World, Writing, Wealth discussion

note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
30 views
World & Current Events > Ban Americans From Travelling To Rest Of World Due To Securty Risk

Comments Showing 1-45 of 45 (45 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Philip (new)

Philip (phenweb) | 2812 comments Just an idea given:

1. Large amount of crime exported from USA
2. Gun exports cause terrorism
3. On terrorism grounds US Americans are clearly a terrorism risk,
Therefore we need to protect the rest of the world until we sort out who and who not is a good American. A ninety day ban should suffice and given the imminent nature of the risk we need to impose this immediately and stop and cease all movement.

(I apologise to all my American friends but you elected him)


message 2: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12920 comments Sarcastic, I know, but usually these things are indeed reciprocal, so 7 countries might suspend entrance of US citizens for a while...
Maybe too drastic and abrupt a measure, however Trump shows he's serious on his promises so far.
Don't think it's entirely baseless though and if he wants to implement some measures verifying who's who, temporary suspension may be reasonable..
It's not foreign citizens he needs to care about, but the safety of his own..
After all, State Department and probably Foreign Office, issued travel warnings for their own citizens not to travel there too...


Tara Woods Turner | 2063 comments You can't fight ignorant xenophobia with ignorant xenophobia. It's a race to the bottom and everyone loses.


message 4: by Michel (new)

Michel Poulin You mean that we are not already on the bottom? Wait! This is only the first effective week of Trump's government. I think that I see the bottom ripping open and uncovering a new, deeper bottom. We were only on the top layer of the Nine Hells!

My personal prediction: Trump's presidency will implode before it completes its first four-year term (if he manages to get reelected for a second term, then the American people will truly deserve what will come next).


Tara Woods Turner | 2063 comments Michel wrote: "You mean that we are not already on the bottom? Wait! This is only the first effective week of Trump's government. I think that I see the bottom ripping open and uncovering a new, deeper bottom. We..."

We will deserve what comes next? Do you really think the millions of people who did not vote Trump actually deserve this? Unfair, harsh and unproductive way to assess the situation, in my opinion. That's like saying the Iraqi people deserved to be bombed and invaded because Hussein was their elected leader. And trust ne, more than Americans will suffer if this catastrophe continues to unfold.


message 6: by Michel (last edited Jan 29, 2017 07:03PM) (new)

Michel Poulin Tara, don't take it personal. What I meant is that, if the American people doesn't wake up, go to the polls en masse to throw Trump out, then they will have only themselves to blame. Vote! Don't stay home and find excuses not to make your voice count! And, while millions did not vote for Trump, the sad truth is that nearly as many millions DID vote for him. As for the rest of the World suffering because of him, I and others are way too conscious of that: that is why basically most of the rest of the World was shouting 'DON'T VOTE FOR THAT CLOWN!' But half of the American voters did anyway. Now, there will be consequences for this, for everyone.


Tara Woods Turner | 2063 comments Michel wrote: "Tara, don't take it personal. What I meant is that, if the American people doesn't wake up, go to the polls en masse to throw Trump out, then they will have only themselves to blame. Vote! Don't st..."

You're incorrect. 27% of eligible voters did not vote for Trump. Americans includes millions upon millions of people who had nothing to do with him being elected.


message 8: by Bernard (last edited Jan 29, 2017 07:17PM) (new)

Bernard Boley (bernard_boley) | 126 comments Michel wrote: "Tara, don't take it personal. What I meant is that, if the American people doesn't wake up, go to the polls en masse to throw Trump out, then they will have only themselves to blame. Vote! Don't st..."d/i>

Even if all the Americans would have voted, it probably wouldn't have changed a lot. Studies have often shown that globally speaking non voters fall within the same percentage as voters do in terms of preferences. The difference however has been noticed between white and non-white voters.

