|
|
Post by pflugh on Sept 28, 2017 19:26:44 GMT
When it comes to this topic, I fully agree with the decision that has been made. This is not a matter of discrimination or hatred towards immigrants, it is simply the president doing his job. His first responsibility is not to bring people in, it is to protect the lives of Americans. Now, that does not mean I am against immigration. I think the fact that our country is seen as a safe haven is phenomenal. But at this point in time, terrorism is a very serious and scary issue. Clearly, countries have made it too easy for terrorist groups to attack within the past few years. All I am able to see are people who enjoy criticizing a man who is only attempting to protect the lives of his citizens. If Trump didn’t create these regulations, and a large scale terrorist attack occurred due to the lack of security, people would still find reasons to attack his decision on not being more careful when it comes to who is crossing our borders. He didn’t randomly select these eight countries. At some point a line must be drawn. Though we are a welcoming country as a whole, we cannot endanger those within our borders. This decision does not make Trump racist, evil, or selfish in anyway. He is playing smart and safe, which is something that should have been done a long time ago. We must protect our own. What other actions could Trump have taken to attempt to ensure the safety of America? Is the fact that he is protecting his people really so terrible? At what point will we as Americans be able to collectively stand up for our country before we welcome dangerous nations with open arms? The Americans that believe Trump is doing a horrible thing and targeting Muslims would finally agree with him if another attack on this country, such like 9/11 would happen. It's sad to say but based on what they're saying, they don't believe the ban is necessary. They'll only trust it once those countries attack us and by then, it would be too late. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 28, 2017 22:36:21 GMT
Great job thus far! Thank you for posting early and getting the conversation started!  |
|
|
|
Post by McIlwain on Sept 29, 2017 15:12:00 GMT
President Trump is in the position of protecting the nation from all threats foreign and domestic. As the number of terrorist attacks increase worldwide, our government must consider all options to keep itself safe. If that means barring travel from other countries, then so be it. The government must constantly be vigilant of who is entering and exiting the nation at all times in order to protect its citizens and sovereignty by controlling borders and immigration. Any other nation is willing to vet their systems. Like North Korea who has barred tourism from the US and Saudi Arabia requires that all tourists have an affidavit from the Saudi government and then approved by the King confirming that they may enter the country. Somalia, Libya, Eritrea, and the Central African Republic also have laws preventing US citizens traveling to their nations. Not because they are threatened by the US but because they want to be in control of their own borders and immigration, as does the US. Being a leader means making tough decisions that benefit the majority of people even if it disrupts a small group. So if stopping a few people from traveling to the US means protecting the over 300 million population that action must be taken. Unless its the NSA trying to spy on us again, but I digress. It is not a matter of discrimination but a matter of actual lives being at stake. With the goal of American safety at hand, how much is too much? IS it fair that in return the countries on the travel list bar US travel if they all ready haven't? It is completely just for the countries we have placed on the ban list to bar us from immigration as well. It is not appropriate if they are just doing it to point fingers and be immature about it, but it is totally apparopriate if they have valid reasons to back their decisions. That’s the case with every country, in my opinion. When it comes to how muc is too much, that is not something that we can decide for ourselves. Having a federal government means putting these matters into their hands, and unforutunately, it can lead to many lives being lost. We just have to trust the people we elect to make the good choices. |
|
|
|
Post by McIlwain on Sept 29, 2017 16:16:55 GMT
When it comes to this topic, I fully agree with the decision that has been made. This is not a matter of discrimination or hatred towards immigrants, it is simply the president doing his job. His first responsibility is not to bring people in, it is to protect the lives of Americans. Now, that does not mean I am against immigration. I think the fact that our country is seen as a safe haven is phenomenal. But at this point in time, terrorism is a very serious and scary issue. Clearly, countries have made it too easy for terrorist groups to attack within the past few years. All I am able to see are people who enjoy criticizing a man who is only attempting to protect the lives of his citizens. If Trump didn’t create these regulations, and a large scale terrorist attack occurred due to the lack of security, people would still find reasons to attack his decision on not being more careful when it comes to who is crossing our borders. He didn’t randomly select these eight countries. At some point a line must be drawn. Though we are a welcoming country as a whole, we cannot endanger those within our borders. This decision does not make Trump racist, evil, or selfish in anyway. He is playing smart and safe, which is something that should have been done a long time ago. We must protect our own. What other actions could Trump have taken to attempt to ensure the safety of America? Is the fact that he is protecting his people really so terrible? At what point will we as Americans be able to collectively stand up for our country before we welcome dangerous nations with open arms? I agree with you when you said, "Though we are a welcoming country as a whole, we cannot endanger those within our borders." I like that statement, because it's the underlying fact of this entire situation. While we do have that responsibility as Americans to help those who need our help, we cannot forget about the safety of our own people who are already living IN the country. People are criticizing Trump because people will criticize him at any time for anything he does. It's because of the past events with the election and even leading up to the election that Trump has built himself this sort of hole with a large portion of the American people. No matter what he does, good or bad, there will be SOMEONE who disagrees with him. That's not just a matter with the President, it's a matter with everyone in life. You can never make everyone happy. Getting back on the main discussion, I do believe what he did is going to have more pros than cons. If countries are offended or upset in any way because of this, leave it up to them and their own governments to fix THEIR problem. Although I do not particularly support Trump in many subjects, I do not believe he would put a travel ban on a nation without a valid reason. |
|
|
|
Post by Neely on Sept 29, 2017 16:36:27 GMT
President Trump had every right to go forward with this travel ban. This article gave valid reason why the eight countries he had listed are banned. They were either unable or unwilling to give the United States what they needed, such as willingly passing along terrorism and criminal-history information. It is Trump's responsibility to protect this country and that's exactly what he's trying to do. People that disagree with this ban most likely don't look into the topic and just hear things like "Trump is against all Muslims." In the article, a senior administration official tried clearing this up by saying, “The restrictions either previously or now were never, ever ever based on race, religion or creed." Terrorism as been a big thing ever since September 11, 2001. Anything could happen so people can never be too careful. In class it was mentioned that sometimes harsh is needed and is a good thing. It shows that we aren't going to be pushed around, and that America is standing their ground. Why do you think those eight countries wouldn't share certain information?
I have came to the conclusion that the eight countries that were targeted, would not share certain information due to the fact that would get "themselves" as a country in more havoc then necessary. For example, according to USA Today, these countries in particular either do not currently manage and screen their citizens to higher United States standards imposed since Trump took office, or they present bigger "significant risk factors” that require restrictions on their citizens' travel to the United States, the White House said. In Sudan, it is listed as a state sponsor of terrorism, which they continue to be the site of terrorist activity, yet it was taken off the most recent list of six countries barred, for fear of anymore more conflicts. In addition, all these eight countries probably would not share certain information and facts, for fear it would get "them" as a whole, in more legal trouble then what is already occurring. |
|
|
|
Post by Weber on Sept 29, 2017 21:30:50 GMT
I completely agree with the changes of the travel ban. President Trump made a statement that said, "As president, I must act to protect the security and interests of the United States and it's people", referring to the revisions he made on the travel ban. From all the terrorist based attacks and groups across the world, it does make sense why President Trump would be quick to make improved revisions. The ban already included the countries Iraq (taken off the ban) Iran, Sudan (taken off the ban), Somalia, Libya, Yemen, and Syria, now adding Chad, North Korea, and Venezuela as well. The countries already on the ban have shown terrorist based activities which gives reason to be on the ban. This isn't being unfair, it's keeping us safe from terrorist groups from entering our country. The newer one's have been added on because, for one, Chad has failed to give out terrorist-related intelligence even though they are anti terrorism, North Korea has been giving threats to our country, and Venezuela's government and leader have been treating their country and people miserably as well as acting in "dictatorship" ways. These reasons are why they are and should be added to the ban. Even then, the ban is not as harsh as it is being made out to be. First off, people who have visas into the U.S are already exempted of the restrictions as well as having a family member and employment here. Also, the countries that are not on this ban is because they met up to the requests of the U.S that made sure they were able to be trusted into coming into this country, and the same could be said with these countries if they did as well. By "using biometric passports and willingly passing along terrorism and criminal based history", none of this would have became an issue. Since these countries are unwilling to do those requests, they have every right to be put onto the ban.
Why do you think the country Chad has failed to give us information on terrorists even though they are anti-terrorism?
|
|
|
|
Post by Weber on Sept 29, 2017 21:52:47 GMT
I agree with the president’s decision to enforce a travel ban due to the current state of terrorism all over the world. The ban is in place to ensure the safety of the American people, not add to Trump’s list of enemies like the article briefly said. America has been and continues to be a safe haven for anyone needing a new home but the problem arises when people take advantage of our country or fail to comply with our laws and regulations. This is the reason why specific countries are banned and each countrie’s rules vary. The ban is stated in the reading to be situation based and not time based which means any country could be taken off the list if they comply with our government and the citizens do not pose a threat to the American people. With all the terrorist attacks and threats that occur not only in America but also in other countries there is definitely compelling government interest to create this travel ban and enforce it. However there is not compelling interest for a complete shutdown of our borders like the article briefly mentioned the president considered. My question is how would you feel about the ban if you were a citizen of one of the banned countries? Would you feel the same as you do now? If not how would your feelings change and why? If I were a citizen of one of the banned countries, I would feel untrusted and angry at the fact that the U.S places all the people in those countries on the travel ban, since not all of them are being named as terrorists when it's not true. It's hard to understand completely what they are feeling since we are not going through it, but I would find it extremely unfair. |
|
|
|
Post by Weber on Sept 29, 2017 22:00:16 GMT
I concur and comprehend with President Trump's settlement to impose a travel ban because of the current events that comply with terrorism in the world today. Due to having the up rise of terroristic threats and acts of terrorism the United States must be alert and have protection. According to CNN, Trump tweeted, "Making America safe is my number one priority.We will not admit those into our country we cannot safely vet." In a statement that occurred on Sunday night, September 24th 2017 the White House had called for new restrictions as a "critical step establishing an immigration system that protects Americans' safety and security in an era of dangerous terrorism and transnational crime." By the act of disappointing the United States' rules and regulations, this has led to why these certain countries have been banned in Trump's latest attempt. I have concluded that there was no harm in President Trump’s decision with the travel ban against immigrants. Along with Trump’s idea of building a “wall”, he has nothing against the immigrants, but he is fulfilling his duties and responsibilities of being a president for the United States. Why was there not actions and procedures taken before “we” as americans, we targeted with terrorism, such as 9.11.01 or the current situations today? Before the event of 9.11, terrorism was not affecting our country in any means, so we did not have a desire or could see that an event that disastrous could happen. Also, it could show that before then, we had a sense of naivety because since it has never affected us yet, that it never would. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 30, 2017 22:30:52 GMT
From now on:
Instead of hitting the "Quote" button, simply use @thestudents name to signify your reply, this way we will not take up so much space (Thank you Emily Sarver for this idea)
For Example:
@elliotmcillwain I appreciate that you were the first to open discussion.
@10thperiodclass nice job with your detailed posts and your replies to one another.
Both student replies may appear (but are not limited to appear) in the same thread. Meaning, both of your relies can be made at once like the example above. Please make your replies to your peers longer than one sentence though.
Your efforts thus far are making me really excited and thrilled by your participation! Keep it up!
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry on Oct 1, 2017 19:20:02 GMT
pflugh I thing the eight countries withheld information because they either have something to hide or they felt it is not any of Americas business to know that information. Either way it makes those countries look very sketchy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry on Oct 1, 2017 19:30:32 GMT
@novak If the countries on our banned list did ban American travelers I think their action would only cause more harm to them instead of us. The people from America who travel there help their economy and there is no evidence of danger from the average American traveler. Because the countries that we banned are smaller and less advanced than America, if they banned us there would not be a large upset in the way we operate but tension between America and the country would rise.
|
|
|
|
Post by McDermott on Oct 1, 2017 20:56:57 GMT
It is absolutely understandable why President Trump has taken the actions that he has regarding the travel ban. Americans are horrified by the countless terroristic events that have taken place before our eyes. There will never be a way that we can be 100% certain of our safety in this country, but this travel ban will have a huge impact on that. I agree that this is not by any means going to be ideal for these 8 countries, and it hurts to know that innocent people and their families are being robbed of their right to enter the United States. I understand that this is unfair for them. Part of me is thinking, "this negativity and pointing fingers is the cause of all of this in the first place. America is suppose to be a welcoming and safe place for all people." But when it comes to the safety of the American people, there are times when it’s best to think with our heads instead of our hearts. I think we can all agree that President Trump has made various questionable and sometimes inappropriate comments on twitter, but the tweet shared in The Washington Post article is one of the most sensible I have read from him,“Making America Safe is my number one priority. We will not admit those into our country we cannot safely vet.” It is sad that it has come to this, but this travel ban will bring more control over American borders as well as more safety. It’s sickening to know that people today leave their homes, and live in a world where they may never come back. I hope that this travel ban, though understandably frustrating and upsetting to some, will prevent many of these terrible things from happening again.
President Trump had called for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States” during his campaign. How far do you think the president will go with this travel ban? Do you think he will go through with this idea?
|
|
|
|
Post by Callihan on Oct 1, 2017 21:16:16 GMT
I agree with the president’s decision about the travel ban with the current stance of terrorism around the world, not one country can be safe from these attacks. I believe the president was only looking out for the best interest of us American people. As American people who have lived through September 11th these thoughts of “will anything like this happen again” pass through our minds at some point. Even if you have not lived through September 11th you look at the world around us, you see the news and you wonder “will we be next.” With this travel ban it helps make us feel a little safer in that aspect. Also, these countries are only on the list because of them being non-cooperative with our government and if they were to change this they would be taken of the list like Sudan. Every country on this list has made it there because of their own reasons not because Trump is “targeting Muslims.” This idea is backed by the fact that some of the countries on the lists’ primary religion is not Islam. Our president decision was only taking american lives to best interests.
Do you think it is okay for us to judge these countries to be guilty before being innocent? Why?
|
|
|
|
Post by Callihan on Oct 1, 2017 21:22:02 GMT
@mcdermott
I believe the president will do anything in this power to make sure this travel ban will stay running because of how this was one of the big interests people liked about him when he was running.
|
|
|
|
Post by McDermott on Oct 1, 2017 21:24:57 GMT
@elliotmcillwain
I totally see where you're coming from and it would be nice if President Trump would one day consider this viewpoint. However, I think that based off of what he has said and how he has reacted to the terrorists attacks not only in America but around the world as well, the president will never see that side of the situation. It is imperative that he is all for keeping Americans safe and putting our lives first because that is what's most important right now, but part if me does wish that he would consider the opposite side of the argument. This way, there would be a better chance for a more universal solution.
|
|
