J.P. Prince stranded in Dubai

#76
#76
BigZiti09 said:
It's a temporary ban while he buffs up restrictions. BFD.

Save your fake outrage dude. It's not the end of the world.
Click to expand...

It is for some refugee kids. But oh well who cares? People like Wenyen Gabriel at UK who's family escaped the violence from Sudan would have been turned away.
 
Last edited:
#77
#77
Stoked said:
It is for some refugee kids. But oh well who cares? People like Wenyen Gabriel at UK who's family escaped the violence from Sudan would have been turned away.
Click to expand...

Delayed while we tighten up our process. Not turned away forever.

Again, save the fake outrage. If Obama had done this it wouldn't have been a blip on the radar. The outrage is because of who is doing it not what is actually happening.
 
#78
#78
BigZiti09 said:
Delayed while we tighten up our process. Not turned away forever.

Again, save the fake outrage. If Obama had done this it wouldn't have been a blip on the radar. The outrage is because of who is doing it not what is actually happening.
Click to expand...

I thought that Obama also had restrictions. Plus the 7 nations on Trump's EO came from the Obama administration's research and recommendations of countries with high levels of terrorist risk. Seems like Trump and Obama were both putting the well being of US citizens ahead of all else. Europe is a mess right now. No need to follow their lead down a **** hole.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#79
#79
TennTom said:
Louisville? Not even close. Try East St Louis for the worst of America and parts of New Orleans
Click to expand...

St. Louis is one of the few bigger midwestern/eastern cities I've not lived in. But I have spent time in all the others mentioned, inluding long times in Lousiville and Memphis, and in the time I was in Lousiville it was terrible the amount of crime and violence I saw, on top of the entire city effectively being under construction since 1975 or so.

However, I looked it up once I got off work and you are correct in terms of violent crimes (in the study I found, homicides.) Of the 50 most violent cities in the world they all belong to either Africa, South America, or the United States, and 41 belong to Latin America. The U.S. has 4 in the top fifty, New Orleans, Detroit, Baltimore, and St. Louis, with St. Louis being the highest at #15 with almost 60 homicides per 100,000 people. These numbers were also published just 5 days ago, so it's as new as you can get.

But, sadly, the difference in the top 5 and the rest is astronomical. The 5 cities are Maturin, Venezuela with 87 homicides/100k, then it jumps enormously to Aculpulco, Mexico at 105/100k, San Salvador at 108/100k, San Pedro Sula, Honduras, at 111/100k, and #1 is Caracas, Venezuala at an insane 120/100k.

So yeah, as bad as the worst city in modern western culture is, the worst in South america is literally twice as bad when it comes to homicide.

But I will also just post the disclaimer from said article as well for the criteria of the cities

The council's ranking contains cities with populations of more than 300,000 and does not count deaths in combat zones or cities with unavailable data, so some dangerous cities may not be represented on the list.

So, it is possible that some middle east cities do have it worse because they are technically combat zones, but I wasn't able to find numbers for any of those.
 
#80
#80
Thunder Good-Oil said:
I thought that Obama also had restrictions. Plus the 7 nations on Trump's EO came from the Obama administration's research and recommendations of countries with high levels of terrorist risk. Seems like Trump and Obama were both putting the well being of US citizens ahead of all else. Europe is a mess right now. No need to follow their lead down a **** hole.
Click to expand...

That's incorrect, those seven nations actually came from Bush's research way back in the weeks after 9/11, as confirmed by a former very high ranking military official. This middle east **** storm has been brewing for literally 20 years almost.
 
#81
#81
Daloth said:
That's incorrect, those seven nations actually came from Bush's research way back in the weeks after 9/11, as confirmed by a former very high ranking military official. This middle east **** storm has been brewing for literally 20 years almost.
Click to expand...

They stayed on the **** list through the Obama regime. Trump isn't relying on data from over 8 years ago.

The ME **** storm was at full boil almost 40 years ago.
 
#82
#82
BigZiti09 said:
Delayed while we tighten up our process. Not turned away forever.

Again, save the fake outrage. If Obama had done this it wouldn't have been a blip on the radar. The outrage is because of who is doing it not what is actually happening.
Click to expand...

Tell me why Saudi Arabi isn't apart of the bans then since that's where majority of the 9/11 attackers came from? I guarantee if Trump had any kind of business with any of the 7 countries they would not be banned whether it's 90 days or a week.

Zero people have died by refugees from those countries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#83
#83
Stoked said:
Tell me why Saudi Arabi isn't apart of the bans then since that's where majority of the 9/11 attackers came from? I guarantee if Trump had any kind of business with any of the 7 countries they would not be banned whether it's 90 days or a week.

Zero people have died by refugees from those countries.
Click to expand...

Saudi Arabia doesn't endorse terrorism.

Trump, or any competent business person, is going to avoid doing business in the risky countries. The fact that they're positively correlated doesn't mean he's granting favors to those that he has done business in. It means that those countries are more stable and receptive to partnering in business as well as not encouraging terrorism. Pro-terrorist countries won't be the beneficiaries of foreign investment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#86
#86
Stoked said:
It is for some refugee kids. But oh well who cares? People like Wenyen Gabriel at UK who's family escaped the violence from Sudan would have been turned away.
Click to expand...

There's going to be some collateral damage. No system of anything is 100% right for 100% of people worldwide. You have to weigh the costs. If keeping out just one jihadist radical with a mind set to killing saves a thousand American lives, then I'm not bothered by the measures being taken to help ensure that. Will it temporarily inconvenience some people who innocently just want to come to the United States? Sure it will. Is it worth it to the 250 million people in this country to better vet who we allow within our borders. Damn right it is.

Gotta break some eggs...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#89
#89
Stoked said:
Just a FYI...there is a 1 in 20 million chance of you dying from a terrorist attack.
Click to expand...

That would "only" be 15 deaths of Americans on a population of 300 million. Pretty sure we exceeded 15 on 9/11 and at the club in Florida. If it was "only" 15 deaths, I guess you could live with that as long as one of the 15 isn't you.
 
#91
#91
Stoked said:
Also why didn't Trump ban Saudi Arabians from coming to our country?
Click to expand...

Good question. His not banning Saudi Arabians sure goes against the whole "Trump is just banning all Muslims" narrative that is being pushed by all the "open-minded" people.

If your argument is that more counties should be banned, I can go along with that.
 
#92
#92
Stoked said:
It is for some refugee kids. But oh well who cares? People like Wenyen Gabriel at UK who's family escaped the violence from Sudan would have been turned away.
Click to expand...
It is not the United States' obligation to cure all the problems and evils that arise from bad leadership of other countries. You are not forced to adopt a gang banger's kid even though that would be a very noble act and probably would make a positive impact on that kid's life. The President's #1 responsibility is to protect US citizens. People seem to expect our government to live up to higher ideals than we are willing to as individuals. Everyone wants to say "we should" but not many say "I will".
 
#93
#93
BigZiti09 said:
Delayed while we tighten up our process. Not turned away forever.

Again, save the fake outrage. If Obama had done this it wouldn't have been a blip on the radar. The outrage is because of who is doing it not what is actually happening.
Click to expand...

Obama did do it, which tell you the state of politics in the US.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top