Trump Calls For Moratorium on Muslim Immigrants

[abaris]

Immigration policy is, and always will be, irreconcilable and identity driven. There is no debate. Never has been. Never will be. There is just tribalism. End of story.

Master race much? Wait, don't answer, I already know what you take for - for lack of a better word - let's call it news sources. Bit right of Genghis Khan, actually. I guess, Breitbart is a little bit too liberal for your tastes. In any case, too reasonable.

Man, there's no bile on my side. Only pity. It really must be horrifying to be inside your head.

[Iroscato]

From what I remember, Genghis Khan was quite tolerant of the differing religions within his empire, certainly for his time.

[Alex K]

@Esquilax

If we let them. Exactly. We still do such a poor job in Germany, I think, of really letting people identify with the country, culture and all that comes with it.

[Neo-Scholastic]

First, I don’t support Trump. Got it, everyone? His comments lack nuance so I cannot be certain of his exact policy stance; yet I can conceive of an interpretation of his statements with which I could agree. Citizens of the United States are to be protected against discrimination on the basis of national origin, ethnicity, gender, and religion. Acceptance of those fleeing persecution and seeking refuge is a long-standing tradition of our country. Yet discriminating on the basis of national origin has been our practice under all previous Congresses, Courts and Administrations.

Placing restrictions upon foreign nationals coming into and residing in the USA is a necessary practice just as it is for other Western democracies. We place quotas on how many immigrants we willingly to legally accept from other countries. Those restrictions relate, not so much to the race or ethnicity; but rather on allegiances and respect. Qualifying immigrants willing to transfer their national allegiance to the US get accepted as legal citizens. Visiting foreign nations willing to respect the authority of the US get to live and work here on a qualified basis. It is right and proper to filter out  those who as citizens would put their allegiance elsewhere, particularly if their allegiance lies with nations wanting to harm the USA. Likewise, people who we suspect will not respect the legal authority of the USA and defy its foundational principles should be filtered out.

Country of origin, ethnic decent, and religious identity matter and can be a legitimate reasons for discrimination against foreign nationals under certain conditions. Historically, US citizens of German and Japanese decent were unjustly persecuted and detained. That was wrong. And yet, no one to my knowledge believes that the USA should have uncritically allowed Germans and Japanese nationals to enter US territory during a time of war.

It is foolish for us to deny that the adherents of some religious doctrines and political ideologies threaten peace in the US and the liberties of our people. It makes no difference if a hostile organization is political (National Socialism for example) or religious (Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood or ISIS) in nature.  It is a fact that many devout Muslims from Syria and other Middle Eastern countries have no intention of respecting US legal authority, openly state their intentions to do harm, and are formally aligned with or tacitly supportive of hostile organizations. There is nothing morally or legally wrong with restricting a non-citizen’s access to the US if the nation from which he or she comes or the religion with which he or she identify calls into question their respect for their host nation.

It would have been madness to let in avowed Nazis during WWII and committed Soviet communist party members during the Cold War. The US did embrace some defectors but not before removing all suspicion that they would respect US sovereignty and did not pose a national security risk. Likewise it would have been madness to give any of those people a pass just because they belonged to a protected class. If some are coming to the US to impose Sharia, they aren’t welcome any more those in times past who wanted to actively undermine the institutions of our government, culture and business.

[abaris]

Country of origin, ethnic decent, and religious identity matter and can be a legitimate reasons for discrimination against foreign nationals under certain conditions. Historically, US citizens of German and Japanese decent were unjustly persecuted and detained. That was wrong. And yet, no one to my knowledge believes that the USA should have uncritically allowed Germans and Japanese nationals to enter US territory during a time of war.

First, I hope you know you're talking about US citizens of Japanese or German origin, not Japanese or German nationals. Secondly, muslim isn't a nationality. Only a belief. Protected and accepted by most countries on this earth. Third, there isn't a war going on. If you know differently, please point me to the opposing nation, it's government and it's army. It's this kind of stupidity being brought up by Bush making it much more difficult to identify the real problem.

So what's your point again?

[Neo-Scholastic]

You must be blind. An organized military is forcibly gaining territory and sujectong those within its borders to its will while controlling the resources within that geographic area. That's what war looks like.

[Anomalocaris]

From what I remember, Genghis Khan was quite tolerant of the differing religions within his empire, certainly for his time.

Yes, those whom he didn't kill or rape, he did tolerate.

Speaking of rape, genetic studies show estimated 30 million men in the world today are direct descendant of the Genghis khan himself.

[abaris]

You must be blind. An organized military is forcibly gaining territory and sujectong those within its borders to its will while controlling the resources within that geographic area. That's what war looks like.

As I said, Bushite idiocy. The results are accordingly.

So you really think, conventional tactics will solve that problem? And, what you failed to answer, where's the muslim nation? You know, such as Germany or Japan. Where's that? Are muslims a nation?

[Iroscato]

From what I remember, Genghis Khan was quite tolerant of the differing religions within his empire, certainly for his time.

Yes, those whom he didn't kill or rape, he did tolerate.

Speaking of rape, genetic studies show estimated 30 million men in the world today are direct descendant of the Genghis khan himself.

There was that small matter, I suppose...

[Minimalist]

You must be blind. An organized military is forcibly gaining territory and sujectong those within its borders to its will while controlling the resources within that geographic area. That's what war looks like.

As I said, Bushite idiocy. The results are accordingly.

So you really think, conventional tactics will solve that problem? And, what you failed to answer, where's the muslim nation? You know, such as Germany or Japan. Where's that? Are muslims a nation?

Facts don't matter to fanatics, Ab.  You should know that by now.