Dark morning in America - talk of Model S seems - frivolous

[Vitold]

I'm curious - which country covered under the ban had previously produced a terrorist attack on the US?

We put two refugees in jail because they fought US Army in Iraq. It's likely there were others.

Now, people do bad things -no matter what country- given right set of circumstances. I do worry that this administration wants bring the bad out of people so they can curtail our rights even further.

 

[msnow]

I'm curious - which country covered under the ban had previously produced a terrorist attack on the US?

None, zero, zilch, nada.

 

[McRat]

None, zero, zilch, nada.

There is no such thing as terrorism to today's liberals, and when there is, it only happens in the USA by USA citizens for extremist Christian right wing white heterosexual male purposes.

Most the world believes the 9/11 accident was false. It either never happened, or was done by the US gov't, or done by Jews, or done by Christians.

Apparently you simply need to align with the majority outside the US.

EDIT: However, the 'screw everybody else in the Western countries' probably is not going to work as foreign policy.

 

[msnow]

There is no such thing as terrorism to today's liberals, and when there is, it only happens in the USA by USA citizens for extremist Christian right wing white heterosexual male purposes.

Most the world believes the 9/11 accident was false. It either never happened, or was done by the US gov't, or done by Jews, or done by Christians.

Apparently you simply need to align with the majority outside the US.

EDIT: However, the 'screw everybody else in the Western countries' probably is not going to work as foreign policy.

I know you're not a liberal so per the posters question why don't you give us an example of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil by an individual from one of those 7 countries? Hint: you might have to go back a few decades to find one.

 

[McRat]

I know you're not a liberal so per the posters question why don't you give us an example of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil by an individual from one of those 7 countries? Hint: you might have to go back a few decades to find one.

Can you say that armed ISIS combatants do not exist in those countries?

What do you think the quota should be for Jihadists?

 

[msnow]

Can you say that armed ISIS combatants do not exist in those countries?

What do you think the quota should be for Jihadists?

You miss the point. The question is how many terrorists have come here from those seven countries and attacked us not how many are there. Since the answer is zero then our vetting process has worked and the focus and intensity on this issue is exaggerated.

 

[Canuck]

There is no such thing as terrorism to today's liberals, and when there is, it only happens in the USA by USA citizens for extremist Christian right wing white heterosexual male purposes.

Most the world believes the 9/11 accident was false. It either never happened, or was done by the US gov't, or done by Jews, or done by Christians.

Apparently you simply need to align with the majority outside the US.

EDIT: However, the 'screw everybody else in the Western countries' probably is not going to work as foreign policy.

The vast majority of people in the US who believe 9/11 was an inside job identify themselves as conservatives. This is a fact but don't let the facts get in away of blaming liberals for this nonsense.

Instead of making up facts, why not debate this issue truthfully? Perhaps there's some merit in the argument that we are creating more terrorists by the now unconstitutional executive order? Home grown terror is just as bad as imported terror. If the object is to stop terror, we need to win both the war on terror and the war of ideas.

This is where I stand:

 

[OBX John]

There is no such thing as terrorism to today's liberals, and when there is, it only happens in the USA by USA citizens for extremist Christian right wing white heterosexual male purposes.

Most the world believes the 9/11 accident was false. It either never happened, or was done by the US gov't, or done by Jews, or done by Christians.

Apparently you simply need to align with the majority outside the US.

EDIT: However, the 'screw everybody else in the Western countries' probably is not going to work as foreign policy.

You do realize that not being scared is the only way to fight terror, right? I can't say I'm against drone strikes, but so long as the conditions that produced the radicals in the first place continue to exist, they will just keep on being produced in one form or another.

If we act irrationally, by say... banning those we have already vetted from countries that have not produced any attacks, and thinking it makes us safer, the terrorists have won. All those people who have had their dreams dashed by a hasty ban are now ripe for radicalization, or at the very least, less willing to stand up to radicals who hate the US.

