"...who had no control over what their parents did."  That's the point.  The parents are the one's who put these kids in a traumatizing situation.  They are the monsters.  Whether it was ignorance, a ploy or stupidity it was those parents who chose to subject and risk their own kids.

Somewhere people are equating the refugees, including the caravans, with "illegals". Coming to the border and asking for asylum is not illegal. Ironically, one of the reasons cited for so many people trying to enter the USA now is fear that Trump will end immigration and close the border.

My main objection is the President's rhetoric, where he talks of the people wanting to come here as if they were all criminals, and very bad people. People we need to build a wall to keep out. Even though anyone with a little bit of understanding knows the wall is a waste of money (paid for by Mexico??).

There's some irony that conservatives claim that gun laws can't prevent crime but a wall can prevent illegal immigration. Perhaps we should build a wall around all the guns? That would keep bad guys from getting them, right?

I personally believe that a zero tolerance policy is never correct. There are always situations that require consideration and judgment. I personally believe that it is better to not punish the innocent, even if the guilty slip through. And if these children are not innocent, I don't know who is.

I grant you that some are just entering the country to get into the USA for a better life. And equally, some are fleeing something so heinous that it's worth the chance. In fact, they might find it worse than even being separated from their children, so long as they are safe and alive. That's a horrific choice between bad and worse.

Once again, the administration created a probably, and then takes credit for solving their own disaster. I'll put it to you as plainly as possible - is it right to separate young children and infants from their parents?

What an odd question when proposing consideration and judgment.  There is no simply about it and I think that's part of the problem.  You say kids should never be detained and I don't see how that's a reality.  Are you suggesting an open border to "kids".  What would be the cutoff?  17 years and 364 days of age?  16?  12?  

The main thing that I am sympathetic to are those who are legally trying to get into the country and the wait time.  I understand the impatience and even the rolling of the dice to circumvent the rules.  But that doesn't mean you get a free pass if you get caught.  It also doesn't mean that if you have a child with you it's a get out of jail free card and all bets are off.

So, what are the authorities left to do?  The kids have to be processed through the system and they have to put them somewhere until they can be taken care of.  From what I've read, officials have repeatedly requested and been denied funding to properly handle/house all involved.

I don't think the answer is to just not detain illegal immigrants because you don't have ideal accommodations in every area.

As far as separating children from their parents, no, I wouldn't pursue that in the manner that caused so many problems.  It obviously shouldn't be a permanent separation.  But yes, I would likely separate kids from anyone being arrested.  Kids go to social services and adults get arrested.  Isn't that how everyone in the US is treated?

 

No one is forcing anyone to illegally cross the border.  Neither is anyone forcing them to subject their children to that endeavor.  And no one is defending those who have abused their power and/or exceeded it.

But conflating policy with individuals who have broken the law themselves isn't right either.  A border guard abusing someone isn't policy, it's that guard breaking the law.

At the end of the day, it seems to me that this administration first enforced the law rather than letting illegal aliens off scott free, then course corrected and ultimately has reduced illegal immigration and increased the number of legal applications being processed.

It doesn't seem to me that this administration is denying entry into the country, it is just not turning a blind eye to it being done illegally. 

——-

Monsters? Whether these are economic migrants trying to escape extreme poverty or refugees trying to escape gang violence, I’m not going to call someone a monster for wanting a better life for them and their children. You make it sound like these are people that were just too lazy to wait in line. And in the case of asylum-seekers, you have to first be in the US to ask for asylum. Crossing the border in that scenario is not illegal. 

What is the US’s moral responsibility for the refugee crisis? Cartel violence in Mexico? It’s not Mexicans buying up all those drugs for themselves. American drug users are providing the revenue that empowers the cartel. 

MS-13? That was a gang that started in the US. INS was discriminating against Central America refugees escaping civil wars in Guatemala and El Salvador by not granting them asylum protection (in rates compared to other refugees), leaving them undocumented immigrants. Which left a bunch of undocumented teens who were more easily exploited because they could not attend school and were not in it. Which resulted in gangs who ended up in the American prison system, which focuses more on incarceration vs rehabilitation, and come out of the system an even more violent gang. Then the US took all those violent gang members and dumped them in El Salvador, where they terrorized the local population. 

And let’s not get started on the century of US intervention in Latin America which resulted in dictatorships and economic disaster that people needed to escape from. 

——-

This is expressly false. Asylum seekers were being turned away at the ports of entry. Coming to the port of entry and asking for asylum IS HOW YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO DO IT.