• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court lets full Trump travel ban take effect

MaggieD said:
So you’re saying when someone boards a plane to the US from London, we vet them? No, we most certainly do not. If they have the right travel documents, we have every faith in England that they’ve done their job.
Click to expand...

You think we let foreigners onto our soil without any check, whatsoever?


In any event, can you name a SINGLE terrorist who would have been denied entry on the basis of this travel ban?
 
Absentglare said:
You think we let foreigners onto our soil without any check, whatsoever?

In any event, can you name a SINGLE terrorist who would have been denied entry on the basis of this travel ban?
Click to expand...

Don’t change the subject. We don’t vet tourists visiting our country from England, Germany, France. In fact most countries. But YOU, otoh are trying to say we vet them? Really? Keep reaching.
 
MaggieD said:
Don’t change the subject. We don’t vet tourists visiting our country from England, Germany, France. In fact most countries. But YOU, otoh are trying to say we vet them? Really? Keep reaching.
Click to expand...

You said "if they have the right travel documents", how do you suppose they obtain the "right" travel documents?

Are you aware of the context? The Muslim ban applies to people who passed vetting.

The executive branch never substantively justified the ban in ANY meaningful way. This isn't a change in vetting requirements, it's a spiteful act of hatred.
 
Absentglare said:
You said "if they have the right travel documents", how do you suppose they obtain the "right" travel documents?

Are you aware of the context? The Muslim ban applies to people who passed vetting.

The executive branch never substantively justified the ban in ANY meaningful way. This isn't a change in vetting requirements, it's a spiteful act of hatred.
Click to expand...

This has been hashed, rehashed, rerehashed since January. Nothing is new. I have my opinion. You have yours. I’m not willing to waste any more time on old news.
 
MaggieD said:
So you’re saying when someone boards a plane to the US from London, we vet them? No, we most certainly do not. If they have the right travel documents, we have every faith in England that they’ve done their job.
Click to expand...

Who is "we", Maggie? President Trump has been attacking the Brits for their handling of "Muslim extremists" since before he ever took office.

British extremists have attacked people. In this country, the attacks on our citizens have come from Saudis, Egyptians, Pakistanis - none of these countries are on the travel ban list. No citizens from any of the countries on Trump's travel ban list have attacked Americans on our soil. None, at all.

If the Brits have this Muslim extremist issue that Trump rambled on about repeatedly, and as recently as a few days ago, then by that logic any British citizen can board a plane from London to NY, and come here and attack us.

The President does NOT have every faith in England. Just the opposite, in fact.
 
Absentglare said:
You think we let foreigners onto our soil without any check, whatsoever?


In any event, can you name a SINGLE terrorist who would have been denied entry on the basis of this travel ban?
Click to expand...

Not the terrorist who along with her husband shot up innocent Americans in San Bernardino. She was a Pakistani citizen who came to this country by way of Saudi Arabia. That travel ban would have been absolutely useless to stop her attack.

This "travel ban" is absolutely nothing but red meat for the Trump faithful.
 
tres borrachos said:
Not the terrorist who along with her husband shot up innocent Americans in San Bernardino. She was a Pakistani citizen who came to this country by way of Saudi Arabia. That travel ban would have been absolutely useless to stop her attack.

This "travel ban" is absolutely nothing but red meat for the Trump faithful.
Click to expand...

That might be true but:
A. I believe it was "Barry" who initiated it originally
B. If it makes Dems whine louder, the Trump people will be happy
 
tres borrachos said:
Who is "we", Maggie? President Trump has been attacking the Brits for their handling of "Muslim extremists" since before he ever took office.

British extremists have attacked people. In this country, the attacks on our citizens have come from Saudis, Egyptians, Pakistanis - none of these countries are on the travel ban list. No citizens from any of the countries on Trump's travel ban list have attacked Americans on our soil. None, at all.

If the Brits have this Muslim extremist issue that Trump rambled on about repeatedly, and as recently as a few days ago, then by that logic any British citizen can board a plane from London to NY, and come here and attack us.

The President does NOT have every faith in England. Just the opposite, in fact.
Click to expand...

I Googled around and I’m not finding anything. Do you have a link?
 
Napoleon said:
That is what the ban identifies.
Click to expand...

The ban identifies countries.

What was your original question on this?

If a country doesn't have a system set up to prove who somebody is, then there is no reason to let that person into the US.
 
MaggieD said:
You are so short-sighted. Until there is a ban in place, the United States has absolutely zero leverage with these countries to have them make any changes at all. So instead of telling me to shove MY ban up where the sun don’t shine, you may want to use your brain and look behind the curtain.
Click to expand...


what do those countries have to do with OUR policies? If we say, you now need this, this and this, to get into our country, then the other countries have to comply, period. There doesn't need to be any negotiation. And the Ban was put in place under the premise that the administration needed it to create appropriate "extreme" vetting policies, which is absolute BS.

The reality is that the BAN is the policy, not a negotiating tactic. They were testing it out to see if it'd fly or not, well, now it's got some of it's wings going, but supposedly only for 90-120 days, but yeah, I think that'll just be extended again and again and again, because the Trump administration has NO IDEA what the hell it's doing. It's even worse than the Obama administration in it's ineptitude. All it has is executive orders and 1 vote margins.

So, what do those countries have to do for their citizens to be allowed to travel to the USA again? What's the vetting criteria? or are you saying we need to let those countries dictate OUR OWN vetting criteria to us?

I might be short sighted, but at least I'm not illogical. The horse pulls the cart, not the other way around.
 
Mason66 said:
The ban identifies countries.

What was your original question on this?

If a country doesn't have a system set up to prove who somebody is, then there is no reason to let that person into the US.
Click to expand...

AWESOME, we have step one! now maybe you should tell the Trump administration to write that down or something, like in a policy or procedure book or heaven forbid actual legislation. :roll:
 
MaggieD said:
This has been hashed, rehashed, rerehashed since January. Nothing is new. I have my opinion. You have yours. I’m not willing to waste any more time on old news.
Click to expand...

well, as much hashing as you've said has been done, there should be some kinda policy or something productive that's come out of that from the administration by now, right? or are they just sitting on their asses not doing anything.... as seems to be customary by the lazy republicans.
 
Mason66 said:
What does that have to do with this action?

Do you not understand it is stupid to allow people in to the country when you don't know who they are or where they are from?
Click to expand...

That's what the Native Americans thought too.... then us white people kicked their asses, as we do.
 
I seriously doubt that this travel ban will result in any measurable or meaningful increase in national security. Considering that so many of the recent "terrorist attacks" that have been committed by "lone wolves" who have lived in this country for years, if not all of their lives. While I understand how many believe this ban to be "racist" or xenophobic, bit it really isn't.

Let me be clear, I am as disgusted with Trump as many of you are, but this move is not without precedent and it's not as horrible as some seem to think it is. It's unfortunate that we find ourselves here (much of the animosity is due to decades of bad foreign policy), but it is what it is. The smart play is to take any level of administrative action possible to lower the potential threat.
 
Lerxst said:
I seriously doubt that this travel ban will result in any measurable or meaningful increase in national security. Considering that so many of the recent "terrorist attacks" that have been committed by "lone wolves" who have lived in this country for years, if not all of their lives. While I understand how many believe this ban to be "racist" or xenophobic, bit it really isn't.

Let me be clear, I am as disgusted with Trump as many of you are, but this move is not without precedent and it's not as horrible as some seem to think it is. It's unfortunate that we find ourselves here (much of the animosity is due to decades of bad foreign policy), but it is what it is. The smart play is to take any level of administrative action possible to lower the potential threat.
Click to expand...



I believe that every terrorist attack in the US and Canada has come from within.

The ban is an indirect assertion that border services are not good enough and can't prevent an attack. I don't understand how demeaning what has been working will make American "great again".
 
Fearandloathing said:
I believe that every terrorist attack in the US and Canada has come from within.

The ban is an indirect assertion that border services are not good enough and can't prevent an attack. I don't understand how demeaning what has been working will make American "great again".
Click to expand...

