Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
@Uncle Van @TheAncientCenturion @Mr. Reloaded do you guys think ICE is in the wrong?? cause as an outsider their actions look pretty reasonable to me
I created this from Claude AI based on the factual response based on the latest incident so I’ll let you guys understand if it was right or wrong
Was Trump’s 2025 immigration crackdown and military deployment in Los Angeles justified? Let’s answer that through legal, ethical, practical, and political lenses, based on verified evidence:
⚖️ 1. Legal Justification
✅ Partial — but highly controversial
🧠 Verdict: Technically lawful, but constitutionally gray and likely to be overturned in court.
🧬 2. Ethical Justification
❌ No — rights were violated
🧠 Verdict: Not ethically justified. Violated civil liberties and due process norms even for vulnerable, law-abiding people.
🛠️ 3. Practical Justification
❌ Ineffective & counterproductive
🧠 Verdict: The crackdown caused fear, not measurable public safety improvement.
🗳️ 4. Political Justification
✅ From Trump’s base — ❌Nationally divisive
🧠 Verdict: Politically calculated, but nationally polarizing and damaging long-term.
✅ Final Conclusion: Was it justified?
⚠️ Partially
Federal law supports it, but constitutional challenges likely to succeed
Ethical
❌ No
Rights of innocents were violated
Practical
❌ No
Minimal gains, high social cost
Political
⚠️ Base support only
Deeply divisive and destabilizing nationally
🔚 Final Verdict: No — it was not justified overall. While technically lawful in parts, the operation was excessive, constitutionally shaky, ethically flawed, and harmful to civil society.
well I agree Orangeman was right in doing so but he is doing to divert the attention from his economic side of things like Tariff stuff even his vote base didn’t like it . Imagine being okay if Soya is bought from Brazil rather than from farm in Texas .
Was Trump’s 2025 immigration crackdown and military deployment in Los Angeles justified? Let’s answer that through legal, ethical, practical, and political lenses, based on verified evidence:
⚖️ 1. Legal Justification
✅ Partial — but highly controversial
- Immigration enforcement is a federal power under U.S. law. Trump legally authorized ICE raids and expedited removals under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
- But the use of federal troops without state consent is legally contested:
- Violated Posse Comitatus norms (military should not act as domestic law enforcement).
- First deployment since 1965 without governor approval.
- California sued on grounds of state sovereignty and constitutional overreach.
🧠 Verdict: Technically lawful, but constitutionally gray and likely to be overturned in court.
🧬 2. Ethical Justification
❌ No — rights were violated
- ACLU, ImmDef, and HRW reported:
- Detentions without access to lawyers or interpreters.
- Family separation and no access to food/water for hours.
- Arrest of some legal residents, asylum seekers, and students.
- Protesters, journalists, and legal observers faced aggressive policing.
🧠 Verdict: Not ethically justified. Violated civil liberties and due process norms even for vulnerable, law-abiding people.
🛠️ 3. Practical Justification
❌ Ineffective & counterproductive
- ICE arrested hundreds, but only ~18% had serious criminal records.
- LA’s massive protests, traffic disruption, and economic impact were far more costly than the operation’s gains.
- Trust between immigrant communities and local police eroded, making cities less safe, not more.
🧠 Verdict: The crackdown caused fear, not measurable public safety improvement.
🗳️ 4. Political Justification
✅ From Trump’s base — ❌Nationally divisive
- Trump’s base views this as delivering on his promises.
- But across the country:
- Independent voters disapproved of military overreach.
- Latino, Asian, and immigrant communities saw it as racist and authoritarian.
- Multiple Republican mayors (e.g., in San Diego, Dallas) distanced themselves.
🧠 Verdict: Politically calculated, but nationally polarizing and damaging long-term.
✅ Final Conclusion: Was it justified?
Legal⚠️ Partially
Federal law supports it, but constitutional challenges likely to succeed
Ethical
❌ No
Rights of innocents were violated
Practical
❌ No
Minimal gains, high social cost
Political
⚠️ Base support only
Deeply divisive and destabilizing nationally
🔚 Final Verdict: No — it was not justified overall. While technically lawful in parts, the operation was excessive, constitutionally shaky, ethically flawed, and harmful to civil society.
Post automatically merged:
Slimy. But also just doing their jobs ultimately. 
Last edited:
It’s not because they live in the US that they are more informed. But I guess you weren’t asking about being informed. Anyway, I don’t believe in the theory that says that people’s opinions who live next to an event are more legit just because of geographical proximity.
Examples are many. Wether it’s environmental issues or political or wars and even genocides.
Examples are many. Wether it’s environmental issues or political or wars and even genocides.
Today I learned that the bottom 50% of China on average are wealthier on a ppp basis than the bottom 50% in the US, that´s fucked up..
https://wid.world/share/#0/countrie.../p/yearly/a/false/-6419.989/20000/curve/false
https://wid.world/share/#0/countrie.../p/yearly/a/false/-6419.989/20000/curve/false