BruceVC

Elerond I watched an interview with someone from the Trump camp about this and what he said actually made sense Trump is prohibiting Muslims coming from countries that cannot guarantee or vet the people who get on planes, these countries include Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Sudan All these countries are either war zones, enemies of the USA or hotbeds of Islamic extremism....do you blame Trump for blocking them? I would think this is appropriate considering the fact the USA is a target of terrorist attacks ? http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/27/politics/trump-plans-to-sign-executive-action-on-refugees-extreme-vetting/ Yes I blame him. USA don't take non-vetted refugees, so everybody now denied are people that US officials though to be safe to take in, many such that have helped them in past. Also USA actions in past are big part why Iraq, Libya and Syria have become hotbeds of Islamic extremist and why people are fleeing from them now. Of course stopping and killing Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi and opposing Bashar al-Assad can be justified and even seen as necessary actions, but they were also actions the destabilized those countries and drive them in uncontrollable civil wars and give room for extremist to get foot hold in them. Also where you think refugees mainly come if not from war zones? Also Iraq's current government is ally of USA. This is one of the few topics you and I dont agree on, since we have had this debate before all I ask is you consider what I am going to say below Even though I dont agree lets say you right about Iraq and thats all the USA fault The initial civil wars in both Libya and Syria were caused by the Arab Spring, everything else came after that and both Gaddafi and Assad had options to share resources and agree to what the protestors were asking for Both of them refused to make any concessions and civil wars started. How is that the fault of the USA? In Libya USA gave weapons to those who opposed Gaddafi and during rebellion they gave air support for rebel forces. Meaning that USA take active part in dethroning Gaddafi and Clinton was quite gleeful when their efforts ended successfully. In Syria USA has given military schooling and weapons to rebels that oppose Assad and some of those weapons even ended in hands of ISIS terrorists. Meaning that USA had active part in Syria's civil war. So just to be clear, you are going to ignore the reasons why these civil wars started which had nothing to do with the USA but still blame the USA for supplying arms and weapons?

Elerond I watched an interview with someone from the Trump camp about this and what he said actually made sense Trump is prohibiting Muslims coming from countries that cannot guarantee or vet the people who get on planes, these countries include Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Sudan All these countries are either war zones, enemies of the USA or hotbeds of Islamic extremism....do you blame Trump for blocking them? I would think this is appropriate considering the fact the USA is a target of terrorist attacks ? http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/27/politics/trump-plans-to-sign-executive-action-on-refugees-extreme-vetting/ Yes I blame him. USA don't take non-vetted refugees, so everybody now denied are people that US officials though to be safe to take in, many such that have helped them in past. Also USA actions in past are big part why Iraq, Libya and Syria have become hotbeds of Islamic extremist and why people are fleeing from them now. Of course stopping and killing Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi and opposing Bashar al-Assad can be justified and even seen as necessary actions, but they were also actions the destabilized those countries and drive them in uncontrollable civil wars and give room for extremist to get foot hold in them. Also where you think refugees mainly come if not from war zones? Also Iraq's current government is ally of USA. This is one of the few topics you and I dont agree on, since we have had this debate before all I ask is you consider what I am going to say below Even though I dont agree lets say you right about Iraq and thats all the USA fault The initial civil wars in both Libya and Syria were caused by the Arab Spring, everything else came after that and both Gaddafi and Assad had options to share resources and agree to what the protestors were asking for Both of them refused to make any concessions and civil wars started. How is that the fault of the USA?

Elerond I watched an interview with someone from the Trump camp about this and what he said actually made sense Trump is prohibiting Muslims coming from countries that cannot guarantee or vet the people who get on planes, these countries include Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Sudan All these countries are either war zones, enemies of the USA or hotbeds of Islamic extremism....do you blame Trump for blocking them? I would think this is appropriate considering the fact the USA is a target of terrorist attacks ? http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/27/politics/trump-plans-to-sign-executive-action-on-refugees-extreme-vetting/

I have been following this on various mediums, I am not trying to undermine the point but its important to understand the context around what Trump said In an interview it all started where he said something like " ISIS is the most brutal group the world has ever seen. They behead and crucify christians and kill and rape indiscriminately...so if you ask me is waterboarding acceptable I say yes ".....I agree with Trump on this, why are we concerned about extending a group like ISIS any humanity or civil rights ? As usual Trump differs to experts, he is leaving this up to Mattis who is opposed to torture http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-torture-works-theresa-may-washington-white-house-a7550316.html

