Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 33 to 48 of 53

Thread: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

  1. #33
    Theoretical Element Spud1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    North West
    Posts
    7,508
    Thanks
    336
    Thanked
    320 times in 255 posts
    • Spud1's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Aorus Master
      • CPU:
      • 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 16GB GSkill Trident Z
      • Storage:
      • Lots.
      • Graphics card(s):
      • RTX3090
      • PSU:
      • 750w
      • Case:
      • BeQuiet Dark Base Pro rev.2
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus PG35VQ
      • Internet:
      • 910/100mb Fibre

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by Macman View Post

    We cannot identify terrorists, what we do know is terrorists are faithful to their version of the Islamic Faith* so Trump is essentially targeting Muslims. As bad as it sounds, what other choice does he have?
    Be very careful with this kind of statement/question - remember that there is absolutely no relationship between muslims and "terrorism" (in fact the word terrorism really annoys me but that's another topic!) and that there are just as many "terrorist" groups out there from other, or no faiths.

    This is one of the big things that annoys people and will trigger them expressing their opinion - the assumption that someone who is different could be a terrorist...when in reality anyone anywhere could be part of such a group and commit an atrocity.

    The sort of action trump has taken will only serve to grow hatred for America and therefore recruit more people to any western causes, it does a lot more harm than good. You also have to remember that the vast majority of border security is for show and to deter casuals (
    Like most security!) - whether it's immigration, anti narcotics, anti weapons...especially in a country the size of America, any organsatiom with a bit of money can smuggle someone or something in by just not using an airport or port. It's a big enough problem in the uk and we have a tiny border to control..the US doesn't have a way to monitor every single inch of coast.

    I could type all day about how angry he makes me and how pointless it is, but then that would be pointless too I guess

  2. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    West Cork
    Posts
    877
    Thanks
    74
    Thanked
    148 times in 109 posts
    • opel80uk's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte MA770-UD3 revision 2
      • CPU:
      • Phenom II X4 955BE
      • Memory:
      • 4gb PC2-8500
      • Storage:
      • Samsung F1 1tb
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI ATI Radeon HD 6950 Twin FrozR II OC 2048MB
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX450W 450w
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 10Mb

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen View Post
    Why not Saudi? Or Pakistan, for that matter?

    Because, as I understand it, the Saudi and Pakistani governments cooperate with the US, UK etc, on in-depth vetting of visa applicants. The governments on the 'banned seven' do not, or cannot.

    So .... if the objective is about keeping undesirable, questionable or known risky individuals OUT, then in the absence of cooperation on in-depth vetting, letting those nations in is a complete punt.

    What Trump said on the campaign was, paraphrasing, "keep Muslims out until we can sort out what the hell is going on".

    The policy interpretation of that appears to be to temporarily prevent individuals from the banned seven, while .... according to the White House .... sorting out the extreme vetting issues.

    And, after all, with ISIS being driven back in Syria and Iraq, among others, the notion of some of the foreign fighters that went there to fight for ISIS leaving and seeking to go elsewhere to cause mayhem is entirely plausible, if not actually probable.

    While I doubt even Trump would guarantee that this 'ban' will keep ALL terrorists out, it's hard to argue that a real threat doesn't exist, and that if this measure, affecting people for whom extreme vetting has been hard or impossible, then in the interests of protecting US citizens, at home, prevents even some getting in, then at least as a stop-gap temporary measure, it's HIS call to make.

    I wonder if that famous "The Buck Stops Here" plaque still sits on the desk in the Oval? Because now, the buck stops with Trump, and if there is a successful attack, he'll have to justify having done everythinv he could to prevent it.

    A real threat DOESN'T exist, not in the US at least. According to the BBC, Islamists have killed 94 people in the States since 9/11. That's just over 6 a year, and that number is fairly consistent with pre 9/11 numbers too (and we all know that the places the 9/11 hijackers came from are the lads you listed as 'cooperating with the US and in the case of the Saudi's, had a security deal in place already a the time of the attacks'), and that was without the supposed 'Extreme Vetting'. Even if a 9/11 happened every year, a US citizen would still be far, far more likely to be killed by a non-terrorist gun attack, car accident, or swimming in a swimming pool then they would by a foreign led terrorist attack.
    If someone said the UK would spend this amount of money and resources (specifically extreme vetting) on something that killed 6 people a year, what would you say? Because as it stands at the time of Trump bringing in the order, that's exactly what was happening in the US. And of course, that's ignoring the fact that numerous people, from both sides of the Political divide in the States, have said that this type of policy makes the US more vulnerable to attack, not less.

    So yes, it is his call to make. But the idea that Donald Trump of all people can, 'sort out what the hell is going on', when terrorism in some form or another has been part of the human way of life since we left caves, makes me laugh and cry in equal measure. It's absurd.

  3. #35
    Banhammer in peace PeterB kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    31,023
    Thanks
    1,870
    Thanked
    3,381 times in 2,718 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 32GB DDR4 3200 CL16
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 970Evo+ NVMe
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGF
      • Internet:
      • rubbish

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by opel80uk View Post

    So yes, it is his call to make. But the idea that Donald Trump of all people can, 'sort out what the hell is going on', when terrorism in some form or another has been part of the human way of life since we left caves, makes me laugh and cry in equal measure. It's absurd.
    But wait for it.. he'll no doubt announce that since his measures are in place, only 6 people a year are being killed, so they must be working!!

  4. #36
    The late but legendary peterb - Onward and Upward peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Looking down & checking on swearing
    Posts
    19,378
    Thanks
    2,892
    Thanked
    3,403 times in 2,693 posts

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    Actually, he should be supplying arms to all these groups, because as the NRA says, "more guns make us safer".
    (\__/)
    (='.'=)
    (")_(")

    Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
    My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute

  5. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    895
    Thanks
    53
    Thanked
    83 times in 71 posts

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by Macman View Post
    If those who are against Trump, tell me. How would you deal with Terrorists?
    I think the west has generally mismanaged the fight against ISIS by acting as recruitment sergeant for them. You can't nuke or carpet bomb an ideology.

  6. #38
    Seething Cauldron of Hatred TheAnimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    17,168
    Thanks
    803
    Thanked
    2,152 times in 1,408 posts

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by Top_gun View Post
    You can't nuke or carpet bomb an ideology.
    We've been doing neither of those this far.

    Also history has shown that you can for a long while at least use force to push back an ideology all too often sadly.
    throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)

  7. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3,526
    Thanks
    504
    Thanked
    468 times in 326 posts

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by TheAnimus View Post
    We've been doing neither of those this far.
    Give him a chance he's only been in power a few weeks.

    Even though only 7% of terrorist groups are ended by military action I'd bet my bottom dollar on Trump ramping up the military action.
    Last edited by Corky34; 01-02-2017 at 05:08 PM.

  8. #40
    Hexus.Jet TeePee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Gallup, NM
    Posts
    5,367
    Thanks
    131
    Thanked
    746 times in 442 posts

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    I'll use this line out of context at any opportunity:

    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin.

    An occasional attack which causes loss of life is tragic, deplorable, and we should do everything to prevent it from happening, except limiting people's freedoms. It is a sad, but necessary, part of the price to live in freedom.

  9. #41
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss


  10. #42
    Admin (Ret'd)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    18,481
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    3,208 times in 2,281 posts

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by opel80uk View Post
    A real threat DOESN'T exist, not in the US at least. According to the BBC, Islamists have killed 94 people in the States since 9/11. That's just over 6 a year, and that number is fairly consistent with pre 9/11 numbers too (and we all know that the places the 9/11 hijackers came from are the lads you listed as 'cooperating with the US and in the case of the Saudi's, had a security deal in place already a the time of the attacks'), and that was without the supposed 'Extreme Vetting'. Even if a 9/11 happened every year, a US citizen would still be far, far more likely to be killed by a non-terrorist gun attack, car accident, or swimming in a swimming pool then they would by a foreign led terrorist attack.
    If someone said the UK would spend this amount of money and resources (specifically extreme vetting) on something that killed 6 people a year, what would you say? Because as it stands at the time of Trump bringing in the order, that's exactly what was happening in the US. And of course, that's ignoring the fact that numerous people, from both sides of the Political divide in the States, have said that this type of policy makes the US more vulnerable to attack, not less.

    So yes, it is his call to make. But the idea that Donald Trump of all people can, 'sort out what the hell is going on', when terrorism in some form or another has been part of the human way of life since we left caves, makes me laugh and cry in equal measure. It's absurd.
    How do you know a real threat "DOESN'T" exist? Absence of public knowledge of attack does not necessarily mean absence of attempted attack. It may simply mean foiled attempt.

    Also, absence of attack so far most emphatically doesn't mean one won't happen at some point in the future.

    Or are you suggesting that these terrorist groups have no intention, or desire, to attack the US?

    And remember, this Trump executive order temporarily suspends most visa applications from countries defined by OBAMA legislation, while a review is done of deep vetting set up by OBAMA legislation to see if that vetting process is working.

    No foreign national has an automatic right of entry to any other country, and every country has the right to determine who it will permit to enter the country. All Trump is doing with this order is a watered down version of his campaign commitment, to spend a few weeks reviewing whether an OBAMA measure is effective or not, when what's at stake is the ability of the US government to detect and exclude those seeking to do it and it's citizens harm. That objective is not only something they have a right to do, but an absolute snd prime duty to do.

