If your country was in a state of crisis or being torn apart by war and you wanted to save your family from that suffering...

Doesn't matter what I would want as a hypothetical, what matters is what the host country wants. Since this is thinly veiled at the US, I would point out that immigration policy isn't set by self serving billionaires donating to Presidential Candidates constitutionally, but by the US Congress.

Most of these countries have a safe area, and the people who are leaving are causing a brain and tax and draft drain on these countries. They will have to be returned to invest their savings locally, to form a new tax base and enact local laws that get their countries out of the trouble they are in. Liberals can't unilaterally to the Hitler Salute and push this crap on everyone else. We have a constitutional order, and it isn't superceded by the liberal crosseyed order that listens to scam the richest 1% tries to push on the rest of us. We need to give these other countries a chance to heal themselves with the best of their best, and not make everyone in the US underemployed with suppressed wages because a massive amount of illegals are here stealing everyone's jobs. For those who are deserving of amnesty dur to torture and persecution, we have a process for that. It needs strict scrutiny and skepticism. I better see whip scars and mutilated fingers from someone applying for that, or a fulan gong member screaming they broke out of a live organ harvesting clinic in China. Those are deserving. Guatamala having alot of people and gangs is not deserving. Haiti has a stable north, so it is not deserving.

You do what you have to do. And it is also idiotic to expect people to stop to make sure they have all the proper documents on them and that the death squads will wait for them to get their documents before fleeing.

The very idea of it speaks to out of touch people speaking from a position of privilege and safety for whom this will always just be an intellectual exercise and never something they have real stakes in.


I also think some of the people obsessed with procedure if they were in that position might be like people my friend from Croatia told me about.

Some of them were still waiting for a government bureaucrat to save them while they were been loaded on to buses to the refugee camps.

So in the UK "illegal migration" is a hot topic. But of those that cross the channel illegally to enter the country when their asylum claims are processed the majority are granted asylum. So I don't understand how it was illegal migration they were actually fleeing oppression, violence etc.

The number of asylum seekers is tiny compared to the number the government gladly give worker etc visas to. It's all a smoke and mirrors exercise to avoid people realising we have an economic model that doesn't function without immigrants currently.

Wouldn't they qualify for asylum and not be considered illegal in that type of situation?

How come men ages 17 to 35 make up roughly 80% of those crossing our border illegally?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/329204/apprehenions-by-the-us-border-patrol-by-sector-and-gender/

I don’t blame them, and know that without them LA would collapse. I also support border enforcement.

Id definitely take any means necessary to keep my family safe.

That is a good and thought-provoking question.

Too bad it won't provoke thoughts in those people who need to think. They're just done thinking for themselves.