The Student Room Group

Trump 'to sign orders restricting refugees from Muslim nations'

Scroll to see replies

Original post by NativesofEurope
I could not care less about palestine or iraq.


of course, just live in the big bucks. Human right only exist in europe
Original post by win011
of course, just live in the big bucks. Human right only exist in europe


Human rights dont exist in Muslims countries because human rights are contrary o Islam and Muslims do no appreciate human rights. Europe is enlightened, muslim countries are not.

Muslims killing each other has nothing o do with Europeans
Original post by win011
how do you know that all of them r muslims, oh yh cause they have a beard, tht makes it easier for u to identify innit. What is happening to palestine, iraq, nothin. they don't matter, do they?



Well generally they shout allahu Akbar before they blow themselves up.As Allah is the Muslim word for God it's not hard to work out they are Muslims. Not all Muslims are terrorists but Islamist terror is a major problem.As for Iraq and Palestine,that part of the world has been fighting each other for literally centuries.Its not for us to sort out their problems.The Iraq war was a disaster but it could have been a success with better planning and leadership.And as the USA originally gave Iraq chemical weapons to use against Iran,it's not that unreasonable that they expected to find weapons of mass destruction especially as Saddam Hussein used them against the Kurds.Saddam Hussein was also a violent dictator who was responsible for genocide.You can't have it both ways.If we don't intervene we get accused of doing nothing.If we do intervene then it turns into a catastrophe.
Original post by Robby2312
Well generally they shout allahu Akbar before they blow themselves up.As Allah is the Muslim word for God it's not hard to work out they are Muslims. Not all Muslims are terrorists but Islamist terror is a major problem.As for Iraq and Palestine,that part of the world has been fighting each other for literally centuries.Its not for us to sort out their problems.The Iraq war was a disaster but it could have been a success with better planning and leadership.And as the USA originally gave Iraq chemical weapons to use against Iran,it's not that unreasonable that they expected to find weapons of mass destruction especially as Saddam Hussein used them against the Kurds.Saddam Hussein was also a violent dictator who was responsible for genocide.You can't have it both ways.If we don't intervene we get accused of doing nothing.If we do intervene then it turns into a catastrophe.


I can respect that, u make excellent point. It's just i hate people seeing muslim as different. cause of those bloody *******s.
Original post by Fenice
It's clearly a stretch to say that Trump won the nomination and the election because of luck. Either 'subtlety' is not as important as you think it is or Trump has compensated in other areas and will presumably continue to do so



I suspect I did overestimate its importance in the electoral process.

You are however trying to compare two different things, the process of convincing voters and that of not making statements which hamstring your lawyers' freedom of argument.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by oldercon1953
His Few actions taken thus far do not warrant him being labeled or described differently than the 44 Presidents before him.


Forty-three presidents*. Although he's the 45th president, he's only the 44th person to hold the office. Grover Cleveland served non-consecutive terms and is therefore counted as both the 22nd and 24th president.
Original post by Hydeman
Forty-three presidents*. Although he's the 45th president, he's only the 44th person to hold the office. Grover Cleveland served non-consecutive terms and is therefore counted as both the 22nd and 24th president.


You are correct,
Original post by Wōden
There are significant numbers of people in the countries cited that are utterly hostile towards the West. It makes perfect sense to halt immigration from these places


Unfortunately it does make sense. Though maybe an attack is what the US needs. Someone tear that big rusty machine down already.

Original post by Ladbants
Everyone
Whites, blacks, browns, yellows
Make America Native Again


From what I just read he doesn't care about the natives either. Something about some oil pipe he wants to stretch through their land. I'm not an environmentalist so Idk what the fuss is but apparently it's illegal.
Shoulda seen it comin'. He's prob only doing it because so many people thought it was a bad joke. Trump is the sort of guy who makes those farting noises with his armpits, and people laugh so he keeps doing it and even louder, ignoring or forgetting how gross and stupid it actually is. But there's white Muslims so you can't say he's racist.
Original post by oldercon1953
I'll put it simply; if Trump is a stateist than every President before him was.


Every President before built the Great Wall of 'Merica without congressional support?

Every President before basically banned immigration based upon religious affiliation, all without congressional support?

Hunh. My counter-argument would be, "Eisenhower using executive orders to decide where a base should be built is not of the same breadth, depth and extent of interpretation as Trump's. Even Obama, whom I criticized for executive ordering his health care act in to existence, did not abuse the system as much as Trump did." if that wasn't your argument, but since I already explained why he was a Statist and you stated every other president was just as bad, I'm guessing you simply aren't open to realizing just how badly he's abusing powers that have been abused in the past.

That's cool, ,but you aren't going to find any support except from die-hard Trump supporters.
Original post by StrawbAri
The wall is going to be very very expensive venture. I am not sure congress will approve. Tbh the money could have gone to more security personnel at borders. A more feasible and cost effective option.


The "Mexico will pay" thing is complete tosh. Trump wants the wall then surely its only fair the U.S pays for it. Banning certain immigrants does make sense to me however.
Original post by 0to100
Shoulda seen it comin'. He's prob only doing it because so many people thought it was a bad joke. Trump is the sort of guy who makes those farting noises with his armpits, and people laugh so he keeps doing it and even louder, ignoring or forgetting how gross and stupid it actually is. But there's white Muslims so you can't say he's racist.


It seems like the new policy supports religious minorities and those that are persecuted in the country they are immigrating from, rather than in the country they are emigrating to.
Original post by Farm_Ecology
It seems like the new policy supports religious minorities and those that are persecuted in the country they are immigrating from, rather than in the country they are emigrating to.


