The less money there are the less action a country can exert on itself and all other nations. Recession within a country shows a decline in funding of major functions of the government, the recession can be seen to be reversed by the increase in immigration from other countries. The new immigrants are provided cheap jobs and thus make money for the country more than the citizens make. However what actually happens is these immigrants take all the jobs of the citizens of the country and thus decline the country of the legal cash flow. Therefore a successful tactic would be to fund the uncontrolled immigration flow from another nation to the enemy country, by supplying the country with boats to travel on, food and ammunition like AK-47. It is important to realize that an enemy country might recognize this tactic and thus an explanation for this event of an increased flow of illegal immigrants can be explained by simply the weaking economical money of the country allowing for easier integration into it. :D Also the enemy country must be somehow aided in its recession...the root of the recession if it is a war in another country overseas must be funded as well but not too much so that there is an illusion of the war that can be won by this enemy country and this illusion allows the enemy country to implement its energy and resources into this war instead on the improvement and reverse of the recession. Great plan.

Now, what other great tactics can be used to allow the recession to continue further on with increased rate?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4635187.stm

http://en.epochtimes.com/news_images/2007-5-8-onegun51630182.jpg

I suggest we have some of the newsmakers in the country say things like:

“Everyone can be a millionaire.”,

“There is no limit to the pie, everyone gets as big a piece as they are willing to work for.”

“There is no limit to wealth. Hard work gives you all you need or want.”

“CEOs are worth every penny of there multimillion $$$ bonuses. It does not matter if the company lost 10,000 jobs and $30,000,000.”

“Only lazy people are poor.”

And one of my favorites, "If it’s good for the rich, it’s good for you.”

exactly, quotes like this are beneficial at destabilizing the enemy country. In fact yes everyone gets the big piece of the pie and yes the pie is infinite...as long as everyone has that mentality the country will starve itself at a much faster rate.

I don't think immigration would negatively affect a country that had a good economy to begin with.

I don't think immigration would negatively affect a country that had a good economy to begin with.

yeah but what about uncontrolled immigration...those people taking jobs and not paying taxes...

There can be a distintion between legal and illegal immigrants.
Legal immigration is controlled, illegal is uncontrolled.

A healthy economey which might easily support legal immigrats can collapse under the strain of providing services to illegals.

A small community near me (two stoplights), spend $30,000 defending an illegal who shot to death 3 promement town citizens (fire chief, etc).

The Medicaid expense for illegals is staggering in some areas of the U.S.

There are special social service regulations specifiying what services can be given to illegals.

exactly BeHereNow...I see this uncontrolled immigration as a political weapon to be successfully employed by another country to destroy its target.

yeah but what about uncontrolled immigration...those people taking jobs and not paying taxes...I don't know what it's like in your country, but in the USA it's impossible to have anything better than a menial, low-wage job without paying taxes. The guys who stand outside Home Depot waiting for somebody with a remodeling project to pick them up, guys who make $100 a day if they're lucky, they don't pay taxes.

Everybody else has to have a Social Security number in order to get work, because their employer has to report the wages they pay to the IRS, and they withhold taxes from the wages and give them directly to the IRS. Sure, if the guys are illegal immigrants they use somebody else's Social Security number, but they're still paying taxes to that guy's account. He'll have to include the illegal immigrant's wages on his tax return, but since the estimated taxes were already paid, it won't cost him anything. Then when he retires he'll have a bigger Social Security pension than he expected because of all the additional contributions that the illegal immigrant made to his Social Security account.

Meanwhile the immigrant won't get any pension and will have to go home. Unless, of course, he's been putting money in the bank for retirement. In which case he's been helping to finance the American economy.

My wife was a social worker for most of her life. Illegal immigrants can get medical care in a public hospital because doctors are caring people whose only priority is to heal the sick. They treat them first and let the accountants worry about who's going to pay the bill. But medical care is the only public, tax-supported service that illegal immigrants can get. They can't get welfare or food stamps or AFDC or even GR.

Sure their kids can go to school, but that's a good deal for America. It's a lot better to have them here, going to school, learning English, maybe even attending a university, growing up to be productive citizens who pay a lot of taxes, than to have them in Mexico, not learning to read, not learning English, growing up to be poor people trying to sneak in so they can look for back-breaking work that pays $100 a day if they're lucky.

Fraggle Rocker...you misunderstand me, my goal is to use illegal immigration as one sort of a weapon to destroy a nation.

The decline and fall of the Roman Empire was as much due to the internal disintegration of the ties that bind a society together as to the assaults of the Romans' external enemies.

The pride of being a Roman citizen was destroyed by cheapening that citizenship by giving it to too many other people. The sense of duty and loyalty eroded among both the elites and the masses.

Without such things, there could be no Roman Empire. Ultimately, without such things, there can be no United States of America. In neither case have tangible wealth and power been enough to save a country or a civilization, for the tangibles do not work without the intangibles.

...from http://granitegrok.com/blog/2006/07/

definetely reiterates my point of view that uncontrolled granting of status
"American" will ultimately destroy USA just as it destroyed Roman Empire.

...granitegrok definetely reiterates my point of view that uncontrolled granting of status "American" will ultimately destroy USA just as it destroyed Roman Empire.That blog is too long to find the entry you refer to. But for the most part it seems to be a board like ours with some posts by precocious teenagers and some by people with credentials, and a few op-eds pasted in that support somebody's position.

