Red Mosquito

Bi_3 wrote:I haven't been reading the news, what did he do this time?

Strat wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:

Strat wrote:Geezes christ spenno. Lets read more about facts

There have been zero fatal terror attacks on U.S. soil since 1975 by immigrants from the seven Muslim-majority countries President Donald Trump targeted with immigration bans on Friday, further highlighting the needlessness and cruelty of the president’s executive order.

This is a bizarre metric - what relevance does this have? It's 2017, the state of the world today isn't comparable to that of 1975, 2001 or 2016.

If that actually were the justification, "your guys killed us, so we'll block you!", it would actually strike me as being pointlessly punitive absent of other considerations.

But he's doing this to stop the bad terrorists who want to blow us up from coming in. The facts say - they dont come from these areas. You dont grasp this, spenno

wtf

Birds in Hell wrote:It's ridiculous - to find that article credible you'd need to adopt the position that the USA exists in a bubble where the only possible way to work out who the bad guys might be is to check the books and see who attacked you five, or thirty-five, years ago.

As though intelligence doesn't exist, as though you can't look to attacks in European countries for guidance here.

Strat wrote:You understand that our country is basically a massive island and to get here....

cutuphalfdead wrote:To me, whether the list gets the countries right or not in terms of where terrorists are coming from is irrelevant. This action keeps people out of this country who have every right to be here.

The pregnant Iranian woman who holds a green card but went to Iran to visit family deserves to return home.

The Iraqi translator that put his entire families life on the line to help the Americans, and then waited two years to secure an emergency visa deserves not to be betrayed and left to die.

And the Syrian refugee, perhaps the most vulnerable and desperate person in the world today, has every right to look to America, who inscribed on her doorstep the words "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."

Actions like this, in the guise of protecting America, actually destroy it. They turn America into a country that is inherently un-American, leaving little to protect.

cutuphalfdead wrote:To me, whether the list gets the countries right or not in terms of where terrorists are coming from is irrelevant. This action keeps people out of this country who have every right to be here.

tragabigzanda wrote:

Strat wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:To me, whether the list gets the countries right or not in terms of where terrorists are coming from is irrelevant. This action keeps people out of this country who have every right to be here.

The pregnant Iranian woman who holds a green card but went to Iran to visit family deserves to return home.

The Iraqi translator that put his entire families life on the line to help the Americans, and then waited two years to secure an emergency visa deserves not to be betrayed and left to die.

And the Syrian refugee, perhaps the most vulnerable and desperate person in the world today, has every right to look to America, who inscribed on her doorstep the words "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."

Actions like this, in the guise of protecting America, actually destroy it. They turn America into a country that is inherently un-American, leaving little to protect.

Yes. This. I got sidetracked. Thank you, Chud.

Its really heartbreaking today. It feels really weird. We are different. We are not great.

Ideologically, I'm with you two on this. But I'm concerned you're over-reacting, when the policy has only been in effect for 24 hours. It could be that Trump follows through on a hardline stance -- no one gets in until a review of the refugee program is conducted. But it's also very possible that all the aforementioned people -- the pregnant woman, the Syrian refugee, etc -- will be able to get in once they jump through some (likely difficult) hoops that have yet to be developed.

Let's put some stakes in the ground:

1. Yes, Trump has adopted the sort of soft-hate speech that McP mentioned a few pages back, and he's tapped into a racist underbelly that has been festering for quite a while.

2. Yes, America has traditionally welcomed people from all over the world (though the "opportunity" it has offered for the last hundred years or so is sort of a sick joke). Going against that ideal is most certainly going against the very fabric of America.

3. The threats the US faces from violent extremists are not the same as they were five years ago, let alone fifty.

4. It does appear as though Trump has cherry-picked the blacklisted states from which Muslims can now emigrate. If, for the sake of argument, we can allow that such a list should exist, then yes, other countries should most certainly be on there as well, and their exclusion is highly suspect.

There are probable more points we could come to a broad consensus on, but this should be enough to make my point: No combination of these statements equates to a clear rational for either polar argument. That is, neither should we allow everyone in willy-nilly, nor should we block every refugee and Green Card holder without exception. LV's post yesterday about his desire to see a liberal version of Trump has been rattling around my head a bit, and I don't think it's the right outlook, because such a figurehead would almost certainly continue to polarize the nation against the Trumpists. What we need right now, in the political realm, are moderate leaders -- people who can address the concerns of both sides, and come up with a solution that is sensible (of course Hillary could have done this)...

Meanwhile, here on the RM POTUS thread, it's disconcerting to see the polarization between Spenno and everyone else. Jesus christ, everyone just take a break -- the anger at Trump's actions yesterday is not contained just within the confines of RM. There will be enormous pushback on this, and I suspect we'll see some huge battles between states and the Fed as certain regions enact measures to welcome refugees.

I'm not saying this isn't a hate-fueled disaster of a situation -- it most certainly is just that. But the far-left approach of "let 'em all in!" is almost certainly going to lead to a Paris-style attack in the near future, and saying "No terrorist attacks have occurred on US soil in which the perpetrators come from one of Trump's blacklisted states" is incredibly disingenuous to the realities of the world today. There will continue to be an increase in violence: from embittered refugees, from radicalized Muslims, from US citizens who are off their meds and have access to heavy-duty firearms. But I can almost guarantee that neither the solutions of the extreme left, nor the extreme right, will fix anything.

Moderate is the word of the day, kids. Demand this behavior from your politicians and leaders, and attempt to be the example yourself.

Strat wrote:And this is also a part of why liberals have lost elections, because they dont call out the bullshit like the conservative right does. We should be angry. You should be angry. You should call out this bullshit.

Birds in Hell wrote:It's ridiculous - to find that article credible you'd need to adopt the position that the USA exists in a bubble where the only possible way to work out who the bad guys might be is to check the books and see who attacked you five, or thirty-five, years ago.

As though intelligence doesn't exist, as though you can't look to attacks in European countries for guidance here.

wease wrote:

Strat wrote:And this is also a part of why liberals have lost elections, because they dont call out the bullshit like the conservative right does. We should be angry. You should be angry. You should call out this bullshit.

Boy, his shoe is on the other foot now, isn't it?

Birds in Hell wrote:

wease wrote:

Strat wrote:And this is also a part of why liberals have lost elections, because they dont call out the bullshit like the conservative right does. We should be angry. You should be angry. You should call out this bullshit.

Boy, his shoe is on the other foot now, isn't it?

How so?

Despite the hashtag, there's no #MuslimBan.

Birds in Hell wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:To me, whether the list gets the countries right or not in terms of where terrorists are coming from is irrelevant. This action keeps people out of this country who have every right to be here.

At the risk of shouting into the ether: nobody has the right (US citizens aside) to enter the USA. Entry is a privilege, extended with discrimination by the US government.
On why some countries, eg. Pakistan, were not on the current list, I saw a suggestion that the seven countries selected are those where our intelligence links are low, making vetting more difficult. Our intelligence links with Pakistan (for example) are more developed and the risk assessment process more straight-forward.