• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 21:43
CEST 03:43
KST 10:43
  • 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
Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru3BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL47Code S RO12 Preview: Cure, Zoun, Solar, Creator4
Community News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack1Weekly Cups (June 2-8): herO doubles down1[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th13Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0
StarCraft 2
General
Lost money due to a cryptocurrency investment scam Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation
Tourneys
[GSL 2025] Code S:Season 2 - RO8 - Group A Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) Bellum Gens Elite: Stara Zagora 2025 $3,500 WardiTV European League 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion FlaSh Witnesses SCV Pull Off the Impossible vs Shu StarCraft & BroodWar Campaign Speedrun Quest Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans?
Tourneys
[ASL19] Grand Finals RECOVER LOST BTC USDT FUNDS RECLAIMER COMPANY [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET NA Team League 6/8/2025
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
Path of Exile Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread What do you want from future RTS games? Armies of Exigo - YesYes? Nintendo Switch Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
LiquidLegends to reintegrate into TL.net
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
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
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
A Better Routine For Progame…
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
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 31353 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2538

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2536 2537 2538 2539 2540 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.
Eliezar
Profile Joined May 2004
United States481 Posts
November 19 2015 16:20 GMT
#50741
On November 19 2015 11:48 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 19 2015 11:43 bo1b wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On November 19 2015 10:26 xDaunt wrote:
On November 19 2015 10:16 RenSC2 wrote:
On November 18 2015 23:10 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
President Barack Obama lashed out Wednesday at Republicans who insist on barring Syrian refugees from entering the U.S., deeming their words offensive and insisting "it needs to stop."

"Apparently they're scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America," Obama said.

Mocking GOP leaders for thinking they're tough, Obama said overblown rhetoric from Republicans could be a potent recruitment tool for Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). He insisted the U.S. process for screening refugees for possible entry into the U.S. is rigorous and said the U.S. doesn't make good decisions "based on hysteria" or exaggerated risk.

Obama's comments during a meeting with Philippine President Benigno Aquino marked his harshest condemnation yet of Republicans' response to the Paris attacks blamed ISIL that killed 129 people last week.

Republicans in Congress and on the 2016 presidential trail have urged an immediate closure of America's borders to Syrian refugees. Also, more than two dozen U.S. governors, most of them Republicans, have called for Syrian refugees to be barred from their states.

But the Obama administration has shown no sign of backing off its plans to bring an additional 10,000 Syrians fleeing civil war into the U.S.

Several Republican presidential candidates also said over the weekend that they oppose bringing refugees into the United States, and Obama took particular aim at a proposal by GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush to admit only Christian Syrians. Bush later clarified he wants to give preference to Christians but not exclude properly vetted Muslims. Still, Obama said the idea of only allowing Christians in amounted to "political posturing" that runs contrary to American values.


Source

The whole "scared of widows and orphans" line is ridiculous. People are scared of the adult males some of which are rumored to be ISIS members posing as peaceful immigrants.

However, I do have a solution. Only allow women and children (12 and under) as refugees. Bring them in, set up homes for them and give them a western education. We're not afraid of the women and children, so bring in a million of them or more and integrate them into a western society.

Leave the men behind in Syria to fight or flee to surrounding countries. This way the women and children are out of the way if someone wants to do some heavy bombing. The able bodied men who don't want to fight can flee on their own, as they've shown. And the ones who want to fight can stay and fight without worrying about killing women and children or having their wives/children killed.

I don't think I've ever seen someone propose this idea before and I'm wondering why not. Is there something wrong with it?

Democrats are going to spit themselves politically if they continue to ridicule the very legitimate concerns raised by republicans with regards to the refugee issue.


Can you please elaborate on what these legitimate concerns are? I've heard a lot of fearmongering and references to how 3 year olds are probably terrorists, but nothing legitimate.

The U.S is now only accepting children as refugees?

On November 19 2015 11:42 Plansix wrote:
That is nothing. If we took in 50k, it would 1+ billion spread across the entire US federal government. That is 1/75 the budget of NYC. The federal government looses that much money in the couch cushions.

