Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would say this is very good news - and a good start! What I love most is that Mr. Trump is really doing what he said he would do.
I would love to know the exact wording of the restriction ... does this mean only if they come directly from those countries to here or if they have any documentation that states they lived there before becoming refugees. My worry is that unfortunately people from those places will continue to stream in by indirect routes and with forged documentation, etc. I see the article says there may be a temporary hold on admitting anyone from anywhere for a while - that may indeed be the best approach till we figure out a way to really 'vet' people properly.
It really is too bad though that Obama imported so many willy-nilly before he left office. We have a really big 'retrospective' job to do to find and verify those 'immigrants' as well as any new ones.
In my opinion, 'refugees' should perhaps not be admitted with the promise of any kind of citizenship or even a green card (unless it is one which has to be renewed perhaps every 6 months so we can keep tabs on them) since they should be expected to return to their homelands when the conditions that forced them to leave improve. If the situation continues for x # of years maybe that could be reviewed but supposedly they left only because of war or some other horrible situation and want to return to their homeland - not flee forever. Syria for instance wasn't always so horrible - it was a rather civilized society not that long ago and could be again.
If indeed, while living here, they decide they would like to make the US their home permanently, they would still have to return home and apply from there like anyone else. If they had been here a while they probably would have an advantage anyway - having learned our values, language, etc. and perhaps even attending school here and making friends to sponsor them.
The other thing I would prefer is that we actively seek out Christian refugees for a while, rather than leaving them to be slaughtered and bringing in so few. Chances are that they might be less of a risk to this country's security/safety.
Yes, I think Saudi should be on the list but that one is probably a bit trickier politically still. The withholding of visas and maybe a temporary halt for every country's applicants may help with that till they can figure out what to do about that situation.
The terror has not been from incoming refugees but wannabe Isis crazy from right here, but so be it with this policy. Ok with me to satisfy his vetting process
Given all these countries, with the exception of Iran, have embassies in DC, what about them and the wealth class who own property and spend enormous sums of money in the US.
The whole thing is unfortunate, but we have to accept the world as it is. I think the great majority of Americans would agree with this.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You'll be disappointed when you finally figure out that most of us agree with this action.
What I love most is that Mr. Trump is really doing what he said he would do. 
