How ironic is it that almost 1/3 of the US troops in Iraq are made up of foreign immigrants & yet if..........

Question

Americans had their way, they'd all be kicked out of the US military and sent back to their homelands?

Or do you think the fact that foreign immigrants in the US military, serve just so they can become US citizens make Americans even madder?

Answer 1

oh they don't mind them doing the dirty work, as long as immigrants make a convenient scape goat for their personal shortcomings, the babies ( arm chair patroits, paid shrills ) will still cry. quite ironic

Answer 2

I'm just wondering where you get your information from. NO ONE in the military is illegal. And as for the "foreign immigrants" that you're asking about, America is a melting pot, every single person who lives here came from somewhere else a long time ago. There is a huge difference between legal and illegal. I suggest you learn it.

Answer 3

It is ironic.

I'm against all this hate towards immigrants. Everyone, if not an immigrant themselves, is a descendant of immigrants. Somewhere, along the blood line, your ancestors came to America to make a better life for themselves. And now people say we shouldn't allow foreign people into the country. If they did that in the 1900's, 1/4 of the people complaining wouldn't even be hear to complain, and most likely be the ones trying to get in!

Answer 4

Having aliens and immigrants serve in the military in order to become citizens make America even greater.

Answer 5

You gave no links.
these links regard the total foreign born in military

About 69,300 foreign-born men and women serve in the U.S. armed forces, roughly 5 percent of the total active-duty force, according to the most recent data. Of those, 43 percent – 29,800 – are not U.S. citizens. The Pentagon says more than 100 immigrant soldiers have died in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/112806dnteximmigmilitary.331e2bd.html

Statistics on the Foreign Born
There are approximately 68,711 foreign born serving in the US armed forces.
The foreign born in the armed forces represent approximately 5 percent of the total on active duty.
Of all military branches, the navy has the highest number of foreign-born personnel.
http://www.migrationinformation.org/USfocus/display.cfm?ID=572

and carefully note this line
"Of all military branches, the navy has the highest number of foreign-born personnel."
And a whole bunch of them are Filipino.



got a link to YOUR info?

Answer 6

Well lets see,

There are about 1.4 million members on active duty.

There are about 30,000 legal immigrants in the military.

Now my math says that's 2.1%

Certainly not the 33% you stated.

So your only wrong by 432,000

But hey, better luck next time , with your made up statestics.

Answer 7

The problem is not with immigrants, it's with ILLEGAL immigrants, so none of these people would be kicked out of the military. Your argument is totally flawed an irrelevant.

Answer 8

I believe an American has to have a high school diploma and the immigrants do not have to just another political loop hole an American can not get a job w/o a ss# they can another loop hole etc etc------

Answer 9

Sacrifice Is for Suckers

On this Fourth of July, President Bush compared the Iraq war to the Revolutionary War, and called for “more patience, more courage and more sacrifice.” Unfortunately, it seems that nobody asked the obvious question: “What sacrifices have you and your friends made, Mr. President?”

By Paul Krugman

07/05/07 "New York Times" -- -- On second thought, there would be no point in asking that question. In Mr. Bush’s world, only the little people make sacrifices.

You see, the Iraq war, although Mr. Bush insists that it’s part of a Global War on Terror™, a fight to the death between good and evil, isn’t like America’s other great wars — wars in which the wealthy shared the financial burden through higher taxes and many members of the elite fought for their country.

This time around, Mr. Bush celebrated Mission Accomplished by cutting tax rates on dividends and capital gains, while handing out huge no-bid contracts to politically connected corporations. And in the four years since, as the insurgency Mr. Bush initially taunted with the cry of “Bring them on” has claimed the lives of thousands of Americans and left thousands more grievously wounded, the children of the elite — especially the Republican elite — have been conspicuously absent from the battlefield.

The Bushies, it seems, like starting fights, but they don’t believe in paying any of the cost of those fights or bearing any of the risks. Above all, they don’t believe that they or their friends should face any personal or professional penalties for trivial sins like distorting intelligence to get America into an unnecessary war, or totally botching that war’s execution.

The Web site Think Progress has a summary of what happened to the men behind the war after we didn’t find W.M.D., and weren’t welcomed as liberators: “The architects of war: Where are they now?” To read that summary is to be awed by the comprehensiveness and generosity of the neocon welfare system. Even Paul Wolfowitz, who managed the rare feat of messing up not one but two high-level jobs, has found refuge at the American Enterprise Institute.
Which brings us to the case of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby Jr.

The hysteria of the neocons over the prospect that Mr. Libby might actually do time for committing perjury was a sight to behold. In an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal titled “Fallen Soldier,” Fouad Ajami of Johns Hopkins University cited the soldier’s creed: “I will never leave a fallen comrade.” He went on to declare that “Scooter Libby was a soldier in your — our — war in Iraq.”

Ah, yes. Shuffling papers in an air-conditioned Washington office is exactly like putting your life on the line in Anbar or Baghdad. Spending 30 months in a minimum-security prison, with a comfortable think-tank job waiting at the other end, is exactly like having half your face or both your legs blown off by an I.E.D.

What lay behind the hysteria, of course, was the prospect that for the very first time one of the people who tricked America into war, then endangered national security yet again in the effort to cover their tracks, might pay some price. But Mr. Ajami needn’t have worried.

Back when the investigation into the leak of Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity began, Mr. Bush insisted that if anyone in his administration had violated the law, “that person will be taken care of.” Now we know what he meant. Mr. Bush hasn’t challenged the verdict in the Libby case, and other people convicted of similar offenses have spent substantial periods of time in prison. But Mr. Libby goes free.

Oh, and don’t fret about the fact that Mr. Libby still had to pay a fine. Does anyone doubt that his friends will find a way to pick up the tab?

Mr. Bush says that Mr. Libby’s punishment remains “harsh” because his reputation is “forever damaged.” Meanwhile, Mr. Bush employs, as a deputy national security adviser, none other than Elliott Abrams, who pleaded guilty to unlawfully withholding information from Congress in the Iran-contra affair. Mr. Abrams was one of six Iran-contra defendants pardoned by Mr. Bush’s father, who was himself a subject of the special prosecutor’s investigation of the scandal.

In other words, obstruction of justice when it gets too close to home is a family tradition. And being a loyal Bushie means never having to say you’re sorry.

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

Answer 10

Not one of your "foreign immigrants" you mention are illegal aliens so it would appear you have no common sense in asking such a illogical question.

I guess your point sounded so good to you and your way of thinking that you just couldn't resist.

Answer 11

I suppose we could explain this to you a million times and you still wouldn't understand. We are all for immigrants. WE ARE ANTI-ILLEGAL immigrants.