So this seven muslim countries travel ban

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by BurnPyro, Feb 1, 2017.

  1. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    it probably does.
     
  2. Dagda

    Dagda Forum Royalty

    yeah badg, i've had that same feeling- i live right outside DC, and am not particularly fearful of random acts of terror either in my vicinity or when i go to crowded places in DC (which recently, by the way, i think there have been many more of. the women's march, for one, seems like it would've been a definite bomb target)


    not really sure what the disconnect there is
     
  3. Baskitkase

    Baskitkase Forum Royalty

    You want to tell me that a normal kid will decide to become a Jihadist over "policies like this"? Yeah, anything is possible. Home-grown terrorists, as they say, are a completely separate issue, even though the result or intended result is the same, the method of their "arrival" is different (internet solicitation). What creates the home-grown version is not policies. Saying that policies would the the tipping point for someone to go out and seek to become a home-grown terrorist is quite a stretch. I could be a lknob and ask you to show me some statistics on something for which I know there are none, but nah. I don't see that as credible.
     
  4. Baskitkase

    Baskitkase Forum Royalty

    I don't fear it happening on my street, to me, but I do fear it happening, because it has happened. The safety you feel has been bestowed apon you by the efforts of those people keeping you safe. When I was in the USMC, I countered those efforts. I've seen what gets stopped and put in a file - not released to CNN. You are definitely not safe by serendipity, it's because people have made a safe place for you to live.
     
    SPiEkY and darklord48 like this.
  5. Dagda

    Dagda Forum Royalty

    I'm not arguing with that at all. From what I know there have been a very small number of foreign-based acts of terror in the US since 9/11, I assume because of how much our intelligence community has ramped up. Again, I live near and am frequently around some fairly high profile targets, and I'm glad for the safety that's provided

    I'm not afraid because, while terrible things have happened, may happen, and no doubt will happen, I believe America's strength and its security keep many, most, indeed close to all of those things from happening to me, or to people I know.



    Also, the argument I've heard made isn't so much that children hear about these policies and decide to become terrorists, it's that policies like these can strip away a number of other options for them, which in turn increases the likelihood of them becoming terrorists
     
  6. calisk

    calisk I need me some PIE!

    mhmm from the figures i saw this law has lead to 100 thousand visa's to be revoked from legal americans, if it's true, then you just gave 100 thousand plus people reasons to listen to isis....not the people deported so much as their friends co-workers, people who don't trust trump, and more who were just unjustly attacked by trump, people who were just trying to make a living here.
     
  7. Vote Kanye 2020

    Vote Kanye 2020 Better-Known Member

    It really annoys me how people call this a Muslim ban, when the majority of Muslim countries are not banned, and the 6 countries with the highest Muslim population are not banned.
     
    StormChasee, SPiEkY and ssez like this.
  8. Baskitkase

    Baskitkase Forum Royalty

    Your visa was revoked, and so you join ISIS? Good Firking riddance.
     
  9. ssez

    ssez I need me some PIE!

    i feel you dude, i just debated that fact in this thread for pages. go read it and see how much some dont like facts.

    muslim ban sounds so much scarier so that sticks in their mind.
     
    Vote Kanye 2020 likes this.
  10. calisk

    calisk I need me some PIE!

    If they are revoked they wouldn't be here for it to matter it's the sons that have their fathers sent away and what not that will grab a gun and shoot up a wall mart

    The easily manipulated young men that are easy picking for isis

    Hell the latest terrorist attack in Canada was done by a trump supporters so it really isn't even exclusive to Muslims anyone who feels threatened can be a terrorists and everything trump does leads to fear
     
    Geressen likes this.
  11. badgerale

    badgerale Warchief of Wrath

    I don't even have a problem with him banning immigration from muslim countries (though he could have done it in a fairer way), not that it's really my business but he won the election on a platform of 'ban all muslims' -- whether you agree with it or not you should respect the mandate he earned from the US people. If that's found to be illegal or whatever, fine, he works around it by not calling it a muslim ban.

