US Marine speaks out on the Iraq War

[Razor]

Iraq As Vietnam
Disappointments on the homefront.

By Dexter Lehtinen

"I feel like we’re winning the war over here and we’re losing the war back home.” These were the words of a Marine corporal at Camp Fallujah, Iraq, just a few weeks ago. They were not constructed political rhetoric, the product of a leading question or an outright fabrication, tailored to the politically charged debate back home. Rather, they were a reflection of a common state of mind among troops in the war zones. Whether an accurate assessment or not, it does bring to mind a similar dichotomy during the Vietnam War.

About an hour before we spoke with this corporal, the Marine general in charge of logistics for the region gave a quick briefing before we left for Fallujah. We were waiting for gunship escorts at Base TQ (Al Taqqadum), leaving our C-130 cargo plane for helicopters. On the table in his office was an issue of Foreign Affairs with the prominent headline “Iraq and Vietnam.” In an earlier article from the same journal, John Lewis Gaddis, a Yale professor and respected critic of the Cold War, had written, “Historians now acknowledge that American counter-insurgency operations in Vietnam were succeeding during the final years of that conflict; the problem was that support for the war had long since crumbled at home.” In one sense, Iraq could become similar to Vietnam.

At Camp Fallujah, troops routinely called for “perseverance and patience.” They argued that “timetables can’t control the political process; the political process must control the timetable,” and they voiced the belief that “back home they don’t understand; you don’t understand unless you see it.” “What we see on TV is not what we see on the ground,” a Marine complained. “The news is just a commercial industry. The news system benefits the terrorists.” The dichotomy these troops lamented sounded like an Afghan saying we heard later in the trip from a village elder in Jalalabad: “What you see and what you hear arenever the same.”

Neither in its military aspects, nor in the structure of the international political system which surrounds it, is the Iraq War like Vietnam. Because of a bipolar system of two superpowers, the North Vietnamese ended up with the military sponsorship of a powerful outside nation-state. Moreover, the communist North Vietnamese had a unified internal party discipline and a popular ideology of domestic reform and nationalism, both of which the fragmented enemies in Iraq lack. The insurgents are split between radical Islamists and minority Sunni restorationists. Most Iraqis want neither a return to Sunni domination nor a new Islamic radicalism. Both nationalism and domestic reform favor the new Iraqi government.

Nevertheless, the corporal’s comment brings to mind the way in which the Iraq war (or any war, for that matter) can be made like the Vietnam War — not in the war zone itself, and not internationally, but in our domestic politics. If people in the United States come to believe, through misunderstanding or misinformation, spread inadvertently or deliberately, for political or partisan purposes, that the Iraq war is like the Vietnam War, then in domestic political terms the misunderstanding becomes the reality. This prophecy can be self-fulfilling.

In other words, even though the Iraq war in Iraq is nothing like the Vietnam War in Vietnam, the Iraq war in Washington is taking on some of the characteristics of the Vietnam War in Washington. There are many back home who want Iraq to become like Vietnam was back home, without regard to the reality of Iraq in the field. And they are trying hard to make it so.

The dominant precedent of the politics of the Vietnam War was the American choice to withdraw U.S. troops and then abandon our ally logistically and economically. This complete abandonment led to South Vietnam’s defeat by an outside conventional military attack (a mobile armored force, not insurgents) more than two years later, while the U.S. watched. Just as this choice was entirely in Washington’s hands during the Vietnam War, so too it is in Washington’s hands now with respect to the Iraq war — regardless of the reality in Iraq. The abandonment of an ally, rather than the way the war itself was fought, signaled a political weakness in the home front, among Washington elites, the media, and parts of the public. Among our enemies, this perceived lack of willpower is the lasting impression of the Vietnam War even to this day. This lasting impression has significantly impaired American foreign policy.

Accordingly, the American homefront is once again the target of our enemies. Radical Islamists define the American homefront as the center of gravity of the war — that is, the point of greatest weakness, where an otherwise strong military power can be defeated. The North Vietnamese did the same: Their military failure in the Tet Offensive of 1968 convinced them that America could not be defeated in the field, but must be defeated politically at home. The American home front became the center of gravity in the North Vietnamese effort.