White - Non-white preference



message 9: by Michel (new)

Michel Poulin The one point that is undisputable is that the World doesn't own Trump: Americans do! Now, only Americans can make sure that Trump stays as little time as possible in power. If only 27% of American eligible voters didn't cast their ballots for Trump, as Tara said, then those who didn't take the time to vote have only themselves to blame for helping Trump getting into power.


message 10: by Mehreen (new)

Mehreen Ahmed (mehreen2) | 1911 comments Michel wrote: "The one point that is undisputable is that the World doesn't own Trump: Americans do! Now, only Americans can make sure that Trump stays as little time as possible in power. If only 27% of American..."

True, But I've also heard of vote rigging.


Tara Woods Turner | 2063 comments Michel wrote: "The one point that is undisputable is that the World doesn't own Trump: Americans do! Now, only Americans can make sure that Trump stays as little time as possible in power. If only 27% of American..."

It is still wrong to blame an entire country for something that much of the population has no control over. Do you realize Trump fell 3 million votes short of the popular vote? Did you not know that the protests, rallies and popular anti-Trump sentiment have broken records. This election has divided people, ended friendships and damaged communities. Yet you're comfortable saying we deserve what we get because this monster is in power. As for non-voters, yes, I am angry with them but I can also understand their disenfranchisement, political alienation and sense of hopelessness with the system. And even they don't deserve a Trump regime.


message 12: by Mehreen (new)

Mehreen Ahmed (mehreen2) | 1911 comments Tara Woods Turner wrote: "Michel wrote: "The one point that is undisputable is that the World doesn't own Trump: Americans do! Now, only Americans can make sure that Trump stays as little time as possible in power. If only ..."

A lot of them are misguided too I think.


message 13: by Michael (new)

Michael Fattorosi | 477 comments Philip wrote: "Just an idea given:

1. Large amount of crime exported from USA
2. Gun exports cause terrorism
3. On terrorism grounds US Americans are clearly a terrorism risk,
Therefore we need to protect the rest of the world until we sort out who and who not is a good American. A ninety day ban should suffice and given the imminent nature of the risk we need to impose this immediately and stop and cease all movement.

(I apologise to all my American friends but you elected him) "


Would you also support a complete pullout of NATO by US ?


message 14: by Philip (new)

Philip (phenweb) | 2812 comments Michael wrote: "Philip wrote: "Just an idea given:

1. Large amount of crime exported from USA
2. Gun exports cause terrorism
3. On terrorism grounds US Americans are clearly a terrorism risk,
Therefore we need to..."


No I would not want US to stop NATO although Trump has threatened that and my first comment was made in jest as Nik remarked

I do not want the USA disengaged at all. I also respect the right of the US Voter's to elect whom they wish. I criticised Obama when he intervened in the UK's Brexit referendum.

I would like to know what the Republican controlled US Congress and Senate are doing apart from letting Trump do what he wants. They passed a law on torture (under Obama) for example but have now said nothing. The Republican leader 6 months agao said any ban was stupid, now he has supported it.

Tara - I know many many Americans did not vote for this but they did also vote for congress, senate and governors. To be fair to the new President, for a change for a politician, he is doing exactly what he said he would do.


message 15: by Bernard (new)

Bernard Boley (bernard_boley) | 126 comments I don't think the US would pull out of NATO. They would have to renegociate all their entrances to Eastern Europe country ports and navigation rights inside coastal off shore borders. It would turn into an automatic self-blockade.


Tara Woods Turner | 2063 comments Philip wrote: "Michael wrote: "Philip wrote: "Just an idea given:

1. Large amount of crime exported from USA
2. Gun exports cause terrorism
3. On terrorism grounds US Americans are clearly a terrorism risk,
Ther..."


Don't see what Senatorial, gubernatorial or congressional elections have to do with the fact that Michel's statement generalized all Americans and insinuated that we deserve to be singled out for devastating outcomes.


message 17: by Denise (new)

Denise Baer Tara Woods Turner wrote: "We will deserve what comes next? Do you really think the millions of people who did not vote Trump actually deserve this? "

Voting

There were millions who didn't vote for Hillary. There were millions who didn't vote for Obama's second term. There were millions who didn't vote for George W. Bush. Those of us who don't get what we want from presidential outcomes need to accept the good with the bad. The want for Trump to fail isn't the stance any American should take. I don't like Trump as a person, but I also don't like Obama or Hillary. I had to suck it up.

Mehreen wrote: "A lot of them are misguided too I think. "

Yes, all party voters, Republican and Democrat, were misguided. I can't for the life of me understand why people or government didn't support the one candidate in my lifetime who could relate to the middle class and who was there for ALL Americans. Those outside of the parties who didn't support Bernie Sanders were either too ignorant to understand his vision or too greedy.

Refugees

Let's all think back now on when the Syrian turmoil began. This is from my blog: "I remember listening to the news about the people of Syria. Extremists were slaughtering hundreds of innocent women and children daily. Slaughtering. Innocence." http://baerbookspress.com/life/refugee-fear/

"Fast forward to 2015, and people are pissed, and oppose taking in refugees. I say to all citizens in the U.S. and Europe, turn your anger toward your government. If all these governments hadn’t sat on their asses for years now, letting the extremists build in strength and slaughter thousands, the people of Syria wouldn’t have left their homes."

Did you get involved in saving these people then? Did you write to the Obama administration asking why we weren't going in there then? Did you protest? Trump's decision along with others is a reactionary decision just like Obama's decision to go into Syria was a reactionary decision toward Putin.

Obama did NOTHING until Putin did. Sure Putin did it for his own political gain, but Obama does the same.

"US President Barack Obama says that Russia’s bombing campaign in Syria will only strengthen ISIL militants."

Obama refused to put troops on the ground in Syria. "than 50" forces deployed in the region to "train, advise and assist" vetted opposition forces, said officials. This will be the first time US troops are working openly on the ground in Syria."

Have we all not learned from history? 1939: Jews fleeing Nazi Germany "Desperate people, fleeing a terrifying, bloodthirsty regime, try to find refuge in the US. But the American government and the public don't want to accept them. They worry that accepting refugees would put citizens at risk, and they don't see the refugee crisis as their problem to fix. So they are turned away."

From what I read, Trump put a 4 month ban on refugees. I can clearly recall how many Americans were against taking in refugees, but now when Trump is involved, they want them. Many nations didn't want to take in the refugees. There are plenty of Germans who can't stand Merkel for doing so.

Now let's look at all the Gulf nations, shall we? I really like Euronews because I don't think they let their opinions get in the way of journalism. http://www.euronews.com/2015/09/25/why-aren-t-rich-gulf-states-welcoming-syrian-refugees-or-are-they

"The problem lies not with the Gulf States’ generous financial support, but instead with their lack of will to host fleeing Syrians as refugees, and expecting other countries to host. “Saudi Arabia has offered no evidence to support its claims that it has ‘welcomed’ so many Syrians, and it appears that figure consist mostly of Syrians who have passed through Saudi Arabia, however briefly. Counting the number of Syrians that have entered and exited from Saudi Arabia does not amount to taking in refugees from Syria,” Peter Bouckaert, the Emergency Director at Human Rights Watch told euronews.“

I've argued this many times. I love how the world hates Americans, yet expects us to bail everyone out. Don't get me wrong, I've always believed all nations should take in the refugees, but I'm also sick and tired of the world focusing on America instead of their own issues.


message 18: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12920 comments Well said, Denise, and I can understand where your feelings come from.
It's just the role of the leader has its toll and US as a superpower gets a lot of attention. Who remembers that Australia and Poland invaded Iraq too? Right, nobody -:)
I think it's still American-friendly ambiance here and it's the criticism of friends not of enemies. And there is praise too (not so often, but understandable, because praise isn't as interesting) -:)
I believe everything's open for discussion and criticism and I hope we offer sufficient criticism towards other countries, when they deserve it and maybe even when they don't.
Many are worried by Trump as a president. Don't think I like the man so much, but I wouldn't claim anything he does is always without merit ....


Tara Woods Turner | 2063 comments Nik wrote: "Well said, Denise, and I can understand where your feelings come from.
It's just the role of the leader has its toll and US as a superpower gets a lot of attention. Who remembers that Australia and..."


America doesn't deserve false praise any more than it deserves inflated criticism. I want to discuss opinions derived from facts and equinimity when it comes to geopolitical conversations.


Tara Woods Turner | 2063 comments Nik wrote: "Well said, Denise, and I can understand where your feelings come from.
It's just the role of the leader has its toll and US as a superpower gets a lot of attention. Who remembers that Australia and..."


I think there's a fine line between merit and justification.


message 21: by Denise (new)

Denise Baer Nik wrote: "Well said, Denise, and I can understand where your feelings come from.
It's just the role of the leader has its toll and US as a superpower gets a lot of attention. Who remembers that Australia and..."


Nik, you've always been courteous in your criticism, and I've never thought you've been rude or belittled me. I'm just so frustrated with the Hillary and Obama groupies and the rest of the world pointing their fingers.

We wouldn't be in this mess if it wasn't for our former president and ALL other nations coming together and going after them in the beginning. Over the past few years, I've hardly read any social media, blogs, or posts about people rallying and promoting nations to take in refugees. It's been pretty damn quiet. But now that Trump has done something, good or bad, they're all on board loving and wanting refugees.

About a year or so ago, my husband and I were talking about the U.S. I was telling him about rude comments people from other countries have said to me because I'm an American. My husband said that some people, not all, have issues with Americans because they feel we get involved in things we shouldn't get involved in. Then a few sentences later, after I commented about countries not going in to save Syrians, my husband said, "Well, we're waiting to see what America does." I smacked the crap out of him. LOL! No I didn't, but I pointed my finger at him and said, "Why? Why are you waiting for us? Why doesn't Europe come together and make a move since 'you're tired of us getting involved in things'."

I'm just as worried about Trump, but all I can do is hope that the rest of government, senators, aren't dumb enough to follow. That they will stand up and battle him. We elected them too to represent us, so all I can do is pray they come through for us.


Tara Woods Turner | 2063 comments Denise wrote: "Tara Woods Turner wrote: "We will deserve what comes next? Do you really think the millions of people who did not vote Trump actually deserve this? "

Voting

There were millions who didn't vote f..."


Completely agree. If we don't intervene we're accused the world over of being just as guilty as those slaughtering women and children in Aleppo. If we do intervene Russia accuses us of terrorism and Hezbollah declares the streets will run red with the blood of Americans. Instead of finding workable solutions to these global crises most of the world is grabbing the popcorn and waiting for the US to star in a wild west showdown. gmafb.


message 23: by Denise (new)

Denise Baer Tara Woods Turner wrote: "Instead of finding workable solutions to these global crises most of the world is grabbing the popcorn and waiting for the US to star in a wild west showdown."

OMG, I love this! I might have to use it in a book. LOL!

But seriously, this is a global issue, not an American issue. Canada is willing to take in these banned refugees, which is good since according to this table from Sept. 2016, they were ranked 15 for taking in asylum seekers.

To clarify, this is asylum seekers. http://globalnews.ca/news/2951263/these-14-countries-have-taken-more-refugees-than-canada/ I don't see the Gulf nations on this table.


Tara Woods Turner | 2063 comments Denise wrote: "Tara Woods Turner wrote: "Instead of finding workable solutions to these global crises most of the world is grabbing the popcorn and waiting for the US to star in a wild west showdown."

OMG, I lov..."


Lol and a thumbs up for the link!


message 25: by Mike (new)

Mike | 181 comments There is an old saying that in a democracy, people tend to get the kind of government they deserve. I would say that's mitigated just a little by the fact that we don't have a direct democracy and he really did lose the popular vote by 2.9 million, but in general I find the idea congenial. Maybe it's the masochist in me, but we collectively have allowed for a culture in which a monster like Trump can flourish.

