CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Should the U.S. bar Muslims to stop ISIS?
“Donald J Trump is
calling for a total and complete shut down of Muslims entering the United
States until our country’s representatives can figure out what the hell is
going on”. This was proposed by presidential candidate, Donald Trump.. So the question is, is he right? Will a bar of Muslims from the U.S. help destroy ISIS? What do you all think?
You'll notice we aren't all about to die, you know. Terrorism has done very little damage to this country, especially compared to every-day issues such as vehicle related deaths, violent crime and illness.
Hmm....we have a massive obesity epidemic that is killing hundreds of thousands. Should we outlaw high-fat foods?
"It's America's safety first, everything else, a distant second"?
Or is it just those brown people we can suspend the Constitution for?
That's fine until you happen to be the one who has their legs blown off or sees the remains of one or more of your loved ones splattered all over the street in a bloody and mangled mess as a result of imported Muslim terrorist activity. The degree of liberalism afforded to any problem is always in direct proportion to the distance from the said problem. There is an argument that people have the right to decide to eat, smoke or drink themselves to death, but no one has the right to slaughter innocent men woman woman and children in the pursuance of a political/religious ideology. You ask, should we outlaw high-fat foods? Of course we should, as well as placing a ban on the sale of foods with high sugar and salt content, as is happening now in the U.K. Anyone who fosters the influx of Muslims is complicit in the terrorists crimes which they will, without a doubt, commit. You will be reading about the next Muslim atrocity soon and can feel smug about how liberal the American Government is in permitting such filth to have access to slaughtering it's citizens, providing it's not you or anyone close to you.
That's fine until you happen to be the one who has their legs blown off or sees the remains of one or more of your loved ones splattered all over the street in a bloody and mangled mess as a result of imported Muslim terrorist activity.
A pathetic response. Millions of people see their loved ones harmed or killed for every-day reasons and we don't care, yet we freak the fuck out over something that isn't actually happening? That's stupid.
The degree of liberalism afforded to any problem is always in direct proportion to the distance from the said problem.
He says to someone who lives near one of the larger Syrian refugee populations in the states.
There is an argument that people have the right to decide to eat, smoke or drink themselves to death, but no one has the right to slaughter innocent men woman woman and children in the pursuance of a political/religious ideology.
You'll note they aren't doing that here. Funny, eh?
You ask, should we outlaw high-fat foods? Of course we should, as well as placing a ban on the sale of foods with high sugar and salt content, as is happening now in the U.K. Anyone who fosters the influx of Muslims is complicit in the terrorists crimes which they will, without a doubt, commit.
At least you are consistent. Idiotic, but consistent.
You will be reading about the next Muslim atrocity soon and can feel smug about how liberal the American Government is in permitting such filth to have access to slaughtering it's citizens, providing it's not you or anyone close to you.
You guys have been saying that for 15 years. Aren't you embarrassed at this point?
Well piggy wiggy, even though you're not worth bothering with I will nevertheless, on this occasion quote that very appropriate and in your case, most applicable adage, ''what else can you expect from a pig but a grunt. As grunts go and grunts come, your grunt was a pretty good grunt, for a disabled and aging pig. All your verbal pig's swill is contaminating, what is otherwise a better than average forum for reasoned debate. Why don't you go and oink somewhere else with your irrational harangues which are as persuasive as a series of burps and farts. You would be a great subject for a week-end convention of psychologists and psychiatrists. But I guess in the overal scheme of life's great and colourful tapestry there is even a place for bitter, mischievous little turds like you.
So, you wait for a smolder to become a raging fire before acting???? Does 911 ring a bell??????
Your analogies are ridiculous, period.
Going back to the well again, I see. Race has nothing to do with it other than what you're trying to make out of it. Race cards don't work, nor will the sexist/chauvinist cards you're gonna play on Broom Hilda's behalf.
Best to let that resentful little turd wallow in his own excrement. He's a twisted social hunchback who was and is Mr. Nobody in real life and gets some sort of bazaar sexual gratification from trying to wind up people of substance who openly present their viewpoints. This moronic, rejected arse bandit seldom, if ever makes a definite stand on any topic but waits for other, more creative participants to express their opinion and then he tries to pick holes in what they had to say in the most provocative manner possible. In my mind's eye I see him as a reeking boil filled to bursting point with festering and putrid puss. I hope I'm not near the creep when he bursts, yuk.
Well stated. I, too, have noticed his m.o. These types lie in wait and then take pot shots at your comments and try to nit-pick you apart. I just try to stay on game and not let them divert me.
So, you wait for a smolder to become a raging fire before acting???? Does 911 ring a bell??????
Right, so a small group of people performed a terrorist attack 15 years ago, which means we should bar 1.6 billion people from coming to the United States.
What font of reason and rationale you are.
Your analogies are ridiculous, period.
"Period" is something someone says when they have no argument to make.
Going back to the well again, I see. Race has nothing to do with it other than what you're trying to make out of it. Race cards don't work, nor will the sexist/chauvinist cards you're gonna play on Broom Hilda's behalf.
This issue is inherently ethnic in origin (much like Islam for the most part).
People aren't calling for barring Indonesians from coming to the United States, or for barring Turks from coming to the U.S. They are calling for barring Syrians, Iraqis, Afghans, and other Middle Eastern ethnicities from coming.
It's like you want to ignore all relevant aspects of this issue.
You wrote these words which you can't back up from -" Right, so a small group of people performed a terrorist attack 15 years ago, which means we should bar 1.6 billion people from coming to the United States."
Are you referring to allowing 1.6 billion Muslims into this country ?
How long would it take for government to vet that many people ?
It is not about allowing all 1.6 million Muslims into this country at once because of course, it will take a ridiculous amount of time to vet so many people. It is about following through with what the United States offers to both citizens and non-citizens: freedom of religion.
Yes, that is correct. However you forgot to include what is in the parentheses: "...I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy)..."
The government could vet this belief if Muslims trying to enter the U.S. don't view Americans as their enemies.
However, I am starting to understand how difficult it would be to prove this. But also, how would the government prove that that specific Muslims trying to come to the U.S. do view America as the enemy?
There are some U.S. citizens that show signs of wanting to cause "terror" by statements they make about their belliefs. Do you suggest that we kick them all out too? Or maybe just stick everyone in jail? Then maybe we can "Make America Great Again".
Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)."
The above is freedom of religion that you want allowed in the U.S. ?
The key is this deceptive video is "fighting for the oppressed" which means destroying Israel and killing all the Jews as well as the United States which supports Israel. Islam is murder, "moderate" Muslims may be peaceful, but they are stepping stones for murderous Muslims. All Mosques should be under investigation and have spies or hidden microphones and cameras inside them to monitor for murderous radicalization.
Bukhari (11:626) - [Muhammad said:] "I decided to order a man to lead the prayer and then take a flame to burn all those, who had not left their houses for the prayer, burning them alive inside their homes."
The above is freedom of religion and can be vetted by the government for those who believe that ? Do tell how that does take place !
Muslim (20:4645) - "...He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said: There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa'id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!"
Government can vet those they allow in on the stated words of the quran ?
Muslim (20:4696) - "the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: 'One who died but did not fight in the way of Allah nor did he express any desire (or determination) for Jihad died the death of a hypocrite.'"
Government vetting can protect the homeland from believers of the Quran ?
Of course he's right. All Muslim immigrants will contain X% of terrorists and another % which will be radicalized to become terrorists. So a simple mathematical calculation will tell us that the greater the number of Muslims in the country the greater the X% will be. Trump is a hard nosed businessman who ''tells it as it is'' and has the political courage and moral fibre to stand up and express his view. The $ billions spent by the various homeland security agencies on monitoring the activities of Muslims is a wasteful drain on the defense budget. Why in hell would any sane person advocate the introduction of more terrorists and potential terrorists unnecessarily? Would you inject yourself and your family with an aggressive strain of cancer? Immigrants= Muslims, Muslims= terrorists, terrorists= death and destruction. Keep the filth out and return as many of the existing filth back to their original countries, regardless of how many generations they've been in the U.S. When they are repatriated to their beloved homelands they can worship Allah until the camels come home and blow each other to smithereens as a leisure activity which seems very popular with the filth.
The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.
You want to imply the those that believe what is stated in the Quran are not here in the U.S. ?
Read my answer fool. I said Muslim immigrants will contain X% of terrorists and another % which will be radicalized and become terrorists. The greater the number of Muslims the greater the X% will be. If X turns out to be 1% then 1% of 100 is 1. So, 1% of 200 is 2, 1% of 2000,000 is 20,000 and so on. How in heavens name did you interpret that this means all Muslims are terrorists, you benighted shit head. Who permits you morons to contaminate this site? I'm not implying anything, I'm stating the fact that without Muslims in our midst, the Muslim threat doesn't exist, so instead of infesting the country with even more vermin, get rid of the existing infestation and stop the spread of the Muslim disease by denying them access.
The only utter nonsense is the diarrhea which you spew out from your little computer and contaminate the internet. Firstly, ''any population'' doesn't have x% of terrorists. Many nations, especially those which have banned Muslims, do not have any terrorists in their societies, criminals yes, but not terrorists. Those that do, do not take the maniacal step of increasing their number by importing more and permitting them to proliferate. Only a fool like you would foster such a disastrous notion. Were you always thick or did you fall off a ladder more recently? You simply don't have a rational argument to present and instead of admitting defeat, recognizing your ridiculousness and conceding you present eye-watering gobbledygook.
Letting the Muslims in is very precarious and it would pose danger to the entire country.
The probability of pretense amongst the citizens will be high and the same, along with ISIS's new
passport printing machine. The ISIS schools in Syria teaches children as young as three to kill and there are many single women who are involved with ISIS.
US should also reinforce its military forces in fighting against ISIS. Syria is the true home for the refugees.
We have to enforce our military fighting to conquer the true nature and power of the ISIS, together we stand with the Syrians!
Canada is currently focusing on admitting more refugees which also poses danger towards the US, as Obama declared.
Although many citizens oppose the recruitment of refugees, Canada has doubled its original intention of 25,000 refugees to 50,000. This will double the danger and threat to us Canadians.
Please sign my newly created petition regarding to this matter if you agree: "In Canada, We Stand with the Syrians"!
Your question is "Will banning Muslims help defeat IS ".
Of course not. It has only become a topic of consideration because Obama has failed in Syria. If we had created a safe zone in the region, the refugees would be there not here and all over Europe.
No, they aren't. The one that got in did so through a different screening process entirely.
2) no fly N zone
Why would a no fly zone establish anything closely resembling a legitimate safe zone for the hundreds of thousands of displaced refugees and who would provide the infrastructure and supplies to support them?
You have zero basis to believe that our refugee screening is any more effective than our immigration system, which has failed.
A no fly zone will provide the protection needed on the ground to take a hold territory. It is my understanding that our NFZ would keep everyone except our allies out of the air.
You have zero basis to believe that our refugee screening is any more effective than our immigration system, which has failed.
The fact that it is far more in depth, takes longer, and is generally more rigorous is a basis. You have zero basis to claim I have zero basis, when the basis, even if you find it to be insufficient, is obvious. As soon as you can show me someone who went through the Syrian refugee vetting process that committed an act of terrorism, I'll believe you. Until then, I have no reason to give credence to fear mongering.
A no fly zone will provide the protection needed on the ground to take a hold territory. It is my understanding that our NFZ would keep everyone except our allies out of the air.
Who do you think that would protect them from? The Islamic State's non-existent air force? You still didn't address how the logistics of a Syrian safe zone would work considering the food, water, and waste involved with housing hundreds of thousands of people within what would have to be a relatively small area.
1) It is sufficiently obvious that my basis is basically much more basic than your basis could basically ever be. You therefore have little basis for challenging my basicness 😀
2) Syria has an airforce which has been used to kill thousands of Syrian citizens. Daaa
1) It is sufficiently obvious that my basis is basically much more basic than your basis could basically ever be. You therefore have little basis for challenging my basicness 😀
Except you lack a basis, which means your basis can't be basic. :P
2) Syria has an airforce which has been used to kill thousands of Syrian citizens. Daaa
Right, so we protect them from the air force and they will be safe right up until all the forces on the ground attacked them.
And you still haven't addressed the logistical issue of providing food, water and sanitation for the hundreds of thousands of people you are saying should stay in this hypothetical safe zone.
When a group such as IS states in internal publications that they want us to fear Muslims and react in such a way that will further alienate the global Muslim community in order to make them desperate and radicalize them into supporting IS, it seems to me that we should think about not doing it.
I still find it weird that after the cluster fuck that was our response to 9/11 (remember, Al-Qaeda had said in internal publications that they wanted us to invade because they knew they could draw out the war and put a massive drain on our economy), we still need to be told to stop and think before reacting.
Islam is already the religion of the perpetually offended, so who cares if they are "alienated"? We are Infidel in their eyes and, therefore, must be converted or killed. Remember: the US is already the great Satan, regardless, so all options should be considered to secure our borders and our people. Who cares what they think.
And the reality is that ISIS must be stopped, but banning Muslims from entering the U.S. is not the solution. ISIS will only use a ban of Muslims to recruit more people (the article explains this a bit more). They will be able to say to other Muslims that the U.S. "deserves" to be attacked because Americans are so self-centered that they do not allow Muslims into the country. And the sad truth is, that many Muslims will believe ISIS. So why give the Islamic State another method of recruiting more people? Why not instead gain the support of the most people possible (including Muslims) in this fight against ISIS?
Banning Muslims from entering is not about stopping ISIS, it's about protecting US citizens. Furthermore, the ban will not recruit more nut jobs any more than attacking ISIS does. They hate us, we are infidel and that's enough to go after us. They are mandated to do so in the Koran. Anything we do to protect ourselves can be spun; let the spinners spin away.
It's always nice to ignore reality and the advice of counterterrorism experts in order to hold onto a stance that flies in the face of both the stated objectives of your enemy and "common sense" (god I hate that term).
Talking heads on the left do not counter terrorism experts make. Furthermore, who cares what these pedobear worshipers state as their objective; we have to do what's in our best interests, regardless.
If their stated interests was to stop us from making ice cream, should we stop lest we offend them???? Quit worrying about what they say and want and just concentrate on our game, not theirs.
They killed 14 people. Meanwhile, three times that number are murdered every year in the same town. That's just murder. When you combine that with vehicular deaths and preventable illness, you realize those 14 people, while tragic, hardly amount to the sort of Armageddon you are pretending exists.
I completely agree. That is why I believe Donald Trump's plan is completely idiotic. ISIS is recruiting more members and if the US alienates Muslims, then ISIS will only gain more supporters. They need to find a better solution to this problem. One that does not discriminate against Muslims (most of who do not approve of ISIS).
Muslims are only 1% of u.s. population. The kkk are the ones behind the Muslim hating because they and their victims are the 99% doing the crimes causing USA to have the largest prison population on Earth. Attacking Muslims is just a distraction so nobody notices who really are doing the crimes and packing the prisons.