When is it ok to wall in your citizens?

[xxlt]

Honest question for all fans of our greatest President, Ronald Reagan. Did you puke in your mouth a little (or a lot) when he said,
"Tear down that wall Mr. Gorbachev!"? It's always played in His greatest hits. It's like, when you hear a Beatles blurb you hear, "yeah, yeah, yeah.." and when you hear a Reagan blurb you hear that line.

So if you thought that line was one of American and Freedom and Saint Ronald's shining moments, how do you square that with, "Mr. Lopez Obrador, build that wall!" Seems to me if you cheered the former you could not cheer the latter. But if you can, kindly explain how. Thanks.

[*bfine32*]

(06-03-2019, 11:22 PM)xxlt Wrote: Honest question for all fans of our greatest President, Ronald Reagan. Did you puke in your mouth a little (or a lot) when he said,
"Tear down that wall Mr. Gorbachev!"? It's always played in His greatest hits. It's like, when you hear a Beatles blurb you hear, "yeah, yeah, yeah.." and when you hear a Reagan blurb you hear that line.

So if you thought that line was one of American and Freedom and Saint Ronald's shining moments, how do you square that with,  "Mr. Lopez Obrador, build that wall!" Seems to me if you cheered the former you could not cheer the latter. But if you can, kindly explain how. Thanks.

I suppose the biggest difference was one was built to keep people in from a place they are authorized to live and the other is considered to keep people out of a place they are not authorized to live,  




 

[hollodero]

I'm certainly not a fan of any border wall, but this is comparing apples to origins. The German wall wasn't used to keep Eastern Germans out, but to keep Eastern Germans in. It was built by the East, not by the West. (if it were built by the West to keep Eastern Germans out, or if it were bulilt by the East to keep Western Germans out, then that would be valid equivalents to Trump's wall; but nope.)

[xxlt]

(06-04-2019, 05:52 AM)hollodero Wrote: I'm certainly not a fan of any border wall, but this is comparing apples to origins. The German wall wasn't used to keep Eastern Germans out, but to keep Eastern Germans in. It was built by the East, not by the West. (if it were built by the West to keep Eastern Germans out, or if it were bulilt by the East to keep Western Germans out, then that would be valid equivalents to Trump's wall; but nope.)

Aye, but the difference is not really so different. In fact, no difference at all. What happened to West Germany when the wall came down? An invasion of rapists and drug dealers, of course. But Americans weren't shedding tears for Deutchland West. We were cheering Freedom and bad ass Saint Ronbo. I guess we could cheer Freedom around the world but say it stops at our "door," and there is a sign on the wall without a door that says, "**** you freedom seeker, look elsewhere." America is the world wide leader in hypocrisy in addition to infant mortality in that scenario.

A wall doesn't only keep in or out, it does both. And DT has insisted from day one Mexico pay for the wall. That equates to building it, except it has the advantage of foreign money enriching DT and his cronies (leaving domestic coffers to be pillaged for other self enrichment schemes). Now since the wall is not being built the tariff card intends to force Mexico to build  a virtual wall - ie stop folks leaving by whatever other means. 

You can't endorse a policy that stops people leaving Mexico if you opposed a policy that stopped people leaving East Germany because people are either free to be self determining or not. In the Germany case, it really didn't matter which side built the wall, what mattered was it oppressed East Germans. Same with US Mexico wall or other policy restrictions on Central Americans. You either support oppression and suffering and denying freedom or you don't. 

Of course, in a perfect world every policy that suppresses freedom and encourages war would enrich an American corporation. And I get it. After being greeted as liberators in Iraq and building freedom there, the Haliburtons of the world need fresh contracts. So let's build a Mexican wall, a Canadian wall, and a Pacific Ocean wall just the other side of Hawaii, and an East Coast wall as well. And let's conveniently forget that Reagan said, "tear down that wall" and pretend that when WWII ended the Marshall Plan was to build world wide walls. Of course that liberal clap trap failed but now America is finally put first. Wall us in! Wall us in!

[hollodero]

(06-04-2019, 07:48 AM)xxlt Wrote: Aye, but the difference is not really so different. In fact, no difference at all. 

Well, ok then.

- I mean, I widely agree with what you say, but you can't ignore the fact that the US border wall would be built to keep Mexicans from entering the US, not to keep US-Americans from entering Mexico. And sure that matters and makes your equivalency severely flawed.

Never mind the fact that the fall of the Berlin wall was also connected with defeating communism. That wall had nothing to do with stopping an influx of migrants or the west being afraid of eastern drug dealers. If your point is "a wall is a wall no matter the intent", then roll with it, but I doubt you will find much consent.

The analogy, imho, would only work if Mexico (or the US) would build the wall because they want to prevent their own citizens from fleeing the country.

[*bfine32*]

(06-04-2019, 07:48 AM)xxlt Wrote: Aye, but the difference is not really so different. In fact, no difference at all. What happened to West Germany when the wall came down? An invasion of rapists and drug dealers, of course. But Americans weren't shedding tears for Deutchland West. We were cheering Freedom and bad ass Saint Ronbo. I guess we could cheer Freedom around the world but say it stops at our "door," and there is a sign on the wall without a door that says, "**** you freedom seeker, look elsewhere." America is the world wide leader in hypocrisy in addition to infant mortality in that scenario.

A wall doesn't only keep in or out, it does both. And DT has insisted from day one Mexico pay for the wall. That equates to building it, except it has the advantage of foreign money enriching DT and his cronies (leaving domestic coffers to be pillaged for other self enrichment schemes). Now since the wall is not being built the tariff card intends to force Mexico to build  a virtual wall - ie stop folks leaving by whatever other means. 

You can't endorse a policy that stops people leaving Mexico if you opposed a policy that stopped people leaving East Germany because people are either free to be self determining or not. In the Germany case, it really didn't matter which side built the wall, what mattered was it oppressed East Germans. Same with US Mexico wall or other policy restrictions on Central Americans. You either support oppression and suffering and denying freedom or you don't. 

Of course, in a perfect world every policy that suppresses freedom and encourages war would enrich an American corporation. And I get it. After being greeted as liberators in Iraq and building freedom there, the Haliburtons of the world need fresh contracts. So let's build a Mexican wall, a Canadian wall, and a Pacific Ocean wall just the other side of Hawaii, and an East Coast wall as well. And let's conveniently forget that Reagan said, "tear down that wall" and pretend that when WWII ended the Marshall Plan was to build world wide walls. Of course that liberal clap trap failed but now America is finally put first. Wall us in! Wall us in!

To be honest i don't think you wanted a straight answer as one has been provided to you twice.

There's absolutely no correlation between the Berlin Wall and a border wall of a sovereign Nation.

[Belsnickel]

(06-04-2019, 01:13 PM)bfine32 Wrote: To be honest i don't think you wanted a straight answer as one has been provided to you twice.

There's absolutely no correlation between the Berlin Wall and a border wall of a sovereign Nation.

Was the Berlin Wall not a border wall of a sovereign nation? I mean, it was on the border of a nation.

[*bfine32*]

(06-04-2019, 01:16 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Was the Berlin Wall not a border wall of a sovereign nation? I mean, it was on the border of a nation.

But the urging of it's destruction was to unify the country after the fall of East German government

Now my time to ask a question:

Do you consider Regan's urging for the Communist leaders to dismantle the Berlin wall to be corollary to the construction of a wall along our Southern Border or were you just pointing to the semantics? 

[GMDino]

Maybe what the point of the OP is that Saint Ron wanted that wall down so those in East Germany could taste some of that sweet 'Murican Freedom Sauce...and building a wall is Trump's way of keeping anyone entering through the southern border from having the same experience.

RR didn't seem to mind if people poured into Western Europe did he?

[Belsnickel]

(06-04-2019, 01:26 PM)bfine32 Wrote: But the urging of it's destruction was to unify the country after the fall of East German government

Now my time to ask a question:

Do you consider Regan's urging for the Communist leaders to dismantle the Berlin wall to be corollary to the construction of a wall along our Southern Border or were you just pointing to the semantics? 

Just the semantics. I couldn't care any less about this discussion.

[*michaelsean*]

It's OK for one liberal to say another liberal made a ridiculous comment. Hollodero was willing, and nobody called him a fascist. The wall wouldn't keeping in its own citizens.

[Belsnickel]

(06-04-2019, 01:32 PM)michaelsean Wrote: It's OK for one liberal to say another liberal made a ridiculous comment. Hollodero was willing, and nobody called him a fascist. The wall wouldn't keeping in its own citizens.

What if Mexico built it or paid for it to be built? Wouldn't it be for keeping in their citizens, then?

[fredtoast]

(06-04-2019, 01:27 PM)GMDino Wrote: Maybe what the point of the OP is that Saint Ron wanted that wall down so those in East Germany could taste some of that sweet 'Murican Freedom Sauce...and building a wall is Trump's way of keeping anyone entering through the southern border from having the same experience.

RR didn't seem to mind if people poured into Western Europe did he?

This.

How can you support refugees pouring into another country but oppose it happening to your own?

[*michaelsean*]

(06-04-2019, 01:35 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: What if Mexico built it or paid for it to be built? Wouldn't it be for keeping in their citizens, then?

Sure and then it's a question for the Mexicans.  Also they'd have to secure all their other exit points or they are still not be keeping their citizens in.  

[Belsnickel]

(06-04-2019, 01:39 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Sure and then it's a question for the Mexicans.  Also they'd have to secure all their other exit points or they are still not be keeping their citizens in.  

But wouldn't that mean we need to secure all our entry points, or we aren't keeping anyone out?

Also, no one wants to go south from Mexico.

[*bfine32*]

(06-04-2019, 01:31 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Just the semantics. I couldn't care any less about this discussion.

Well you're doing it wrong then.

[Belsnickel]

(06-04-2019, 01:59 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well you're doing it wrong then.

My goal is entertaining myself. I'm entertained. So I'm doing it right.

[*bfine32*]

(06-04-2019, 02:01 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: My goal is entertaining myself. I'm entertained. So I'm doing it right.

...and here I thought you were a Liberal the whole time.

[hollodero]

(06-04-2019, 01:32 PM)michaelsean Wrote: It's OK for one liberal to say another liberal made a ridiculous comment. Hollodero was willing

I'm always willing!
But why would you call me a liberal?

[Belsnickel]

(06-04-2019, 02:10 PM)bfine32 Wrote: ...and here I thought you were a Liberal the whole time.