Nik wrote: "Well said, Denise, and I can understand where your feelings come from.
It's just the role of the leader has its toll and US as a superpower gets a lot of attention. Who remembers that Australia and..."


I don't think other governments, though, will be able to think of the US as friendly in the coming years. If people like Bannon and Flynn gets their way, our government is going to be doing everything it can to support populist and neo-fascist movements everywhere. Other countries are going to have to be extremely wary of us, and start to regard us as basically another Russia.

The American travel ban is probably unnecessary, however. I have the feeling that most Trump voters don't travel. They like it just fine here- in "the greatest country in the world." Besides, it's hard to watch sunday football when abroad, if only because of the time difference.


Tara Woods Turner | 2063 comments Mike wrote: "There is an old saying that in a democracy, people tend to get the kind of government they deserve. I would say that's mitigated just a little by the fact that we don't have a direct democracy and ..."

Sunday football :O


message 27: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12920 comments Mike wrote: "Other countries are going to have to be extremely wary of us, and start to regard us as basically another Russia. ..."

So far, looks like the style is undergoing a considerable change: no more convincing and wooing, more - you do this or else....
Indeed reminds me a little Russian-style shutting off gas and letting Ukraine and Europe freeze in 2008-2009...


message 28: by Krazykiwi (new)

Krazykiwi | 193 comments I have a question though, why were those countries picked for the ban?

I just watched a video on CNN giving figures from a conservative think tank, showing that in the past 45 years, the number of US citizens killed by citizens from any of the now banned 7 countries, is a total of 0, while Egypt, whose citizens are still allowed to travel, the number is 162, Saudi Arabia, 2369, and the UAE, 314 (I can't figure out how to get a link for the video to share it.)

Additional numbers they had: Including 9/11, the chance of a US citizen being killed by an act of terrorism on US soil, is 1.364 million per year. The chance of being killed by a refugee is 1.364 billion per year (over the same 45 year period).

Incidentally, Trump has financial dealings with and property holdings in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.

Or is that just a coincidence?

I just really don't understand the reasoning behind the specific choices of countries caught up in this current situation.

As for the rest of the world sitting around waiting for the US to bail us out, I think that's probably a generalisation that isn't very helpful. But I think it's pretty hard to understand what the entire populace of another country is thinking. I mean, I don't understand what the US was thinking in November, either.

As a final aside, please note those are asylum seekers in those numbers listed, not refugees. It takes months, if not years, to get to the point of seeking asylum, and that is a final ditch step, meaning they accept they are never going to get to go home, and it's also a step taken at the final destination. The people still being shuffled around between camps are a very long way from seeking asylum anywhere. So the US is relatively overrepresented there (by the time people have gotten to the US, which tends to take many steps, they're pretty sure they're not going to ever get to go home, so they may as well apply for asylum.)

Syrian refugees are not likely to be seeking asylum in Iraq, or Jordan, or Lebanon. The refugee numbers are MUCH much higher. There are currently 2 million Syrians registered by UNHCR in Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon (of which 1.6m are in Jordan and Lebanon), 2.8 million Syrians registered by the Government of Turkey, as well as more than 29,000 Syrian refugees registered in North Africa. And this is only the people still in the camps.

Lebanon only has a population of 4 million, and has taken close to a million refugees - it CANNOT sustain that, and certainly can't grant asylum to all of them, it's crumbling under the load already. Sweden is listed there as having 150k asylum seekers, because it's also an end point (you can't get a whole lot further in Europe from Syria). Almost everyone who gets this far, is probably going to stay, if they can't go home.

I was in Stockholm volunteering at the train station in the summer of 2015 when the trains were coming in, around 10 thousand people a week. Sweden--remember this is a country the size of California, and with a population of 10 million--took in close to 190k people that year, and almost 50k of them were unaccompanied children who won't need to file for asylum until they are 18, reducing the numbers.

