Trump's plan for dealing with the "Muslim problem"

This is intended to be a constructive thread about Trump's plan for dealing with jihad terrorism. Although this thread is critical of Trump's policy proposals, it is not intended to be another "HAHA TRUMP SO DUMB" thread.

Trump's latest plan, as I understand it, is to place a temporary ban on Muslims entering the United States from certain countries. Please correct me if I'm wrong, because I know his policy changes frequently. My position is that this policy is not well thought out, and it is most likely a "spite" measure designed to make people who harbor anti-muslim feelings better because they are lashing back at Islam.

Keeping Muslims from entering the country may reduce terrorism at home for a decade--which is unquestionably a good thing. But it is not worth the long term price we would pay. We would essentially be alienating many of the world's Muslims. I'm not particularly concerned with hurting their feelings. However, I am concerned with fueling their hatred for America by giving them a reason to hate us.

The war on radical islamic terrorism has many fronts. I by no means intend to belittle the suffering that occurs on the battlefields in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. But the most important front of the war on terror is the public relations aspect. The more we give Muslims around the world a reason to hate us, the more they will. We can never hope to kill every single terrorist. The best we can do is reduce the number of people who resort to terrorism by striving to maintain a positive reputation in the Muslim world. Donald Trump's temporary ban on admitting Muslims from certain countries will induce more Muslims to resort to terrorism. It will make the world a less safe place.

I'm sure that most Republicans will respond that we can't base American immigration policy on what offends the least amount of people. That much is true. However, when we impose an immigration policy for the purpose of thwarting terrorism, we should consider whether that policy will have long term effects that defeat its very purpose. Do we really want a little less terrorism now for a lot more later? Or do we want to start defeating Islamic terror by establishing a positive reputation for the United States around the globe?

 

Not to mention that it won't work. I don't believe any of the Muslim terrorism we've had in the US has come from Muslim immigrants but rather Muslim citizens. Muslims naturally should be our greatest allies in a fight against insane Muslims who want to kill them as well as us, but Trump wants to make them our enemies too. Conservatives truly just love to hate people even when such hate is irrational and works against their own interests, and Trump is just pandering to his base here. I believe he knows this will increase terrorism and is doing it so he can use such increase to justify the concentration camps which he intends to be his regime's major accomplishment

 

So, basically, you want to give them citizenship because if we don't, they may hate us and become violent. Almost sounds like blackmail, doesn't it?

 

Concentration camps?

Preposterous. Won't happen. Your belief doesn't make it a fact.

- - - Updated - - -

Good post.

When your fellow righties decried the fema camps what did you think of that?

 

How is it irrational? We have a movement of almost 2 billion people who follow the commands of a violent warlord who instructed them to do exactly what the terrorists are doing. So these "moderates" are to be lauded for rejecting the violent doctrines of the Qur'an and traditions in their religion, yet if we aren't nice enough to them, they may invariably choose that violent path anyway?

If the US becoming less Christian is a good thing on the left, how is the US becoming more Islamic a good thing?

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks.

Let's not derail the thread with tangential conversations.

 

The OP makes the fundamental liberal mistake in thinking that Muslim aggression toward the US and elsewhere in the West is based on us not being nice enough to them. This type of thinking is what prompted Obama to go overseas on a US apology tour. It did nothing to make Muslims like us more. Quite the opposite, in fact. The radicals among them see weakness as an opportunity to gain power. That's what Muhammad believed, practiced, and preached, and many Muslims today follow the same principle.

If you have the stomach, look up the beheading video of Abdullah Issa. This was a 12 year old boy living in a refugee camp who was kidnapped with an IV line still attached to his arm. He is brutally beheaded on the back of a pickup truck by one of the rebels that we helped fund in Syria. Do you know how twisted someone has to be to behead a 12 year old with his hands tied behind his back? And this isn't a rare occurrence in that part of the world.

Islam is not compatible with Western civilization, and the less of it, the better. I understand the political benefit Muslims offer the Democratic Party. Is that really what this is all about?

 

There is absolutely no upside to Muslim immigration and plenty of downside. Muslim culture is incompatible with Western culture as has been demonstrated in Europe and the U.K.

 

Trump is a fool, fraud, and probably the biggest disaster ever, but honestly, a "muslim ban" is not what makes him bad. It doesn't even make it to the top 20 bad ideas of his. As you say, it would undoubtedly reduce terrorism. Because, let's be frank, there is a particular problem with islamic terrorism, which obviously, is tied to muslims. While Trump wording, as usual, was very.. crude but also vague, the basic principle is not a bad one. I actually agree with trump's basic points on this: we don't know what's going on, and until we do, we should not let in risky people. It doesn't have to be a complete ban on ALL muslims. in fact, that would be unnecessary. But temporarily banning people from certain countries.. that would be wise. increasing screening, monitoring of muslim immigrants would be wise also.

 

They used to say that of the Jewish immigrants then it was Jamaicans, Greek, Indian,Vietnamese......

 

maybe so, but is it really comparable? was there any any comparable problems with terrorism and extremism with the jewish, jamaican, greek, indian, or vietnamese, as there are today with muslims?

it seems that many people believe that terrorism and honour culture are just things we "have to accept" because it's inevitable and unavoidable, as if we don't have a choice in the matter, and as if these are things to be expected from immigration. Let me tell you: no, this is not normal, or to be expected. Muslims are, historically speaking, a VERY problematic group in many regards. I can't think of any other migrant group which is so antagonistic, so hostile, so hard to assimilate, which brings with it such problems. there is no comparison. And no, it's not unavoidable, we do have a choice about who we let into our countries, and quite frankly, we should start to exercise that choice more, because there's a lot of really stupid and crazy people out there, who happen to be muslim, who we should NEVER let into our countries. People whose only interaction with us ought to be being killed by a drone.

 

Ah yes. That was a legit beef. Now this one isn't....

Lol

 

Bump for relevance.

 

We don't really have a Muslim problem.

We do have an Islam problem; however.

 

To be clear a Radical Muslim problem

 

Oh great. The "well, actually" guy.

 

It's not an issue with just radicals or Muslims. It is an issue with the ideology.

- - - Updated - - -

The ideology is backwards and it is a problem. There are no actualities about it.

 

On Friday Trump signed an executive order banning Muslims from seven countries.

White House advisors said it can't be a Muslim ban because only seven Muslim nations are affected.

In other words, because Trump didn't ban all Muslim nations, banning seven Muslim nations is justified.

In response to Trump's Muslim ban, there are protesters in airports across the country.

There are protesters in cities across America.

Thousands of protesters are in front of the White House.

Eighty-year old Muslim men were detained and handcuffed.

Muslim children were detained and handcuffed.

Muslims who were in compliance to all relevant U.S. law were detained and handcuffed.

Federal judges in four states issued injunctions against Trump's executive orders.

President Trump, It is not a Muslim ban... but is working very nicely.

 

Which ideology is that?

 

Islam. I thought I mentioned that already.

 

Well I cant argue with that. The problem is the book and the founder being a murdering warlord. What a great role model

[video=youtube;RqanBHi6AD0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqanBHi6AD0[/video]
Like in my sig

 

Do you think all Muslims have the same ideology? Or even a majority of them? What percentage of Muslims would you say are terrorists? Alternatively, what percentage of Muslims are willing to engage in jihad for the honor of Muhammad [ETA: or Allah]?

The problem isn't ideology. It certainly doesn't help that the Koran calls for violence against non-believers, but most Muslims don't follow that to the letter--just as most Christians don't stone football players to death for touching pig skin.

 

For me, a believer in secular gov't with religious freedom, I have a problem with Islam. For their book ties them to theocracy, and theocracy is just another repressive form of gov't. The world has decided secularism is better for several important reasons because of the greater freedom and liberty which comes from a non theocracy. Islam is an enemy of modernity. No better than flat earthers in adding to intelligent, civil discourse.

 

... Again. Won't happen again. I hope you are correct but the language I am hearing today sounds all too familiar.



​

 

I could have sworn I said that the problem is not with Muslims.

Oh, yes it is.

If you think that the problem is JUST killing non believers, there is a even greater problem then originally understood.

Aside from that, that is not an accurate comparison. Christians, at least in most countries, are progressing and becoming more tolerant. That other religion is apparently stuck in the stone age.

 

The problem is it combines politics with religion which does not fit well with the American way or our constitution