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.
Given that you (or I) are privy to the PDB or any real intelligence (CIA,DIA,NSA etc) information you/we have no idea if there's an immediate threat or 50 or 0 at this point in time.
About all we DO know for certain is there's a group of religious zealot nutters out there who have continuously threatened and in fact acted on sending people to various nations to commit terrorist acts. Given that, why should any sensible person/nation NOT believe them when they say they will continue to do so, continue to infiltrate their loons in with innocent people?
To make this even more simple, if you had a neighbor with a house full of people start threatening you, they had beaten up a couple of your neighbors and burned up a couple other's cars, would you invite them over for dinner or to spend the night?
If there was a direct and imminent threat then the security levels would have been raised, they were not. When Obama took action to rescreen Iraqi refugees in 2011 there was a concrete verifiable reason, they offered no specific reason for this current action, just terror in general.
He just happened to leave out Saudi Arabia and Pakistan...
Don't let facts get in the way of being scared of the browns.
As I've said in other posts, while I'm concerned that he left those countries out there are a couple of reasons put forward as the reason why.
Saudi Arabia is evidently fighting ISIS in Yemen AND willing to support the U.S. in renegotiating the Iran Nuclear deal among other things like providing support for a safe zone in Syria for refugees. Maybe it's true, maybe not but it's reasons to consider.
As for Pakistan? I don't see any reason they should be left off given their history. I don't know why Obama didn't sanction them heavily years ago for lying to us, hiding Bin Laden AND locking up the Doctor that helped us AND protecting (arming?) Afghan terrorists.
Can YOU explain that one?
As I've said in other posts, while I'm concerned that he left those countries out there are a couple of reasons put forward as the reason why.
Saudi Arabia is evidently fighting ISIS in Yemen AND willing to support the U.S. in renegotiating the Iran Nuclear deal among other things. Maybe it's true, maybe not but it's reasons to consider.
As for Pakistan? I don't see any reason they should be left off given their history. I don't know why Obama didn't sanction them heavily years ago for lying to us, hiding Bin Laden AND locking up the Doctor that helped us AND protecting (arming?) Afghan terrorists.
Can YOU explain that one?
No because in case you were unaware you won and Trump is president now. The explaining falls on him now. He owns this EO and each decision after 1/20
If there was a direct and imminent threat then the security levels would have been raised, they were not. When Obama took action to rescreen Iraqi refugees in 2011 there was a concrete verifiable reason, they offered no specific reason for this current action, just terror in general.
You think which does not make it so. Case in point, several terror attacks were stopped just before they started and the terror level was not raised and they knew about several more they were watching. This is from Obama's own mouth.
As I've said in other posts, while I'm concerned that he left those countries out there are a couple of reasons put forward as the reason why.
Saudi Arabia is evidently fighting ISIS in Yemen AND willing to support the U.S. in renegotiating the Iran Nuclear deal among other things like providing support for a safe zone in Syria for refugees. Maybe it's true, maybe not but it's reasons to consider.
As for Pakistan? I don't see any reason they should be left off given their history. I don't know why Obama didn't sanction them heavily years ago for lying to us, hiding Bin Laden AND locking up the Doctor that helped us AND protecting (arming?) Afghan terrorists.
Can YOU explain that one?
The reason they're left off is because, for better or worse, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are officially allies of the U.S. and as such they are cooperative in our vetting efforts. What all the countries on the list have in common is that they are either failed states, in a state of war, or are openly hostile to the United States and thus we have little to no access to those state's records (to the extent that adequate records even exist), little to no way of verifying the people coming from those countries are who they say they are, we have no idea what their past history is, etc.
I think that many moderates that voted for him are saying "what have I done".
Pew Research and Reuters Polls would beg to differ.
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.