Not a bad thing to say when National debt is pushing 18.6 trillion. And what on earth makes you think it would stop at 50k?

So you're scared of the refugees and don't think the we are capable to finding potential terrorist? Because that is what I'm hearing. That you are afraid we can't handle it, that we are competent enough.


I'm sorry...You actually think the US government is competent enough? Typo or something? Born tomorrow maybe?
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 16:34:25
November 19 2015 16:26 GMT
#50742
it's really not as simple as just border control. domestic radicalization is a genuine and serious problem especially when some imam in afghanistan or whatever can directly preach via the internet.

the constitutional constraint of freedom of speech must also be respected. so it is a problem of creating positive, non-terrorist speech to combat the ideology that is freely distributed to young people.
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
Doublemint
Profile Joined July 2011
Austria8467 Posts
November 19 2015 16:29 GMT
#50743
wow, one can only hope this line of thinking catches on and makes ordinary people ask tough and very inconvenient questions to a few candidates in the sad nomination process.

I mean ben carson for example seems to be a somewhat smart person, but you cannot seriously want to be president and not have a clue about what the hell is going on in regions your country has been involved in for way over half a century.

and that's not even addressing the crazy stuff he has said very recently.

trump's foreign policy is basically "behold my any my countries awesomeness - or perish under my tough deals you will sign unquestionably"
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
November 19 2015 16:34 GMT
#50744
On November 20 2015 01:20 Eliezar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 19 2015 11:48 Plansix wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:43 bo1b wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On November 19 2015 10:26 xDaunt wrote:
On November 19 2015 10:16 RenSC2 wrote:
On November 18 2015 23:10 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
President Barack Obama lashed out Wednesday at Republicans who insist on barring Syrian refugees from entering the U.S., deeming their words offensive and insisting "it needs to stop."

"Apparently they're scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America," Obama said.

Mocking GOP leaders for thinking they're tough, Obama said overblown rhetoric from Republicans could be a potent recruitment tool for Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). He insisted the U.S. process for screening refugees for possible entry into the U.S. is rigorous and said the U.S. doesn't make good decisions "based on hysteria" or exaggerated risk.

Obama's comments during a meeting with Philippine President Benigno Aquino marked his harshest condemnation yet of Republicans' response to the Paris attacks blamed ISIL that killed 129 people last week.

Republicans in Congress and on the 2016 presidential trail have urged an immediate closure of America's borders to Syrian refugees. Also, more than two dozen U.S. governors, most of them Republicans, have called for Syrian refugees to be barred from their states.

But the Obama administration has shown no sign of backing off its plans to bring an additional 10,000 Syrians fleeing civil war into the U.S.

Several Republican presidential candidates also said over the weekend that they oppose bringing refugees into the United States, and Obama took particular aim at a proposal by GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush to admit only Christian Syrians. Bush later clarified he wants to give preference to Christians but not exclude properly vetted Muslims. Still, Obama said the idea of only allowing Christians in amounted to "political posturing" that runs contrary to American values.


Source

The whole "scared of widows and orphans" line is ridiculous. People are scared of the adult males some of which are rumored to be ISIS members posing as peaceful immigrants.

However, I do have a solution. Only allow women and children (12 and under) as refugees. Bring them in, set up homes for them and give them a western education. We're not afraid of the women and children, so bring in a million of them or more and integrate them into a western society.

Leave the men behind in Syria to fight or flee to surrounding countries. This way the women and children are out of the way if someone wants to do some heavy bombing. The able bodied men who don't want to fight can flee on their own, as they've shown. And the ones who want to fight can stay and fight without worrying about killing women and children or having their wives/children killed.

I don't think I've ever seen someone propose this idea before and I'm wondering why not. Is there something wrong with it?

Democrats are going to spit themselves politically if they continue to ridicule the very legitimate concerns raised by republicans with regards to the refugee issue.


Can you please elaborate on what these legitimate concerns are? I've heard a lot of fearmongering and references to how 3 year olds are probably terrorists, but nothing legitimate.

The U.S is now only accepting children as refugees?

On November 19 2015 11:42 Plansix wrote:
That is nothing. If we took in 50k, it would 1+ billion spread across the entire US federal government. That is 1/75 the budget of NYC. The federal government looses that much money in the couch cushions.

Not a bad thing to say when National debt is pushing 18.6 trillion. And what on earth makes you think it would stop at 50k?

So you're scared of the refugees and don't think the we are capable to finding potential terrorist? Because that is what I'm hearing. That you are afraid we can't handle it, that we are competent enough.


I'm sorry...You actually think the US government is competent enough? Typo or something? Born tomorrow maybe?

Yes. They have prevents terrorist attacks before and they can do it again. I don't subscribe to the cynical belief that everyone in the government is an incompetent rube and then use that as an excuse for inaction on any issue.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Eliezar
Profile Joined May 2004
United States481 Posts
November 19 2015 16:40 GMT
#50745
Having been in a situation where we took thousands of refugees I can tell you that it is an awful situation. My city took 240K refugees from New Orleans in 2005 which represented a 7% increase to the city population. The city murder rate for 2005 was up 23% from the prior year and up 70% in November and December after the New Orleans population arrived.

Long term things more or less stabilized, but taking refugees is going to be a problem. You as a society take on that problem because you know that the other 230k people that came needed help and were valuable citizens.

The democrats are failing in this in that it is a discussion that needs to be had. There are problems and risks and we already are spending way too much money that we don't have so why would we increase spending more?

The republicans are failing in this because frankly these are people whose homes and lives have been destroyed and if you can just turn your back on them that you are hardly more human than ISIS.

The evangelicals had already gotten many refugees into the country through proper channels and completely broke with the republicans over this.

Today there were Syrians caught crossing the border into Texas, yesterday there were Syrians with fake passports caught in Honduras heading to the US.

This is going to be a big mess and its our fault for allowing ISIS to flourish and not stamping them out in Iraq and Syria.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
November 19 2015 16:45 GMT
#50746
Although I believe that was a huge problem for your city, I don’t think the horrible and inadequate response from the government when it comes to New Orleans is how this will be handled. That the poster child for mishandling of a disaster by administration at the time. The refugees wouldn’t all be put in one city, as that is a terrible plan. And the cost of taking in refugees is minimal when spread across the US and we have taken in refugees from other conflicts before.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
November 19 2015 16:52 GMT
#50747
when it comes to refugees and the u.s. the self selection effect will probably make it a much easier problem to handle. assuming europe is still letting some refugees through, so that the u.s. is not the only western destination or something, those refugees that get to america will be the better off, more educated, and all that.

the 'cap' obama gave is illusory because i doubt that many people will come. it's the atlantic ocean lol
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
Eliezar
Profile Joined May 2004
United States481 Posts
November 19 2015 16:56 GMT
#50748
On November 20 2015 01:34 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 20 2015 01:20 Eliezar wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:48 Plansix wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:43 bo1b wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On November 19 2015 10:26 xDaunt wrote:
On November 19 2015 10:16 RenSC2 wrote:
On November 18 2015 23:10 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
President Barack Obama lashed out Wednesday at Republicans who insist on barring Syrian refugees from entering the U.S., deeming their words offensive and insisting "it needs to stop."

"Apparently they're scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America," Obama said.

Mocking GOP leaders for thinking they're tough, Obama said overblown rhetoric from Republicans could be a potent recruitment tool for Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). He insisted the U.S. process for screening refugees for possible entry into the U.S. is rigorous and said the U.S. doesn't make good decisions "based on hysteria" or exaggerated risk.

Obama's comments during a meeting with Philippine President Benigno Aquino marked his harshest condemnation yet of Republicans' response to the Paris attacks blamed ISIL that killed 129 people last week.

Republicans in Congress and on the 2016 presidential trail have urged an immediate closure of America's borders to Syrian refugees. Also, more than two dozen U.S. governors, most of them Republicans, have called for Syrian refugees to be barred from their states.

But the Obama administration has shown no sign of backing off its plans to bring an additional 10,000 Syrians fleeing civil war into the U.S.