 

[McRat]

You do realize that not being scared is the only way to fight terror, right? I can't say I'm against drone strikes, but so long as the conditions that produced the radicals in the first place continue to exist, they will just keep on being produced in one form or another.

If we act irrationally, by say... banning those we have already vetted from countries that have not produced any attacks, and thinking it makes us safer, the terrorists have won. All those people who have had their dreams dashed by a hasty ban are now ripe for radicalization, or at the very least, less willing to stand up to radicals who hate the US.

Terrorism is done for PR, not body count. Every victory swells their ranks. So the defensive goal against the spread of terrorism is to humiliate their efforts globally, in every single country. Make the Jihadists look like idiots when they fail, and baby killers when they succeed.

Fear of terrorism is why the Left is worried about making Jihadists upset. They strangely believe that if you don't provoke them, they will just stop. That has never worked in the past, so it probably won't work today either.

 

[OBX John]

Terrorism is done for PR, not body count. Every victory swells their ranks. So the defensive goal against the spread of terrorism is to humiliate their efforts globally, in every single country. Make the Jihadists look like idiots when they fail, and baby killers when they succeed.

Fear of terrorism is why the Left is worried about making Jihadists upset. They strangely believe that if you don't provoke them, they will just stop. That has never worked in the past, so it probably won't work today either.

I actually kind of agree with that - terrorism is pure PR; body count is just a tool.

I'm not worried about provoking terrorists, and I think you mischaracterize the left in that I'm not sure they really care about what terrorists think either. I'm am pretty sure pissing people off who are NOT terrorists, just who were trying to live here, doesn't further U.S. interests. It's a PR black eye so to speak, handing the terrorists a victory without them even making an attack.

 

[CuriousG]

The only terrorism I've seen lately are the ignorant people that continue to attack Mosques.

 

[hockeythug]

I'm curious - which country covered under the ban had previously produced a terrorist attack on the US?

St. Cloud Minnesota, Ohio State, Manhattan pressure cooker bomb, etc.

 

[AudubonB]

Dang! That's three more countries I've never visited!

Or - care to bring your remarks up to the level of other participants in TMC there, thug? Full sentences would be a start; getting rid of non-sequiturs another; engaging in reasoned discussion a third. The possibilities are endless.

 

[Skipdd]

Interesting article in the NYT today - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/04/...l?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share

Article describes how terrorists are now focusing on co-opting in country residents to become radicalized and coaching them on how to plan and carry out activities. So, what's the solution to this? Block all internet service originating from within "bad countries." I probably shouldn't jest, it's probably next on the list.

 

[hockeythug]

Dang! That's three more countries I've never visited!

Or - care to bring your remarks up to the level of other participants in TMC there, thug? Full sentences would be a start; getting rid of non-sequiturs another; engaging in reasoned discussion a third. The possibilities are endless.

I'm ok. Quote me next time though so I can find your response faster though. Unless passive aggressive is your thing.

 

[Canuck]

Terrorism is done for PR, not body count. Every victory swells their ranks. So the defensive goal against the spread of terrorism is to humiliate their efforts globally, in every single country. Make the Jihadists look like idiots when they fail, and baby killers when they succeed.

Fear of terrorism is why the Left is worried about making Jihadists upset. They strangely believe that if you don't provoke them, they will just stop. That has never worked in the past, so it probably won't work today either.

Thanks for a reasoned post. While I don't agree with the second paragraph, I do agree with the first. But I think it is in all of our best interest to leave out left vs. right when it comes to terrorism. We both want the same goal: A safe world for our children. And we need to work together on this, both left and right. I'm probably what you'd call left, but I leave the ranks of the left when it comes to how the left gives Islam a pass on how it treats women, gays, etc. I believe I'm a true liberal since I stand up for those minorities and I won't turn a blind eye to it. In fact, while Brietbart usually stands for everything I'm against politically, I find myself in agreement with this one Breitbart article:

Linda Sarsour, Women's March Organizer and Fake Feminist

For me, it's not about left or right when it comes to terrorism, or anything else for that matter. It's about what's right. I hope it's the same for you.

