What do you think of this, Any one who wishes to become a us citizen should have to serve in the military for a min of 6 yrs, Learn to speak English and be discharged honorably. Now they come out of the military fluent in English, Have learned a trade, Pays into Social security, Can work here legally, pay’s taxes, and they still maintain their hardedge. Keep in mind do to security of the us the only jobs they could do in there first enlistment, would be infantry, and construction. This only stands for the first enlistment after that there U.S. citizens and can do what ever there asvab score allows them to.
2006-10-25 16:13:37 · 20 answers · asked by matt v 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
That would work except for the jobs they can do. They could also be cooks, mechanics or any other job that doesn't require a security clearance. Also due to their heritage they will not be able to get a security clearance. This goes for all immigrants as it is now. I have a friend who is a korean and she could not get a security clearance either. You could also give them the option of 10 years in the guard or the 6 year active duty. For the ones that are not able to join due to felonies or health problem they will have to go thru the normal system to get citizenship.
2006-10-25 16:21:42 · answer #1 · answered by knight35966 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Each state demands to enact legislation like Oklahoma and Arizona. This is the one the government will ever take proactive steps. Most of the Senators and Congressmen spend the majority in their time counting votes and cash for his or her subsequent election, such a lot of, who're both counting at the votes or crusade cash, or each, from this crisis, quite are not able to see it as a crisis. Since so much illegals are from international locations south of our border, the votes will constantly be a trap to Democrat professional-amnesty politicians, however the cash may also be dried up through making it too high priced or unattainable for American corporations to rent them with out risking the lack of the whole lot they possess. Then a minimum of the Republicans and Independents could flip anti-amnesty or even anti-unlawful. Right now, there may be close to no one in Washington taking this severely, besides the ones seeking to push amnesty via. It will take plenty longer, however could have a extra lasting outcome, if adequate states comply with the Oklahoma and Arizona lead.
2016-09-01 02:47:14 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Boy, it's bad enough that the U.S. will start wars at the drop of a hat without sending poor expendable immigrants that nobody cares about over to Iraq.
Seriously, you have to keep the politicians honest by having an armed force that represents the country's citizenry not wannabees.
2006-10-25 16:17:14 · answer #3 · answered by grapeshenry 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think anyone who is not a U.S. citizen should be able to enlist in any of our armed forces. I mean they have no loyalty to us and in doing so they could easily gain accesss to our vital secrets. I do think that before they are given acces to our social security they should be required to work a minimum of five years or so.
2006-10-25 16:27:29 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
ok... i dont think they should have to be in the military for six yrs. About the job stuff they only take the jobs that the citizens dont want. So i dont think its a valid argument to say that They are taking the jobs. Because if it wasnt for all the hispanics in this country , tihs place wouldnt be what it is 2day...
2006-10-25 16:18:36 · answer #5 · answered by shorty23 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not a bad idea. But what about the women who immigrate to this country? What kind of national service would you suggest for them?
And also, what about the people past military duty age?
You've got some good ideas for young men though.
2006-10-25 16:16:49 · answer #6 · answered by WhatAmI? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We don't need 12 million in the military. Many Americans depend on it to further their educations. Lets send them home and every month we don't get enough recruits we pull from the Illigrant stack.
2006-10-25 16:55:33 · answer #7 · answered by carolinatinpan 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A generally sound approach. I think that a 6-year enlistment is too long -- three feels more right to me.
2006-10-25 16:19:14 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You aer under the mistaken impression that the military teaches everybody a trade.
Not so.
Good concept though.
2006-10-25 16:15:16 · answer #9 · answered by Cattlemanbob 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yeah but there still needs to be an immigration quota, or else everyone in the country would come here.
2006-10-25 16:16:25 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