Dunno but "Trump's order will also cancel the Visa Interview Waiver Program, which once allowed repeat travelers to the United States to be able to forgo an in-person interview to renew their visa. Under the new order, these travelers will now have to have in-person interviews."

Classic.

And it's not a "ban," people, because apparently he's still gonna let 50k of them in. That's what I've been saying this whole time! To not completely block them out, but REGULATE entry with a QUOTA. I should be a politician.
"Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement. "Taking in immigrants and refugees boosted our economy and created jobs decade after decade. This is one of the most backward and nasty executive orders that the president has issued."

This is all the pricks are about. Same motives behind the remainers. They don't care about refugees, it's just money at the end of the day. Lefties probably care less about refugees than the far right does. How dare they seriously bring in people for profit? So if there was no profit they'd shut them out, no doubt. Snakes. And this guy is the "Minority Leader." Pfft.
The ban seems to apply to people who hold green cards as well. bet that will be a shock if you are away on business and suddenly find you cant get back in the country.
Original post by 999tigger
The ban seems to apply to people who hold green cards as well. bet that will be a shock if you are away on business and suddenly find you cant get back in the country.


An Iranian filmmaker nominated for an oscar won't be able to attend the event.
I suppose someone will just have to receive the award for him if he wins. Quite unfortunate.
Original post by StrawbAri
An Iranian filmmaker nominated for an oscar won't be able to attend the event.
I suppose someone will just have to receive the award for him if he wins. Quite unfortunate.


He wont be able to pick up his award......the horror,the horror.

Then again, maybe Trumps ban will prevent the next Tsarnaev bros from entering the US.
Original post by StrawbAri
So deport everyone that isn't a Native American?


Vikings discovered North America before the "indians"
Original post by 999tigger
The ban seems to apply to people who hold green cards as well. bet that will be a shock if you are away on business and suddenly find you cant get back in the country.

There are reports of Iranian students in the U.S. (with valid visas) who were abroad (one visiting family in Austria), have since tried to return, and been denied entry and sent back.

https://twitter.com/hdagres/status/825292253048557568

What is shocking is that this ban applies to green card holders who are legal residents of the U.S., that, upon returning from leaving the country (for holidays, etc), may find that they cannot reenter their home country.

This ban is incredibly ineffective and disproportionate.

Firstly, this doesn't really seem to be a "Muslim ban" - it doesn't include the country with the largest population of Muslims (India), nor the largest Muslim-majority country (Indonesia), nor Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan or Pakistan.

Secondly, there have been very few terrorist attacks in the U.S. by Muslim immigrants. Even fewer from the countries actually affected by this ban. When we look at the nationalities of the 9/11 hijackers we see that 15/19 were citizens of Saudi Arabia, none of them were from the 6 countries subject to this ban. There are more Americans in ISIS than Iranians in ISIS.

Thirdly, the threat of terrorism is clearly most likely to arise in the domestic context - that is to say, home grown terrorists. This ban does nothing to address this issue, other than further marginalise American Muslims and provide further fuel to ISIS/radical elements. Curiously, if we want to address the problem of home grown terrorism, dealing with Saudi Arabia's funding of Wahabbism across the globe might be a good place to start.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-yousaf-butt-/saudi-wahhabism-islam-terrorism_b_6501916.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/saudi-arabia-funding-islamic-extremism-west-german-vice-chancellor-sigmar-gabriel-a6763366.html


Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump do not agree on much, but Saudi Arabia may be an exception. She has deplored Saudi Arabia’s support for “radical schools and mosques around the world that have set too many young people on a path towards extremism.” He has called the Saudis “the world’s biggest funders of terrorism.”


https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/26/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-islam.html?_r=0
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Palmyra
There are reports of Iranian students in the U.S. (with valid visas) who were abroad (one visiting family in Austria), have since tried to return, and been denied entry and sent back.

https://twitter.com/hdagres/status/825292253048557568

What is shocking is that this ban applies to green card holders who are legal residents of the U.S., that, upon returning from leaving the country (for holidays, etc), may find that they cannot reenter their home country.

This doesn't really seem to be a "Muslim ban" - it doesn't include the country with the largest population of Muslims (India), nor the largest Muslim-majority country (Indonesia), nor Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan or Pakistan.

This ban is incredibly ineffective and disproportionate. Firstly, there are more Americans in ISIS than Iranians in ISIS. Secondly, there have been very few terrorist attacks in the U.S. by Muslim immigrants. Even fewer from the countries actually affected by ban. When we look at the nationalities of the 9/11 hijackers we see that 15/19 were citizens of Saudi Arabia, none of them were from the 6 countries subject to this ban. Thirdly, the threat of terrorism is clearly most likely to arise in the domestic context - that is to say, home grown terrorists. This ban does nothing to address this issue, other than further marginalise American Muslims and provide further fuel to ISIS/radical elements. Curiously, if we want to address the problem of home grown terrorism, starting with Saudi Arabia's funding of Wahabbism across the globe might be a good place to start.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-yousaf-butt-/saudi-wahhabism-islam-terrorism_b_6501916.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/saudi-arabia-funding-islamic-extremism-west-german-vice-chancellor-sigmar-gabriel-a6763366.html



https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/26/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-islam.html?_r=0


It appeals to his core voters that something grand is being done and you dont have to look at the detail or think it through. He is picking on those countries that cant really fight back. I doubt whether he is bothered if its effecive or unjust, it will only be called into question if more attacks happen, in which case he will just say theres a need to block even more. Trump is a salesperson.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending