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.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,428,613 times
Reputation: 40736
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez
Probably not, but never say never.
We have a lot of companies with billions of assets over there , so it COULD be that Trump has instructed the State Department to radically reduce Saudi visas as he signals US companies that it is going to happen and give them time to pull assets if they choose.
I'm not saying this is the plan. I'm just saying this might be the plan. Speculation.
What's not speculation is the Saudis practice one of the most radical forms of Islam in existence and have a history of funding religious schools teaching hatred of the west. Reason enough to put them on the list.
If we're going to base the defense of our country on what business interests US companies have in potential enemy states, we're pretty much screwed.
Start by banning muslims from "terrorist countries". Slowly add more countries to the list. Start arresting Muslim citizens for suspicious associations. Internment camps.
That's how you get from point A to B.
Stick with that narrative please. I'd like the Democrats to lose more seats in 2018.
What's not speculation is the Saudis practice one of the most radical forms of Islam in existence and have a history of funding religious schools teaching hatred of the west. Reason enough to put them on the list.
If we're going to base the defense of our country on what business interests US companies have in potential enemy states, we're pretty much screwed.
No argument from me. I would have them number one on the list. I'd do it regardless of any reciprocity to our business interests. My thought is that if US companies chose to risk billions in that region of the world, that was their risk.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,428,613 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez
No argument from me. I would have them number one on the list. I'd do it regardless of any reciprocity to our business interests. My thought is that if US companies chose to risk billions in that region of the world, that was their risk.
I'm just saying what his plan MIGHT be.
That's the way I see it and why I see Trump's move as more a PR stunt than actually attacking the issue.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,428,613 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez
Trump understands the value of PR.
This gives him a lot of momentum and will gain him a lot of praise from the public which provides more leverage over congress.
I agree that it was meant as PR, but I still like the ban. (Of course, I'm a person who wants to eliminate almost all immigration to the US, so...)
I have to wonder how easy Saudi Arabia will make it for those from the list of banned nations having bad intentions to obtain Saudi passports? They're certainly no strangers to abetting the actions of terrorists.
I'm not a big fan of PR, I know all too well the food I'm likely to get at some place like Taco Bell bears absolutely no resemblance to its PR pix, political PR is often similar.
What happens to USA citizen who travels to said countries for visit/vacation/family? Will they be not allowed or what happens to USA legal citizens from those countries
Since Saudi Is not in it, I am not impress with this news
Fortunately there will be lawsuits from civil rights groups opposing this measure. We are supposed to have freedom of religion in this country. Do you not remember how our country came into being? We emigrated here from Britain because we wanted religious freedom. Oh, but that's OK because we're Christian and any other religion is violent and wrong. (Have you even read the Bible lately?) Immigration from people of any other religion should be abolished because there is a microscopic chance they could be violent, so we should close the doors on all of them. (As if Christians aren't violent). I challenge you to prove to me that every Muslim person is violent. Or is every American going to punish every Muslim person until the end of time for the crimes of a few?
And what happens when Trump decides Hindus and Buddhists are a threat to "national security?" They're not Christians, so they must be a threat. And what about women? We have uteruses, we might want an abortion which will soon be illegal I'm sure, so we're a threat. Or gays? We want to be married, that's "unnatural," so it might be a threat to him too. And what about people who aren't white? They're a threat because there is a higher crime rate between black people than whites. He already put a gag order on the EPA because he doesn't want them voicing any dissenting opinion.
A prime example of not only Common Sense but it's the Governments job
to protect it's citizens
First job of government : Protect the citizens from the government.
Second job of government : Protect the citizens from other citizens
Third job over government : Never allow the government to protect citizens from themselves.
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.