I understand where you are coming from, I really do. Insinuating that our current national security measures aren't up to par is just part of him fulfilling a campaign message of "Obama bad, me good!" Which is why I say it won't make much of any difference, the "need" for this policy was a creation of the alt-right strategy the Trump campaign used to win the White house. The argument is "if it prevents just one" is going to be the mantra, and even if I don't agree, I understand why it appeals to people. Ultimately it won't amount to anything, good or bad. Other than making us look like quasi-isolationists. I just think their are plenty of other problems we need to worry ourselves over regarding Trump's presidency.
 
MaggieD said:
So you’re saying when someone boards a plane to the US from London, we vet them? No, we most certainly do not. If they have the right travel documents, we have every faith in England that they’ve done their job.
Click to expand...

actually, YES we do vet them.

There is no faith in any other country doing their "job." WE issue visas to foreigners, not their own country. They might go through their country's state department but the visa comes from us, our rules. Just like other countries, like China, Iran, North Korea, etc... allow or disallow travel to US Citizens, it is OUR responsibility to control OUR borders, doing so at airports is much easier than along a physical border, but still, it's us, NOT THEM, that set the rules, just like they set the rules for us (to allow us in and even where we can travel and what activities we can do while we're there) when we travel there.

look here for details: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/tourism-visit.html

now, that's just VISAS, i don't know about other valid forms of traveling to the US, so other "right travel documents" whatever those are, might have other rules.
 
Lerxst said:
I understand where you are coming from, I really do. Insinuating that our current national security measures aren't up to par is just part of him fulfilling a campaign message of "Obama bad, me good!" Which is why I say it won't make much of any difference, the "need" for this policy was a creation of the alt-right strategy the Trump campaign used to win the White house. The argument is "if it prevents just one" is going to be the mantra, and even if I don't agree, I understand why it appeals to people. Ultimately it won't amount to anything, good or bad. Other than making us look like quasi-isolationists. I just think their are plenty of other problems we need to worry ourselves over regarding Trump's presidency.
Click to expand...

Not in any expected way, but there is already a backlash from around the world. A political site here raised the question of a Trump visit to Canada...87 replies to the negative, more than a few suggesting similar bans....against Americans. On a radio call in show a woman called in to complain about how much static she was getting, for "being American...appears someone called her "racist". She then went on to say that all Muslims should be restricted to their own countries.

At some point they stopped teaching Machiavelli's "The Prince" where the power remains in power by keeping the citizenry in fear, and convinced they are the only ones who can keep people safe.

Trump's campaign and what he's doing now is right out of the same book.
 
Fearandloathing said:
Not in any expected way, but there is already a backlash from around the world. A political site here raised the question of a Trump visit to Canada...87 replies to the negative, more than a few suggesting similar bans....against Americans. On a radio call in show a woman called in to complain about how much static she was getting, for "being American...appears someone called her "racist". She then went on to say that all Muslims should be restricted to their own countries.

At some point they stopped teaching Machiavelli's "The Prince" where the power remains in power by keeping the citizenry in fear, and convinced they are the only ones who can keep people safe.

Trump's campaign and what he's doing now is right out of the same book.
Click to expand...

Oh there is no question, his Presidency has already set us back on global stage. The damage he is doing will take years to correct from just a foreign relations perspective. He's awful. Like...really awful. If he's out next election I am sure the incoming POTUS will revoke the ban, provided it doesn't get shot down somewhere along the way.
 
Absentglare said:
They don't issue travel visas, or vet immigrants, for us. We do that ourselves.

And we've done it without any issue, for decades. There's literally no reason to ban refugees from war torn countries from our soil. We have nothing to gain by exacerbating their suffering. We aren't any safer, if anything, the Muslim bans have made us less safe, through the insult to Chad and to the entire Muslim world.
Click to expand...

Actually there are a number of very legitimate economic reasons to ban refugees.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Groogrux said:
Actually there are a number of very legitimate economic reasons to ban refugees.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Sure, it'd be great for another economy to attract the next Steve Jobs!
 
Fearandloathing said:
I believe that every terrorist attack in the US and Canada has come from within.

The ban is an indirect assertion that border services are not good enough and can't prevent an attack. I don't understand how demeaning what has been working will make American "great again".
Click to expand...
So the people who perpetrated the 9/11 attack were actually from "within"? How did you come to that conclusion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom