reason why I find the haphazard comparisons to Nazi Germany/Gestapo so farcical.

Let’s say you’re a person of questionable immigration status who has lived in the US for a couple of decades, achieved some modest success - your own home, mostly paid for, a car or two, maybe even a small business.

Sure, just walk away for not even a month’s pay, back to a country you’ve not lived in for decades.

Oh, and there’s a good chance some roided-up high school dropout is going to snatch you and stuff you in a van when you go to the immigration office to begin this nice, civilized process so that he can make quota.

Yeah, I’d be uninterested in drawing the attention of the immigration enforcement machinery right now, too.

If the government wanted people to take the carrot, they shouldn’t be so quick with the stick, even at immigration courts where people were doing their best to follow the laws.

Biden did not do it successfully, or most of anything really

Number of immigrants has been slowly increasing or steady for decades. It's a fantasy that it's a crisis or that there is a risk of tens of millions flooding our shores. We mostly drastically benefit from products downstream from cheap labor while tacitly allowing those who don't get in trouble so we can continue to benefit from this.

We could have "solved" immigration decades ago with enough punative treatment of employers but didn't want to.

If you want to actually stop it you could just ramp up punative treatment of employers over the next 5 years while keeping other policies at Obama or Bush era.

Half the undocumented without us family members would self deport gradually whilst jobs dried up. Offer amnesty to productive people with family roots and no criminal record and you end up with a microscopic undocumented pop.

Meanwhile DSHS is tweeting a pic of an island paradise with the caption America after 100M deportations. There are around 12M undocumented but about 100M non-whites if you have trouble interpreting their meaning or intention.

Ah yes, the "fantasy" of housing price inflation and wage depression.

The fantasy is that's it's caused by migrants and going to be fixed by deporting them.

'cause feelings

1. You don't deport millions of undocumented people, you find a way integrate those who are willing to work (most of them) into your society.

2. Obama and Biden didn't get the same level of attention because they weren't being publicly antagonistic and racist, or using deliberately cruel tactics to accomplish their goals. Or breaking the law / violating the constitution to meet their ends.

> 1. You don't deport millions of undocumented people, you find a way integrate those who are willing to work (most of them) into your society.

How is that currently working out for all of Europe? Hint: not well at all.

> 2. Obama and Biden didn't get the same level of attention because they weren't being publicly antagonistic and racist, or using deliberately cruel tactics to accomplish their goals. Or breaking the law / violating the constitution to meet their ends.

You've made a lot of ambiguous accusations right here. Can you please give specific examples?

Example: Kavanaugh stops. Racial profiling is now legal thanks to our Supreme Court.

Trump referred to Somalis as "garbage". If that's not publicly antagonistic or racist then what is?