Cum Laude Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 8 hours ago, dialamah said: 1. That had nothing to do with my question relating to safe zones, which is an interesting idea to me, but I am really not sure how it would work in a war zone, and given the situation over there. 2. Conservatives are arrogant, and also stupid. They are unable to employ critical thinking and so embrace any fake news that seems to agree with them. And they are also remarkably prone to generalizing, tossing insults and name-calling for no reason. Next time you respond to me, please remember that I'm not a "Liberal", I'm an individual. Thank you. Ahh, but Liberals are intolerant and cry and destroy and name-call when they lose. They love democracy until things don't go their way. You fail to seek the truth and instead accept the pablum fed to you by your CBC. Maybe downgrade the size of your spoon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 Just now, Cum Laude said: Ahh, but Liberals are intolerant and cry and destroy and name-call when they lose. They love democracy until things don't go their way. You fail to seek the truth and instead accept the pablum fed to you by your CBC. Maybe downgrade the size of your spoon. Agreed...intolerance is the working currency for liberals when it serves their purposes. "This is what democracy looks likes" only counts when liberals win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) Quote On 1/29/2017 at 7:40 PM, CITIZEN_2015 said: First of all it is not a Muslim ban. It is a CITIZEN ban. It is based on the color of their passports not any religion they believe in. Why wouldn't you call it as it is? Temporary ban on Muslims! That's what he's calling it - he's specifically identifying MUSLIMS in this temporary ban! The countries named are Muslim-majority countries! Edited January 31, 2017 by betsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altai Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 Yes I support Trump's decision not to allow any Muslims in non-Muslim countries and I hope they can achieve it. But I support this decision based on a condition, Muslim countries wont allow any persons from non-Muslim countries too. I dont want any non-Muslim persons in my country and in other Muslim countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 8 hours ago, OftenWrong said: Many refugees are scared to leave their own country, even despite the danger that war brings. What they really want is for the problems to be solved so they can get back to their lives again. Anyone would prefer to stay home, among their family and friends. In the land they were born. THAT would be the best outcome for everybody. Yeah, I agree with this. That's what we'd all prefer for them too, I'm sure. 7 hours ago, Derek 2.0 said: .Reader's Digest, his "plan" was to protect and provide further assistance to refugee camps in the border regions, like Jordan, Iraq and Turkey. IIRC, doing this saw a dollar spent go three times as far, in other words, for the cost of bringing one family to the United States, they could support three families in prefab camps over there, providing for all of their needs closer to home. I see. I think there is a certain sense to that although I'm not sure I'd trust Trump to actually do it. Thanks to you both for answering my question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 17 hours ago, Smallc said: Because Christian terrorism is a real thing, even if it exists in smaller numbers. It is? Can you name a Christian terrorist group? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 16 hours ago, OftenWrong said: Yep, and nor does it even matter if they do protest. He is the POTUS. His power is practically absolute. Whatever he says WILL be done immediately, and no amount of whining by unwashed leftists is going to change it. His power is far from absolute, and if he keeps pissing off important members of Congress, especially Republican ones, he'll soon find that out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 1 hour ago, Argus said: It is? Can you name a Christian terrorist group? The Lord's Resistance Army The IRA The KKK Sons of Odin Should I find more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kactus Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) Shocking video!!! Trump supporters love this Edited January 31, 2017 by kactus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 23 hours ago, Argus said: I thought that myself, at first, but then as I came to think about it, those countries are, for the most part, riven by civil war and instability, where you can't rely on the government to even know, much less care, who these people are getting onto airplanes to travel abroad, and where it's childishly easy to obtain travel documents, including passports. I understand the Syrian government will simply sell their passport to anyone who wants one, no questions asked. You can at least talk to the government in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan to check someone out, for example. You can't do that in these other countries. Iran, I admit, is considerably more organized and has an excellent security apparatus, but I think the feeling is there that you can't rely on anything they say to be truthful, given they still refer to the US as "the great Satan". Argus if he had any intelligence he understands a terrorist can come from any country and disguise themselves to be just about anyone from anywhere. So the key is tighter and more efficient screening of ALL people. This arbitrary decision to pick only certain countries is a crock. Its not about vetting, its about saying we won't vet we will just penalize anyone and everyone in certain countries. What is stupid about it is most terrorists in the ME come from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait countries he won't p ut on the list. Its a crock. He could have asked his people to create stricter vetting criteria. He chose not to. This criteria he uses does not change the vetting process currently being used. Its posturing and pandering. Its hot air. All he has done is facilitate chaos at the borders and turned all MUSLIMS into victims including terrorists. He's fed right into their hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 12 minutes ago, Rue said: ... Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait... All he has done is facilitate chaos at the borders and turned all MUSLIMS into victims including terrorists. He's fed right into their hands. Don't forget Canada > Ahmed Ressam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cum Laude Posted January 31, 2017 Report Share Posted January 31, 2017 4 hours ago, Smallc said: The Lord's Resistance Army The IRA The KKK Sons of Odin Should I find more? Wasn't it the KKK behind the Paris attacks last year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted February 1, 2017 Report Share Posted February 1, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, Smallc said: The Lord's Resistance Army The IRA The KKK Sons of Odin Should I find more? The IRA was never a Christian terrorist group, and narrow focused its attentions on the British military and police, and the members of Protestant militant groups, and it's no longer in operation.. The KKK is already in America and has no international links that I'm aware of, so I don't see why the US would be concerned about them flying in, and the Sons of Odin/Soldiers of Odin is not, as far as I know, a terrorist group. They do sort of vigilante street patrols in Finland because they say Muslims are raping Finnish girls. So... yeah, you better find more. Edited February 1, 2017 by Argus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hal 9000 Posted February 1, 2017 Report Share Posted February 1, 2017 1 hour ago, Argus said: The IRA was never a Christian terrorist group, and narrow focused its attentions on the British military and police, and the members of Protestant militant groups, and it's no longer in operation.. The KKK is already in America and has no international links that I'm aware of, so I don't see why the US would be concerned about them flying in, and the Sons of Odin/Soldiers of Odin is not, as far as I know, a terrorist group. They do sort of vigilante street patrols in Finland because they say Muslims are raping Finnish girls. So... yeah, you better find more. Did anyone catch the live Facebook video of three muslims raping a swedish girl? It didn't get much coverage, but authorities say they even though they know who the perps are, without the actual video, there's not much they can do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted February 1, 2017 Report Share Posted February 1, 2017 11 hours ago, dialamah said: I think there is a certain sense to that although I'm not sure I'd trust Trump to actually do it. I don't see why he wouldn't, likewise pressure nations within the region to contribute. Trump, IMHO, has a point when he questions why numerous Arab States are doing little to help the refugees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted February 1, 2017 Report Share Posted February 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, Derek 2.0 said: I don't see why he wouldn't, likewise pressure nations within the region to contribute. Trump, IMHO, has a point when he questions why numerous Arab States are doing little to help the refugees. Well, we all have different levels of trust and nothing I've seen so far suggests Trump is someone to be trusted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted February 1, 2017 Report Share Posted February 1, 2017 7 minutes ago, dialamah said: Well, we all have different levels of trust and nothing I've seen so far suggests Trump is someone to be trusted. Other then him doing all the stuff he promised Might not be popular or good policy, but he's doing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted February 1, 2017 Report Share Posted February 1, 2017 Just now, Derek 2.0 said: Other then him doing all the stuff he promised Might not be popular or good policy, but he's doing it. As someone else mentioned, so does ISIS. Doesn't mean they're trustworthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted February 1, 2017 Report Share Posted February 1, 2017 1 hour ago, Hal 9000 said: Did anyone catch the live Facebook video of three muslims raping a swedish girl? It didn't get much coverage, but authorities say they even though they know who the perps are, without the actual video, there's not much they can do. I didn't know, so I looked it up. That's horrific!! Makes me sick to my stomach! I hope those guys pay dearly. There seems to be a trend, sadly. https://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2017/01/31/friends-live-streamed-sexual-assault-of-teen-on-snapchat-while-she-slept/ https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/19/us/periscope-rape-case-columbus-ohio-video-livestreaming.html It was horrible enough when men would just video themselves raping girls, and now they've taken it to live streaming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpankyMcFarland Posted February 1, 2017 Report Share Posted February 1, 2017 'O to play Boswell to this mighty Johnson'; 'Twas the wish of many that fateful year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpankyMcFarland Posted February 1, 2017 Report Share Posted February 1, 2017 Whatever about the substance, the manner of it was a PR disaster for the US. There was no need to rush it like that and leave people stranded all over the place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OftenWrong Posted February 1, 2017 Report Share Posted February 1, 2017 11 hours ago, Argus said: His power is far from absolute, and if he keeps pissing off important members of Congress, especially Republican ones, he'll soon find that out. What can they do if Trump works within the framework of law that enacts his presidential power? Glare at him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted February 1, 2017 Report Share Posted February 1, 2017 What? No bans from Saudi Arabia? Seems a bit selective, dontcha think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
segnosaur Posted February 1, 2017 Report Share Posted February 1, 2017 6 hours ago, Derek 2.0 said: I don't see why he wouldn't, likewise pressure nations within the region to contribute. Trump, IMHO, has a point when he questions why numerous Arab States are doing little to help the refugees. He may have a valid point about some Arab nations not doing enough to help refugees. The problem is, does Trump have the skills to actually convince the leaders of those other countries to help out. Evidence suggests not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
segnosaur Posted February 1, 2017 Report Share Posted February 1, 2017 On 1/31/2017 at 1:52 AM, Derek 2.0 said: I remember him talking about it during the primaries........Reader's Digest, his "plan" was to protect and provide further assistance to refugee camps in the border regions, like Jordan, Iraq and Turkey. IIRC, doing this saw a dollar spent go three times as far, in other words, for the cost of bringing one family to the United States, they could support three families in prefab camps over there, providing for all of their needs closer to home......end result, no security issue for the United States, and more people are helped and ready to return home and rebuild once the conflict is over. That is such a vague "plan" to set up a safe zone as to be completely useless. Will America provide the protection or will they get others to provide troops? And if Americans are directly involved, will it require adding forces or diverting resources from the fight against ISIS? And what type of losses of troops are the Americans willing to accept? What if Syria disagrees with having American troops around? Nobody is claiming that it's not cheaper to have refugees live near their homeland; the problems in doing so are more political and military than financial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.