><snip>
>>>>There is a point I would like to make here.
>>>>Don't you think the gov't of some of these countries should get their crap together so that their people won't have to resort to defecting to other countries as much?
>>>>I don't think it all due to past exploitations by the "rich" countries.
>>>
>>>Yes I do and I didn't say it was "all due to past exploitations by the "rich" countries" although that certainly plays a significant role. Even ignoring the past, every time we hire a cheap gardender, insist on and buy produce which is the cheapest, allow business' to employ illegal emigrants, turn a blind eye, chose not to investigate deeper, chose not to insist on equal opportuinity employment conditions, etc, we are guilty and responsible to some degree.
>>>
>>>But even if you want to ignore this point and simply argue that we are not responsible for anything or anyone but ourselves then we can still take a more pragmatic approach to the problem: we cannot solve our problems without helping them to solve theirs. Their problems are our problems regardless of whether we want to admit any level of responsibility in the creation of those problems. We live in an interdependent world.
>>>
>>>So long as we argue "them vs. us" the problem remains and in the process becomes another divisive issue (which is perhaps what the politicians want?).
>>
>>So the solution is to keep on accepting them forever?
>>
>>I'm saying it's not "them vs. us".
>>Is giving them amnesty the best long term solution? Won't granting amnesty just encourage more to come. In case of illegals from Mexico, shouldn't they be protesting their own gov't? Mexico has many natural resources, oil, natural gas, tourism etc.... It's got many ways to generate money and jobs. All that money is going into someones' pocket.
>>
>>As long as the United States keep accepting illegals, the corrupt gov't in Mexico will never improve. Isn't fixing their corrupt gov't the best long term solution? It's not just Mexico. There are many crooked gov't everywhere. I guess the question then becomes how do we help.... so, how?
>
>I have answered the question already. If we want to solve our problems then we must help them solve theirs.

what does this mean? this statement is ambiguous to me.
solve their problems by doing what?


>We need to rise above "us vs. them" and start thinking about "all of us". How to do so is a question for people who are far more expert in these matters than me.

Again to me it's not "us against them".
So whatever the "experts" decide is fine with you even if you think what they decide is crual and inhuman?