if Hezbollah light up a nuke in NewYork would you accept undocumented immigrants for the army and reconstruct?

Answer 1

No, only legals. Illegals can not serve, and should not be allowed to enlist, though they get to enjoy the benefits of freedoms in America. Then again, so do most of you, and no requirement for you to serve.

Answer 2

a most interesting question, without reference to time and/or timing,

you talk about a nuke in ny, and we all know what radiation levels take to achieve a safe level.

you talk about reconstruction. when? while the nuke's still hot or when everything has cooled down, both the reasons for war as the radiation level?

remember pearl harbor?
remember hisroshima and nagasaki?
the u.s. and japan are friends, allies, partners today.
undocumented immigrants from where, why the army, why hezbollah?

yes, a most interesting question, thank you for making me think.

Answer 3

Nice trick question. They already can join the service. Just illegal immigrants to reconstruct NO WAY.

Answer 4

Any man living in the USA is required to register for the draft, whether they are here legally or not. You can read about it yourself on the governments web page for selective service.

Answer 5

If the same thing happened in Mexico city do you think that the illegals would return home to help?

Answer 6

Wouldn't need to. The line to the recruiters would be a mile long of legitimate residents.

Answer 7

I would ask how the hell they managed to get into the U.S! Through the Southern border? Nahhhhh ... only poor honest folks go through there, right?

Answer 8

both. Logical causes ought to correctly be divided into deterrence, practicality and reciprocity. The emotional ones are fairness and the golden rule. Deterrence: human beings ought to correctly be managed by employing authorities in the adventure that they are dealt with harshly. I easily have arrested and fined human beings for immigration and tax violations contained in the U. S.. In Africa I segregated housing on the theory of race, tribal association, and had the right to arrest, or maybe shoot those who antagonistic the authorities. virtually: we do no longer have the aspects to deport all those who's deportable lower than contemporary regulation. It makes extra sense to spotlight terrorists and criminals than to waste time on maids and busboys. Nor do we favor to impose that variety of harm on our monetary device, on the employers who remember on immigrant complicated artwork, or on the U. S. electorate and LAPRs who're on the problem of illegals. Reciprocity: I easily were an American living foreign places and characteristic had journey with overseas immigration departments who do compared to human beings. Our embassy does no longer allow those governments to act arbitrarily antagonistic to its electorate and that i trust that overseas governments sense the same way about theirs. fairness: ought to you want your children arrested because they neglected a flight and their visa expired? ought to you want to be separated out of your significant different because it takes US immigration takes 3 years to procedure her eco-friendly card? What ought to you do in case you've been in a automobile coincidence and had to stay right here till the case is settled, yet necessary to become profitable? What in case you've been raised contained in the U. S. from age 5, ought to you want to be deported to a rustic whose language you do not talk? What if staying on your us of a meant certain lack of existence and also you became a refugee? finally, what in case you had no artwork on your own us of a (because the neighboring us of a bought each and each and every of the land and marketplace lower than NAFTA) yet there became multiple call for for you to artwork in that us of a?

Answer 9

No, I would hold accountable the NY Times and every other liberal group out there that has undermined and sabotaged our war on terror.

Answer 10

NO... we'd have enough problems on our hands. No use increasing the crime rate too.