The God Emperor has only been in office for a few weeks, there are still 8 years left of his presidency, but he's already doing what he promised he would do and he's doing these things better than expected. I was a reluctant Trump supporter during his campaign because even though I didn't agree with him on everything, he was the most liberal candidate (classical liberal, not retard liberal)
I have yet to see any valid criticism of Trump coming from anti-Trumpers, the best they can come up with can be summed up as 'everyone who disagrees with us is a Nazi, let's act like fascists against them'
There is some valid criticism coming from Trump supporters, such as that the things he has done may seem a bit rushed, which I agreed with at first, but even then the damage coming from what Trump has done has been minimal while the benefits could be yuge in the long run, which is probably why he's the president and I'm a mere follower of Kek.
Overall I'm very pleased with both the God Emperor's work so far as well as the Keks that he has provided and if it weren't for the rioters terrorizing people in the streets then I would say that the future is looking bright.
(http://i.imgur.com/Zelksmi.jpg)
#PraiseKek #FreeKekistan
The God Emperor has only been in office for a few weeks, there are still 8 years left of his presidency, but he's already doing what he promised he would do and he's doing these things better than expected. I was a reluctant Trump supporter during his campaign because even though I didn't agree with him on everything, he was the most liberal candidate (classical liberal, not retard liberal)8 years?
I have yet to see any valid criticism of Trump coming from anti-Trumpers, the best they can come up with can be summed up as 'everyone who disagrees with us is a Nazi, let's act like fascists against them'
There is some valid criticism coming from Trump supporters, such as that the things he has done may seem a bit rushed, which I agreed with at first, but even then the damage coming from what Trump has done has been minimal while the benefits could be yuge in the long run, which is probably why he's the president and I'm a mere follower of Kek.
Overall I'm very pleased with both the God Emperor's work so far as well as the Keks that he has provided and if it weren't for the rioters terrorizing people in the streets then I would say that the future is looking bright.
(http://i.imgur.com/Zelksmi.jpg)
#PraiseKek #FreeKekistan
perhaps I'm stating the obvious, if not then just count it as my opinion. here's what I think; American presidents have only so little power if you ask me. why do I think so? since ever the people who controlled most of the US eco were and are the rich people (mostly jewish) , which makes the whole thing self explanatory. if you do something that will affect the riches in a bad way that's potentially affecting the economy and the opposite is true , which led to the development of a never changing system that stayed until today.
for each and every president goes the same criteria, but each president is assigned a role. here's a small example:-
-Obama "the good president" prevents Iraqi immigrants to enter the U.S. (secretly)
-Trump prevents initially called "Muslim countries", and finally "potentially terrorist countries". ( the so called promise).
Conclusion: immigrants have so many times proven to be a bad effect to the economy, in 2011 when Obama prevented Iraqi immigrants from entering US, Iraq at that time was one of the most needy.now if you look at the list of the countries Trump banned you will clearly see that it's a war-filled countries that mostly produce immigrants along with Iran for different reasons.
Now don't rage for no reason and start spitting bullshit, that was by all means my opinion. it's entirely up to you to think however you want of it, and I'm open for debates about it.
(http://i.imgur.com/cgPH4k1.jpg?1) | God Emperor Trump didn't even mention the countries. The law that the God Emperor signed references to a law that Obamer created, which considered these countries potential threats because they either don't have a stable government or don't have a government that we can trust. The reason why this is a problem is because during the vetting process of immigrants the US does not do background checks on the people that are coming here, the countries where they're coming from do and the US looks over the information that these countries provide. If we can't trust the information that these countries provide then we can't take immigrants from them. |
lmfaoperhaps I'm stating the obvious, if not then just count it as my opinion. here's what I think; American presidents have only so little power if you ask me. why do I think so? since ever the people who controlled most of the US eco were and are the rich people (mostly jewish) , which makes the whole thing self explanatory. if you do something that will affect the riches in a bad way that's potentially affecting the economy and the opposite is true , which led to the development of a never changing system that stayed until today.
for each and every president goes the same criteria, but each president is assigned a role. here's a small example:-
-Obama "the good president" prevents Iraqi immigrants to enter the U.S. (secretly)
-Trump prevents initially called "Muslim countries", and finally "potentially terrorist countries". ( the so called promise).
Conclusion: immigrants have so many times proven to be a bad effect to the economy, in 2011 when Obama prevented Iraqi immigrants from entering US, Iraq at that time was one of the most needy.now if you look at the list of the countries Trump banned you will clearly see that it's a war-filled countries that mostly produce immigrants along with Iran for different reasons.
Now don't rage for no reason and start spitting bullshit, that was by all means my opinion. it's entirely up to you to think however you want of it, and I'm open for debates about it.
Adding to that:And just to be clear, this was never a Muslim ban, that's the leftist media narrative.
(http://i.imgur.com/cgPH4k1.jpg?1) God Emperor Trump didn't even mention the countries.
The law that the God Emperor signed references to a law that Obamer created, which considered these countries potential threats because they either don't have a stable government or don't have a government that we can trust.
The reason why this is a problem is because during the vetting process of immigrants the US does not do background checks on the people that are coming here, the countries where they're coming from do and the US looks over the information that these countries provide.
If we can't trust the information that these countries provide then we can't take immigrants from them.
If this was a Muslim ban then it would've included countries that have more Muslims than these countries.
Indonesia alone has roughly the same amount of Muslims that all of the countries, that the God Emperor banned immigration from, have combined.
Just wanted to clarify that it's not the immigrants that are the problem, it's the (lack of) government in these countries.
Conclusion: immigrants have so many times proven to be a bad effect to the economy,
all of these are true and I 100% agree with them all, and for the sake of it I'll say it again, the banned countries are war-filled countries.
Conclusion: immigrants have so many times proven to be a bad effect to the economy,
@Rocklal, Ukraine is also 'war-filled' country, should have banned them also? Many arabic countries including UAE have way over 50% of immigrants. Not to mention Singapore who is thriving with its almost 50% immigration rate.once again, in the beginning this was called a "Muslim ban", and after banning these 7 countries it was changed to "preventing potential danger", oh? then why not ban Saudi Arabia the nest for the terrorists>>>>>> same reason for not banning other countries, if that's not the case for Ukraine then its still debatable, because neither one of us knows about whether this was true or not, (we are debating theories here you know).
This debate is really fascinating so please if you could, try to organise your arguments a little better. It's kind of hard to keep track of what are you trying to say.@Rocklal, Ukraine is also 'war-filled' country, should have banned them also? Many arabic countries including UAE have way over 50% of immigrants. Not to mention Singapore who is thriving with its almost 50% immigration rate.once again, in the beginning this was called a "Muslim ban", and after banning these 7 countries it was changed to "preventing potential danger", oh? then why not ban Saudi Arabia the nest for the terrorists>>>>>> same reason for not banning other countries, if that's not the case for Ukraine then its still debatable, because neither one of us knows about whether this was true or not, (we are debating theories here you know).
now for your second point about, UAE don't have over 50% illegal immigrants, I would bet that most of them are workers and buisnessmen. well for now I have to go
This debate is really fascinating so please if you could, try to organise your arguments a little better. It's kind of hard to keep track of what are you trying to say.
Trump stated the idea behind the ban as "protection from foreign terrorist entries." Yet he failed to realise that many families who already had permits to live in the states were also denied access to their homes. This left people feeling discriminated and hence naming the ban "muslim ban." The ban was rushed and very robust way to deal with the potential threat of terrorism in the United States. Remember 9/11? The most devastating act of terrorism in the 21st century? 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Was Saudi Arabia one of the 7 countries banned? No.
"if that's not the case for Ukraine then its still debatable, because neither one of us knows about whether this was true or not" Please clarify that, I'd love to weigh in on the Ukraine subject.
And I never talked about illegal immigrants. That's the issue, governments are yet to find a way to blend in immigrants into our society. Make them work, make them pay the taxes. To stop immigrants from radicalising you have to make them feel as part of the society. And hence Singapore and UAE come into play.
Ukraine is not in war with US (while the countries from where immigration was banned are)Say what. In what world are these 7 countries "in war with US?"
Trump has implied that he may be willing to lift sanctions against Russia if Russia pulls its troops from UkraineActually more recently the US clearly stated that the sanctions against Russia will be lifted only once Crimea is returned to Ukraine.
The sanctions against Russia have hurt European countries more than they've hurt Russia itself. They're fully capable of surviving all by themselves because of how massive they are. Most of the Eastern European countries are having recession, Finland included, because of how big object of export Russia is.The sanctions have hurt European countries - yes
I also don't want to say straight up banning all immigrant from those countries is a good thing, but looking at how many terrorist attacks we saw in Europe last year, you can't possibly deny that tightening up the immigration policy isn't a completely bad thing.
US has a very thorough and secure vetting system and it can take up to 10 years to immigrate to the Murica.No, it doesn't, background checks are done by the countries where they're coming from, these countries give the information to the US and people working in US read the information that they provide, there are other steps but this is the one that's supposed to catch the terrorists, if the US can't trust the countries where these people are coming from, perhaps because US has been sending drone strikes on these countries, then there's no reason to assume that any of that information is accurate. The amount of time it could take to immigrate is irrelevant, because they are not spending these years doing background checks.
Now think that you finally have passed all the requirements to immigrate to the US and then they just tell you to piss off for no reason whatsoever. Also it bans people from enetering the USA who had a green card and were out of the country for some reason. The whole system is based on being guilty until proven innocent.Minor inconvenience.
The whole system is based on being guilty until proven innocent.Sure, why not? The people wanting to go to US are not citizens, they don't have any rights to go to US. Also that's how it works with every country, that's the whole reason they ask the country where the immigrant is coming from to do a background check on the person and 'prove them innocent' before they're allowed entry.
Yet its a lot easier to get a gun than immigrate to the USA. Perhaps we're focusing on the wrong problem?No, a law for gun control in the US would be impossible to enforce, there are too many guns, take away a million guns and you would change nothing, take away 2 million, still nothing, take away 5 million, nothing. Could they confiscate a million guns? No way, the riots would be worse than the ones from the Antifa that are going on right now.
You call my statement a weak argument meanwhile you bring Justin Bieber into the conversation? Neither Hitler nor Justin Bieber committed an act of violence in which thousands of people were killed on US soil.I already explained that the countries were not named because of what people from these countries had done in the past, but instead Obama named them because these countries are in war with the US.
And no, it is not a weak argument as Saudi Arabia is still considered one of the funders behind Al-Qaeda, which by the way is a terrorist group and therefore a potential threat to the United States.Since 1979 US funded and armed Afghan Jihadists which contributed to the creation of Al-Qaeda, why don't you blame Obama for not naming US as a country of concern? Also how would banning immigration from Saudi Arabia stop them from funding Al-Qaeda? It wouldn't and that's why it's a weak argument. Just like with Ukraine, this is not the way to deal with this issue. These issues need to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
Obama only named these 7 countries as "countries of concern." The ban itself came from Trump administration.That's what I said, Trump did not name these countries, why are you blaming Trump for the countries that were picked when it was Obama who picked them? I also explained why a temporary ban may be a smart move, I don't know if the pros outweigh the cons or not but the point is that there are pros and cons, he had to make a decision and no one knows whether it was the right one.
Say what. In what world are these 7 countries "in war with US?"In this one, Obama's was ordering drone strikes on all of them except for Sudan. If that's not war then I don't know what is. It's fairly reasonable to expect that some people from these countries would try to kill Americans and that these countries would be willing to help with that.
Actually more recently the US clearly stated that the sanctions against Russia will be lifted only once Crimea is returned to Ukraine.Same thing. There's no point in banning Ukraine, because it's an ally of US, the countries that Obama was bombing are not.
instead Obama named them because these countries are in war with the USNo, Obama also named those countries because of the "threat of foreign terrorist fighters."
why don't you blame Obama for not naming US as a country of concern?I assume you're being ironic here and I'm not even going to continue that one.
Also how would banning immigration from Saudi Arabia stop them from funding Al-Qaeda?In a perfect world Saudi Arabia would want to keep the good relations with US and cut the funding of Al-Qaeda in order to show that they value western politics.
why are you blaming Trump for the countries that were picked when it was Obama who picked them?I'm not blaming Trump for picking the countries. I'm blaming him for banning whole countries from entering the states including people who already had permits to live there. There are more humane ways to deal with immigration than straight up ban.
If that's not war then I don't know what is.So in your opinion Estonian Republic was in war with Iraq and Afghanistan also?
yeah that's what I was saying, but it's just my bad habit that made this complicated. what I was saying is that a really high possibility for why trump never banned Saudi-Arabia is because they have economic relations for oil and suchThis debate is really fascinating so please if you could, try to organise your arguments a little better. It's kind of hard to keep track of what are you trying to say.@Rocklal, Ukraine is also 'war-filled' country, should have banned them also? Many arabic countries including UAE have way over 50% of immigrants. Not to mention Singapore who is thriving with its almost 50% immigration rate.once again, in the beginning this was called a "Muslim ban", and after banning these 7 countries it was changed to "preventing potential danger", oh? then why not ban Saudi Arabia the nest for the terrorists>>>>>> same reason for not banning other countries, if that's not the case for Ukraine then its still debatable, because neither one of us knows about whether this was true or not, (we are debating theories here you know).
now for your second point about, UAE don't have over 50% illegal immigrants, I would bet that most of them are workers and buisnessmen. well for now I have to go
Trump stated the idea behind the ban as "protection from foreign terrorist entries." Yet he failed to realise that many families who already had permits to live in the states were also denied access to their homes. This left people feeling discriminated and hence naming the ban "muslim ban." The ban was rushed and very robust way to deal with the potential threat of terrorism in the United States. Remember 9/11? The most devastating act of terrorism in the 21st century? 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Was Saudi Arabia one of the 7 countries banned? No.
"if that's not the case for Ukraine then its still debatable, because neither one of us knows about whether this was true or not" Please clarify that, I'd love to weigh in on the Ukraine subject.
And I never talked about illegal immigrants. That's the issue, governments are yet to find a way to blend in immigrants into our society. Make them work, make them pay the taxes. To stop immigrants from radicalising you have to make them feel as part of the society. And hence Singapore and UAE come into play.
ShadilayFreekekistan
FAHAD do you want to go behind the sun in a black GMC???I do not care, And I do not give a fuck.
We don't care about Tramp and will never care. you all should know that trump needs us how we need America.
FAHAD do you want to go behind the sun in a black GMC???I do not care, And I do not give a fuck.
We don't care about Tramp and will never care. you all should know that trump needs us how we need America.
Go report to them if you want to Saif.
(https://i.imgur.com/Bx315mG.png)unfortunately, being popular doesn't mean being bright.