First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply America vs Japan on Refugees
13826 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
☆Land of sweets☆
Offline
Posted 1/31/17

outontheop wrote:


namealreadytaken wrote:

rawratl wrote:
a lot of them are from European citizens that traveled to fight with ISIS and somehow were allowed to return to Europe.

this, very much this. it's like people already forgot about Jihadi John, who is (or was) British caucasian. people who think only muslims are responsible for acts of terror are grossly misinformed.


...that moment when you have to explain that a person can be both a "British caucasian" and a muslim, because muslim is not an ethnicity....

What, can arabs not be Christians?


i obviously meant "arab". nice strawman argument you tried there though.
12117 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Offline
Posted 1/31/17

MysteryMiss wrote:

Trump raised the Obama situation in a January 29, statement defending his immigration executive order. He wrote, “My policy is similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months. The seven countries named in the executive order are the same countries previously identified by the Obama administration as sources of terror.”

>> hmm looks like Obama did same thing but no complaints from left? interesting

and same countries why the tears flow


Another golden nugget from the lies brigade. You can always count on them to deliver the goods.

After all, it wasn't like what Obama's plan was proposed in a completely different context or anything. And of course, what Obama did had the exact same effect. Better not do research or anything, or else you might offend his holy trumpiness.
7377 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / Pacific North West
Offline
Posted 1/31/17 , edited 4/9/17

nomadhar wrote:


Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


DarthRutsula wrote:

No, Japan is right, Trump is wrong.

Japan wants to prioritize the welfare of it's people first, not to mention the country be population dense.

Trump doesn't want refugees because they are (mostly I think) Muslim, and/or believes them to be terrorists in disguise.

There has been nothing indicating that we are taking in "millions" of refugees. And for a nation where everyone believes that our national religion is christianity, it seems hypocritical to not help those in need, you know... what the freaking religion encourages everyone to do.

It all comes down to the reasoning. If Trump said "I want to give the homeless a home and treat the sick before we consider taking refugees" I'd be all for it. But no, he chooses a xenophobic route.






and the countries that are not on the ban list, yet have been massive sponsors of terrorism? they just happen to be countries that Trump has financial interests in.

Trump did this to appease racists like you. this will literally accomplish nothing but horror and death for refugees, including a lot of children. the list does not even include the 4 states that have been publicly known sponsors of terrorism. SMH


ok your post lacks research the graph your showing is incorrect about number killed. I would suggest researching USS Cole, Battle of Mogadishu(well it technically was civil war so I will give you half credit), Iraq war(they count as citizens right?), Libya had... well if your not familiar with Benghazi... idk. ect. Please dont post incorrect information it makes your opinion invalid


EDIT: on a side note Syria IS the US's problem we knew Syria was commiting genocide in 2011 and did nothing to stop it because America didnt want war. now we are reaping the whirlwind. Unfortunatley we cannot appease the world and always be the good guy. As to immigrants honestly not sure how the ban is an issue. The US accepts fewer immigrants from the middle easy in the last 11yrs? then any other country in say Europe has in the last 12mo. Setting aside 2015 we took an avg.of 1200ish a year. what a joke.
Posted 1/31/17

namealreadytaken wrote:

also: America caused the mess in Syria, while Japan didn't. one has a moral obligation to help people who lost their homes because of the attacks, while the other has no such moral obligation.


>- Syria is majority Sunni and most have issues with ruling pres. Assad! It is not up to USA to fix those issues
Syrians need to step up to their pres. or focus on better their own country.
1006 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 1/31/17
I'm actually disappointed in Trump because I wanted a permanent ban on all middle east countries, especially Saudi Arabia.

But this is not permanent, it's only for a few months. Stop crying.
13826 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
☆Land of sweets☆
Offline
Posted 1/31/17

thatgirl202 wrote:But this is not permanent


Congress is trying to push for a perma-ban, but they exclude countries like Saudi Arabia.
6636 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 1/31/17
personally i think taking in massive amount refugees would cause nothing but trouble especially from countries who are relatively hostile towards your own especially when many of them would refuse or resist assimilating to the country they moved to and bring many of the problems they were supposedly fleeing from with them.. i think the better solution and possibly the best solution wouldn't be take in large numbers of people but to use the resources that would be involved in that to try and help solve whatever situation and such they were fleeing from in the first place.
13826 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
☆Land of sweets☆
Offline
Posted 1/31/17
number of Arab Americans: 3.7 million
http://www.aaiusa.org/demographics
number of terrorist activity caused by an Arab American in a decade: 0
Posted 1/31/17

namealreadytaken wrote:

number of Arab Americans: 3.7 million
http://www.aaiusa.org/demographics
number of terrorist activity caused by an Arab American in a decade: 0


> how did you come up with 0 cause i have different numbers? on arab attacks
6215 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / England
Offline
Posted 1/31/17 , edited 4/10/17
Trump's recent executive order the so-called "Muslim ban" is totally illegal - It obviously breaks the Immigration and Nationality act of 1965 which made it illegal to discriminate immigrants because of their race, sex or nationality. The only standing it has is the 1952 Immigration and Nationality act, an earlier amendment which was created in the witch-hunting era to prevent commies, however, since newer amendments overrule older ones this executive order will be canceled if taken to the supreme court, and Trump will have to claim ignorance to avoid being impeached. (Ignorance is an excuse if you're president supposedly.)

It should also be noted that the vast majority of terrorist attacks are carried out by radicalized US citizens, homegrown terrorists. Banning refugees from 7 countries will not prevent this, and arguably could have the opposite effect since Muslims in the USA might feel more segregated in their country, leading to more radicalized homegrown Muslims.

mxdan 
11765 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / A Husk.
Offline
Posted 1/31/17 , edited 4/10/17
Total deaths of Americans due to Terrorism post 9/11: 101 people
Total number of Muslims in the world: 1.6 billion people

12117 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Offline
Posted 1/31/17

mxdan wrote:

Total deaths of Americans due to Terrorism post 9/11: 101 people
Total number of Muslims in the world: 1.6 billion people



Just for the sake of clarity, would that first number represent terrorism in general or islamic terrorism?
17189 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 1/31/17 , edited 4/10/17

dragonlord1234 wrote:
i think the better solution and possibly the best solution wouldn't be take in large numbers of people but to use the resources that would be involved in that to try and help solve whatever situation and such they were fleeing from in the first place.


Nice sentiment but fundamentally flawed.

The Syrian rebels, with Saudi Arabian support, are trying to topple Assad.
Assad, with Iranian support, is trying to fight off the rebels and remain in power.
Al Qaeda-linked rebel groups are trying to secure a new base of operations.
Islamic State (IS, ISIS, Daesh) is trying to carve out a caliphate from Syria and Iraq.
The Iraqis (Sunni, Shia and Kurds) are trying to force IS out of Iraq.
The Kurds are trying to gain territory to support the case for their own homeland.
NATO & allies are primarily fighting IS but offering proxy support to some rebel groups
Turkey is paranoid about the Kurds' activity (given their long history of conflict) and attacks them when they make a significant gain (giving IS a respite).
Russia is intent on propping up Assad as one of their key allies in the region and is using the fight against IS as an excuse to attack other groups.


Meanwhile the civillians and aid agencies are caught in the cross-fire.

Where should the resources be invested to best effect?
mxdan 
11765 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / A Husk.
Offline
Posted 1/31/17

octorockandroll wrote:


mxdan wrote:

Total deaths of Americans due to Terrorism post 9/11: 101 people
Total number of Muslims in the world: 1.6 billion people



Just for the sake of clarity, would that first number represent terrorism in general or islamic terrorism?


Terrorism in general. The figure for islamic terrorism is even lower.

http://www.ibtimes.com/united-states-after-911-how-many-major-terrorist-attacks-have-there-been-america-2001-2414070
13826 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
☆Land of sweets☆
Offline
Posted 1/31/17

MysteryMiss wrote:


namealreadytaken wrote:

number of Arab Americans: 3.7 million
http://www.aaiusa.org/demographics
number of terrorist activity caused by an Arab American in a decade: 0


> how did you come up with 0 cause i have different numbers? on arab attacks


key word: Arab American / Arab immigrants, not some random crazy dude who stole a plane due to a severe lapse in airport security.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.