Even in 1812, the US Army was still sufficiently successful to produce a commander who seized control of the Great Lakes and another who secured the Mississippi Delta, feats that eventually made both of them presidents. Perhaps that explains why the force that took the field in 1845 was so much more capable than the one that frequently quit the field (even when that abandoned the White House itself to arson) in 1812. It certainly explains much of WHY the Mexican-American War happened; even if one accepts the view the US was merely defending the legal rights of its new Texas citizens, those citizens might never have existed absent Jackson and Tyler encouraging US expatriates seeking land grants from Mexico. And, of course, without Jacksons protege Sam Houston needing to re-invent himself after ouster from Congress, the Texas War of Independence likely fails.

I could accurately note that the US easily would have easily conquered Canada had it not been also defended by the British Army and most resident Indians. Yet the flip side is that that combined force would have just as easily smothered the US republic in its cradle had the British not been rightfully more focused on the European phase of the war against Napoleon.

Precisely, but this is also the problem with racial profiling: Many completely innocent people are presumed guilty, not because of anything they have DONE, but simply due to how they LOOK. It is not even as simple as presenting a birth certificate, drivers license and/or SS card as proof of legal US residency, since illegal aliens can (and many DO) obtain fraudulent versions of those documents specifically for use as proof of legal residence. So any brown person who shows a birth certificate to police is as much "suspected felon" as "proven US citizen."

So where does that leave a 7th-generation native of a places that have only been part of the US for 6 generations? In legal limbo.

Politics should not be a shibboleth though, nor citizenship nor even legal alien residency contingent on conforming to current ruling partys particular platform. The Republican Partys values and principles are not synonymous with those of the US: Republicans just THINK they are. So I agree with operating on the basis of merit (and need,) because I think ALL government should operate on that basis, but politics itself is neither here nor there to that (and goes a long way toward undermining the merit aspect anyway.) This was an old complaint of mine at wotmania even before I met my wife:

Back-assward US immigration inhibits legal residence and encourages illegal residence, yet should do the opposite.

I would LOVE to see genuine "reform," as such, rather than the simplified absolutist options that are the ONLY ones EITHER major US party allows: "Visas for all" or "visas for none" and no "miniature American flags for" anyone.

That said, marrying and siring a child with a filthy Foreign has given me far more firsthand knowledge and experience with our badly broken immigration process. It was never cheap, fast nor easy, but since 911 immigration is no longer handled solely by the State Dept: It must go through Homeland Security FIRST, before being handed off to a completely different Cabinet-level agency only if/when approved by the first. With an immediate US relative (i.e. spouse, parent or child) the wait is (usually) "only" 1½ years, while everyone else must wait 7-10. Either way, the fees for filing multiple forms ALONE (i.e. excluding the cost of travel and moving belongings) is THOUSANDS of dollars. That is hard enough for someone from a country like Norway, where per capita income is ~$95,000 US; imagine what thousands of dollars in fees looks like for a Central American who dropped out of school to become a migrant worker only to find a press gang coercing them into a drug cartel now head-hunting them in the traditional rather than employment sense. We are talking a full YEARS income just to go through a 7-10 year process that bewilders me even as a fairly intelligent native speaker, much less a semi-educated speaker of English as a second or third language.

Or, y'know: Swim the river and you can be here tomorrow; even if caught, that will just mean you are dumped back on the south side of the river to try again tomorrow. Most people make it sooner or later; far sooner the 7-10 years. Amnesty screws the law-abiding (hereafter referred to as the Party of the Suckers Part) while rewarding the criminal. We practically hung a sign on the border that reads "Honest people need not apply," because we actively exclude the honest and actively encourage the dishonest. Do that for 30-40 years and what will you have?

A nation of criminals: Because criminality is a prerequisite of entry, and honesty disqualifying.

Seriously, in terms of the actual legal REQUIREMENTS, it was easier, faster and cheaper to get a visa so I could move to Norway and THEN marry a citizen than for my wife to move to the US with a US citizen to whom she is ALREADY married and with whom she even has a biological child. Technically, she could visit under the Visa Waiver Program (at least until Trump repeals it, which was another one of the things quietly included in his initial Executive Order) and then "decide" to say and apply for Adjustment of Status as my wife. There is just one tiny little problem:

That would be considered visa fraud and thus a CRIME, because she would have told the border control people at the airport that she was "just visiting" despite intending from the start to stay indefinitely (i.e. she would have LIED.) People do it all the time, and many get away with it, but when it comes time to actually receive the green card, if the State Dept. personnel deciding the case decide THAT happened, they will deny the application, deport the fraudster, and bar them from entering the US under ANY circumstances for a decade.

My wife and I are decent (i.e. stupid) so we are doing it the legal way. And that will take at least two months longer (so far...) because half the State Dept. has quit in disgust, the other half has been fired in disgust, and ALL of it is having its budget slashed by $50 billion despite the fact it already has too little cash to even provide its embassies security in war zones.

Point being: The many people on the right whose idea of "reform" is throwing out EVERYONE and sealing the border are dead wrong—but the roughly equal number of people on the left convinced "reform" means admitting EVERYONE and abolishing all borders forever are just as wrong, only for the opposite reason. The only people who sincerely feel immigration should several thousand dollars, several years of ones life and several lawyers are lawyers themselves.