    Just seems that some people, in their devotion to their orange god, are taking it at face value.
     
  12. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    it is getting hard not to... no..
    *don't draw parallels to Germany, don't draw parallels to Germany, don't draw parallels to Germany, don't draw parallels to Germany.*
     
    Tweek516 and NevrGonaGivUup like this.
  13. Baskitkase

    Baskitkase Forum Royalty

    You don't build policy on what some guys son might think in 20 years. This is getting kinda dumb.
     
  14. calisk

    calisk I need me some PIE!

    Not sure why you should think 20 years it took 1 week for the first attack from a trump supporters to occur why would it take 20 years for a radical to do one

    Family members of American born muslims can end up deported even if they are of 16+ and that's just one scenario where this risks instigating an attack

    That said trump did say he'd aim for families to so his plan might be to send off every single muslim in America that's related to another muslim
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2017
  15. StormChasee

    StormChasee The King of Potatoes

    BINGO! It would be nice if the mass media would actually describe it properly.
     
  16. badgerale

    badgerale Warchief of Wrath

    FFS, stop reading any media (mass, mainstream, alt, altright, conspiracy website) and think about it for your yourself.

    I'd like to say more but I feel like it would be kicking puppies at this point.
     
    Tweek516, BurnPyro and Geressen like this.
  17. Baskitkase

    Baskitkase Forum Royalty

    You are off on some really long tangential tangent of tangentry. P sure my opinions are stated. I've noted yours and have given you a Firking giant thumbs up.
     
  18. Sokolov

    Sokolov The One True Cactuar Octopi

    As I said earlier, I think a large problem of this issue is that people are working with different definitions and different criteria - and some are working with the HOW, while others, like me, are working with the WHY.

    And it's not so much the media is that PEOPLE feel it's a Muslim ban, including myself.

    I understand the arguments for claiming it's not a Muslim ban:
    1. It doesn't ban all Muslims
    2. The EO doesn't specifically call out Muslims
    But for me, those are technicalities. The RESULT of the EO is that it primarily affects Muslims, and the INTENT of the EO is to prevent Muslim terrorists from entering the country. The countrries not affected are not regions from which Muslim Terrorists are thought to be found, thus they are excluded, but this doesn't change the fact that it is Muslims in the target countries that are the primary concern.

    Add to that Trump's campaign statements and promise to "ban all Muslims immigration" and it's hard to see this as anything but.

    Again, as I said before, calling it a Muslim ban is not a judgement, but rather a reflection of the REALITY of what this EO means - most of the people potentially affected will be Muslim, and I think it's hard to argue that it is specifically terrorists of Muslim persuasion that this EO is intended to address. It's not looking to address left-wing terrorists or white nationalist terrorists or Korean terrorists - it's MUSLIM terrorists.

    ~

    To use a Pox example - there are situations where a theme will be problematic, and we decide that it is a specific rune in the theme that's a problem - and that it is a specific ability on him that's the problem.

    So, we nerf the ability - now, this also happens to affect other champions with the ability, but they were mostly unplayable anyway.

    In this scenario, it is quite clear to everyone why the nerf happened. But you can TECHNICALLY argue that it was not a nerf to said theme because no specific rune in the theme changed. Rather, we just nerfed an ability. And if we wanted to nerf the theme, why did we only nerf one rune of the theme and all other runes in the theme were unaffected? Clearly, then, the change cannot be called a "Theme Nerf."

    I assume that most of you, in the Pox example here, would agree that the nerf is CLEARLY intended to nerf the theme, and that calling it a Theme Nerf would not be inappropriate given what the nerf ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISHES.
     
    BurnPyro likes this.
  19. Baskitkase

    Baskitkase Forum Royalty

    No really gives a Bane Shift about the semantics except the internet dudes. It's a Muslim ban. That's what it is. Let's move on.
     
    Geressen likes this.
  20. SPiEkY

    SPiEkY King of Jesters

    Usually.
     
    Ohmin likes this.

Share This Page