Could you please quote specific things that I said and respond to them? I really can't tell if you are even reading the content of my posts. I don't think I proposed that.Josh wrote:What Bootstrap is proposing is entirely different; I think he is saying he wants America to aggressively invite non-American people to America who have no connection to America. That’s very different from the Israeli way of doing things.
Bunny trail on borders
Re: Bunny trail on borders
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Re: Bunny trail on borders
Because America stands for something very different than many countries. We have been a leader of the world community, negotiating to get many countries to care for refugees when a crisis like this occurs, and now we are suddenly withdrawing from what we have built.Josh wrote:The question I am raising is why America has the duty to do so, when a country that is smack dab in the middle of the Middle East sets a very, very different policy.
Ronald Reagan understood this. Have you read his farewell address?
If we stop caring about American values, we lose a lot.Ronald Reagan wrote: I've been reflecting on what the past eight years have meant, and mean. And the image that comes to mind like a refrain is a nautical one - a small story about a big ship, and a refugee, and a sailor.
It was back in the early Eighties, at the height of the boat people, and the sailor was hard at work on the carrier Midway, which was patrolling the South China Sea. The sailor, like most American servicemen, was young, smart and fiercely observant. The crew spied on the horizon a leaky little boat - and crammed inside were refugees from Indochina hoping to get to America. The Midway sent a small launch to bring them to the ship, and safety. As the refugees made their way through the choppy seas, one spied the sailor on deck, and stood up and called out to him. He yelled, "Hello, American sailor - Hello, Freedom Man."
A small moment with a big meaning, a moment the sailor, who wrote it in a letter, couldn't get out of his mind. And, when I saw it, neither could I.
Because that's what it has to - it was to be an American in the 1980's; We stood, again, for freedom. I know we always have but in the past few years the world - again, and in a way, we ourselves - rediscovered it.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Re: Bunny trail on borders
I remembered that Reagan had to deal with sudden influxes of refugees, so I thought I would look up his response. I found it here.
I think those are the principles that the United States has followed during my lifetime, leading other countries to share this responsibility. Take a look at the entire document I point to here, would you disagree with it? If so, which parts do you find problematic? I think this document represents what I would call the mainstream traditional view of how to deal with refugees and immigration as long as I have been alive.Reagan wrote:Our nation is a nation of immigrants. More than any other country, our strength comes from our own immigrant heritage and our capacity to welcome those from other lands. No free and prosperous nation can by itself accommodate all those who seek a better life or flee persecution. We must share this responsibility with other countries.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
- Josh
- Posts: 24926
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
- Location: 1000' ASL
- Affiliation: The church of God
Re: Bunny trail on borders
I think one of America's problems is that we think we're a "leader" and we "negotiate" to get other countries to do something (often that "negotiation" is at the end of a gun barrel). The reason there is so much displacement of refugees in the Middle East is directly tied to U.S. policy. We should have:Bootstrap wrote:Because America stands for something very different than many countries. We have been a leader of the world community, negotiating to get many countries to care for refugees when a crisis like this occurs, and now we are suddenly withdrawing from what we have built.Josh wrote:The question I am raising is why America has the duty to do so, when a country that is smack dab in the middle of the Middle East sets a very, very different policy.
1. Not invaded Iraq
2. Not created ISIS by destabilising Iraq
3. Not destabilised Syria by helping create ISIS
We should focus a lot more on what we need to do at home and a lot less on trying to play chess on an international scale.
I'm not a fan of Ronald Reagan at all and don't look up to him as a moral example or an example of good policy. His main god seemed to be the almighty dollar, and under his watch illegal immigration skyrocketed.Ronald Reagan understood this. Have you read his farewell address?
0 x
Re: Bunny trail on borders
But a great deal of diplomacy involves moral leadership and building relationships over time. The United States has greatly increased its influence because many countries think of us as a fair and honest broker, at least compared to other countries. Nobody thinks we are perfect, but if they have to decide who to deal with, we have been a good choice. If you don't have good diplomacy, you wind up using the military more than you would otherwise. Generals are fond of saying that you can't possibly pay for a military that could make up for bad diplomacy.Josh wrote:I think one of America's problems is that we think we're a "leader" and we "negotiate" to get other countries to do something (often that "negotiation" is at the end of a gun barrel).Bootstrap wrote:Because America stands for something very different than many countries. We have been a leader of the world community, negotiating to get many countries to care for refugees when a crisis like this occurs, and now we are suddenly withdrawing from what we have built.
OK, so we helped create this problem. Could we perhaps try to help some of the refugees displaced by it?Josh wrote:The reason there is so much displacement of refugees in the Middle East is directly tied to U.S. policy. We should have:
1. Not invaded Iraq
2. Not created ISIS by destabilising Iraq
3. Not destabilised Syria by helping create ISIS
We should focus a lot more on what we need to do at home and a lot less on trying to play chess on an international scale.
Are you saying you do object to his guidelines for immigration and refugees? Is there any president since World War 2 whose policies you would endorse?Josh wrote:I'm not a fan of Ronald Reagan at all and don't look up to him as a moral example or an example of good policy. His main god seemed to be the almighty dollar, and under his watch illegal immigration skyrocketed.Ronald Reagan understood this. Have you read his farewell address?
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
-
- Posts: 2526
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:41 pm
- Affiliation: MidWest Fellowship
Re: Bunny trail on borders
Not just European, although that may be the largest source of what they prefer to take in. Those close by come from the very people who are trying to destroy Israel, although anti-semitism is increasingly alive and well in Europe and elsewhere.Josh wrote:Okay, then let's look at it this way. Israel is a 1st world country which sets its refugee and immigration policy such that they encouraged refugees that are the ethnic mix they want, or the same as the current ethnic mix of the country. So European background refugees were encouraged.silentreader wrote:In the actual meaning of 'refugees', that, however, is what the vast percentage of them are.
An equivalent thing in America would be if we required refugees to come in from different ethnic backgrounds in equal numbers to the ethnic groups already established in America. Of course, America would never do that. The question I am raising is why America has the duty to do so, when a country that is smack dab in the middle of the Middle East sets a very, very different policy.
For another example of a country that is large, wealthy, yet does almost nothing for refugees in its back yard, look at Saudi Arabia. Most Syrians are Sunni Muslim, including a lot of refugees. Saudi Arabia is a friendly place for Sunni Muslims. Both countries speak Arabic. So why aren't they eagerly welcoming refugees into their borders, but instead pushing the problem to Lebanon, Turkey, and Europe?
Saudi Arabia, though, good question, are they sensitive to the probability of de-stabilization?
0 x
Noah was a conspiracy theorist...and then it began to rain.~Unknown
- Josh
- Posts: 24926
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
- Location: 1000' ASL
- Affiliation: The church of God
Re: Bunny trail on borders
Destabilisation by accepting Sunni Arab Muslims into a Sunni Arab Muslim country?silentreader wrote:Saudi Arabia, though, good question, are they sensitive to the probability of de-stabilization?
0 x
-
- Posts: 2526
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:41 pm
- Affiliation: MidWest Fellowship
Re: Bunny trail on borders
Far as I know most doesn't mean all.silentreader wrote:Not just European, although that may be the largest source of what they prefer to take in. Those close by come from the very people who are trying to destroy Israel, although anti-semitism is increasingly alive and well in Europe and elsewhere.Josh wrote:Okay, then let's look at it this way. Israel is a 1st world country which sets its refugee and immigration policy such that they encouraged refugees that are the ethnic mix they want, or the same as the current ethnic mix of the country. So European background refugees were encouraged.silentreader wrote:In the actual meaning of 'refugees', that, however, is what the vast percentage of them are.
An equivalent thing in America would be if we required refugees to come in from different ethnic backgrounds in equal numbers to the ethnic groups already established in America. Of course, America would never do that. The question I am raising is why America has the duty to do so, when a country that is smack dab in the middle of the Middle East sets a very, very different policy.
For another example of a country that is large, wealthy, yet does almost nothing for refugees in its back yard, look at Saudi Arabia. Most Syrians are Sunni Muslim, including a lot of refugees. Saudi Arabia is a friendly place for Sunni Muslims. Both countries speak Arabic. So why aren't they eagerly welcoming refugees into their borders, but instead pushing the problem to Lebanon, Turkey, and Europe?
Saudi Arabia, though, good question, are they sensitive to the probability of de-stabilization?
0 x
Noah was a conspiracy theorist...and then it began to rain.~Unknown
-
- Posts: 2526
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:41 pm
- Affiliation: MidWest Fellowship