Of suspending people traveling into the US from 7 Middle East Countries...a suspension of 90 days.
Do you agree with these diplomats? or do you think they should resign?
I personally think they are not looking out for the American people. It is their primary duty to keep Americans safe. This action is a temporary measure so that we can have a better handle on dealing with refugees and others seeking asylum.
These same diplomats have done little to prevent previous attacks by Al Qaeda and ISIS on US and other European soils. Perhaps they are part of the problem when they refuse to be part of the solution...
What is your opinion?
No they should not be fired. But at best their specialty, diplomacy, can be used to gain assistance from other countries in the physical fight against terrorism. The terrorists themselves aren't much interested in diplomacy, not when the stated goal is the eradication of every human being that doesn't embrace their version of religion. You are either a Muslim accepting their (terrorist) version of Islam or you are dead; anything else is unacceptable.
Here is link to article in case you missed it -
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/30/politics/ … index.html
As I would have expected: long on talk and short on actions. But that's what we hire diplomats to do - talk their way out of trouble. It's why they are there, and we need them to to keep on doing that.
Unfortunately, that means that those same diplomats will refuse to acknowledge that talk cannot solve the problem of militants who demand no less than extermination of every human being not under their control. There is nothing to negotiate, no concessions to be made and no cooperation possible.
Useful in a great many areas, then, but utterly useless in dealing with terrorism for there is nothing to talk about.
by Ralph Deeds6 years ago
Here is a list from the latest issue of The Nation of a number of interesting revelations culled from media reports on WikiLeaks's leaks:-The Saudis, our allies, are among the leading funders of international...
by My Esoteric4 hours ago
My thought is No, they should go ahead and filibuster Judge Gorsuch now and not wait. The fear of filibustering now is that the Rs might use the "Nuclear Option" - using a simple majority to change...
by Don W7 weeks ago
Call me simplistic, but doesn't the 2017 executive order break the law?Executive Order, Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into The United States, 2017:"Sec. 3. Suspension of Issuance of Visas and...
by My Esoteric4 weeks ago
Donald Trump has been President for 14 days now. In that time he has issued around 14 executive orders, most of which impact the world.The American polls show over 50% of America think Trump is doing a poor...
by ahorseback2 weeks ago
Ultra-libs are actually not only calling for but, actively bringing " Blood into the Streets " politics to America's main streets , It has arrived ! Loretta...
by Jack Lee5 weeks ago
This ruling is an over reach by our courts to co opt the powers of the Executive branch.When did our courts and judges stop reading our Constitution? They are suppose to rule based on the Constitution, instead they have...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.