 

[McRat]

Thanks for a reasoned post. While I don't agree with the second paragraph, I do agree with the first. But I think it is in all of our best interest to leave out left vs. right when it comes to terrorism. We both want the same goal: A safe world for our children. And we need to work together on this, both left and right. I'm probably what you'd call left, but I leave the ranks of the left when it comes to how the left gives Islam a pass on how it treats women, gays, etc. I believe I'm a true liberal since I stand up for those minorities and I won't turn a blind eye to it. In fact, while Brietbart usually stands for everything I'm against politically, I find myself in agreement with this one Breitbart article:

Linda Sarsour, Women's March Organizer and Fake Feminist

For me, it's not about left or right when it comes to terrorism, or anything else for that matter. It's about what's right. I hope it's the same for you.

If you are serious, then look at this graph and the other graphs created by a neutral entity. The 120 day restrictions are put on countries with serious stability problems:

Visualizations Related to Terrorist Attacks and Threats in Yemen

 

[McRat]

I know you're not a liberal ...

Of course I'm not a liberal. I believe all people should be judged by their character, not their skin color, sex, or religious beliefs I simply do not believe that Gays, Women, Hispanics, or Blacks are genetically inferior like liberals do. I believe that countries that are having 2-10 terror attacks a day and no reliable documentation of their residents, and somehow evaded ITAR weapon restrictions need to have their visas put under a fine tooth comb until the violence is quelled.

Rich liberals want to acquire foreign nationals so they can fire US citizens and save money. They believe that skin colors other than 'white' are genetically inferior so must be given tax dollars to make them 'white'. It's also what justifies paying them less. 'Hire Women Today! Special, 25% off!'

Liberals hate taxes as much as anyone, so they simply do not pay them. Taxes are for suckers or workers according to wealthy liberals like Soros or Buffet. So raising taxes is a good idea to them. It has no effect on them and makes them look like kindly Slave Owners.

 

[bonnie]

Of course I'm not a liberal. I believe all people should be judged by their character, not their skin color, sex, or religious beliefs I simply do not believe that Gays, Women, Hispanics, or Blacks are genetically inferior like liberals do. I believe that countries that are having 2-10 terror attacks a day and no reliable documentation of their residents, and somehow evaded ITAR weapon restrictions need to have their visas put under a fine tooth comb until the violence is quelled.

Rich liberals want to acquire foreign nationals so they can fire US citizens and save money. They believe that skin colors other than 'white' are genetically inferior so must be given tax dollars to make them 'white'. It's also what justifies paying them less. 'Hire Women Today! Special, 25% off!'

Liberals hate taxes as much as anyone, so they simply do not pay them. Taxes are for suckers or workers according to wealthy liberals like Soros or Buffet. So raising taxes is a good idea to them. It has no effect on them and makes them look like kindly Slave Owners.

Thanks for the laugh this morning.

You talk about liberals judging others based on group characteristics (which I disagree with, but moving on). And in the same breath you judge anyone who says they're a liberal with sweeping statements about liberals. Do you not see the humor in that? (Rhetorical, of course. I know you don't.)

I'm a liberal. I own a gun. I believe we should have more common sense gun controls. I take personal responsibility. I pay taxes. I care about the environment, endangered species, clean water, and the right for women to make their own decisions about their bodies. I believe life is a team sport, not a competition & that we have a responsibility to help those that need help.

Everything you've said above about liberals doesn't apply to me. I'm not going to say all conservatives are judgmental or stupid. Because I don't talk about groups that way. And because I know some reasonable conservatives. A lot in fact.

 

[bugZPDX]

Exactly this.

I'm a liberal. I own a gun. I believe we should have more common sense gun controls. I take personal responsibility. I pay taxes. I care about the environment, endangered species, clean water, and the right for women to make their own decisions about their bodies. I believe life is a team sport, not a competition & that we have a responsibility to help those that need help.