    As for what I'd say if this was done over 6 people a year ....

    1) The figure of 6 is irrelevant, because scale of future threat is not demonstrated by past events when circumstances have changed.

    2) I've not said I support this measure in the US, so why would my opinion of a hypothetical UK version matter, when our PM has alreafy explicitly ruled it out.

    3) What I did was answer your "Why not Saudi" question. Because the list of countries Trump used was a list already in US immigration law, put there by Obama, and indeed including some countries on the list of state sponsors of terrorism for decades, like Syria. Trump didn't create the list, or select the countries. He merely used the list already in place.

  11. #43
    Admin (Ret'd)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    18,481
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    3,208 times in 2,281 posts

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by TeePee View Post
    I'll use this line out of context at any opportunity:

    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin.

    An occasional attack which causes loss of life is tragic, deplorable, and we should do everything to prevent it from happening, except limiting people's freedoms. It is a sad, but necessary, part of the price to live in freedom.
    That's all very well, except that the freedom for non-US citizens to enter the US just because they want to does not and never has existed. We all need visa's, or participation in a visa waiver program. I've been in and out of the US countless times - up to 6 or 7 times a year in some years, for about 40 years, and I still am not "free" to assume a right of entry. Being permitted entry is still a privilege, not a right.

    This, of course, is also a non-trivial aspect of Brexit - regaining control of our borders and who can enter, and work, as a right.

    As a citizen of a country with a good relationship with the US, I qualify for visa-waiver privileges that citizens of msny countries do not, but even that privilege is not without limit - many citizens of the UK don't qualify for visa waiver, because citizenship of a country on the visa waiver list (in that same Immigration law) is necessary to get visa waiver, but not sufficient. I must also, for instance, be free of criminal convictions, etc.

    Many, if not all, countries do this. I've had my right of entry queried in extended interview in Canada (before entry was approved). Ironically, hours after that interview I was at a gala dinner in Ottawa, and my dinner companion was the then Spanish Ambassador to Canada. I've also had my tight of entry to Romania queried .... by several large and serious looking troops, at sub-machine gunpoint.

    The point?

    You're not being denied a freedom by having qualification for entry, or granting of a visa, restricted, because you never had that freedom in the first place. You are free to seek entry, not to assume it as a right.

  12. Received thanks from:

    Macman (02-02-2017)

  13. #44
    Seething Cauldron of Hatred TheAnimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    17,168
    Thanks
    803
    Thanked
    2,152 times in 1,408 posts

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    Isn't part of the issue that there are people who have VISAs multi-entry issued, even some people who are citizens who were impacted by this ban?

    It's deplorable to deny entry to someone who is a citizen.
    throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)

  14. Received thanks from:

    CAT-THE-FIFTH (02-02-2017)

  15. #45
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by TheAnimus View Post
    Isn't part of the issue that there are people who have VISAs multi-entry issued, even some people who are citizens who were impacted by this ban?

    It's deplorable to deny entry to someone who is a citizen.
    Going further to my previous comment:

    https://www.airforcetimes.com/articl...r-iraqi-pilots

    It seems the Pentagon might be trying to get those F16 trainee pilots exempt.

  16. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    895
    Thanks
    53
    Thanked
    83 times in 71 posts

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by TheAnimus View Post
    We've been doing neither of those this far.

    Also history has shown that you can for a long while at least use force to push back an ideology all too often sadly.
    Actually it has been done already.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...t-Taliban.html

    Also history has shown persecution of religion can make them flourish. Take Christianity for example.

  17. #47
    Admin (Ret'd)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    18,481
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    3,208 times in 2,281 posts

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by TheAnimus View Post
    Isn't part of the issue that there are people who have VISAs multi-entry issued, even some people who are citizens who were impacted by this ban?

    It's deplorable to deny entry to someone who is a citizen.
    Even having a valid visa is not a guarantee of being allowed to enter. That decision, at least except for special visa classes like diplomatic, etc, is still down to the discretion of border authorities, and the legal framework they operate within.

    It can also be revoked or cancelled at any time, not least by modification of the terms of the INA. Exactly that happened to me when I rolled up at JFK immigration, a couple of decades back, with my valid "multiple-indefinite" visa. The ICE officer stamped it as cancelled there and then. Why? INA had been changed, such visas withdrawn and the Visa Waiver program implemented.

    That change didn't much affect me, as I went in anyway, and dozens of times subsequently, but the fact is that as someone seeking to enter the US, I'm an applicant every time I arrive and the decision is in their hands, exactly as a US citizen arriving here is the applicant, and they do, or don't, get in based on UK law, and the interpretation of the facts and circumstances by UK border force staff.

    And if either UK or US citizens arrive in Australia, they'll both be subject to Aussie rules and decisions .... such as whether they have sufficient funds or access to credit to support themselves. If not, and in the absence of someone to support you, then ticket and visa or not, you'll quite likely find yourself detained and on the next flight home.

    And that's without coming from a country on a terrorism watch list.

  18. #48
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Trump: The Protests & Petition - Discuss

    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen View Post
    How do you know a real threat "DOESN'T" exist? Absence of public knowledge of attack does not necessarily mean absence of attempted attack. It may simply mean foiled attempt.

    Also, absence of attack so far most emphatically doesn't mean one won't happen at some point in the future.

    Or are you suggesting that these terrorist groups have no intention, or desire, to attack the US?

    And remember, this Trump executive order temporarily suspends most visa applications from countries defined by OBAMA legislation, while a review is done of deep vetting set up by OBAMA legislation to see if that vetting process is working.

    No foreign national has an automatic right of entry to any other country, and every country has the right to determine who it will permit to enter the country. All Trump is doing with this order is a watered down version of his campaign commitment, to spend a few weeks reviewing whether an OBAMA measure is effective or not, when what's at stake is the ability of the US government to detect and exclude those seeking to do it and it's citizens harm. That objective is not only something they have a right to do, but an absolute snd prime duty to do.

    As for what I'd say if this was done over 6 people a year ....

    1) The figure of 6 is irrelevant, because scale of future threat is not demonstrated by past events when circumstances have changed.

    2) I've not said I support this measure in the US, so why would my opinion of a hypothetical UK version matter, when our PM has alreafy explicitly ruled it out.

    3) What I did was answer your "Why not Saudi" question. Because the list of countries Trump used was a list already in US immigration law, put there by Obama, and indeed including some countries on the list of state sponsors of terrorism for decades, like Syria. Trump didn't create the list, or select the countries. He merely used the list already in place.
    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen View Post
    That's all very well, except that the freedom for non-US citizens to enter the US just because they want to does not and never has existed. We all need visa's, or participation in a visa waiver program. I've been in and out of the US countless times - up to 6 or 7 times a year in some years, for about 40 years, and I still am not "free" to assume a right of entry. Being permitted entry is still a privilege, not a right.

    This, of course, is also a non-trivial aspect of Brexit - regaining control of our borders and who csn enter, and work, as a right.

    As a citizen of a country with a good relationship with the US, I qualify for visa-waiver privileges that citizens of msny countries do not, but even that privilege is not without limit - many citizens of the UK don't qualify for visa waiver, because citizenship of a country on the visa waiver list (in that same Immigration law) is necessary to get visa waiver, but not sufficient. I must also, for instance, be free of criminal convictions, etc.

    Many, if not all, countries do this. I've had my right of entry queried in extended interview in Canada (before entry was approved). Ironically, hours after that interview I was at a gala dinner in Ottawa, and my dinner companion was the then Spanish Ambassador to Canada. I've also had my tight of entry to Romania queried .... by several large and serious looking troops, at sub-machine gunpoint.

    The point?

    You're not being denied a freedom by having qualification for entry, or granting of a visa, restricted, because you never had that freedom in the first place. You are free to seek entry, not to assume it as a right.
    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen View Post
    Even having a valid visa is not a guarantee of being allowed to enter. That decision, at least except for special visa classes like diplomatic, etc, is still down to the discretion of border authorities, and the legal framework they operate within.

    It can also be revoked or cancelled at any time, not least by modification of the terms of the INA. Exactly that happened to me when I rolled up at JFK immigration, a coupke of decades back, with my valid "multiple-indefinite" visa. The ICE officer stamped it as cancelled there and then. Why? INA had been changed, such visas withdrawn and the Visa Waiver program implemented.

    That change didn't much affect me, as I went in anyway, and dozens of times subsequently, but the fact is that as someone seeking to enter the US, I'm an applicant every time I arrive and the decision is in their hands, exactly as a US citizen arriving here is the applicant, and they do, or don't, get in based on UK law, and the interpretation of the facts and circumstances by UK border force staff.

    And if either UK or US citizens arrive in Australia, they'll both be subject to Aussie rules and decisions .... such as whether they have sufficient funds or access to credit to support themselves. If not, and in the absence of someone to support you, then ticket and visa or not, you'll quite likely find yourself detained and on the next flight home.

    And that's without coming from a country on a terrorism watch list.
    It also affects people who hold US passports.

    Plus the own goal about the Iraqi F16 pilots who can't now train in the US after Iraq purchased 24 new F16s recently. Even the Pentagon is trying to intervene now,and we know that if the Pentagon gets their way,expect a whole lot of their staff to be fired,etc.
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 02-02-2017 at 02:28 PM.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •