6 ms·

Trivia: the specific seven countries are ones deemed by DHS to be "high risk" in February 2016, during the Obama administration, so it's not an arbitrary pick b

Trivia: the specific seven countries are ones deemed by DHS to be "high risk" in February 2016, during the Obama administration, so it's not an arbitrary pick by Trump [1]: "Have you traveled to, or been present in, Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, or Yemen..." [1] https://www.cbp.gov/travel/international-visitors/visa-waiver-program/visa-waiver-program-improvement-and-terrorist-travel-prevention-act-faq https://www.cbp.gov/travel/international-visitors/visa-waive...

grzm 10y ago
so it's not arbitrary action by Trump The choice of countries may not be arbitrary. The Executive Order is most definitely Trump's choice. Edit: My parent has since changed the quoted section to "so it's not an arbitrary pick by Trump".
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- geezerjay 10y ago
  > The choice of countries may not be arbitrary. The Executive Order is most definitely Trump's choice. The distance between declaring a whole nation to be "high risk" and refusing entry to those coming from those "high risk" nations is very slim. It would be understandable if there was any backlash or public outcry against labeling whole nations and all people passing through them as being "high risk", but there was none. As there was zero oucry, this sounds a whole lot more like partisan, kneejerk anti-Trump rants than anything else. Perhaps this is only a wakeup call for americans to take a long hard look at their immigration and foreign relations policies, which have been put in place since the early 2000s. Trump hasn't revolutionized anything. If anything, he is only directing attention to what the US has been continuously doing since then.
facetube 10y ago
It is arbitrary. He is engaging in collective punishment – holding those hostage who are lawful residents, including those who have already been thoroughly vetted over multiple years. This will result in loss of life, loss of income, and intangible suffering on the part of families and children. Some of those being blocked have specifically assisted the United States in its war on ISIS, and are now under threat specifically because of this.
551199 10y ago
Obama administration bombed every one of those countries in 2016 to the tune of 72 bombs per day (some this year as well). Might make some sense why those countries were selected..[0] [0]http://blogs.cfr.org/zenko/2017/01/05/bombs-dropped-in-2016/ http://blogs.cfr.org/zenko/2017/01/05/bombs-dropped-in-2016/ Edit: I get several downvotes for stating a fact? Please.
- rjtobin 10y ago
  Well, not Iran (thankfully)
- achamayou 10y ago
  With the notable exception of Iran, with which diplomatic relationships had improved to a significant extent following the creation of the nuclear framework.
- potatosoup 10y ago
  I'm sorry you're being downvoted (even though you're off by a couple of countries). These were useful and scary stats. 26,000+ bombs...
- lend000 10y ago
  There's a lot of denial on HN about the magnitude of Obama's foreign policy belligerence. I guess it challenges Dem's beliefs that he was a 'good' president, since foreign policy is the one item that is fully attributable to the POTUS.
  - Mithaldu 10y ago
    Please be more detailed. How is it belligerence? Is he doing it against these countries' governments' wishes? From all i can glean https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_Joint_Task_Force_–_Operation_Inherent_Resolve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_Joint_Task_Force_–_Op... is aimed against terrorist and rebel organizations, in cooperation with 58 other countries, while the entire world is screaming at the USA to finally destroy those terrorist organizations. Particularly in Iraq this is being done in cooperation with the iraq government as well. And from what i hear from friends who read more about this the usa is actively by the countries in question to help their efforts by doing these things. So where exactly does the belligerence come in?

grzm 10y ago

so it's not arbitrary action by Trump The choice of countries may not be arbitrary. The Executive Order is most definitely Trump's choice. Edit: My parent has since changed the quoted section to "so it's not an arbitrary pick by Trump".

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
geezerjay 10y ago
> The choice of countries may not be arbitrary. The Executive Order is most definitely Trump's choice. The distance between declaring a whole nation to be "high risk" and refusing entry to those coming from those "high risk" nations is very slim. It would be understandable if there was any backlash or public outcry against labeling whole nations and all people passing through them as being "high risk", but there was none. As there was zero oucry, this sounds a whole lot more like partisan, kneejerk anti-Trump rants than anything else. Perhaps this is only a wakeup call for americans to take a long hard look at their immigration and foreign relations policies, which have been put in place since the early 2000s. Trump hasn't revolutionized anything. If anything, he is only directing attention to what the US has been continuously doing since then.

facetube 10y ago

It is arbitrary. He is engaging in collective punishment – holding those hostage who are lawful residents, including those who have already been thoroughly vetted over multiple years. This will result in loss of life, loss of income, and intangible suffering on the part of families and children. Some of those being blocked have specifically assisted the United States in its war on ISIS, and are now under threat specifically because of this.

551199 10y ago

Obama administration bombed every one of those countries in 2016 to the tune of 72 bombs per day (some this year as well). Might make some sense why those countries were selected..[0] [0]http://blogs.cfr.org/zenko/2017/01/05/bombs-dropped-in-2016/ http://blogs.cfr.org/zenko/2017/01/05/bombs-dropped-in-2016/ Edit: I get several downvotes for stating a fact? Please.

rjtobin 10y ago
Well, not Iran (thankfully)
achamayou 10y ago
With the notable exception of Iran, with which diplomatic relationships had improved to a significant extent following the creation of the nuclear framework.
potatosoup 10y ago
I'm sorry you're being downvoted (even though you're off by a couple of countries). These were useful and scary stats. 26,000+ bombs...
lend000 10y ago
There's a lot of denial on HN about the magnitude of Obama's foreign policy belligerence. I guess it challenges Dem's beliefs that he was a 'good' president, since foreign policy is the one item that is fully attributable to the POTUS.
- Mithaldu 10y ago
  Please be more detailed. How is it belligerence? Is he doing it against these countries' governments' wishes? From all i can glean https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_Joint_Task_Force_–_Operation_Inherent_Resolve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_Joint_Task_Force_–_Op... is aimed against terrorist and rebel organizations, in cooperation with 58 other countries, while the entire world is screaming at the USA to finally destroy those terrorist organizations. Particularly in Iraq this is being done in cooperation with the iraq government as well. And from what i hear from friends who read more about this the usa is actively by the countries in question to help their efforts by doing these things. So where exactly does the belligerence come in?