Originally posted by sh76No. He'd be better off saying he'd ban members of Daesh. And he'd be better off finding a better ally than Katie Hopkins. And he needs to stop using the Daily Mail as a source of information. You have Donald Trump. We have David Ike.
So, Trump would be better off merely saying that he'd ban people from predominantly Muslim countries?
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76This reminds me of my daughter's experience in an introductory International relations course. The assignment was to advise Saddam Hussein on how to best advance his interests. When the prof reviewed the answers, he said most of those who answered would be taken out and shot.
So, Trump would be better off merely saying that he'd ban people from predominantly Muslim countries?
What would make Trump better off is only for him to say. And his answers might vary from day to day.
Originally posted by sh76Never mind that, what about European countries refusing to take in more Muslim immigrants?
Can anybody tell me why all of the Muslim countries that ban Israelis from entering don't get the same kind of righteous indignation that Trump is getting?
There is clearly a double standard in the world today.
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76Trump does not support a permanent ban, just a temporary ban
So, Trump would be better off merely saying that he'd ban people from predominantly Muslim countries?
After all, from what I hear US intelligence says that ISIS is trying to sneak terrorists in with the refugees, just like they did in France.
It is then a reasonable thing to halt immigration until this can be sorted out a bit better.
Originally posted by whodeyThat's for sharing information that I'm sure is available only for those with Top Secret clearance like yourself.
Trump does not support a permanent ban, just a temporary ban
After all, from what I hear US intelligence says that ISIS is trying to sneak terrorists in with the refugees, just like they did in France.
It is then a reasonable thing to halt immigration until this can be sorted out a bit better.
Trump's ban on ALL Muslims (not just from Syria as you keep dishonestly claiming) is open-ended.
Originally posted by whodeyThere is no reason to stop Muslims from entering the USA or anywhere else, there is very
So moonbats are running around saying that Trump is violating the Constitution by wanting to stop Muslim immigration to the US. Even the GOP is calling him to drop out saying he is violating the Constitution.
How so?
Unconstitutional would be locking up American Muslims only because they are Muslim when the US is at war with Muslims in the Middle East. ...[text shortened]... ng from a region at war with the US. This is what Trump wants to do. Trump is who Obama opposes.
good reasons to stop those that want to commit terrorist acts. The vetting process needs
to be good enough to stop anyone regardless of their religion or any other grouping from
flagging the bad guys and allowing good ones through. I think in the US our president has
done a very poor job of identifying those that want to do anyone harm from those that do not.
Because he refuses to acknowledge the difference between Muslims of good will from
those that are not, people tend to lump them all together. Thus when someone like
Trump comes along, Trump sounds reasonable to a large number of people who are very
sick and tired of the President bending over backwards to avoid the linkage which almost
everyone but him sees without any effort.
So the vetting process needs to improve, and if they do a good job no worries, if they do
not than those mistakes will be costly in lives.
Originally posted by whodeyWhich European countries are that? Under EU rules, member states get significant leeway in determining asylum policy (some allow only a small number of legal immigrants) but I am not aware of any state specifically targeting Muslims, although some politicians in Eastern Europe (where a tiny number of migrants go anyway) have said they prefer Christians. Are you confused again?
Never mind that, what about European countries refusing to take in more Muslim immigrants?
There is clearly a double standard in the world today.
Originally posted by no1marauderI support Donald Trump's proposal to stop Muslim immigration into the USA. There are over 5,000 vetted Syrian Christians refugees we could be charitable to instead. Perhaps we could save them from getting their heads cut off. 😏
What does that have to do with Trump's proposal to bar ALL Muslims from anywhere in the world from entering the US? Do you support that proposal or not?
Originally posted by KellyJayNo reason? Have you gone mad?
There is no reason to stop Muslims from entering the USA or anywhere else, there is very
good reasons to stop those that want to commit terrorist acts. The vetting process needs
to be good enough to stop anyone regardless of their religion or any other grouping from
flagging the bad guys and allowing good ones through. I think in the US our president has ...[text shortened]... d if they do a good job no worries, if they do
not than those mistakes will be costly in lives.
Originally posted by RJHindsSo you clearly would rather ten thousand die of starvation than to let in one terrorist.
No reason? Have you gone mad?
Is that your bottom line? ONE thousand? What is your personal magic number not to be exceeded?
You quite obviously care little for anything outside your rocking chair, unless it is to revile president Obama.
Originally posted by sonhouseYes. Let charities feed them.
So you clearly would rather ten thousand die of starvation than to let in one terrorist.
Is that your bottom line? ONE thousand? What is your personal magic number not to be exceeded?
You quite obviously care little for anything outside your rocking chair, unless it is to revile president Obama.
Originally posted by sonhouseFunny how it is either let them immigrate or have them die. You present a false dichotomy and expect a person to answer it.
So you clearly would rather ten thousand die of starvation than to let in one terrorist.
Is that your bottom line? ONE thousand? What is your personal magic number not to be exceeded?
You quite obviously care little for anything outside your rocking chair, unless it is to revile president Obama.
Pathetic.