3 ms·

A lot of the talk has come from the man himself (this is from 2015, but still) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/12/08/donald-trump-say

A lot of the talk has come from the man himself (this is from 2015, but still) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/12/08/donald-trump-says-he-is-not-bothered-by-comparisons-to-hitler/?tid=sm_fb https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/12... Stephanopoulos responded: "You want to bring back policies like that?" After a pause, Trump responded: "No, I don't to bring it back, George. At all. I don't like doing it at all. It's a temporary measure until our representatives, many of whom are grossly incompetent, until our representatives can figure out what's going on."

teddyh 10y ago
“It” in this case seems to refer to the “ban on Muslims entering United States”, not any internment?
- roywiggins 10y ago
  My reading is the most likely "it" in context is restricting the freedom of movement of ethnic minorities that he mentions immediately before: "They went through a whole list of things -- they couldn't go five miles from their homes, they weren't allowed to use radios, flashlights," Trump said. Maybe he means "Hey, if that's legal than my policy is less bad and therefore legal too" which is only marginally reassuring. Citing internment as a necessary tactic in wartime as a moral justification for your policy is plenty worrying on its own. "Look how generous I am- I'm not actually interning people, just X. I don't like it, but it's a time of war, so it's necessary."
- gnu8 10y ago
  It's hard to develop a clear impression of what Donald Trump's position really is from that interview. He wants to sound like a hard liner who will be tough on muslim immigrants, but he also won't allow himself to be cornered into stating that he wants to take any explicitly repressive measure, like a religious ban on immigration, registration, or internment. So he winds up saying nothing at all. The reason he is so creepy is that he either has no policies or refuses to articulate them.
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    A quote from the article: "The very fact that no sabotage has taken place to date is a disturbing and confirming indication that such action will be taken." Seems surprisingly similar to your comment, albeit with a different target.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
- okreallywtf 10y ago
  I'm not given to slippery slope arguments but in terms of civil liberties and emotion/fear based decisions this seems to be a fair use. A ban is just a first step, as it validates the perception of danger it will not do much to reduce mistrust of muslims already here and all it would take would be a single attack possibly to shift public perception away from a ban and to more drastic measures. That is why we should not relax and assume the best when there are so many parallels to past atrocities.

teddyh 10y ago

“It” in this case seems to refer to the “ban on Muslims entering United States”, not any internment?

roywiggins 10y ago
My reading is the most likely "it" in context is restricting the freedom of movement of ethnic minorities that he mentions immediately before: "They went through a whole list of things -- they couldn't go five miles from their homes, they weren't allowed to use radios, flashlights," Trump said. Maybe he means "Hey, if that's legal than my policy is less bad and therefore legal too" which is only marginally reassuring. Citing internment as a necessary tactic in wartime as a moral justification for your policy is plenty worrying on its own. "Look how generous I am- I'm not actually interning people, just X. I don't like it, but it's a time of war, so it's necessary."
gnu8 10y ago
It's hard to develop a clear impression of what Donald Trump's position really is from that interview. He wants to sound like a hard liner who will be tough on muslim immigrants, but he also won't allow himself to be cornered into stating that he wants to take any explicitly repressive measure, like a religious ban on immigration, registration, or internment. So he winds up saying nothing at all. The reason he is so creepy is that he either has no policies or refuses to articulate them.
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  A quote from the article: "The very fact that no sabotage has taken place to date is a disturbing and confirming indication that such action will be taken." Seems surprisingly similar to your comment, albeit with a different target.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
okreallywtf 10y ago
I'm not given to slippery slope arguments but in terms of civil liberties and emotion/fear based decisions this seems to be a fair use. A ban is just a first step, as it validates the perception of danger it will not do much to reduce mistrust of muslims already here and all it would take would be a single attack possibly to shift public perception away from a ban and to more drastic measures. That is why we should not relax and assume the best when there are so many parallels to past atrocities.