In Iraq, if Washington can be cajoled into withdrawing forces and aid prematurely, then outside forces with outside aid are free to concentrate larger military units in more effective conventional attacks. The great theorist of war Carl von Clausewitz emphasized the trinity of war — the military, the government, and the people — and the overriding role of willpower. The enemy may not have read Clausewitz (they have their own excellent theorists of the ultimate political nature of war), but they are certainly proving him right.

So the legacy of Vietnam in Washington, Vietnam “back home,” hangs over a war with little similarity to Vietnam in the field. The Marine commander at Base TQ sees no similarity to Vietnam, yet on his entrance table sits a journal from back home comparing the two. Notwithstanding the actual situation, politicians and the media can turn Iraq (or any situation) into a “Vietnam” if they work at it long enough and hard enough. Then the fears and predictions of our troops in Iraq could come true — we could lose the war over here even while were winning it over there.

— Dexter Lehtinen was severely wounded as a reconnaissance platoon leader in Vietnam. He later graduated first in his class from Stanford Law School and served as a Florida state senator and United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida. He recently returned from a congressional trip to Iraq, Kuwait, and Afghanistan (he is married to Florida congresswoman Illeana Ros-Lehtinen).

Whether you support the war or not, you should support the troops that have to fight in it. It must be so disheartening for anyone fighting out in Iraq and Afghanistan to think that the press and protestors back at home are villifying them as much as Al Jazeera are...when they're the ones out in Iraq trying to help rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan...something all the politicians and protestors aren't doing anything to help with, especially when a lot of protestors cool the troops murderers and rapists.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

But its retarded really. To support the troops, and not support the war.

I believe we're winning over there. As long as won't accept defeat, then victory is still within your grasp.

something all the politicians and protestors aren't doing anything to help with, especially when a lot of protestors cool the troops murderers and rapists.

Yep.

 

[VictimOfScience]

Radical Islamists define the American homefront as the center of gravity of the war

I think this is inaccurate. I think that for them, the center of gravity for the war (their terror campaign against the West) was the Islamic people. The whole idea behind 9/11 was to get the Muslim world united against the West--they expected (or at least hoped for) the Muslim population to rise up in a war against Western governments and it didn't happen. The main goal of al Queda failed and whatever fervor it had is dying out now. Islamic governments are turning more to the side if the West and routing the terrorists in their own countries. Radical Islam is on the decline and Iraq is becoming an example of that.

 

[NotATool]

I live in a liberal city, and have never met anyone who doesn't support the troops.

But its retarded really. To support the troops, and not support the war.

No. It's illogical to support the troops and support the war. They're dying in Iraq.

 

[JNightshade]

It's perfectly logical to support the troops, but not the war. Not everything is in black and white

 

[CptStern]

catch-22 ...they use patriotism to fuel the war machine

 

[satch919]

Whether you support the war or not, you should support the troops that have to fight in it. It must be so disheartening for anyone fighting out in Iraq and Afghanistan to think that the press and protestors back at home are villifying them as much as Al Jazeera are...when they're the ones out in Iraq trying to help rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan...something all the politicians and protestors aren't doing anything to help with, especially when a lot of protestors cool the troops murderers and rapists.

Listen, a lot of people who strongly disagree with the war can support the troops. We support them by sending donations and other stuff that they may not have access to. I support them getting the armor and equipment they need. I support the person, not the war. I would have liked to see our troops used in a more just cause.

A lot of the protestors don't call the troops murderers and rapists. You're looking at a small section of protestors; not at all representative of the movement as a whole.

That whole "If you don't support the war, you don't support the troops!" line was created by those extreme right-wing weirdos who try to put down anyone who speaks out against their bullshit war.

 

[Pajari]

I would have liked to see our troops used in a more just cause.

Purely out of curiosity, what do you think would be a more just cause?

EDIT: I know a few Marines, actually, and I've read a lot of books about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan written by armed forces officers, and the consensus I get from all this is that the corporal in Fallujah is exactly right. I'd like to go to Afghanistan and Iraq and see what's really going on (and I hear Afghanistan's a beautiful country, too...), but I know I'll not have the chance anytime soon. Until then, I'll trust the folks that have been there.

 

[Glirk Dient]

catch-22 ...they use patriotism to fuel the war machine

Just curious...do you cheer for your favorite hockey team...or anything like that?

