His doctrine sure has worked out well for Europe
You ever think about the fact that as we buy less mideast oil, the people there will be even poorer and more isolated which will make them just as if not more angry
I'm so thankful for President Obama right now. His Obama doctrine clearly realizes the further away we get from the middle east.. the better we are but of course conservaterrorists want to flame him for it.
Also you stop importing people known to be sympathetic to their cause
The problem is that support of terrorism among muslims isn't limited to the 'radical fringe', it's practically mainstream
Fully a quarter of muslims believe that terrorist attacks against civilians can be justified
his liberal, liberal, liberal doctrine sure has liberally worked out well for liberal europe
I'd say the attacks in Europe are in an effort to get European authorities to close their borders. The largest influx of people out of ISIS controlled territory are going to Europe. ISIS needs Europes borders closed because they need the fleeing tax base to continue their war.
I'd like to know as well, particularly since not only are the majority of refugees women and children, but Obama's "widows and orphans" comments that DSF is referring to has a context he left out - he was specifically referring to Chris Christie's comment that he opposes allowing any refugees in, "even orphans under five."
http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...efugee-opponents-scared-of-widows-and-orphans
Border control is not a problem of logistics, it's a problem of political will.
japan
they have home-grown issues (Aum Shinrikyo) but not imported ones
His doctrine sure has worked out well for Europe
You ever think about the fact that as we buy less mideast oil, the people there will be even poorer and more isolated which will make them just as if not more angry
It is strange that DSF talks about 'blatant lies' and not wanting to be lied to, but never stops to think who is actually lying to him.
It's unlikely he came up with the idea that the 'widows and orphans' comment was a lie on his own, he probably read it on conservative media somewhere. You would think if anything he would be tired of them lying to him.
Absolutely 100% true. :thumbsup:
From a logistics/technology perspective, it would not be unreasonably difficult to reduce illegal entry to a trickle. Not just illegal entry, you'd also have to have strong controls in place to make sure that those who are supposed to enter for a limited amount of time also get out when that time passes (visa overstays etc). All in all it can be done, but it requires political will.
His doctrine sure has worked out well for Europe
You ever think about the fact that as we buy less mideast oil, the people there will be even poorer and more isolated which will make them just as if not more angry
yea, you catch those responsible and punish them accordingly.
Not all muslims are radical, but of course, now I am a terrorist sympathizer for mentioning such blasphemy.
There will be no simple solution to fix this isis problem, it's world wide and it's in small clusters. So who would jesus bomb?
.0038
That's the sample size. Out of 10,000,000 muslims, they interviewed 38,000. Mathematically that's less than 1/2 of 1%.
I haven't had a chance to dig deeper into the document, but that's hardly a representative sample size.
Bin Laden (like many of the terrorists) was never poor
Ah, I hadn't even thought of that.
Although they need to walk a fine line. Make the attacks severe enough to close the borders but not so severe that Europe and it's allies gain the political will to wipe them off the map.
.0038
That's the sample size. Out of 10,000,000 muslims, they interviewed 38,000. Mathematically that's less than 1/2 of 1%.
I haven't had a chance to dig deeper into the document, but that's hardly a representative sample size.
1. Why am I or my friends never included in political polls conducted for the media?
The reason is fairly simple. There are about 200 million adult or voting-age Americans. But the average poll has a sample size of 1,000 adults. This means that only one person in 200,000 will be included in any one national or state poll. To put it another way, it would take 200,000 polls with samples of 1,000 for pollsters to get around to all Americans -- and this assumes no one is called twice.
Of course, national and local media organizations conduct several polls in one year. The number of national or local media political polls you see in a single year is about 250, but can vary depending on where you live. But even 250 polls in a single year means your chance of being interviewed at least once is still small.
2. Is a larger sample always better than a smaller sample?
Larger sample are generally more precise, but sometimes not. The important rule in sampling is not how many poll respondents are selected but, instead, how they are selected. A reliable sample selects poll respondents randomly or in a manner that insures that everyone in the area being surveyed has a known chance of being selected.
I always thought it was weak security to allow people, carrying luggage, to walk with no security checks until they get to the security check area.
I wont be surprised if we change the rule and only allow ticketed passengers inside an airport.. Israel does this I believe.
His doctrine sure has worked out well for Europe
You ever think about the fact that as we buy less mideast oil, the people there will be even poorer and more isolated which will make them just as if not more angry
I always thought it was weak security to allow people, carrying luggage, to walk with no security checks until they get to the security check area.
I wont be surprised if we change the rule and only allow ticketed passengers inside an airport.. Israel does this I believe.
This is how I think. Most muslim clearly do not wish to co-exist with us and clincg to their old ways. So why should we co-exist with them?
What's your solution?