Already answered, it doesn’t matter, and it doesn’t matter.

Because sovereign nations have the right to decide who is and who is not allowed across their borders, and they also have the right to take reasonable measures to expel those who are present in their country without permission.

Not quite sure what the past 8 years have to do with the Panamanian government, but I am certainly in the “I’m not going to assume that Panama of all places is running a concentration camp until I see some actual evidence of it” camp, especially when they probably don’t want these migrants anyway, and don’t seem to have a reason to vindictively mistreat them like the US does.

Source that the Panamanian location is a concentration camp? Random Twit-heads don’t count.

They sent people to the jungle without shelter.

I suppose that’s possible, but Imma need a source for that claim, because it’s definitely not in the article I read. That seems more like the sort of blind, knee-jerk reaction the twit-head in the pic is intending to elicit with their inflammatory one-liner.

Do you really think they plan to meet all of their needs?

All of the needs required of a brief detainment before repatriation? Yeah, I see no reason why Panama wouldn’t do that, especially since they probably want these people out of Panama as soon as possible.

And if they are just doing their best to cope with the migrants, then the US is responsible for sending them to a place that could not handle them.

They seem to be handling them just fine. I agree that the US sending them there was a dick move, and probably an attempt at strongarm tactics on Trump’s part, but Trump being a dick doesn’t suddenly mean that Panama is running a concentration camp, as the talking head is asserting to make people angry enough to engage en masse with their “content”.

Whether the US is following its laws or not has literally nothing to do with whether this Panamanian location is a concentration camp, which is the talking head’s claim and the entire point of this comment chain.

The US is calling the shots, you admitted they might not be following the law, and yet you expect the US to follow the rules they create and break? That’s a very niave outlook on global politics.

It would be, if, once again, the specific day-to-day operation of these camps had anything whatsoever to do with the US, which it doesn’t seem to.

Please read carefully this time:

This is not a US camp. This location is constructed and operated entirely by the sovereign government of Panama, and we have no evidence that the Panamanian government is doing anything that could be construed as being a concentration camp. If anything, Panama is likely being forced by the US to detain these people against their will, giving them even less incentive to mistreat them, especially since these camps are now international news.

I’m pretty sure it’s also lined with inflammatory rhetoric, so I think I’ll just keep reading original sources and waiting for facts that are supported by evidence.

The fact that people will be leaving the Panamanian camp as soon as next week, according to the article, meaning that it really does seem intended to be temporary.

Also, Imma need a source on your claim that they’re exposed to the elements. Meeting their material needs is perfectly appropriate for the sort of temporary situation being described.

The US allows legal asylum. Whether the US is correctly following their own laws with regard to legal asylum is a completely separate issue from whether or not this Panamanian site is a concentration camp, as the talking head is asserting in an incredibly emotionally manipulative manner.

As I’ve mentioned elsewhere in this thread, people here seem really intent on conflating their own thoughts on immigration in general with the actual situation being described in the article.

I’ve always kinda sucked at dodgeball. Good at throwing, good at catching, reeeally bad at dodging.

Uh, bye, I guess?

That’s fair. I guess we’ll see. Just because the camp remains open doesn’t mean that people aren’t being repatriated in a timely manner though.

So, even Panama decides “ah, well, fuck it, just kill em I guess”, that’s still on us.

I do agree with this. We do have some culpability in the way they are treated until they reach their home countries.

I think I’m still missing your point about “if they CAN go anywhere else, why are they being held in Panama?” though. I think it’s a show of force on Trump’s part, exercising his leverage over Panama from the threat of stealing the canal. I don’t think Trump cares about what happens to the migrants once they’re in Panama, so I don’t really see a reason for Panama to purposefully mistreat them, when they don’t seem to have the incentives to do so that the US does.

If I’m still missing something (other than your healthy inherent distrust of governments, including Panama’s), definitely do let me know.

I’m deeply skeptical of this whole “oh, they’re just innocent lil camps outside of our own borders and laws where the media can’t easily check, why are you suspicious lmao?” narrative.

This is a very fair and respectable position to take.

I’m also of the belief that people should live and work where they please, and that national borders are the tools of oppressors.

Here we will have to disagree (not that national borders can’t be tools of oppressors, but that they are inherently so). I’ve enjoyed our conversation - you’ve given me the benefit of the doubt here, unlike many other commenters, and I very much appreciate your good faith comments.