What happens when they do something people don't approve of...do you go about saying that cheering for that team supports the act people don't approve of? No...you go about cheering realizing that was a bad egg and hope that team wins. Same with patriotism, you love your country because it is your country. If they do something wrong you try and fix it because you love your country. You don't sit back and complain and whine and come up with conspiracy theories like some extreme lefties do. Stop being so paranoid of patriotism stern, if you look back on history you will realize patriotism has pulled America through many tough stuggles in the past.

 

[Pajari]

Stop being so paranoid of patriotism stern, if you look back on history you will realize patriotism has pulled America through many tough stuggles in the past.

No, he's completely correct. Patriotism fuels the war machine and we are but grist for its inexorable, inhuman, all-conquering mill.

 

[satch919]

Purely out of curiosity, what do you think would be a more just cause?

We should have devoted all of our resources and military might to Afghanistan in our pursuit in finding Bin Laden and shutting down his terrorist network across the world. I don't think I need to remind you that he's still at large.

Additionally, we could have used the troops to secure the Mexican-American border. We could have used the 240 billion dollars to build a secure border and provide funds to hire a qualified and tight force around that border.

:thumbs:

 

[kaf11]

All of my friends and I hate this war and at the same time have nothing but respect for the soldiers of every country fighting the "war on terror" right now. Who we hate are the politicians and leaders who orchestrated this unjust war.

 

[Pajari]

We should have devoted all of our resources and military might to Afghanistan in our pursuit in finding Bin Laden and shutting down his terrorist network across the world. I don't think I need to remind you that he's still at large.
:thumbs:

Cool, I agree that we should devote more resources to Afghanistan. We should have waited longer for Iraq, or at least attempted to balance the two countries out a bit more. Afghanistan needs more help, anyway.

The border isn't that big of a problem, I don't think. Its easy enough for terrorists and other unsavory elements to get into the country legally, there's no need for us to crack down on those that simply want a chance at some more money (to send back to their relatives in Mexico or not).

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

The border isn't that big of a problem, I don't think. Its easy enough for terrorists and other unsavory elements to get into the country legally, there's no need for us to crack down on those that simply want a chance at some more money (to send back to their relatives in Mexico or not).

You have got to be kidding me. I live here and yes, it is quite harmful to the economy and local job market. Legal immigration is fine, more people is great. The problem is illegal immigration because illegal business owners pay them wages below minimum and pay in literal cash dollars (paper money) for services.

It's not the immigrants faults, I don't blame them- it's the ones employing them that need to face the penalties. Eliminate that as best as possible and you will curb illegal immigration, as immigrating illegally won't offer as much prospect- they will be forced to come legally and work within the system of the US economy and not just syphon money out.

But please don't claim illegal immigration isn't a problem, it most certainly IS down here.

Illegal immigration can never be fully stopped. But what we have going on now is MASS ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. People don't understand that. It's literally THOUSANDS each day. Think about that. THOUSANDS. THREE ZEROS.

These signs are REAL on roads near the border.
http://www.numbersusa.com/images/aliens.jpg
http://www.huntingtonnews.net/images/sign.jpg
http://www***shlimbaugh.com/home/ei...surdity/gallery_22.parcol1.0007.ImageFile.jpg

In 2002 (one of the worst years) over 4 million illegally immigrated. For that year that's an average of 11,000 a day.

Very low estimates are at ~5000 on good days. Bad days/high estimates get up to 15,000 daily.

 

[satch919]

The border isn't that big of a problem, I don't think. Its easy enough for terrorists and other unsavory elements to get into the country legally, there's no need for us to crack down on those that simply want a chance at some more money (to send back to their relatives in Mexico or not).

I take it you don't live in a state bordering Mexico. They've had negative effects on our health care system, public schools, and other institutions. They need to come through legally. There's plenty of opportunities for them to do so. Did you happen to read about that massive tunnel in So. Cal that was found? I guess it was used to smuggle people and huge amounts of drugs into the U.S. The complexity of the system was rather impressive.

EDIT - RakuraiTenjin is right on target with his post. He lives in Arizona so he knows what's up.

 

[Pajari]

You have got to be kidding me. I live here and yes, it is quite harmful to the economy and local job market. Legal immigration is fine, more people is great. The problem is illegal immigration because illegal business owners pay them wages below minimum and pay in literal cash dollars (paper money) for services.

You'll have to explain to me how cheap labor for unsavory jobs is harmful to the economy. The national economy is humming along, and the southwest is the fastest-growing region in the US, in population and economic terms.

It's not the immigrants faults, I don't blame them- it's the ones employing them that need to face the penalties. Eliminate that as best as possible and you will curb illegal immigration, as immigrating illegally won't offer as much prospect- they will be forced to come legally and work within the system of the US economy and not just syphon money out.

Eliminate that and you'll have to find far higher-priced workers to get stuff done. No one is perpetually paid under the table, after a while we have an amnesty and everyone goes out and gets a legitimate ID and citizenship. As long as we'ere not mowing people down with machine guns and kicking them out of the country forcefully, and as long as we're still giving amnesties, the problem will still be there regardless of the enforcement efforts along the border. People come because we don't really want them to go back, honestly.

But please don't claim illegal immigration isn't a problem, it most certainly IS down here.

Everything is relative. I didn't say it was a problem, but I don't think its even close to the biggest one facing us.

I take it you don't live in a state bordering Mexico. They've had negative effects on our health care system, public schools, and other institutions. They need to come through legally. There's plenty of opportunities for them to do so.

I don't live in a state bordering Mexico, you're right. We get all kinds of crazy Canadian illegals up where I'm from . And, if the Mexicans do come through legally, then the schools and hospitals still experience the same overcrowding effects- that's with any fast-growing area, not just an area with illegal immigration. You can blame the lack of federal funding for schools more than the influx of immigrants- from what I understand conditions in turn-of-the-century Brooklyn weren't peachy, and all that immigration was completely legitimate.

My point is that all your (our) problems are from immigration, period, not illegal immigration specifically, and not from any source that we can really stem.

Oh, and by the way, perhaps we should ask Mexico to step up to the plate for once- it is their border too, after all.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

You'll have to explain to me how cheap labor for unsavory jobs is harmful to the economy. The national economy is humming along, and the southwest is the fastest-growing region in the US, in population and economic terms.

The national economy is doing alright. Locally, illegal immigration has brought my area to shit. It may be a while or it may never significantly make a big impact on the national scale, but you can't sit where you are and tell me it isn't significantly harming the economy and state services provided here. You're insane though to try and claim illegal immigration in any way is a benefit to the economy.

Eliminate that and you'll have to find far higher-priced workers to get stuff done.

That's the point, pay Americans. Why the stereotype is "rubbish jobs that no one wants to do" I don't know. These are actual jobs that should pay a decent wage. It's easy for you to say that stuff but I personally know people who have been pushed out of jobs because cheaper illegal labor offered itself up.

No one is perpetually paid under the table, after a while we have an amnesty and everyone goes out and gets a legitimate ID and citizenship.

That's not how it works. Amnesty was last declared 1986 that was TWENTY years ago.

As long as we'ere not mowing people down with machine guns and kicking them out of the country forcefully, and as long as we're still giving amnesties, the problem will still be there regardless of the enforcement efforts along the border. People come because we don't really want them to go back, honestly.

Everything is relative. I didn't say it was a problem, but I don't think its even close to the biggest one facing us.

It is one of the biggest here! Arizona requires federal assistance to solve the problem.

I don't live in a state bordering Mexico, you're right. We get all kinds of crazy Canadian illegals up where I'm from . And, if the Mexicans do come through legally, then the schools and hospitals still experience the same overcrowding effects- that's with any fast-growing area, not just an area with illegal immigration. You can blame the lack of federal funding for schools more than the influx of immigrants- from what I understand conditions in turn-of-the-century Brooklyn weren't peachy, and all that immigration was completely legitimate.

No they don't. There are immigration quotas. When people are coming legally you don't have 10,000 every day. Lack of federal funding? Illegals don't pay taxes or pay into social security, yet many programs allow them to draw from them! Draw welfare! It is illogical. One government agency is out to locate them and deport them, one is indexing them and providing welfare handouts. Guess what, the social services aren't allowed to hand over or keep indexes on which ones are actually citizens receiving benefits for the INS. It's uttery bullshit.

My point is that all your (our) problems are from immigration, period, not illegal immigration specifically, and not from any source that we can really stem.

Oh, and by the way, perhaps we should ask Mexico to step up to the plate for once- it is their border too, after all.

It's illegal immigration. Not immigration. It's not a social problem. Communities get along fine, especially given the situation and as bad as it could be. It's an economic issue.

Mexico won't step up to the plate. We've prodded and begged them to for years. We can't depend on them to and we have to take action.

edit: read my edit on numbers too on the first page.

edit2: Read this to understand more how cheap illegal labor is negatively effecting the economy, it doesn't help. http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscal.html

 

[gick]

Back on topic....

I have an immense amount of respect for the troops. To go out everyday and do what they do, with every vehicle being a potential car bomb and every person being a potential suicide bomber - they must have balls of steel.
Having said that, I'm totally against the war, I think it was based on lies and tens of thousands of people have died for no real reason. The sooner the whole thing is over, the better.

 

[Direwolf]

I recently read One Bullet Away which follows a Marine officer from his decision to join until the end of his first tour in Iraq (early in the war), from his perspective. Its interesting and well-written, and is an extremely candid account of what they did and what they saw, from the boredom in Afganistan to the firefights in Iraq. I enjoyed it all the more for sidestepping the political side of the war and just focusing on what he saw.

 

[satch919]

I recently read One Bullet Away which follows a Marine officer from his decision to join until the end of his first tour in Iraq (early in the war), from his perspective. Its interesting and well-written, and is an extremely candid account of what they did and what they saw, from the boredom in Afganistan to the firefights in Iraq. I enjoyed it all the more for sidestepping the political side of the war and just focusing on what he saw.

Sounds like a good book. I'll have to check it out. :thumbs:

 

[CptStern]

there comes a time when "I was just following orders" isnt good enough

 

[Mechagodzilla]

It's natural that people want the war to end fast and whatnot.

But, frankly, pulling out is the last thing the US should do. People need to take accountability for their actions, and for George Bush, that means staying in Iraq until it is secure to the point that it was worth all the billions of dollars and thousands of lives.

It's too bad for the troops that they'll have to stay there for however many decades, but they'll know who to blame come election time.

Making afghanistan stable first, at least, would have been soooo much better.

 

[CptStern]

It's natural that people want the war to end fast and whatnot.

But, frankly, pulling out is the last thing the US should do. People need to take accountability for their actions, and for George Bush, that means staying in Iraq until it is secure to the point that it was worth all the billions of dollars and thousands of lives.

I'm all for Bush staying in Iraq, just him no one else ...he's an awesome war president, if he cant defeat the infidels no one can

 

[Solaris]

Pwnt By Maddox

 

[Ome_Vince]

Bush would kick butt
lol

 

[DeusExMachina]

I support troops that aren't assholes. Most of the soldiers I've had contact with start calling you a bleeding heart liberal if you don't support the war. So they can go kill themselves for all I care :|.

But the ones who don't care about that kind of stuff...kudos.

 

[CptStern]

Bush would kick butt
lol

yes he would



although I like him much better when he's in his civilian clothes


oh sorry wrong pic, that's when he goes cruising :naughty:

 

[Solaris]

The national economy is doing alright. Locally, illegal immigration has brought my area to shit. It may be a while or it may never significantly make a big impact on the national scale, but you can't sit where you are and tell me it isn't significantly harming the economy and state services provided here. You're insane though to try and claim illegal immigration in any way is a benefit to the economy.

It allows large companies to employ people at low costs thus they make more money.

That's the point, pay Americans. Why the stereotype is "rubbish jobs that no one wants to do" I don't know. These are actual jobs that should pay a decent wage. It's easy for you to say that stuff but I personally know people who have been pushed out of jobs because cheaper illegal labor offered itself up.

Well then lets force companies to pay illegal immigrants the same as everyone else, and then they would have no incentive to hire illegal immigrants.

 

[Ome_Vince]

yes he would



although I like him much better when he's in his civilian clothes


oh sorry wrong pic, that's when he goes cruising :naughty:

It seems he more of a TopGun kind of guy lol

 

[CptStern]

It seems he more of a TopGun kind of guy lol

you can still like Top Gun if you look like this

 

[K e r b e r o s]

No. It's illogical to support the troops and support the war. They're dying in Iraq.

On the contrary, they're not just dying in Iraq. Many are infact living and destroying Al-Qaeda cells. The media's lack of reporting on Insurgent casualties and desertions is also whats probably getting you to believe the Coalition is loosing. Where you get that perception is probably from Libera Mantra born Op-Ed services like the News & Observer.

When you do nothing but report on the casualty figure (like the N&O), I can see how someone would believe thats all that ever happens. But evidently, as the topic is, this Marine has a different opinion on the war and its been one of my opinions for a very long time. Whats also evident is if you want news on the war, you're going to have to go somewhere else for a more accurate depiction. I see insurgents and marines dying -- the N&O just see's marines dying; and thats the loudest bias you could create against the war effort.

catch-22 ...they use patriotism to fuel the war machine

So, whats Catch-1? I guess what I'm trying to get at is, Catch-22 sounds more cool then it does real. Is this something you heard from PrisonPlanet?

That whole "If you don't support the war, you don't support the troops!" line was created by those extreme right-wing weirdos who try to put down anyone who speaks out against their bullshit war.

Actually, I say it because if you support the troops you inherently support the continueing of their war. For example, sending them letters and donations only makes them more inclined to continue the fight for as long as it lasts. It resteems them, and restructures their confidence, inclining them to continue the fight until they get home.

Thats what I'm saying is odd -- if you support the troops, then you support them continueing the war. And in many respects, you are helping the war to continue.

If your someone who wants the troops to leave Iraq, then thats the last thing you want to do.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Pwnt By Maddox

Maddox's reasoning is flawed. "pay the illegals the same wage"

Well that's the entire problem- illegal employers won't. If they became citizens they'd be payed minimum wage, pay into Social Security/taxes, and employer tax would be payed- rather than under the table cash payments simply syphoning money back to Mexico and ONLY salex tax revenue being generated for the state services they use.

Well then lets force companies to pay illegal immigrants the same as everyone else, and then they would have no incentive to hire illegal immigrants.

Like I said above, that doesn't work because you create a huge budget deficit for yourself. All you generate is hopeful sales tax revenue. Force the companies to hire citizens or legal workers. Severely punish those who hire illegals. That way illegals will become citizens and contribute to the system rather than only draw from it.

Please read the link I gave with the information from the economist if you haven't already. You're not factoring in all the variables.

 

[CptStern]

So, whats Catch-1? I guess what I'm trying to get at is, Catch-22 sounds more cool then it does real. Is this something you heard from PrisonPlanet?

you're so brain dead kerberos. Reading is good for you

catch 22

 

[DeusExMachina]

Catch-22 is an excellent novel <3.

 

[SAJ]

And by coincidence, it just finished showing on BBC1 about ten minutes ago.

Spooky.


Maddox? Flawed reasoning?
Heresy!!

 

[Razor]

there comes a time when "I was just following orders" isnt good enough

Exactly, but that is one of the problems with some of the lower classes of military, not the elite fighting forces who can think on a battlefield but some of the non-elite general infantryman. They're trained to follow orders and follow orders is what they do best. It's probably an over generalisation but that's the point of view of a lot of the more elite commandants and higher ranks in the British military - it won't be any different for any other military, especially the military forces of terrorists and insurgents.

 

[VictimOfScience]

Catch-22 is an excellent novel <3.

QFT. One of the few novels that actually had me laughing aloud with each turn of the page! Great great writing....

 

[Solaris]

Maddox's reasoning is flawed. "pay the illegals the same wage"

Well that's the entire problem- illegal employers won't. If they became citizens they'd be payed minimum wage, pay into Social Security/taxes, and employer tax would be payed- rather than under the table cash payments simply syphoning money back to Mexico and ONLY salex tax revenue being generated for the state services they use.


Like I said above, that doesn't work because you create a huge budget deficit for yourself. All you generate is hopeful sales tax revenue. Force the companies to hire citizens or legal workers. Severely punish those who hire illegals. That way illegals will become citizens and contribute to the system rather than only draw from it.

Please read the link I gave with the information from the economist if you haven't already. You're not factoring in all the variables.

Heres an Idea. Make a law that states anyone hired illegally, and being paid below the minimum wage, can claim total ammnesty and become a US citizen, and the employer must pay him $100 for every hour he has been underpaid.

That would mean illegals wouldn't be taking up jobs, unless they were genuinly better qualified to do such a job.

 

[jimbo118]

Catch-22 is an excellent novel <3.

QFT&E, one of my fav books, the film isnt bad either...

 

[DeusExMachina]

You ever read the sequel? I haven't had a chance to yet.