You really shouldnt watch that show, its racist and sexist ...it will rot your brain and maybe you could become reticent and cynical

volo you sound very bitter about California, its a similar temperament to when you hear those stories about some young starry eyed Canadian women leaves Canada with dreams of becoming an actor in Hollywood....but once arriving in Hollywood her dreams are dashed as she cannot find work and ends up working in the Porn industry but pretending to her friends and family in Canada she has a real acting job, you know that can make a person bitter ....did that happen to you ? Be honest ...no judgement here

I'm pretty sure Google, Apple, all the movies studios, HP, Tesla, etc. are not owned by the US in any way. That would kind of violate the entire model of capitalism. And considering a lot of these tech companies make their stuff in China, an independent California would probably have no trouble negotiating trade deals. Plus the port of LA is the largest trade port in terms of dollars in the world. Basically it would be a major loss for the US, but it doesn't really matter because it isn't going to happen. Anyone who wants it is delusional and is too caught up in political rhetoric to recognize basic economics. California loves the idea though, like a scorned wife that keep saying that she'll leave. Even if they are a big producer without a market they can't make profits and the US is a large consumer market. I would argue states like Texas play the old " I want to secede from the USA card " more regularly than Cali ? The reason why Texas talks so much about it is because they are actually legally allowed to secede from the US. As part of their deal of surrender during the Civil War they have the right to do exactly just that whenever they feel like it. That cant be true? Do you have links so I read it myself ....Im not being rude I just find that incongruous

I'm pretty sure Google, Apple, all the movies studios, HP, Tesla, etc. are not owned by the US in any way. That would kind of violate the entire model of capitalism. And considering a lot of these tech companies make their stuff in China, an independent California would probably have no trouble negotiating trade deals. Plus the port of LA is the largest trade port in terms of dollars in the world. Basically it would be a major loss for the US, but it doesn't really matter because it isn't going to happen. Anyone who wants it is delusional and is too caught up in political rhetoric to recognize basic economics. California loves the idea though, like a scorned wife that keep saying that she'll leave. Even if they are a big producer without a market they can't make profits and the US is a large consumer market. I would argue states like Texas play the old " I want to secede from the USA card " more regularly than Cali ?

From my point of view, it's the source of all of US's political problems, or most of them anyway. It was fine when it was Republican, or even a swing state, but now it's an evil, lawless Democrat empire. WOD you cant use such hyperbole.......you must be using certain just to tease the guys who live in California For example how is California evil or lawless ? Neither of those words can be used to reasonably describe any state in the USA

As usual you make excellent points I tell what I think might be a necessary outcome to this whole Mexico contention ....because of the culture of " alternative facts " and " post-truth " rhetoric Trump sometimes uses its very difficult to convince people to agree to your point The only way we may get agreement about this type of event is for the USA to have this trade war with Mexico and then after 12 months or so the US citizens can see for themselves what the outcome is ...will it be good for the USA or detrimental ? I firmly believe it will hurt the US economy but then Trump will negotiate again with Mexico and things can stabilize What amazes me is there are very educated and intelligent people around Trump who must understand the importance of trade with Mexico yet no one says anything. I can only assume its because this is more about the campaign promise to " build the wall " so now Trump is going a more strategic path so his supporters dont think he is a hypocrite ?

Is it though? Mexico is our 3rd biggest trading partner and they are in the hole of 60 billion towards us....by those numbers, it sounds like we are better to not trade towards them if we are in the hole and trying to get out. What's the point of trading if the other one is paying and instead putting it on a tab. I also realize the irony since we are trillions in the whole with china. Maybe it's best of China did the same towards us. Mexico pays what they owe and USA pays what we owe to china and we stop borrowing. If u ain't got the money then don't spend. That goes towards us as well. Im glad you asking these questions, there is a misunderstanding about this $ 60 billion apparent " debt " Its not debt, its the trade deficit. What this simply means is Mexico has sold the USA $ 60 Billion more goods than the USA has sold to Mexico This is very important and its fundamental to the argument., All countries export and import goods to each other but some countries are able to export goods globally cheaper than other countries, like China So this $60 billion trade deficit is not the fault of Mexico ....there are ways to increase the USA exports to Mexico but its unreasonable to expect Mexico to now be punished for simply tapping into the USA consumer market http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2016/jan/26/donald-trump/donald-trump-says-course-mexico-can-pay-wall-becau/

Sorry, all my family live in London

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/steve-bannon-donald-trump-war-media-transparency-liberal-elite-interview-new-york-times-a7548406.html See how populist Bannon is , he really loves to pander to that " you cannot trust the media " group within the Trump support base

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/mexican-president-cancels-meeting-with-trump-after-wall-order/ar-AAmhvNh?li=BBoPRmx The Mexican PM has cancelled his trip to see Trump, you guys realize Mexico is the US third largest trading partner....you want to avoid some idiotic and unnecessary trade war that will hurt the US economy

Also its not going to be a solid wall of concrete, there will be " virtual parts of the wall " but things like drones, satellites, infrared, different barriers and increased patrols will protect these parts of the wall

Yes, it's going to cost more than the entire highway budget. Trump always brings his projects in ahead of time and under budget. This figure is relatively accurate WOD, you better prepare yourself Estimated cost $10 billion and some people predict it will double to $20 billion

In SA white people generally never march or protest, its not our culture But for me people must protest in the interests of a progressive, open society around whatever they want if that is what they believe in, I support many protests in spirit ....I just wont actually participate unless it was very important to me on a personal level. And I have to be honest I have never attended any march in 42 years

This is so important, the whole " GG is going to lead to real changes in.....gaming journalism " to " you cant trust ANY media " to " alternative facts" is a huge concern to me as in many cases this leads to people believing comments on social media and unquestioningly following Breitbart opinion or other similar websites It can cause unnecessary invective and controversy around public commentary by people, we lose the ability to use objective reasoning and formulate opinions based on facts as we become selective around what parts of a story we dont like or we just believe what someone says on Twitter I am very supportive of this march, I wish I could attend

what Obama tried to do was take away the states right to chose to do or not something they had the right to decide. Sanctuary cities on the other hand is something a state does not have power to have and it goes against Federal law. Obama tried to force states to do things they had the right to chose to do. Trump is trying to force states to stop doing something they do NOT have the right to do. States dont have right to receive degrees of Federal funding and Trump has a right to just take it away? Did you read the link I posted? What you saying is not what New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman says " he said in a statement that Trump lacked the authority to take away funding from cities and states " There is a whole section underneath this in the article that clarifies this that I cant paste , please read the link below so you are familiar with the point. https://twitter.com/AGSchneiderman/status/824362523529007104/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.za/entry/donald-trump-border-wall_us_5888a9c3e4b0441a8f71f08e Im confused and I need our American members to explain this. For years I have heard endless criticism how Obama overreached in the affairs of the various states through numerous Federal initiatives Now Trump is threatening to hold back Federal funding to any city that doesnt support his immigration policies, these cities have been " sanctuary cities " How is what Trump is threatening to do not interfering in the affairs of the states? This seems very inconsistent and reeks of double standards

Cool, can you do Bolivia now please. For some reason potted rants about the evils of socialism never address Bolivia and I'm wondering why. I wait, with 'bated breath. Technically "he" could, since it's straight from the CIA World Factbook. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ve.html https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/bo.html I thought it was Harvard or bust. Is CIA an accredited academic institution now? So its irrelevant where he got this information from, the assessment of state of the Venezuelan economy is 100 % correct

Nope. what 'bout the numerous "pretty ladies" who were groped/assaulted by trump? doesn't seem fair to exclude 'em if ivanka is okie dokie fodder... though Gromnir is not actual advocating such. quite the opposite. Gromnir we dont want this thread to turn into some depraved and profoundly iniquitous sexual den of licentiousness and turpitude with inappropriate pictures of women ..its all about our moral compass

Not your sources, BVC, its you yourself! I frequently scour the forums with the search function just to find your pearls of wisdom to impart onto others. You funny... " scour the forums "

Thats also what Breitbert wants you to think! They have their fingers in everything and if something doesnt fit someones narrative, its all Breitberts fault. Im pretty sure their server is maintained by the Antichrist under the Vatican. Obviously, I'm greatly entertained by the back-and-forth pissing contests of who's source is "better". Internet, you never let me down. Gfted1 wouldn't you agree with all your years on this forum and everything you have seen you can objectively say my sources of information are the most accurate?

Like you don't know that here is massive difference in elected president claiming things in official setting compared to private citizens whining about something. Also there was provable case of hacking and leaking information during elections, as we all were able to see those leaked emails, even if people that did hack and leak can't be identified for sure, where any proof that even singular people are voting illegally is nearly non-existent and there isn't anything that even remotely suggest thousands let alone millions of people are voting illegally in US. But world where everything that you claim is just alternative fact there seems to be no need for any proof and if such behavior is accepted for president and his advisory then it is accepted to everybody else. volo I have to say Elerond is 100 % correct in this post, I would strongly suggest you heed his wise words