• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 10:14
CEST 16:14
KST 23:14
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL46Code S RO12 Preview: Cure, Zoun, Solar, Creator4[ASL19] Finals Preview: Daunting Task30
Community News
[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th12Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0EWC 2025 Regional Qualifier Results26Code S RO12 Results + RO8 Groups (2025 Season 2)3
StarCraft 2
General
BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation Magnus Carlsen and Fabi review Clem's chess game. Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th
Tourneys
Bellum Gens Elite: Stara Zagora 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament SOOPer7s Showmatches 2025 Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) $5,100+ SEL Season 2 Championship (SC: Evo)
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance Mutation # 473 Cold is the Void
Brood War
General
BW General Discussion [BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans? BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ I made an ASL quiz
Tourneys
[ASL19] Grand Finals [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] ProLeague Bracket Stage - Day 2 [BSL20] ProLeague Bracket Stage - Day 1
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread What do you want from future RTS games? Path of Exile Nintendo Switch Thread Mechabellum
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
LiquidLegends to reintegrate into TL.net
Heroes of the Storm
Heroes of the Storm 2.0 Simple Questions, Simple Answers
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread Cleaning My Mechanical Keyboard
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Cognitive styles x game perf…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Poker
Nebuchad
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 25227 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2534

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2532 2533 2534 2535 2536 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
Deathstar
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
9150 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 03:11:47
November 19 2015 03:11 GMT
#50661
On November 19 2015 12:09 Acrofales wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 19 2015 12:07 RenSC2 wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:46 kwizach wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:17 RenSC2 wrote:
The only thing it takes to get over this roadblock is to ignore political correctness on this issue.

Respecting human rights is "political correctness", now? Let me fix your post: "The only thing it takes to get over this roadblock is to ignore any shred of human decency and empathy you might have left, and fully embrace bigotry and right-wing xenophobic myths".

So proposing that we take in more immigrants than currently proposed is "ignoring any shred of human decency and empathy"? Not sure how you came to that conclusion. Reading comprehension fail? Logic fail?

I suggest that we can do the most good as a country by taking in the women and children. Setting up planes or ships and getting those women and children across the Atlantic and setting them up in America.

If we can get past the sexism of the solution, it actually ends up being a better solution for everyone... the able bodied men fleeing to Europe aren't leaving their mothers/sisters/wives/children in a warzone on the hopes that they'll eventually get proper clearance. Instead, those men know that their families are safe in America and can make the journey to Europe with confidence or stay and fight with confidence.

Mhm, Im sure all those families you're proposing to split in half see it your way too.


Yeah I'm pretty sure parents coming from third world war zones would not mind being separated from their son or daughter if it means their child can live a life in the US. Please think for just 5 seconds.
rip passion
RenSC2
Profile Blog Joined August 2011
United States1050 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 03:15:14
November 19 2015 03:14 GMT
#50662
On November 19 2015 12:10 bo1b wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 19 2015 12:09 Acrofales wrote:
On November 19 2015 12:07 RenSC2 wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:46 kwizach wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:17 RenSC2 wrote:
The only thing it takes to get over this roadblock is to ignore political correctness on this issue.

Respecting human rights is "political correctness", now? Let me fix your post: "The only thing it takes to get over this roadblock is to ignore any shred of human decency and empathy you might have left, and fully embrace bigotry and right-wing xenophobic myths".

So proposing that we take in more immigrants than currently proposed is "ignoring any shred of human decency and empathy"? Not sure how you came to that conclusion. Reading comprehension fail? Logic fail?

I suggest that we can do the most good as a country by taking in the women and children. Setting up planes or ships and getting those women and children across the Atlantic and setting them up in America.

If we can get past the sexism of the solution, it actually ends up being a better solution for everyone... the able bodied men fleeing to Europe aren't leaving their mothers/sisters/wives/children in a warzone on the hopes that they'll eventually get proper clearance. Instead, those men know that their families are safe in America and can make the journey to Europe with confidence or stay and fight with confidence.

Mhm, Im sure all those families you're proposing to split in half see it your way too.

They don't seem to mind, 70% of the people going to Europe are men. 15% women, 15% children. Such a family!

Thanks! Now I don't have to reply to Acrofales.

However, I would also point out that there shouldn't be any political issue of getting a family of refugees out of America and into Europe to reunite with a father/brother/husband who has established himself there. Certainly no harder than getting them out of Syria or a refugee camp in Turkey/Jordan/other.
Playing better than standard requires deviation. This divergence usually results in sub-standard play.
Mercy13
Profile Joined January 2011
United States718 Posts
November 19 2015 03:14 GMT
#50663
On November 19 2015 11:54 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 19 2015 11:48 farvacola wrote:
Being a coward in public is quite in fashion these days it would seem.

I'll be honest. I really hope that democrats continue with this idiotic line of thought. Even Mother Jones gets it:

Show nested quote +
Mocking Republicans over this—as liberals spent much of yesterday doing on my Twitter stream—seems absurdly out of touch to a lot of people. Not just wingnut tea partiers, either, but plenty of ordinary centrists too. It makes them wonder if Democrats seriously see no problem here. Do they care at all about national security? Are they really that detached from reality?

The liberal response to this should be far more measured. We should support tight screening. Never mind that screening is already pretty tight. We should highlight the fact that we're accepting a pretty modest number of refugees. In general, we should act like this is a legitimate thing to be concerned about and then work from there.

Mocking it is the worst thing we could do. It validates all the worst stereotypes about liberals that we put political correctness ahead of national security. It doesn't matter if that's right or wrong. Ordinary people see the refugees as a common sense thing to be concerned about. We shouldn't respond by essentially calling them idiots. That way lies electoral disaster.


Source.


This is actually a really good point. It's fun to get angry and yell at people on the internet, but if we want to change hearts and mind about refugees or Muslims in general, it would probably help to acknowledge their concerns even if they aren't very logical.
TheTenthDoc
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
United States9561 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 03:27:43
November 19 2015 03:18 GMT
#50664
If we don't trust the United States to screen out terrorist male refugees, why do we trust them to screen terrorist immigrants in general?

It's infinitely easier to force 10,000 refugees through an intensive screening and interview process than everyone entering the country, after all, so we get way more information on them than Joe Q. flying in from Dubai. Should we just not let any men into the country at all if they're from a region with religious extremists? And no, this is not a straw man, this is a logical extension of the argument against letting in any male Syrian refugees.

+ Show Spoiler +
Incidentally, Christie is a coward as evinced by his borderline-insane handling of Ebola (alongside Cuomo), where they flew directly in the face of all scientific evidence, so anything he says is not going to be very representative or useful.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
November 19 2015 03:21 GMT
#50665
On November 19 2015 12:10 bo1b wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 19 2015 12:09 Acrofales wrote:
On November 19 2015 12:07 RenSC2 wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:46 kwizach wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:17 RenSC2 wrote:
The only thing it takes to get over this roadblock is to ignore political correctness on this issue.

Respecting human rights is "political correctness", now? Let me fix your post: "The only thing it takes to get over this roadblock is to ignore any shred of human decency and empathy you might have left, and fully embrace bigotry and right-wing xenophobic myths".

So proposing that we take in more immigrants than currently proposed is "ignoring any shred of human decency and empathy"? Not sure how you came to that conclusion. Reading comprehension fail? Logic fail?

I suggest that we can do the most good as a country by taking in the women and children. Setting up planes or ships and getting those women and children across the Atlantic and setting them up in America.

If we can get past the sexism of the solution, it actually ends up being a better solution for everyone... the able bodied men fleeing to Europe aren't leaving their mothers/sisters/wives/children in a warzone on the hopes that they'll eventually get proper clearance. Instead, those men know that their families are safe in America and can make the journey to Europe with confidence or stay and fight with confidence.

Mhm, Im sure all those families you're proposing to split in half see it your way too.

They don't seem to mind, 70% of the people going to Europe are men. 15% women, 15% children. Such a family!

You do realize they are traveling to the EU ahead of their families and will send for them when they get refugee status, right? That the journey is so dangerous that women and children avoid it, specifically children. That during the journey and child could be kidnapped and the family would have no police to go to. And that is a totally reasonable fear.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Falling
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
Canada11340 Posts
November 19 2015 03:21 GMT
#50666
I can't help but think that keeping immigrant families together would a better protection against radicalization then letting just the children and mothers in without their fathers/ husbands. But maybe I'm a little old fashioned.
Moderator"In Trump We Trust," says the Golden Goat of Mars Lago. Have faith and believe! Trump moves in mysterious ways. Like the wind he blows where he pleases...
bo1b
Profile Blog Joined August 2012
Australia12814 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 03:26:01
November 19 2015 03:24 GMT
#50667
On November 19 2015 12:21 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 19 2015 12:10 bo1b wrote:
On November 19 2015 12:09 Acrofales wrote:
On November 19 2015 12:07 RenSC2 wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:46 kwizach wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:17 RenSC2 wrote:
The only thing it takes to get over this roadblock is to ignore political correctness on this issue.

Respecting human rights is "political correctness", now? Let me fix your post: "The only thing it takes to get over this roadblock is to ignore any shred of human decency and empathy you might have left, and fully embrace bigotry and right-wing xenophobic myths".

So proposing that we take in more immigrants than currently proposed is "ignoring any shred of human decency and empathy"? Not sure how you came to that conclusion. Reading comprehension fail? Logic fail?

I suggest that we can do the most good as a country by taking in the women and children. Setting up planes or ships and getting those women and children across the Atlantic and setting them up in America.

If we can get past the sexism of the solution, it actually ends up being a better solution for everyone... the able bodied men fleeing to Europe aren't leaving their mothers/sisters/wives/children in a warzone on the hopes that they'll eventually get proper clearance. Instead, those men know that their families are safe in America and can make the journey to Europe with confidence or stay and fight with confidence.

Mhm, Im sure all those families you're proposing to split in half see it your way too.

They don't seem to mind, 70% of the people going to Europe are men. 15% women, 15% children. Such a family!

You do realize they are traveling to the EU ahead of their families and will send for them when they get refugee status, right? That the journey is so dangerous that women and children avoid it, specifically children. That during the journey and child could be kidnapped and the family would have no police to go to. And that is a totally reasonable fear.

Absolutely reasonable, it explains why there are more child refugees then women. Another salient point Plansix.

Apparently I misspoke, for this month, only 62% of the refugees were male.

http://data.unhcr.org/mediterranean/regional.php
Rassy
Profile Joined August 2010
Netherlands2308 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 05:33:45
November 19 2015 03:25 GMT
#50668
.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
November 19 2015 03:25 GMT
#50669
On November 19 2015 12:21 Falling wrote:
I can't help but think that keeping immigrant families together would a better protection against radicalization then letting just the children and mothers in without their fathers/ husbands. But maybe I'm a little old fashioned.

Are you saying that a child raised away from his father for years might grow to resent the government that passed the law due to irrational fears that his father might be a terrorist, even though there is zero evidence? I find your theory to be shockingly logical.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
bo1b
Profile Blog Joined August 2012
Australia12814 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 03:28:36
November 19 2015 03:28 GMT
#50670
If that's all it takes to raise chaos then they shouldn't get in in the first place.

On November 19 2015 12:25 Rassy wrote:


American foreign policy has failed so hard.
For the past 15 years or so.
Is there realy no one in the usa that realizes this?

Russia today is pretty low hanging fruit.
Kickstart
Profile Blog Joined May 2008
United States1941 Posts
November 19 2015 03:33 GMT
#50671
I have little faith in the government to 'screen' anything. Hell, how long has it been since 9/11? And yet, they still don't have a working system to get the information on potential terrorists to airports. How hard can it be to give pictures and names of potential threats, and how incompetent that almost 15 years after 9/11 the best we have is making people take off their shoes and get molested in airports.
Now if they could do it competently then of course refugees and immigrants in general should be screened, to say otherwise is dumb.

Also want to point out that the 'problem' with Islam is more than just the radical adherents. When the vast majority of Muslims think that apostates should be punished, that certain images are so blasphemous that they must not be allowed, that wives are to obey and be subservient to their husbands, that homosexuality is a punishable 'offence'. The problem is with the entire backwards thinking, not just a select few who take it a bit further than most. But I think this about every such idealogy, just Islam happens to be the most relevant at this point in time.
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
November 19 2015 03:35 GMT
#50672
On November 19 2015 12:14 Mercy13 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 19 2015 11:54 xDaunt wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:48 farvacola wrote:
Being a coward in public is quite in fashion these days it would seem.

I'll be honest. I really hope that democrats continue with this idiotic line of thought. Even Mother Jones gets it:

Mocking Republicans over this—as liberals spent much of yesterday doing on my Twitter stream—seems absurdly out of touch to a lot of people. Not just wingnut tea partiers, either, but plenty of ordinary centrists too. It makes them wonder if Democrats seriously see no problem here. Do they care at all about national security? Are they really that detached from reality?

The liberal response to this should be far more measured. We should support tight screening. Never mind that screening is already pretty tight. We should highlight the fact that we're accepting a pretty modest number of refugees. In general, we should act like this is a legitimate thing to be concerned about and then work from there.

Mocking it is the worst thing we could do. It validates all the worst stereotypes about liberals that we put political correctness ahead of national security. It doesn't matter if that's right or wrong. Ordinary people see the refugees as a common sense thing to be concerned about. We shouldn't respond by essentially calling them idiots. That way lies electoral disaster.


Source.


This is actually a really good point. It's fun to get angry and yell at people on the internet, but if we want to change hearts and mind about refugees or Muslims in general, it would probably help to acknowledge their concerns even if they aren't very logical.

Do you know who's laughing all of the way to the political bank right now? Donald Trump. This refugee issue is right in the wheelhouse of his immigration narrative. More importantly, it's an issue on which Trump is going to receive popular support.

Between the evolution of the immigration debate in America and the development of rabid anti-political establishment sentiments in the electorate, I'm starting to wonder whether it is Trump's destiny to be president. Regardless of whether its due to serendipity of true political acumen, Trump has been at the cutting edge of these issues, which has fueled his success so far.
bo1b
Profile Blog Joined August 2012
Australia12814 Posts
November 19 2015 03:35 GMT
#50673
On November 19 2015 12:33 Kickstart wrote:
I have little faith in the government to 'screen' anything. Hell, how long has it been since 9/11? And yet, they still don't have a working system to get the information on potential terrorists to airports. How hard can it be to give pictures and names of potential threats, and how incompetent that almost 15 years after 9/11 the best we have is making people take off their shoes and get molested in airports.
Now if they could do it competently then of course refugees and immigrants in general should be screened, to say otherwise is dumb.

Also want to point out that the 'problem' with Islam is more than just the radical adherents. When the vast majority of Muslims think that apostates should be punished, that certain images are so blasphemous that they must not be allowed, that wives are to obey and be subservient to their husbands, that homosexuality is a punishable 'offence'. The problem is with the entire backwards thinking, not just a select few who take it a bit further than most. But I think this about every such idealogy, just Islam happens to be the most relevant at this point in time.

Don't bring up the disgusting sexism and homophobia rampant in the middle east, it will leave every sjw with such cognitive dissonance they won't know how to act.
TheTenthDoc
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
United States9561 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 03:46:27
November 19 2015 03:37 GMT
#50674
On November 19 2015 12:25 Rassy wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbZDyr2LkdI&feature=youtu.be

American foreign policy has failed so hard.
For the past 15 years or so.
Is there realy no one in the usa that realizes this?


Oh please, spare me the tears about the political climate in Middle East, Putin. The U.S. definitely helped foster the climate in the Middle East that led to ISIS, but wasn't there, like, a nine-year war the Soviet Union participated in that further stoked the fires of resentment in the region and drove tens of thousands of mujahideen to organize into terrorist cells that formed the genesis of Al Qaeda and the blueprint for ISIS? That region is a clusterfuck because everyone wanted to flex their geopolitical muscles there to secure resources and/or allies in the latter half of the 20th century, not just the U.S.

+ Show Spoiler +
Well, the mujahideen were armed by the U.S. to be fair, but still, executing a military coup on the president of the country was no bueno


On November 19 2015 12:33 Kickstart wrote:
I have little faith in the government to 'screen' anything. Hell, how long has it been since 9/11? And yet, they still don't have a working system to get the information on potential terrorists to airports. How hard can it be to give pictures and names of potential threats, and how incompetent that almost 15 years after 9/11 the best we have is making people take off their shoes and get molested in airports.
Now if they could do it competently then of course refugees and immigrants in general should be screened, to say otherwise is dumb.

Also want to point out that the 'problem' with Islam is more than just the radical adherents. When the vast majority of Muslims think that apostates should be punished, that certain images are so blasphemous that they must not be allowed, that wives are to obey and be subservient to their husbands, that homosexuality is a punishable 'offence'. The problem is with the entire backwards thinking, not just a select few who take it a bit further than most. But I think this about every such idealogy, just Islam happens to be the most relevant at this point in time.


Why do you have little faith in the government's screening procedures when the only terrorist plot since 9/11 that actually worked domestically was the Boston Marathon bombings, which involved individuals completely unconnected to outside terrorist groups? Do you just think there haven't been any (which is possible I suppose)? Wikipedia lists 29, but they could be wrong I suppose.
Kickstart
Profile Blog Joined May 2008
United States1941 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 03:41:10
November 19 2015 03:38 GMT
#50675
On November 19 2015 12:35 bo1b wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 19 2015 12:33 Kickstart wrote:
I have little faith in the government to 'screen' anything. Hell, how long has it been since 9/11? And yet, they still don't have a working system to get the information on potential terrorists to airports. How hard can it be to give pictures and names of potential threats, and how incompetent that almost 15 years after 9/11 the best we have is making people take off their shoes and get molested in airports.
Now if they could do it competently then of course refugees and immigrants in general should be screened, to say otherwise is dumb.

Also want to point out that the 'problem' with Islam is more than just the radical adherents. When the vast majority of Muslims think that apostates should be punished, that certain images are so blasphemous that they must not be allowed, that wives are to obey and be subservient to their husbands, that homosexuality is a punishable 'offence'. The problem is with the entire backwards thinking, not just a select few who take it a bit further than most. But I think this about every such idealogy, just Islam happens to be the most relevant at this point in time.

Don't bring up the disgusting sexism and homophobia rampant in the middle east, it will leave every sjw with such cognitive dissonance they won't know how to act.

And yet I still personally think we should let in immigrants and refugees. It's just that we should encourage assimilation as best we can and of course screen to keep everyone safe. What we don't want is a situation that always happens where the groups stick with themselves and don't adopt the values of their new country. This happens anyways, even here in the US minority groups tend to stick to themselves and in their own communities. How we do this is a rather complicated problem but vilifying the entire population or not letting any in seem to not be good solutions at all.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 03:43:08
November 19 2015 03:42 GMT
#50676
On November 19 2015 12:38 Kickstart wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 19 2015 12:35 bo1b wrote:
On November 19 2015 12:33 Kickstart wrote:
I have little faith in the government to 'screen' anything. Hell, how long has it been since 9/11? And yet, they still don't have a working system to get the information on potential terrorists to airports. How hard can it be to give pictures and names of potential threats, and how incompetent that almost 15 years after 9/11 the best we have is making people take off their shoes and get molested in airports.
Now if they could do it competently then of course refugees and immigrants in general should be screened, to say otherwise is dumb.

Also want to point out that the 'problem' with Islam is more than just the radical adherents. When the vast majority of Muslims think that apostates should be punished, that certain images are so blasphemous that they must not be allowed, that wives are to obey and be subservient to their husbands, that homosexuality is a punishable 'offence'. The problem is with the entire backwards thinking, not just a select few who take it a bit further than most. But I think this about every such idealogy, just Islam happens to be the most relevant at this point in time.

Don't bring up the disgusting sexism and homophobia rampant in the middle east, it will leave every sjw with such cognitive dissonance they won't know how to act.

And yet I still personally think we should let in immigrants and refugees. It's just that we should encourage assimilation as best we can and of course screen to keep everyone safe. What we don't want is a situation that always happens where the groups stick with themselves and don't adopt the values of their new country. This happens anyways, even here in the US minority groups tend to stick to themselves and in their own communities. How we do this is a rather complicated problem but vilifying the entire population or not letting any in seem to not be good solutions at all.

Do you feel comfortable parroting the language used to deny the Jews refugee status in 1938? Screening for terrorists is fine and should be done, but the failure to assimilate and staying int there own communities is the exactly language used to stereotype the Jews.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Kickstart
Profile Blog Joined May 2008
United States1941 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 03:50:05
November 19 2015 03:43 GMT
#50677
On November 19 2015 12:42 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 19 2015 12:38 Kickstart wrote:
On November 19 2015 12:35 bo1b wrote:
On November 19 2015 12:33 Kickstart wrote:
I have little faith in the government to 'screen' anything. Hell, how long has it been since 9/11? And yet, they still don't have a working system to get the information on potential terrorists to airports. How hard can it be to give pictures and names of potential threats, and how incompetent that almost 15 years after 9/11 the best we have is making people take off their shoes and get molested in airports.
Now if they could do it competently then of course refugees and immigrants in general should be screened, to say otherwise is dumb.

Also want to point out that the 'problem' with Islam is more than just the radical adherents. When the vast majority of Muslims think that apostates should be punished, that certain images are so blasphemous that they must not be allowed, that wives are to obey and be subservient to their husbands, that homosexuality is a punishable 'offence'. The problem is with the entire backwards thinking, not just a select few who take it a bit further than most. But I think this about every such idealogy, just Islam happens to be the most relevant at this point in time.

Don't bring up the disgusting sexism and homophobia rampant in the middle east, it will leave every sjw with such cognitive dissonance they won't know how to act.

And yet I still personally think we should let in immigrants and refugees. It's just that we should encourage assimilation as best we can and of course screen to keep everyone safe. What we don't want is a situation that always happens where the groups stick with themselves and don't adopt the values of their new country. This happens anyways, even here in the US minority groups tend to stick to themselves and in their own communities. How we do this is a rather complicated problem but vilifying the entire population or not letting any in seem to not be good solutions at all.

Do you feel comfortable parrorting the langauge used to deny the Jews refugee status in 1938? Screening for terrorists is fine, but

You are going to have to be more specific. This comparing everything to Hitler and the Nazis thing happens so much I'm not sure what you are getting at or what in my statement is similar. I think everything I've said is quite logical and objectively true.

*edit after you completed the post*
Yet they do. You yourself described the community you live by as a 'muslim community'. Here in my city we have quite a large Bosnian community, they stick themselves, live in the same part of town, go to Bosnian Doctors, and all the rest of it. This isn't healthy, especially when, as I outlined before, their values and the values of our country are quite different and often at odds.

*edit to say a bit more*
The problem I have with your line of thinking, and the line of thinking of the SJW (forgive me for using the term, it just happens to sum up the type of person I'm explaining and everyone will immediately know what I mean) is that you too often conflate what ought to be in a perfect world with the reality of the world as it is.
Would it be nice if anyone and everyone could easily assimilate into a new society that is quite different from their native one? Yes.
Does this happen often? No it doesn't.

I was merely saying that this is an issue that we need to take into account when we let people in. Notice how I still advocate for allowing people into the country, but I think more effort should be made in assimilation and inclusion so that everyone feels like they are a part of the country, not so they feel like 'muslims living in the US', or 'insert group here living in the US'.

GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23059 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 03:53:30
November 19 2015 03:47 GMT
#50678
On November 19 2015 12:35 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 19 2015 12:14 Mercy13 wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:54 xDaunt wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:48 farvacola wrote:
Being a coward in public is quite in fashion these days it would seem.

I'll be honest. I really hope that democrats continue with this idiotic line of thought. Even Mother Jones gets it:

Mocking Republicans over this—as liberals spent much of yesterday doing on my Twitter stream—seems absurdly out of touch to a lot of people. Not just wingnut tea partiers, either, but plenty of ordinary centrists too. It makes them wonder if Democrats seriously see no problem here. Do they care at all about national security? Are they really that detached from reality?

The liberal response to this should be far more measured. We should support tight screening. Never mind that screening is already pretty tight. We should highlight the fact that we're accepting a pretty modest number of refugees. In general, we should act like this is a legitimate thing to be concerned about and then work from there.

Mocking it is the worst thing we could do. It validates all the worst stereotypes about liberals that we put political correctness ahead of national security. It doesn't matter if that's right or wrong. Ordinary people see the refugees as a common sense thing to be concerned about. We shouldn't respond by essentially calling them idiots. That way lies electoral disaster.


Source.


This is actually a really good point. It's fun to get angry and yell at people on the internet, but if we want to change hearts and mind about refugees or Muslims in general, it would probably help to acknowledge their concerns even if they aren't very logical.

Do you know who's laughing all of the way to the political bank right now? Donald Trump. This refugee issue is right in the wheelhouse of his immigration narrative. More importantly, it's an issue on which Trump is going to receive popular support.

Between the evolution of the immigration debate in America and the development of rabid anti-political establishment sentiments in the electorate, I'm starting to wonder whether it is Trump's destiny to be president. Regardless of whether its due to serendipity of true political acumen, Trump has been at the cutting edge of these issues, which has fueled his success so far.


It won't last, but you're right his consistent appeals to fear and bigotry will make him essentially untouchable in the primary.

Hope you like Trump as he's probably going to win the Republican nomination. Would be a shame if 6 months from now we are hearing about how if only Republicans had nominated a "real conservative" (as if their constant refusal to nominate one isn't indicative that "conservatives" have little-no sway in the Republican party) they wouldn't be getting trounced nationally.

As if the faults highlighted over a general wouldn't have been easily knowable prior, but republicans just didn't care.

EDIT: Just a friendly reminder, Bernie Sanders is already beating Trump in a heads up race.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
TheTenthDoc
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
United States9561 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 03:53:00
November 19 2015 03:51 GMT
#50679
I can't wait until we decide not to let people into the country from the Middle East at all because they get even less screening than these refugees. Better not let in people that look Middle Eastern, either, since they could be terrorists too; even if they were born in the U.S., they might have radicalized. Then we'll have great legs to stand on when it comes to negotiating deals, right Donald?
bo1b
Profile Blog Joined August 2012
Australia12814 Posts
November 19 2015 03:53 GMT
#50680
On November 19 2015 12:51 TheTenthDoc wrote:
I can't wait until we decide not to let people into the country from the Middle East at all because they get even less screening than these refugees. Better not let in people that look Middle Eastern, either, since they could be terrorists too; even if they were born in the U.S., they might have radicalized. Then we'll have great legs to stand on when it comes to negotiating deals, right Donald?

Deals with what? No nation in the world is going to turn down the spending power of the U.S.

"We were going to buy billion of dollars of shit off you but not anymore." Get real.
Prev 1 2532 2533 2534 2535 2536 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
AllThingsProtoss
11:00
Team League - Grand Finals
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Hui .185
EnDerr 106
ProTech85
StarCraft: Brood War
Calm 6827
Rain 3382
Shuttle 1513
Horang2 1006
Bisu 997
EffOrt 774
Hyuk 519
firebathero 481
Mini 269
actioN 241
[ Show more ]
sorry 124
TY 119
Hyun 118
Pusan 79
Aegong 78
Sea.KH 70
sSak 54
Barracks 40
PianO 35
sas.Sziky 30
Killer 26
Yoon 24
Mong 22
GoRush 19
Sacsri 18
Sharp 16
JulyZerg 15
Terrorterran 14
yabsab 13
soO 10
ivOry 4
Britney 0
Dota 2
Gorgc6233
qojqva2630
XcaliburYe342
Fuzer 289
syndereN260
Counter-Strike
olofmeister3237
allub384
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor308
Other Games
singsing2253
B2W.Neo1163
mouzStarbuck445
XaKoH 88
ArmadaUGS84
KnowMe33
Organizations
Dota 2
PGL Dota 2 - Main Stream7184
StarCraft 2
angryscii 35
Other Games
BasetradeTV18
StarCraft: Brood War
Kim Chul Min (afreeca) 5
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 15 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Adnapsc2 22
• MJG 5
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• Michael_bg 8
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• C_a_k_e 3700
League of Legends
• Jankos1649
Upcoming Events
Fire Grow Cup
46m
BSL: ProLeague
3h 46m
HBO vs Doodle
spx vs Tech
DragOn vs Hawk
Dewalt vs TerrOr
Replay Cast
9h 46m
Replay Cast
1d 9h
Replay Cast
1d 19h
WardiTV Invitational
1d 20h
WardiTV Invitational
1d 20h
GSL Code S
2 days
Rogue vs GuMiho
Maru vs Solar
Online Event
3 days
GSL Code S
3 days
herO vs TBD
Classic vs TBD
[ Show More ]
The PondCast
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
WardiTV Invitational
4 days
Korean StarCraft League
5 days
CranKy Ducklings
5 days
WardiTV Invitational
5 days
Cheesadelphia
6 days
GSL Code S
6 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2025-06-05
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
ECL Season 49: Europe
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.