FA+
Shop
ATTENTION! Angry PSA from Banryu.
8 years ago
General
If you support Donald Trump and agree with his decisions as president of the United States, please unfollow me! :3
Unfavorite everything of mine. Stop enjoying the art I paid for with my hard earned money and look at somebody else's shit.
Normally not into drama, but this is not Furry Drama, just regular drama.
If you like Trump, I don't want you.
Kthx bai
2 less inferior creatures to see my art.
Protip: emigrate to Iceland/Greenland asap
So i agree with ya xx
Or, did you mean? Then yes, Fuck Trump!
I don't hate the guy, but I severely disagree with his views and the way he's conducted policy so far. I hope he gets taken out by a more competent Republican during the 2020 GOP Primary.
Fuck Trump.
That's all. I am under no obligation to wish him well. He is an embarrassment to the nation.
That's a denial of reality, right there. :3
What, if I may ask, is your reaction to Trump's ban on immigration from six countries: Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen? All of which are majority-Muslim countries (though Iran is Shi'a rather than Sunni) and all but two of which (Iran and Somalia are not Arab, though Somalia is part of the Arab League, it's complicated) are Arab states?
You mentioned you disagreed with some of Trump's decisions and agreed with others. I am not assuming off-hand which ones you do and do not support, but I have to ask what is your reaction to the immigration ban?
Also keep in mind that the countries added to the list have very little real economic, political, or even diplomatic ties to the United States. There is no clear criteria for what actually causes a country to be included on the list, but realistically, the US government isn't going to torpedo its relations with countries in which it has actual strategic interests: Pakistan, for example, is classified as a major non-NATO ally, a status which entitles Pakistan to purchase weapons, military equipment, and other armaments which are not generally sold on the open market and are only circulated to a select group of particular countries and governments which are deemed to be of strategic or political reliability as an ally to the US.
That said, with Pakistan as with many other countries, there are lingering questions as to political stability and connection by some elements of national governments to extremist organisations. Yet why were these countries not added? Is it out of sheer good faith? Or is it just because it would harm US economic and geopolitical interests to do so and thus they have been exempted for that reason only?
In other words, the list of banned countries would be larger but it's easy to start with countries which have no real ties to the US and go outward from there. Moreover, screening policies for asylum seekers (AKA refugees) as well as potential immigrants in the US is very, very strict. Vetting policies are incredibly complex and difficult to trick. The policies to evaluate potentially dangerous individuals are already in place.
That said, the rationale of banning people from "hot bed" regions for recruitment into extremist groups doesn't stack up with the actual origin of terrorists attacks in Western countries. Large amounts of religion-based terror attacks (including those perpetrated by non-Muslims such as Hindus and Buddhists, and yes that is actually a thing in South and Southeast Asia) are not carried out not by refugees, recent immigrants, or by visitors, but by naturalised citizens who were born and raised in the country. Syrian refugees have not committed terrorist attacks in the United States to date.
The Fort Hood shooter, the perpetrators of the Brussels Attacks, and the single gunman who perpetrated the Pulse Nightclub shooting? Every person involved in these attacks was a citizen of the country in which the attack took place. And the overwhelming majority of them came from families and religious backgrounds with no real affiliation with extremist groups or ideologies. Actually, many of them basically came from families that were basically "culturally Muslim". In the same way that one could be "culturally Christian" in the sense of believing in God and celebrating Christian holidays but not attending church or reading the Bible on a regular basis.
So, the basic moral of the story is, there's no real way of predicting this kind of thing, there are millions of better ways to deal with immigration than banning people from entry into the US solely because of where they came from.
It's kind of a classic example of the phrase "The right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing."
If you go back to Pakistan's founding as a nation, its earliest leader (a man named Muhammad Ali Jinnah, who is as respected in Pakistan as Gandhi is in India) and his successors were staunch advocates of secular government and, while they saw Pakistan as a fundamentally Muslim state, this was really more in a nationalist sense, much in the same way Israel was and is seen to be a Jewish state. And even if you go to today, huge amounts of Pakistan's government, people, and general society do not seek for Pakistan to become some kind of extremist state where terrorist groups (who have also killed thousands of Pakistanis) have free reign.
But the longstanding history of Pakistani conflict with India along with legacies of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (where over a third of Afghanistan's population was forced to flee to Pakistan) have created some warped arrangements in the military and intelligence services of Pakistan. Pakistan's approach to Afghanistan has historically been "stability at any cost" and also with the intent of making sure Afghanistan is not in a position to align itself towards India. The Taliban, historically, were often seen as a means of accomplishing this goal: having formerly controlled much of the country prior to 2001 but also because the Taliban's extremely harsh interpretation of Islam and fierce intolerance towards other religious groups effectively saw to it that the Taliban were not going to have anything in the way of good relations with India.
Moreover, as a lot of extremist groups are deeply opposed to Indian rule of the region of Kashmir (which is majority-Muslim) it has at times encouraged cooperation between Pakistan and extremist groups that share a common enemy.
And yet at the same time, Pakistan has an intense insurgency in its northern regions where tens of thousands of Pakistani civilians and soldiers have been killed by extremist militants operating in the region and which is effectively a massive ongoing war effort for Pakistan that has taken far more lives than 9/11, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan combined have for the US.
So... it's really, really complicated to say the least.
i do not support trump :B i just merely point and laugh at where we have fallen
Now, the fact that it is a giant, unstoppable lupine who can crush anyone who disagrees is something of a mitigating factor, but still.
But there is also the simple reality that large amounts of Trump's supporters are simply never going to desert him no matter what he does. No matter what he says, no matter what his past, present, or future actions have been or will be, some of the people backing him will always back him. This is someone who in his views and the character of people who tend to support him is more reminiscent of an authoritarian leader and regime than a democratic system.
He's an idiot and a bigot with a dangerous mindset that actively threatens US democracy. What bothers me most about modern-day discussions of Trump is how little this is acknowledged: his immigration ban is unconstitutional, his proposed border wall is a violation of basic human rights, appointing far-right fanatics to his cabinet and to the Supreme Court is setting the federal government back in all of its efforts by decades, bringing his unqualified and inexperienced family members in on his administration is the basic definition of nepotism. And disregarding treaties and foreign relations with other countries and organisations at-will is destroying the USA's position on the international stage.
It can't be sugarcoated or downplayed, Trump's actions are a threat to the US in every conceivable way. This is someone who fundamentally does not know how to govern or to whom standard political considerations apply. In his ignorance, he poses an incredible threat to the credibility and therefore the stability of US democracy.
Therefore, knowing all this, I am simply tired of trying to be fair and moderate to people with ugly views. There are some issues where a nuanced, reasonable debate should be expected and both sides given fair treatment. But this isn't one of those issues: racism, sexism, anti-LGBT sentiments, and attacks on basic civil rights and principles of US government are not matters for debate. They're not some question to be discussed: they're fundamentally intolerant views. People who espouse them do not deserve to be treated with credibility.
Though if your voice is to undermine everything I put my life on the line for, to wish ill and death upon those who don't see and believe as you do... I shame you and I will not follow you, watch your art, or discuss anything further with you. You are an ignorant child who knows not of what freedom is and what it means. Perhaps one day when you grow up, I will be more willing to soeak with you.
You bring shame to yourself and your shameful words reflect badly on what this nation stands for. I truly hope you can see the error of your ways and work towards something that will help and nkt harm people.
Good day.
2. I don't seek to undermine anything. I refuse to wish him well. He is the president, but I am under no obligation to wish him success or support him.
3. You proved my point when you said "wish ill on those who don't see and believe as you do"
Not wanting a sexist, racist, islamophobic, 1%, Russia colluding, ignorant, small minded bigot as the leader of our country isn't a belief. It's something that, if you're okay with? I don't want to associate with you. That is it. If you're at all comfortable with it, I don't want you. The end.
Goodbye, don't forget to shut the door on your way out.