And what does that have to do with the Panama camps mentioned in the article? People in this thread seem to have a really, really difficult time staying on topic.

No u lmao gotteeeeeem

These kinds of operations always end up scooping up actual US citizens. That’s what happens when you break a few eggs to make an omelette.

Sure, but again, that’s a US problem and not really a Panamanian one that I can tell. Also, as I mentioned in my other comment, it’s a false dichotomy to argue that the way US enforces immigration is bad, so therefore no immigration enforcement can be allowed at all.

The countries of origin might either not be known (in the case of someone in the country since they were a small child) or might not recognize them as a citizen for a variety of reasons, including paperwork cock-ups.

If that proves to be the case, then yes, Panama will have the responsibility to find a humane resolution to the situation. That has very little bearing on the immediate situation described by the article though.

It seems that in your responses here you’re often conflating a lot of your opinions about immigration policy in general with the specifics of the situation at hand, which is what I’m specifically talking about. I’m happy to discuss immigration more generally, as I did in my other comment, but again, I don’t think many of the points you’ve made so far are very relevant.

The country of origin might refuse to repatriate the person, because you can’t just dump a shitload of people on a poor country all at once and expect no consequences.

The country has responsibility for their citizens anyway though. Refusal to repatriate is then on that country, not on Panama or the US. If that country is so concerned about its ability to repatriate its citizens, it should do a better job of making sure they’re not placed in that position.

This whole thing is honestly like when a cartoon character sticks a shotgun in a hole and ends up blowing their own ass off. That’s us right now.

Maybe so, but it’s the US’s right to make that determination, and it’s a right that (with all of the specific caveats of we’re doing a horrible job of it and most people are interested in it for the cruelty, etc.) I fundamentally support.

You should always, always have a healthy doubt of the government.

This is always a true and refreshing statement to hear, and trust me, I have no inherent faith in the Panamanian government in general. I just see no reason to assume all of these horrible things when a) there’s no evidence that that’s the case and b) just because some idiotic talking head is trying to emotionally manipulate me into doing so.

Nope - I just don’t see any reason to assume the worst of a government when I have no evidence that they deserve that assumption. If this were about a camp actually in the US, I’d be a lot more prepared to believe that the conditions were inhumane.

Under Trump 1…

Panama doesn’t have the same animosity against migrants that I’m aware of, so I’m not sure why they’d do that. Plus, the article doesn’t mention any sort of treatment like that, so I don’t see a reason to assume it of Panama without some sort of evidence.

My thoughts about national borders are fully examined. All countries have the right to say who is and who is not allowed to be within their borders, and they also have the right to temporarily detain individuals who they don’t want within their borders until they can be repatriated, regardless of those individuals’ intentions or behaviors.

The way that illegal immigrants are exploited is also bullshit, of course, but it’s a false dichotomy to claim that sovereign nations therefore cannot decide who is or is not allowed to cross their borders.

I’m not sure what you mean by “legitimately returned”? Do you mean that Panama can’t be sure of their place of origin?

I fully agree that the detainment camps that Trump inherited from Obama were inhumane, but in my opinion a lot of that was due to the unreasonably long amount of time people were forced to spend in them. Most of those conditions (obviously not refusing to provide soap, turn the lights off, etc. - that was just intentional cruelty) are reasonable for a few weeks or so, as a temporary stop-gap, but after months of detainment it definitely becomes inhumane.

We don’t have any evidence that the Panamanian camps are doing any of those things though, or why Panama would want to treat them like that.

If anything, this seems like an improvement.

a. Sure, if we’re disingenuously ignoring the meanings and implications of words today for some reason.

b. For the first part of this question, here’s a response I made elsewhere that addresses it:

"The article doesn’t address that, so I’d be speculating, but if I had to guess, I’d say either:

1. US authorities determined that Panama had some sort of culpability for the migrants entering the US - maybe they were lax in their policing of the Darien Gap, for example

or, also quite likely given how much of a petty dick Trump is:

2. Trump forced Panama specifically to take them as a show of power related to his threat to steal the Panama Canal."

For the second part of your b. point, I don’t see a reason that this is a bad thing for Panama to do, even if it sucks that they’re the ones having to do it. This isn’t a concentration camp - it’s a temporary camp until the migrants can be repatriated.