Immigration and Security Essay

The article, in a general context, raised the doubt on whether the concept of diplomacy and democracy has come back into the ideologies of the join States Government? After utiliziation of progress reports on the issue, the writer came up with a central argument suggesting that the United States political relation, with direct intervention by The Whitehouse, eventu wholey came up with a well-crafted solution that does non require the use barbarian force.Article writer David Silverberg (2007) stated that the compromise stipulated the followingExisting embezzled aliens in the country (United States) can apply for residence Visas and eventual citizenship. Up yo 4oo,oo temporary employees can be admitted into the country for temporary employment barely would have to leave after 2 years. The act result and hence open new portals for educated, skilled English-Speaking black aliens that have bulky conformed to the old system of family ties prevalent in the past. (2007)A certain bring in of the article stationed kayoed that the United States government had promulgated a doable solution to a problem that had been plaguing several of its major policies. The offset printing policy ravishment was on il licit in-migration, which perk upd disorient on the government accompaniment be hunting expedition anti- illegal immigration efforts b unsmootht additional costs and damaged the American providence in general.The other was the destruction of the myth of the connection between illegal immigration issues and terrorism which affects the United States governments war against terrorism. In connection, it was with surface a doubt that the United States have started filtering the country of foreigners particularly of Middle-Eastern inheritance as an initial reaction to the Al Qaeda attacks in 2001. In spite of the fact that most illegal immigrants were quite useful in doing menial tasks, immigration policies intended for homeland security system threats would not be efficient if it did not consider illegal immigration matters (Farnam, 2005, p. 168).The said issues answered the So what? question due to the fact that issue of illegal immigration in the United States draw mixed opinion from American citizens and political figures (Pew Latino Center, 2006, p. 1). It was in this regard that the main point of the article was very persuade in giving the importance to the matter, for the United States government appeared to have helpless the sense of diplomacy in executing its policies directed toward national security after the 9/11 attacks. The compromise mentioned by Silverberg then was the first non-hostile resolve on a national security matter.The issues that the article tackled was not unique in any way for illegal immigration was already a serious matter in the United States since the late nineteenth century. The issues of illegal immigration started in the United States in 1882 (Lui, 2007), wherein the United States government banne d most Chinese laborers because of threats of cheap labor which undermined the economic perceptual constancy of the country (Smith & Edmonston, 1997, 23).Silverberg articulated several points, primarily on how the compromise became bonny and fair, and how it give be beneficial to all the parties entangled. The reason behind Silverbergs judgment was grounded on the logic of the advocates who, because of their conflicting points of view, created dilemma in the legal and ethical perspectives. The dilemmas also affected the United States constitution, particularly immigration laws and human being rights of the illegal aliens.Silverberg first bequeathed the side of the anti-illegal immigration advocates who argued that the United States constitution never tolerated mass law-violations, therefore such neglegeance should be punished accordingly. Sileverberg conversely showed shame over poverty stricken individuals who sought for a better life sentence in the United States, he also a rgued that penalizing illegal aliens was not a viable option for it will violate the policies of human rights. Second is the interpretation of the side of the liberals who contested that illegal immigrants cannot afford legal fines that would be imposed. However, a simple humane point cannot justify the unconstitutional act of enormous law breaking, hence, this is also not the perfect solution to the predicament.In a different note, Silverberg also attempted to pesuade readers in a securing perspective, that proposed counter-measures against illegal immigration such as investments on additional border patrol officers, much sophisticated border security technology, as well as winding of new detention facilities and extra efforts on identification of undocumented immigrants will tremendously affect the results of the compromise. In spite of the cost, Silverberg argued that the American government will reap a lot of fruit in their investments. Furthermore, Silverberg believed that despite all of the expenditures, the act and the counter-measures will provide favorable opportunities for the United States.Silverberg also pointed out careful and proper timing in implementation was a observe factor for a rush in implementation may cause a difficulty in the process or disastrous results. attached the account that the proposition was a compromise, a wreckless execution of concepts may cause discrepancies in the status of illegal aliens.Silverberg exclusively provided the idea of the compromise which is the only element close to literature in the article. However, the articles arguments were solidified by cited comments from observe contributors such like Department of homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and Senators Ted Kennedy, Jon Kyl, and flush toilet McCain who supported and rejected the idea of the compromise respectively.The given sources provided Silverberg with ingenuity in crafting solid arguments which highlighted the importance of the sub ject matter at hand. Though the order of data collecting was not well explained or expounded, Silverberg managed to analyze the constitution of the problem, the objectivity of the proposed solution, and glib solutions to avoid the problem from repeating again. In this sense, the need can be replicated for the compromise generated numerous ideas for preventive methods. Furthermore, conducting a more formal study may serve as an eye -opener to the parties involved because the concerns of the article were inclined on how the United States government could lessen the violation of human rights in implementing policies.The variables Silverberg used were the parties involved, the against party and the pro party in concert with the points argued by the two opposing sides. Because as previously mentioned, the article pointed out the irrationalities and flaws of the advocacies which lead to the connotation that the articles premise was the alternative point of view on the matter.There wer e no exact findings or results notwithstanding as the compromise is still under the stages of development. However, Silverberg managed to give a rough estimate that the compromise can practically give a irrefutable light to all the parties involved. Silverberg gave particular tension on the universal character of the compromise in how it addressed all the concerns of the parties involved. He also reason out that the efficiency of the compromise , regardless of ammendments, would be solid if ample clock time is given to perfect it.The findings were therefore comprehensive and complementing with the central argument and main points for Silverberg was capable of explicating how the compromise satisfied all sides in conflict. Judging from the arguments and the plausible solutions given, Silverberg successfully stimulated the importance of the matter. The articles conclusion then proved to be full-proof for one of the conditions included careful implementation and able time for amm endments and revisions.Silverberg thoroughly addressed the implications of his conclusions particularly on how he gave emphasis on the dilemma created by the opposing sides. Through explanations of the advocacies, Silverberg made a comprehensive defense of his main arguments about the advantages and impartiallity of the compromise.ReferencesFarnam, J. (2005). US Immigration Laws infra the Threat of Terrorism. tender York Algora Publishing.Lui, C. (2007, May 7). How Illegal Immigration was Born. American Heritage. Retrieved 23May 2008, from http//www.americanheritage.com/articles/web/20070507-chinese-exclusion-act-california-chester-a-arthur-immigration-san-francisco-earthquake-of-1906-paper-sons.shtmlSilverberg, D. (2007, May 22). The Immigration Debate and Homeland Security. HomelandSecurity Today. Retrieved 21 May 2008, from http//hstoday.us/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=284&Itemid=151Smith, J.P., & Edmonston, B. (Eds.). (1997). The New Americans Economic, Demographi c, and Fiscal Effects of Immigration. Washington, DC The National Academies Press.The American Public imprint on Immigration in Spring 2006 A review of major(ip) Surveys (2006). Washington, DC Pew Hispanic Center.