Donald Trump

"

MrSmiley21 wrote:

Refugees sexually assault 5 year old girl in Idaho:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/06/23/an-alleged-sexual-assault-fuels-rumors-that-turn-an-idaho-town-against-muslim-refugees/

You know its funny how Washington Post tries to play damage control over this, but the fact of the matter is that 5 year old girl was sexually assaulted by refugees from the middle east region and Africa. No denying that.

If it was up to me, the perpetrators would be executed via schaphism. So if you think Donald Trump is "hard" you're lucky I'm not running for President. Because Donald Trump is a light weight compared to how I'd personally handle scum who sexually assault 5 year old girls.

How is this relevant to the Trump topic? Well, it goes right along with what Trump has been saying about a lot of these refugees being rapists. When people see stories like this in the media, its working in Trump's favor. This also explains why a lot of Trump's rhetoric isn't hurting him with most people. No amount of refugees is worth a single 5 year old girl getting sexually assaulted. Nobody has came up with a compelling reason as to why these refugees have a right to reside here?

Here in Canada we are stuck with Trudeau, who want to double the number of refugees, remove any screening, paperwork, passport or visa needed to enter the country.....
I hope he will be kicked out of the office soon.

"

diablofdb wrote:

Here in Canada we are stuck with Trudeau, who want to double the number of refugees, remove any screening, paperwork, passport or visa needed to enter the country.....
I hope he will be kicked out of the office soon.

Canada has accepted more refugees than the United States, if I´m not mistaken. Removing all screening of immigrants would be a bad idea indeed, but does your country really have many problems with them ? Like for example more than with Chinese immigrants(once saw a documentary about Chinese immigrants in Canada, if I´m not mistaken there´s also an amount worth mentioning there). The U.S. and Canada mainly consist of descendants of immigrants, right ?

Or is it just the diversity that´s disturbing to some ?

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

The U.S. and Canada mainly consist of descendants of immigrants, right ?

That's an interesting argument because if Native Americans would have been able to enforce a strict immigration law, they probably wouldn't have been genocided. Just saying.

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

The U.S. and Canada mainly consist of descendants of immigrants, right ?

That's an interesting argument because if Native Americans would have been able to enforce a strict immigration law, they probably wouldn't have been genocided. Just saying.

Refugees usually don´t kill people, instead they look for help and asylum. And Daesh/Isil remains a threat even without one single immigrant.

So i rewatched a classic Cronenberg film, The Dead Zone, and it reminded me so much of Trump. I found a clip on youtube and no surprise, several hundred people made the same connection:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EO9y4rGxvk

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

The U.S. and Canada mainly consist of descendants of immigrants, right ?

Yup, even the "Natives" immigrated here (15,20,30, or 50K years ago, depending on who's looking at what data.

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

Or is it just the diversity that´s disturbing to some ?

The word has become so overused for a variety of differing meanings and purposed that it is a cliché. To some it means variety, to others it means anything that is different from the previous state, to others it means equity, while some even consider that any only a new dominant group replacing the old group is worthy of being called diversity.

This doesn't quite cover all of what I am saying, but it does cover a portion of it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/01/magazine/has-diversity-lost-its-meaning.html?_r=0

People aren't feeling their home nations in droves because their home nation is failing. THAT is the problem that needs to be fixed - the FAILING. As long as we continue to ignore that, the problem will only get worse.

The costs to try and stabilize Greece are a pittance compared to the economic drain on the US. Imagine that Europe had to pay the costs for stabilizing Greece - not by lowered debt, but by actual cash infusions, and that Europe had to pay the same full amounts three or four times yearly.

It has become this bad of a situation because of the complicity of business owners, and companies that found they can make "Yuge" profits by exploiting every legal and illegal loophole in employment.

Why would the government allow this racket (some of the cases have fallen under RICO, anti-racketeering laws) to go on?

1) Those companies pay big money to help people get in office and stay in office
2) When those immigrants all vote a certain way - the people benefiting from that vote swing, most definitely want immigration to continue and expand.

That's the problem in a nutshell. The ONLY reason that racism was ever a question is that the vast majority of immigrants are coming from one country, and that country is not very diverse - hence ANYTHING said against those immigrants can be construed as racist.

Trump (since the thread is ostensibly about Trump - hah) had the gall and piss poor public awareness to actually mention the nation that the vast majority of immigrants to the US come from.

Once again, it isn't the people that are the problem, it is the FAILING country (which is why they are leaving it) that is the problem. The corruption, poverty, lack of employment aren't caused by the people. The corruption, poverty and lack of employment DO cause other common problems in society - which is true just about anywhere.

The world is full of people who can say what you want to hear. Even little kids know what their parents want them to say when certain questions are asked. The people that are willing to actually reach out their hand and help are the ones you want on your side, not the ones who will smile and speak pleasantries to your face, and then stab you in the back when it suits their purposes.

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

Schmodderhengst wrote:

The U.S. and Canada mainly consist of descendants of immigrants, right ?

That's an interesting argument because if Native Americans would have been able to enforce a strict immigration law, they probably wouldn't have been genocided. Just saying.

They were already practicing genocide against each other every chance they got. The First Immigrants were no more peaceful with each other than any other groups around the world have been. The only real difference is that population density wasn't yet a major factor, and they hadn't developed modern implements of war.

Violence has been around far longer than people have. Humans are just "better" at it.

"

SkyCore wrote:

So i rewatched a classic Cronenberg film, The Dead Zone, and it reminded me so much of Trump. I found a clip on youtube and no surprise, several hundred people made the same connection:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EO9y4rGxvk

Let me guess, these people have very little practical knowledge about nuclear weapons? They have very little knowledge of strategic (or tactical nuclear) doctrine? Other than the Cuban Missile Crisis (if they even know what that is) they have zero knowledge of previous close calls where nuclear weapons were almost used? These people have little knowledge of war and the military, other than a bias against it? These people have (with a few execptions) never been in a war themselves?

In short, these people are living in a fantasy land- one where anyone they don't like does the worst thing they can imagine - which is a nuclear war.

The fact that the candidate they prefer over Trump has already been responsible for several wars herself - isn't a factor at all in their thinking.

Trump reiterated (in his clownish off the cuff manner) US nuclear policy. Nothing more.

The US insistence on not relinquishing nuclear weapons is and has been part of the standard defense policy. It is part of NATO policy.

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_87597.htm

That policy has already prevented some major wars. Most people have no idea what I am talking about. If you wish to not sleep well for a few nights - feel free to start looking for more information on it.

Hillary would be no more likely, or less likely to use nuclear weapons than Trump would be. She has shown already that she doesn't have much reluctance to go to war.

She makes Cheney look like a hesitant wallflower by comparison.

I like Vladimir Putin. I think he's a great leader. Not only that, but he's one of the most, if not the most popular democratically elected leader anywhere in the world. Like over 80% approval among Russians. I think the Russophobia lingering from the cold war era is comical. Even more hilarious is that the primary instigator in the geopolitical conflicts with Russia is none other than the United States. Yes, that includes Ukraine. The "coup" in Ukraine was a plan set into motion by the USA. So MrTremere, you need to understand that its primarily the USA instigating conflict with the Russians. You're acting like the Russians are just gonna YOLO and start dropping megaton nukes when mutually assured destruction would be 100% guaranteed. They're not that crazy. Putin seems like a level headed guy.

I'm aware that a lot of the neocons think Putin is Sauron. I'm relieved to hear that Trump is at least willing to work with Putin in some regard. Its time to bury the hatchet with the Russians. If mouth breathing neocons start WW3 with the Russians, you know people like John Mccain who'd establish a no-fly zone over Syria and shoot down Russian aircraft? Then the human race is screwed. There won't be a WW4. There won't be any more humans around. Because the surface of the Earth will be about as habitable as Venus.