The US that year took in 69933 (and granted asylum to 25k). (Most of those were not Syrian, the "target" for 2016 was to increase the intake from Syria to 10000.)

http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/...
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/articl...


message 29: by Mike (new)

Mike | 181 comments Representatives of the Trump administration have already met with Marine Le Pen, Nigel Farage, the leader of the far-right Austrian Freedom Party...

Trump is a vessel in my opinion, without any morals except the pursuit of money or power- and he has a talent for demagoguery. Bannon, on the other hand, is an ideologue, he means to export his ideology, and now he's on our national security council. The entire world is going to have to watch its back a lot more closely because of the decision 62 million Americans made.


message 30: by Denise (new)

Denise Baer Mike wrote: "I don't think other governments, though, will be able to think of the US as friendly in the coming years."

Instead of thinking of us as stupid in the past, right?

Krazykiwi wrote: "I just watched a video on CNN"

Nuff said. One of the many unreliable networks.


message 31: by Mike (last edited Jan 30, 2017 07:34AM) (new)

Mike | 181 comments Denise wrote: Instead of thinking of us as stupid in the past, right?

Actually, the clarification that came to mind after I posted isn't yours at all- in fact, that sense of grievance never would have entered my mind. It's that many governments over the past 50 years, quite rightly, have thought of us as mendacious.

Nuff said. One of the many unreliable networks.

Nuff said. Very empirical approach you have there. Why don't you check the data yourself?


message 32: by Michael (last edited Jan 30, 2017 07:30AM) (new)

Michael Fattorosi | 477 comments Its not just Trump that does a significant amount of business with Saudi Arabia, Egypt and UAE, many American companies have significant interests in those countries.

The value of American dollar and by default the EU is based on the relationship of the US and Saudi Arabia and their oil reserves. Research the "petro-dollar." Its for the same reason Obama vetoed a bill that would have allowed US citizens to sue the government of Saudi Arabia in US courts for deaths of 9/11. Its the same reason that the Bush family allowed members of the Bin Laden family to fly out of the US when all other flights were grounded.

Money talks.

Of the 7 countries in the ban, America's interest is relatively non-existent.

As for Egypt, we need another ally in that area other than Israel. And 10% of all global shipping goes through the Suez Canal. We cannot cut off that relationship.


message 33: by Krazykiwi (new)

Krazykiwi | 193 comments Denise wrote: "Mike wrote: "I don't think other governments, though, will be able to think of the US as friendly in the coming years."

Instead of thinking of us as stupid in the past, right?

Krazykiwi wrote: "..."


Really. You're just going to dismiss the entire rest of my post based on a dislike for CNN?

Those numbers were from the Cato institute, who are plenty conservative. CNN was just reporting them.

You asked where the Gulf states were re refugee numbers, those numbers I gave you are from the UNHCR.


message 34: by Mike (new)

Mike | 181 comments Krazykiwi wrote: "Or is that just a coincidence?"

I really doubt it.


message 35: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12920 comments Krazykiwi wrote: "I have a question though, why were those countries picked for the ban? .."

For me it's pretty clear - I can try to explain. And it's not a ban as far as I understand, but - a suspension. These are countries with ongoing conflicts or hostile regimes, which require independent effort to understand who of their citizen may pose threat.
Saudi and Egypt are friendly to US, controllable by their authorities countries. I believe when in doubt - US can receive credible verification about any of their subjects in a matter of minutes or so...
The chances in lottery are somewhere in the same ballpark, yet so many play it -:)
Re: refugees I'm also of the opinion that the best solution would've been creating safe havens inside Syria, what is being discussed now. We had this debate long before Trump. The humanitarian situ in Syria in my opinion is the result of under-intervention. Without decisive power, the war was waged for long years with thousands in losses, millions in refugees, dozens of militias....


message 36: by Krazykiwi (new)

Krazykiwi | 193 comments Nik wrote: "Krazykiwi wrote: "I have a question though, why were those countries picked for the ban? .."

For me it's pretty clear - I can try to explain. And it's not a ban as far as I understand, but - a sus..."


Ok, but, no US citizens in the US have been killed in the past 45 years by any citizens of the affected countries, whereas nearly 4000 have been killed by citizens of the UAE, SA, and Egypt. So apparently being able to ask for confirmation from those countries either hasn't been used at all, or doesn't work anyway.

It's still wildly illogical to me.


message 37: by Michael (new)

Michael Fattorosi | 477 comments Krazykiwi wrote: "It's still wildly illogical to me."

Read above, its not about the lives of Americans, its about money. Everything that America does have a financial underpinning to it.

Its strange to me how people just swallow this media idea that America is concerned with human life and cares about refugees. Its almost laughable at this point.


message 38: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12920 comments Krazykiwi wrote: "Ok, but, no US citizens in the US have been killed in the past 45 years by any citizens of the affected countries, whereas nearly 4000 have been killed by citizens of the UAE, SA, and Egypt. So apparently being able to ask for confirmation from those countries either hasn't been used at all, or doesn't work anyway.

It's still wildly illogical to me. ..."


The confidence in reliable info may be false -:) But what would really clarify the picture is the real numbers. How many Somalis visited the US or Iranians monthly? Were the numbers higher/lower/comparable with Egyptians or Saudis? Because 1000 a year from Somalia would be hardly comparable with, say - 50,000 Egyptians.

How about Cubans traveling to US and Americans to Cuba? Castro may be revolutionists and Marxist, but hardly Cubans pose that much danger -:)


message 39: by Krazykiwi (new)

Krazykiwi | 193 comments Nik wrote: "Krazykiwi wrote: "Ok, but, no US citizens in the US have been killed in the past 45 years by any citizens of the affected countries, whereas nearly 4000 have been killed by citizens of the UAE, SA,..."

Nik, you're almost adorably sure it's innocent misplaced faith. I'm more inclined to think this has little to do with the US and it's interest in humans and everything to do with... well, here's a visual aid.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3YJUdGUk...


message 40: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12920 comments Krazykiwi wrote: "Nik, you're almost adorably sure it's innocent misplaced faith. I'm more inclined to think this has little to do with the US and it's interest in humans and everything to do with... well, here's a visual aid.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3YJUdGUk... ..."


Could be. We both don't know for sure, so it's guesswork on both sides. You can be right. It looks logical though to have business interests in friendly countries and not to have them in hostile. But even if Trump has biz interests in Saudia, what does he or Saudi royals care about some Mustafa or John having to postpone a trip for 3 months or experiencing troubles at passport control? They don't. The royals can be always accepted in Washington through a call or two.
Sure, can imagine a businessman all his life, being biz motivated and not switching his hat to another position.
With the wall on the border with Mexico - maybe some construction company is in dire need for new big construction commission? -:)


message 41: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12920 comments Michael wrote: "Read above, its not about the lives of Americans, its about money. Everything that America does have a financial underpinning to it.

Its strange to me how people just swallow this media idea that America is concerned with human life and cares about refugees. Its almost laughable at this point. ..."


Suspect it might be true, hope - only to a degree -:)


message 42: by Krazykiwi (last edited Jan 30, 2017 08:43AM) (new)

Krazykiwi | 193 comments Heh. This one is also a little entertaining. It's beds and toddlers should be banned, clearly.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3UGjGpUc...


message 43: by Philip (new)

Philip (phenweb) | 2812 comments Thanks everyone for commentating but before things get too heated I think I'll call a halt to this part of the discussion. I started it as a joke with a dose of sarcasm and we can finish on the number of US citizens killed by toddlers.

Seems fitting - that's a joke too


message 44: by Philip (new)

Philip (phenweb) | 2812 comments Another joke - although I opened it I can't close it Nik I think you or one of the other moderators has to.


message 45: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 12920 comments Ok, since it's your specific request, I'm closing it, although - I think the debate was in good spirit and not overly heated, but maybe it's only a thick skinned me -:)


back to top
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.