Several Republican presidential candidates also said over the weekend that they oppose bringing refugees into the United States, and Obama took particular aim at a proposal by GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush to admit only Christian Syrians. Bush later clarified he wants to give preference to Christians but not exclude properly vetted Muslims. Still, Obama said the idea of only allowing Christians in amounted to "political posturing" that runs contrary to American values.


Source

The whole "scared of widows and orphans" line is ridiculous. People are scared of the adult males some of which are rumored to be ISIS members posing as peaceful immigrants.

However, I do have a solution. Only allow women and children (12 and under) as refugees. Bring them in, set up homes for them and give them a western education. We're not afraid of the women and children, so bring in a million of them or more and integrate them into a western society.

Leave the men behind in Syria to fight or flee to surrounding countries. This way the women and children are out of the way if someone wants to do some heavy bombing. The able bodied men who don't want to fight can flee on their own, as they've shown. And the ones who want to fight can stay and fight without worrying about killing women and children or having their wives/children killed.

I don't think I've ever seen someone propose this idea before and I'm wondering why not. Is there something wrong with it?

Democrats are going to spit themselves politically if they continue to ridicule the very legitimate concerns raised by republicans with regards to the refugee issue.


Can you please elaborate on what these legitimate concerns are? I've heard a lot of fearmongering and references to how 3 year olds are probably terrorists, but nothing legitimate.

The U.S is now only accepting children as refugees?

On November 19 2015 11:42 Plansix wrote:
That is nothing. If we took in 50k, it would 1+ billion spread across the entire US federal government. That is 1/75 the budget of NYC. The federal government looses that much money in the couch cushions.

Not a bad thing to say when National debt is pushing 18.6 trillion. And what on earth makes you think it would stop at 50k?

So you're scared of the refugees and don't think the we are capable to finding potential terrorist? Because that is what I'm hearing. That you are afraid we can't handle it, that we are competent enough.


I'm sorry...You actually think the US government is competent enough? Typo or something? Born tomorrow maybe?

Yes. They have prevents terrorist attacks before and they can do it again. I don't subscribe to the cynical belief that everyone in the government is an incompetent rube and then use that as an excuse for inaction on any issue.


It takes pretty much one person to be incompetent in the case of Benghazi (Clinton) or 911 (Bush) or the US Cole (Clinton) or ISIS (Obama) to keep these problems growing, festering, and happening. Time and time again we have seen the government just make bad decisions or be too scared to make a decision. The system at large seems to work, but the leaders and their advisors have not been good in a long time. I mean...our country has pretty good relations with Saudi Arabia and has forever and they seem to be the source of a lot of the funding of terrorist organizations.
Mercy13
Profile Joined January 2011
United States718 Posts
November 19 2015 17:02 GMT
#50749
On November 20 2015 01:56 Eliezar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 20 2015 01:34 Plansix wrote:
On November 20 2015 01:20 Eliezar wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:48 Plansix wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:43 bo1b wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On November 19 2015 10:26 xDaunt wrote:
On November 19 2015 10:16 RenSC2 wrote:
On November 18 2015 23:10 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
President Barack Obama lashed out Wednesday at Republicans who insist on barring Syrian refugees from entering the U.S., deeming their words offensive and insisting "it needs to stop."

"Apparently they're scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America," Obama said.

Mocking GOP leaders for thinking they're tough, Obama said overblown rhetoric from Republicans could be a potent recruitment tool for Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). He insisted the U.S. process for screening refugees for possible entry into the U.S. is rigorous and said the U.S. doesn't make good decisions "based on hysteria" or exaggerated risk.

Obama's comments during a meeting with Philippine President Benigno Aquino marked his harshest condemnation yet of Republicans' response to the Paris attacks blamed ISIL that killed 129 people last week.

Republicans in Congress and on the 2016 presidential trail have urged an immediate closure of America's borders to Syrian refugees. Also, more than two dozen U.S. governors, most of them Republicans, have called for Syrian refugees to be barred from their states.

But the Obama administration has shown no sign of backing off its plans to bring an additional 10,000 Syrians fleeing civil war into the U.S.

Several Republican presidential candidates also said over the weekend that they oppose bringing refugees into the United States, and Obama took particular aim at a proposal by GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush to admit only Christian Syrians. Bush later clarified he wants to give preference to Christians but not exclude properly vetted Muslims. Still, Obama said the idea of only allowing Christians in amounted to "political posturing" that runs contrary to American values.


Source

The whole "scared of widows and orphans" line is ridiculous. People are scared of the adult males some of which are rumored to be ISIS members posing as peaceful immigrants.

However, I do have a solution. Only allow women and children (12 and under) as refugees. Bring them in, set up homes for them and give them a western education. We're not afraid of the women and children, so bring in a million of them or more and integrate them into a western society.

Leave the men behind in Syria to fight or flee to surrounding countries. This way the women and children are out of the way if someone wants to do some heavy bombing. The able bodied men who don't want to fight can flee on their own, as they've shown. And the ones who want to fight can stay and fight without worrying about killing women and children or having their wives/children killed.

I don't think I've ever seen someone propose this idea before and I'm wondering why not. Is there something wrong with it?

Democrats are going to spit themselves politically if they continue to ridicule the very legitimate concerns raised by republicans with regards to the refugee issue.


Can you please elaborate on what these legitimate concerns are? I've heard a lot of fearmongering and references to how 3 year olds are probably terrorists, but nothing legitimate.

The U.S is now only accepting children as refugees?

On November 19 2015 11:42 Plansix wrote:
That is nothing. If we took in 50k, it would 1+ billion spread across the entire US federal government. That is 1/75 the budget of NYC. The federal government looses that much money in the couch cushions.

Not a bad thing to say when National debt is pushing 18.6 trillion. And what on earth makes you think it would stop at 50k?

So you're scared of the refugees and don't think the we are capable to finding potential terrorist? Because that is what I'm hearing. That you are afraid we can't handle it, that we are competent enough.


I'm sorry...You actually think the US government is competent enough? Typo or something? Born tomorrow maybe?

Yes. They have prevents terrorist attacks before and they can do it again. I don't subscribe to the cynical belief that everyone in the government is an incompetent rube and then use that as an excuse for inaction on any issue.


It takes pretty much one person to be incompetent in the case of Benghazi (Clinton) or 911 (Bush) or the US Cole (Clinton) or ISIS (Obama) to keep these problems growing, festering, and happening. Time and time again we have seen the government just make bad decisions or be too scared to make a decision. The system at large seems to work, but the leaders and their advisors have not been good in a long time. I mean...our country has pretty good relations with Saudi Arabia and has forever and they seem to be the source of a lot of the funding of terrorist organizations.


This is one of the funniest posts I have read in a while, thank you : )
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18821 Posts
November 19 2015 17:06 GMT
#50750
Yeah, I had to resist my initial inclination to openly mock the bare assertion that causality can so easily be traced between those actors and the tragedies described. Hillary having withstood congressional interrogation that failed to establish administrative culpability appears to mean nothing I suppose? Being reminded of the USS Cole was fun though
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
November 19 2015 17:08 GMT
#50751
On November 20 2015 01:56 Eliezar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 20 2015 01:34 Plansix wrote:
On November 20 2015 01:20 Eliezar wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:48 Plansix wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:43 bo1b wrote:
On November 19 2015 11:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On November 19 2015 10:26 xDaunt wrote:
On November 19 2015 10:16 RenSC2 wrote:
On November 18 2015 23:10 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
President Barack Obama lashed out Wednesday at Republicans who insist on barring Syrian refugees from entering the U.S., deeming their words offensive and insisting "it needs to stop."

"Apparently they're scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America," Obama said.

Mocking GOP leaders for thinking they're tough, Obama said overblown rhetoric from Republicans could be a potent recruitment tool for Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). He insisted the U.S. process for screening refugees for possible entry into the U.S. is rigorous and said the U.S. doesn't make good decisions "based on hysteria" or exaggerated risk.

Obama's comments during a meeting with Philippine President Benigno Aquino marked his harshest condemnation yet of Republicans' response to the Paris attacks blamed ISIL that killed 129 people last week.

Republicans in Congress and on the 2016 presidential trail have urged an immediate closure of America's borders to Syrian refugees. Also, more than two dozen U.S. governors, most of them Republicans, have called for Syrian refugees to be barred from their states.

But the Obama administration has shown no sign of backing off its plans to bring an additional 10,000 Syrians fleeing civil war into the U.S.

Several Republican presidential candidates also said over the weekend that they oppose bringing refugees into the United States, and Obama took particular aim at a proposal by GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush to admit only Christian Syrians. Bush later clarified he wants to give preference to Christians but not exclude properly vetted Muslims. Still, Obama said the idea of only allowing Christians in amounted to "political posturing" that runs contrary to American values.


Source

The whole "scared of widows and orphans" line is ridiculous. People are scared of the adult males some of which are rumored to be ISIS members posing as peaceful immigrants.

However, I do have a solution. Only allow women and children (12 and under) as refugees. Bring them in, set up homes for them and give them a western education. We're not afraid of the women and children, so bring in a million of them or more and integrate them into a western society.

Leave the men behind in Syria to fight or flee to surrounding countries. This way the women and children are out of the way if someone wants to do some heavy bombing. The able bodied men who don't want to fight can flee on their own, as they've shown. And the ones who want to fight can stay and fight without worrying about killing women and children or having their wives/children killed.

I don't think I've ever seen someone propose this idea before and I'm wondering why not. Is there something wrong with it?

Democrats are going to spit themselves politically if they continue to ridicule the very legitimate concerns raised by republicans with regards to the refugee issue.


Can you please elaborate on what these legitimate concerns are? I've heard a lot of fearmongering and references to how 3 year olds are probably terrorists, but nothing legitimate.

The U.S is now only accepting children as refugees?

On November 19 2015 11:42 Plansix wrote:
That is nothing. If we took in 50k, it would 1+ billion spread across the entire US federal government. That is 1/75 the budget of NYC. The federal government looses that much money in the couch cushions.

Not a bad thing to say when National debt is pushing 18.6 trillion. And what on earth makes you think it would stop at 50k?

So you're scared of the refugees and don't think the we are capable to finding potential terrorist? Because that is what I'm hearing. That you are afraid we can't handle it, that we are competent enough.


I'm sorry...You actually think the US government is competent enough? Typo or something? Born tomorrow maybe?

Yes. They have prevents terrorist attacks before and they can do it again. I don't subscribe to the cynical belief that everyone in the government is an incompetent rube and then use that as an excuse for inaction on any issue.


It takes pretty much one person to be incompetent in the case of Benghazi (Clinton) or 911 (Bush) or the US Cole (Clinton) or ISIS (Obama) to keep these problems growing, festering, and happening. Time and time again we have seen the government just make bad decisions or be too scared to make a decision. The system at large seems to work, but the leaders and their advisors have not been good in a long time. I mean...our country has pretty good relations with Saudi Arabia and has forever and they seem to be the source of a lot of the funding of terrorist organizations.

Your metric for incompetence of government seems to be based on existing in a complex world. Like the sort of person who uses Apollo 13 as proof that NASA is a waste of money and run by skill-less rubes. And our relationship with other sovereign nations is a little more complex and nuanced than good guys and bad guys. We considered Stalin an “ally” in WW2, even though it was very clear that danger they presented to the EU once the war was over.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Eliezar
Profile Joined May 2004
United States481 Posts
November 19 2015 17:09 GMT
#50752
On November 20 2015 01:45 Plansix wrote:
Although I believe that was a huge problem for your city, I don’t think the horrible and inadequate response from the government when it comes to New Orleans is how this will be handled. That the poster child for mishandling of a disaster by administration at the time. The refugees wouldn’t all be put in one city, as that is a terrible plan. And the cost of taking in refugees is minimal when spread across the US and we have taken in refugees from other conflicts before.


We should take in refugees period. But it will not be without problems.
We should vet them, but that doesn't mean they won't turn into terrorists here.

People displaced from their homes are vulnerable. Robbery? Murder? Terrorism? who knows.

But they are people and people deserve a chance at a good life.

But I don't trust the government or the American people to manage this well.

Of course part of this comes down to experience to. I had over an hour interview with the secret service last December/January because of ISIS members in the US discussing killing the president at my place of work. The person whose car's license plate I called in to the police evidently was on his way to the airport and believed to be heading to join ISIS in Syria. The thing is he was from Chicago, in Texas, and the secret service had been looking for him for making threats on Obama's life before I called the police on him and yet he was still able to get to the airport and fly out of the country no problem.

The secret service officer did tell me that he wasn't considered a real terroristic threat on the president because real terrorists don't have conversations in public where anybody can hear, but whatever.
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
November 19 2015 17:21 GMT
#50753
^there are only so much resources at hand, and the procedure for detaining a guy is pretty serious. they don't just arrest and gitmo everyone (or anyone right now) without an immediate threat present. even guys who return from isis are only watched and not quarantined or whatever.
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
Rassy
Profile Joined August 2010
Netherlands2308 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 17:26:33
November 19 2015 17:24 GMT
#50754
Thought the suspicion of terror was enough to send someone to guatanamo bay.
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
November 19 2015 17:39 GMT
#50755
What a surprise...


Hillary Clinton distanced herself from Barack Obama’s strategy for defeating Islamic State extremists on Thursday in a sweeping foreign policy speech that called for greater use of American ground troops and an intensified air campaign.

Though ruling out deploying the tens of thousands of US troops seen in Iraq and Afghanistan, the former of secretary of state made clear she would take a notably more hawkish approach than the current administration if she is elected president.

“The United States has been conducting this fight for more than a year; it’s time to be begin a new phase and intensify and broaden our efforts,” Clinton told the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

“We should have no illusions about how difficult the mission before us really is ... but if we press forward on both sides of the border, in the air on the ground and as well as diplomatically, I do believe we can crush Isis’s enclave of terror,” she added.

The extensive but nuanced speech singled out coalition efforts against Isis in Iraq for particular implied criticism, urging that US troops be given “greater flexibility” to embed with Iraqi troops on the frontline and target airstrikes. She also said the US should arm Sunni tribes and Kurds in the country if the government in Baghdad refused to.

But Clinton called for further US special forces to be deployed to Syria too, reiterated her call for a no-fly zone and demanded an “intelligence surge” to allow the airstrikes against Isis to be stepped up. “We have a lot of work to do to really decimate Isil in Iraq and Syria,” she said, using an alternate name for Isis.

Dressed entirely in white, a determined Clinton also used the speech to attack a number of key allies, including Turkey and the Gulf states for not doing enough to tackle fundamentalism.

She called on Silicon Valley to stop viewing the US government “as the enemy” and urged the tech industry to design encryption tools that can balance privacy and yet still allow for state surveillance.


Source
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
TheTenthDoc
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
United States9561 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-11-19 17:50:11
November 19 2015 17:43 GMT
#50756
On November 20 2015 01:26 oneofthem wrote:
it's really not as simple as just border control. domestic radicalization is a genuine and serious problem especially when some imam in afghanistan or whatever can directly preach via the internet.

the constitutional constraint of freedom of speech must also be respected. so it is a problem of creating positive, non-terrorist speech to combat the ideology that is freely distributed to young people.


Honestly, I'm more frightened of domestic terrorists (radicalized Muslims or not) than foreign refugee terrorists. It's far easier for a group of citizens to organize and prosecute an attack and it's far harder to identify them as potential threats for monitoring if they're intelligent about it, and the government doesn't force them through hoop after hoop.

That said, the fact that there are far more international terrorists than domestic terrorists does mean we should probably be more worried about international terror attacks than domestic ones. I have my doubts that the ~6,000 men that would fill out the 10,000 refugees really have much of a chance of both being terrorists and avoiding detection to the point that they wouldn't even be monitored though.

The Oklahoma City bombings occurred during a different time with a different security atmosphere, but it killed and injured more people than the Paris attacks. I suppose it might have been stopped if it happened in 2015 instead of 1995, though, so it's not a great comparison.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
November 19 2015 17:47 GMT
#50757
On November 20 2015 02:39 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
What a surprise...


Show nested quote +
Hillary Clinton distanced herself from Barack Obama’s strategy for defeating Islamic State extremists on Thursday in a sweeping foreign policy speech that called for greater use of American ground troops and an intensified air campaign.

Though ruling out deploying the tens of thousands of US troops seen in Iraq and Afghanistan, the former of secretary of state made clear she would take a notably more hawkish approach than the current administration if she is elected president.

“The United States has been conducting this fight for more than a year; it’s time to be begin a new phase and intensify and broaden our efforts,” Clinton told the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

“We should have no illusions about how difficult the mission before us really is ... but if we press forward on both sides of the border, in the air on the ground and as well as diplomatically, I do believe we can crush Isis’s enclave of terror,” she added.

The extensive but nuanced speech singled out coalition efforts against Isis in Iraq for particular implied criticism, urging that US troops be given “greater flexibility” to embed with Iraqi troops on the frontline and target airstrikes. She also said the US should arm Sunni tribes and Kurds in the country if the government in Baghdad refused to.

But Clinton called for further US special forces to be deployed to Syria too, reiterated her call for a no-fly zone and demanded an “intelligence surge” to allow the airstrikes against Isis to be stepped up. “We have a lot of work to do to really decimate Isil in Iraq and Syria,” she said, using an alternate name for Isis.

Dressed entirely in white, a determined Clinton also used the speech to attack a number of key allies, including Turkey and the Gulf states for not doing enough to tackle fundamentalism.

She called on Silicon Valley to stop viewing the US government “as the enemy” and urged the tech industry to design encryption tools that can balance privacy and yet still allow for state surveillance.


Source

I like how she hits the crowd pleasing points about arming the Kurds and also talks about Turkey, the ally that would be SUPER pissed if we did that. Continue to tell people what they want to hear as solutions, regardless of the realities.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42429 Posts
November 19 2015 18:19 GMT
#50758
I'm inclined to agree with Silicon Valley over Clinton. The threat to American liberty does not come from a handful of zealots half a world away, it's right here.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
November 19 2015 18:26 GMT
#50759
keep thinking that. these technical barriers are used to hide everything from terrorist preaching to white collar crimes. american liberty never included immunity from discovery by court order.
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
November 19 2015 18:27 GMT
#50760
The Tech industry has its own problems with indifferent when their products are used by extremists. I wish they would do more, rather than hope the problem goes away. Reply-all covered the use of Yik-Yak in the recent campus threats(that lead to arrests). It was encouraging to hear that the company is not going to protect people who use the app for hate speech and threats. But most services do not seem to be taking that route and are more interested in keeping their user base or not being involved.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Prev 1 2536 2537 2538 2539 2540 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
PiGosaur Monday
00:00
#35
PiGStarcraft521
CranKy Ducklings150
SteadfastSC122
davetesta31
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
PiGStarcraft521
RuFF_SC2 157
SteadfastSC 122
ROOTCatZ 52
Nina 47
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 26044
Sea 1965
Artosis 862
Icarus 8
Sharp 6
Dota 2
LuMiX1
League of Legends
tarik_tv9291
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor106
Other Games
summit1g10222
shahzam1360
WinterStarcraft215
ViBE213
Maynarde117
Sick68
Trikslyr18
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1051
BasetradeTV123
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 15 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH255
• rockletztv 59
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• Ler34
League of Legends
• Shiphtur1382
Other Games
• Scarra853
Upcoming Events
GSL Code S
7h 47m
Rogue vs GuMiho
Maru vs Solar
Online Event
22h 17m
Replay Cast
1d
GSL Code S
1d 7h
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Bunny
The PondCast
1d 8h
Replay Cast
1d 22h
WardiTV Invitational
2 days
OSC
2 days
Korean StarCraft League
3 days
SOOP
3 days
[ Show More ]
CranKy Ducklings
3 days
WardiTV Invitational
3 days
Cheesadelphia
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
GSL Code S
4 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Wardi Open
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
RSL Revival
6 days
Cure vs Percival
ByuN vs Spirit
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
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 17: 2025 SUMMER
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
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

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.