There is by no means a consensus among historians that the downfall of Rome had a single cause, much less that it was the influence of external cultures. I've seen analyses suggesting that the Empire was doomed by its tolerance of Christian evangelism: too much emphasis on an imaginary afterlife and not enough taking care of business.

Synchronicity does occur; that's why we have a word for it. Sometimes a bunch of bad things happen at the same time and you're screwed.

The only immigrant community that includes a significant faction of members who genuinely want to remake America according to their culture, instead of coming here to enjoy and appreciate American life, is the one that political correctness forbids us to speak of: Muslims. For all the ill will toward Latinos, they assimilate so quickly and enthusiastically that you can hardly find a third generation.

Meanwhile Muslim taxi drivers refuse to take old blind women to their doctor's appointments because they think it's a "sin" to have a service dog.

Meanwhile Muslim taxi drivers refuse to take old blind women to their doctor's appointments because they think it's a "sin" to have a service dog.
How many of them do this? What kind of study determined this? How do the taxi driver's know? The woman says take me to this address please and then adds that she is going to her doctor to get a service dog? How strange? And these women do this regularly enough so that we have a pool of Muslim taxi drivers on which this study was based? Fascinating.

As far as them being the only ones...
The Amish.
Hasidic Jews.

I am quite sure there are other examples.
Even if your generalizations are correct.

How many of them do this? What kind of study determined this? How do the taxi driver's know? The woman says take me to this address please and then adds that she is going to her doctor to get a service dog? How strange? And these women do this regularly enough so that we have a pool of Muslim taxi drivers on which this study was based? Fascinating.Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. The woman hails a taxi and when he pulls up he sees that she has her seeing-eye dog with her, and refuses to take her. This happened often enough in New York City that it made the national news a couple of years ago. If you're looking for more easily verifiable reports, Muslim taxi drivers in Minneapolis were refusing to pick up passengers at the international airport if they had liquor in their luggage. This became a crisis and the political leadership had to deal with it. I'm not sure what the solution was.As far as them being the only ones... The Amish. Hasidic Jews.My thesis was that an immigrant community is aggressively trying to change America to conform to its own culture. Neither the Amish nor the Chasidim fall into that category.

The Amish have been here longer than this has been a country so they're hardly an immigrant group any more. More importantly, they have no desire to convert the rest of the country to their way of life. They are not the least bit evangelical and are very respectful of the laws and customs of other Americans. In fact they live in symbiosis with us. They refuse to run power lines into their towns but they happily buy batteries and the electrical appliances that will run on batteries. They also use gasoline powered tractors and other farm machinery, and some towns have kerosene-powered refrigerators; and of course they have to acquire the petroleum fuels from us.

Chasidism is a relatively recent movement that arose after America's Jewish community was already established. It is not growing through immigration. Like the Amish, the Jews are not an evangelical people and do not push their way of life on others. To the extent that there is a separate Jewish community--and this is becoming increasingly less true in America with the Chasidim as a very small exception--it exists in symbiosis with ours, much like the Amish.Even if your generalizations are correct.In the state of Virginia, just last year, there was an investigation of several Islamic schools. They found textbooks directing children to be intolerant of their Christian neighbors.

I carefully avoided implying that the majority of Muslim immigrants in America want to change America to a Stone Age theocracy. My point was that there is nonetheless a visible, vocal, influential contingent of them who do. You can't find this phenomenon in the Mexican-American community. La Raza or the "Aztlán movement" is a bunch of college students with too much time on their hands and a few iconoclastic professors who can actually read and write Spanish. Nobody takes them seriously.

Yet we treat the Mexican-Americans with contempt, derision and harassment. And at the same time we pussyfoot around the Muslims so we don't hurt their feelings.

rom what I can tell the issue with the guide dogs was that in Muslim culture dogs are considered unclean. Your version is more sensationalistic.

Christians have a long history in the US of trying to influence legislation, call it a Christian Sharia. This is quite different from individual taxi drivers denying service because of their beliefs. Not that I agree with the latter, but religious people trying to change the way things are done is certainly traditional in the US.

Last, I wasn't aware that Muslims in the US are evangelical. Have you been approached? I have been approached by a large number of Christians, Scientologists, Jews for Jesus, Jehovah's Witnesses and so on. In fact proselytizing and being evangelical can be argued to be traditional in the US. In not one of my contacts with Muslims in the US or anywhere else in the world has anyone handed me a Koran or sought to convince me to join. I realize this is anecdotal evidence, but at least it points out why I am confused by your implying above that Muslims are evangelical.

None of this post or my other one is meant to condone the actions of certian taxi drivers and their refusal to offer service, nor do I think highly of their view of dogs. Nor do I intend to support racism against Latin Americans.

We do have some precedents in our country for religious people refusing to participate, for example, in wars on religious grounds. I would guess there are other instances where religious people asked for and were even granted exceptions for participation in certain sectors of
'normal' American life. In fact I'll bet a decent number of Latinos as Catholics, which a large percentage are, have also.

I don't think it's a good idea to say
dont be phobic of these people, we should really be phobic of these people
Also, I think a rather large percentage of the American public is in an uproar over the presence of Muslims. So it seems odd to see them as somehow simply getting away with something whereas the Latinos are unfairly picked on.
Ask a Sikh who lives in the states if Muslims are well accepted. And yes, I realize that Sikhs are not Muslims. That was part of my point. I'll be however, as a third party often mistaken for being Muslims, they have some insight in the matter. There is plenty of xenophobia to go around.