Who will better protect the US from terror attacks on US soil?

[Grand Mal]

If you're going to rely on a politician to keep you safe from a terror attack then you've already lost. The responsibility for your safety lies on your shoulders and yours alone.

That's pretty simple, isn't it? If they're in sight, some politician has failed. If you're having to protect yourself from terrorists you've been abandoned by people who took your money because they were supposed to keep that threat at bay. You're responsible for protecting yourself from the criminals down the block but not from international operatives. Unless all those people who died on 9/11 failed in their responsibility. Unless all those people at the Boston Marathon failed in their responsibility. Unless all those people in that nightclub etcetra, etcetra.

 

[clownboy]

Stopping Muslim immigration not only will not stop terrorism, but it will provide a major point in terrorist recruiting campaigns: "See? The "Christians" hate you and they fear you! That's why they won't even let you have visas to enter their oh-so-free country! But we don't need no stinkin' visas in order to get you into their nation!"

I'm not suggesting we stop the immigration of all Muslims. But in your scenario you have the result wrong. What stirs up the Muslim extremists is when we visit their country and set up shop, try to impress our values upon them. Not allowing Muslims into the US wouldn't make them hate us any more or any less. However, the liberal idiots and the ones that style themselves Muslim Americans (the Muslim coming first and with emphasis) would flip their ****.

 

[Josie]

Neither one.

 

[Phys251]

The lack of option to conclude that they are equal is a glaring oversight of this poll.

No. Given two continuous distributions that overlap in any way, the probability of selecting x1 = x2 from the two respective distributions is zero. The OP was right to leave off this statistically impossible option.

 

[Grand Mal]

I'm not suggesting we stop the immigration of all Muslims. But in your scenario you have the result wrong. What stirs up the Muslim extremists is when we visit their country and set up shop, try to impress our values upon them. Not allowing Muslims into the US wouldn't make them hate us any more or any less. However, the liberal idiots and the ones that style themselves Muslim Americans (the Muslim coming first and with emphasis) would flip their ****.

Considering it was conservative idiots that got you into this mess, maybe you need to take idiots of all stripe out of the equation and find some sane heads to guide you.
And you won't find one on Trumps shoulders. Probably not Clinton's either. Quite the conundrum, eh?

 

[Hawkeye10]

No. Given two continuous distributions that overlap in any way, the probability of selecting x1 = x2 from the two respective distributions is zero. The OP was right to leave off this statistically impossible option.

That is the dictionary definition of over thinking right there.....

 

[Phys251]

That is the dictionary definition of over thinking right there.....

I can rephrase that into layperson's terms if you'd like.

 

[Hawkeye10]

I can rephrase that into layperson's terms if you'd like.

Dont bother, I am off to find some quality.

 

[Phys251]

Dont bother, I am off to find some quality.

Lemme know if you find what you're looking for!

 

[radcen]

Considering it was conservative idiots that got you into this mess, maybe you need to take idiots of all stripe out of the equation and find some sane heads to guide you.
And you won't find one on Trumps shoulders. Probably not Clinton's either. Quite the conundrum, eh?

It was a team effort. Sorry.

 

[Grand Mal]

It was a team effort. Sorry.

Idiots all.
Lets just overthrow the dictator and show the people how to vote. Oops, that didn't work.
Lets just overthrow the dictator and teach the people how to vote. Oops, that didn't work.
Lets just overthrow...

 

[Risky Thicket]

Hillary's big foreign policy successes:

1.

2.


Trump's big foreign policy successes:

1.

2.


Neither is capable, neither is competent. I choose neither.

 

[Van Basten]

If you're going to rely on a politician to keep you safe from a terror attack then you've already lost. The responsibility for your safety lies on your shoulders and yours alone.

What the heck are you talking about?

The state has a responsibility to protect its' citizens. It's literally one of the biggest reasons states exist and why people by majority accept their existence. You're supposed to rely on the state to protect you, it's their job. Obviously you can go the extra mile, which is why the second amendment is so great and should be protected, but your comment is profoundly misinformed.

 

[DiAnna]

Who will better protect the US from terror attacks on US soil?

Trump -Why
Clinton -Why

Clinton, because she's not a bloviating blowhard and a buffoon.

 

[Turin]

On many levels Clinton is better prepared to protect this country - yet just in the election cycle Trump has played into ISIL to help the recruiting pocess and try to hand them the support of a religion that the majority denounce and abhor ISIL.

Besides the fact Clinton has resolute intellect and has shown us she is not only a scholar on foreign affirms she knows the details and will make the decisions that can possibly be mde.

Now I will add there is no human or party that can completely prevent any attack as the world has 7 bil people and only a fewe need to be right just once and our intel and military and and secretary of state and POTUS on their best game and ideal cannot always prevent yet some will do bette than others and some actually comprehend this challenging and horrific state of affairs.

Clinton is th eintellectual superior of Trump and she really does have this experience and is motivated to do her best to have our back and prevent further radicalization of the heinous criminal mindset of terror.

Yet no one has a magic wand.

She is just the best qualified

 

[radcen]

Clinton, because she's not a bloviating blowhard and a buffoon.

We need to use that word more. Maybe we'll get ample opportunity with a President Trump. :2razz:

(I think I just threw up a little.)

 

[finebead]

Clinton. At least she won't start off by pissing off all the Muslims by insulting them like Trump regularly does. The nation needs to be united and feel like one. Trump is a divider.

When you do not integrate the a community into your nation, they get disaffected and civil disturbances result. See how the French treated their Muslims, then they got the riots.

“In a very broad sense, you have the same communities in Europe and America. Both are Muslims living in the West. But in fact, there are huge sociological differences between the two groups. Most importantly, the relationship between Europe and its Muslims is one rooted in colonialism, whereas the U.S. has no previous history with its Muslim populations. So [in Europe] there is some of the residue of racial and cultural prejudices of the colonial era,” says Akbar Ahmed, chair of Islamic Studies at American University’s School of International Service and the author of several renowned field projects on Muslims, including “Journey Into Europe: Islam, Immigration and Empire.”

The result is two very different communities: One in America that is hopeful, affluent and better assimilated, versus one in Europe, particularly in countries like France, that exists on the periphery of society, both economically and socially. It’s that marginalization of European Muslim communities that can leave certain members vulnerable to recruitment attempts from groups like ISIS.

Why Do American Muslims Fare Better Than Their French Counterparts?

Trumps prejudice will make america more vulnerable. Our strength is in our unity. The Orlando killer was just another deranged crazy man IMO, who used a convenient excuse for him, being muslim, to justify in his mind his action. Trump would only make the situation worse.

 

[dimensionallava]

Hillary's big foreign policy successes:

1.

2.


Trump's big foreign policy successes:

1.

2.


Neither is capable, neither is competent. I choose neither.

what makes you say hillary clinton hasn't had any foreign policy successes?

 

[Cardinal]

Who will better protect the US from terror attacks on US soil?

Trump -Why
Clinton -Why

Clinton, because she understands that we need partnerships from the regions most responsible for Islamic extremism. Trump thinks nothing of alienating every single Islamic country, which means when we need help stopping a terrorist organization's plot or apprehending an important terrorist leader, that help will not be found. Also, Clinton appreciates the necessity of keeping close relations with our allies, something Trump values not one bit based on his willingness to start a spat with England, our single strongest and closest ally.

 

[Cardinal]

If you're going to rely on a politician to keep you safe from a terror attack then you've already lost. The responsibility for your safety lies on your shoulders and yours alone.

That's a nice thought, but my four years of Tae Kwon Do aren't going to do very much to stop an attack by ISIS on a nuclear power plant. I mean, that would be completely awesome if I karate'd thirty ISIS terrorists and killed the last one with a snappy one liner, but that's probably not going to happen.

 

[Kal'Stang]

Who will better protect the US from terror attacks on US soil?

Trump -Why
Clinton -Why

Neither. The People can do it better if they pull their heads outta their butts and stand up instead of cowering behind anything and everyone else. That's one of the biggest problems in society today, everyone will stick their noses where it don't belong but won't stick their noses where it does belong.

 

[Risky Thicket]

what makes you say hillary clinton hasn't had any foreign policy successes?

Ah, jeez, I don't know. Maybe you should list Hillary's big foreign policy successes.

 

[Kal'Stang]

no?

I predict those within your country which he has disenfranchised and the already marginalized will band together

I predict race wars and great harm

and then there will come the attacks from outside of your country

everything the tightie righties fear this idiot will bring to bear

I believe so

Ironic considering Obama and those that use the race card for everything but their own mothers has done just as much, if not more due to time alone, than Trump regarding racial division.

 

[dimensionallava]

Ah, jeez, I don't know. Maybe you should list Hillary's big foreign policy successes.

I feel like I shouldnt have to, I mean shes been secretary of state? what would you consider a success?

 

[Redress]

Who will better protect the US from terror attacks on US soil?

Trump -Why
Clinton -Why

There is no good answer to that question, largely because the president has limited control. Even the best president will fail with bad advice, but a large portion of the advice the president will get on the issue will come from people the president does not appoint. What types of attacks, how well planned they are, etc and so on has much more to do with an attacks likelihood of success than anything the president will do. Any significant changes from status quo would end up coming from congress, which the president does not control. There are simply too many factors, and too many of them are outside of presidential control(and some of them impossible to foreknow) to really make a good guess as to the right answer.