Where does Donald Trump stand on the issue of genocide?

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

Loaded question; my mother doesn't have any notions of illegal people or illegal cultures.

The biggest part of my ancestry on my mother's side is from Europe - mainly Spain. One of our ancestors was a Spanish field marshal and one of the last Spanish Viceroys in South America. She told me that she watched a documentary about him and the things he did, and she said that what he did was horrible.

I don't know if he specifically was responsible for any genocide, but in general the Spanish empire for a time spread throughout North and South America and dominated most of both, and was responsible for incidents of genocide throughout both.

If anything, it would be one reason for why I oppose genocide, but it shouldn't be necessary for anyone to have a viceroy as an ancestor who did horrible things in order to have a problem with genocide & if anything, it's also a reason for why I oppose monarchism.

I think humanity ought to do away with monarchies throughout the world; they're nothing but systems of soft slavery (their nobility does nothing other than oppress & mooch off of everyone else), and they have quite a historical track record & reputation for genocide.

Aside from genocide by European empires here in North & South America, there are also cases of treaty violations; I think that's also wrong, and when I hear of cases of the US government imposing recreational substance bans on indigenous tribal nation communities (aka Indian or Native American reservations) here in the US, it not only infringes on their autonomy, but also - of all things - on their 1st Amendment freedom of religion, and I think that's also wrong.

Anyhow, building walls along borders is not genocide, just like locking the doors to your own home is not genocide.

Loaded question?

Seriously?

Your mother comes from a legal culture, and she’s told you stories about my wife, who comes from an illegal culture.

What am I missing, here?

Your mother has never even met my wife.

Yet, your worldview has some very strong opinions about her.

It is my assertion that those opinions are cultural in nature, and a result of history.

We could talk about royalism as well, if you’d like, but then we’d have to get into history.

Not a big problem, really, since we’re already talking about that history.

 

[anotherneil]

Part of being an American is welcoming the stranger.

It’s a fundamental part of Americanism.

Remember, wars were fought right here in America over these issues.

Centuries ago.

Do you want to re-fight those wars with 21st century weapons, just to redefine what it means to be an American?

La Piragua​

Una familia colombiana debe escapar del conflicto armado de su país, al cruzar la frontera los niños encuentran en Venezuela una oportunidad para trascender a través de la música. La niña "Luz" expresa su recorrido cantando el tema La Piragua transformando sus tristezas en una alegre celebración en Santa Bárbara del Zulia.

El Alto Comisionado de Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados (ACNUR), El Sistema de Orquestas y Coros Juveniles e Infantiles de Venezuela, Froid International, Hiper Tv y El Sistema Zulia presentan: LA PIRAGUA, música original de José Barros.

Yes, it is - remember, my mother was one of those strangers who was welcomed into the US. She did so by going through the proper channels to get here like all other immigrants from throughout the world who come here legally, not by sneaking into the US like a burglar breaking into someone's home.

Although there may be a different criteria for refugees coming to the US, they still have to go through the proper channels to be here & remain here legally & that at least includes reporting their entry into the US, going through the process of claiming asylum, etc.

I don't think anyone's calling for re-fighting any wars, but there is a dereliction of duty when it comes to the border under the current administration; in any case, none of this - in itself - comes near qualifying as genocide.

Strictly speaking, it would be the US government's obligation to use force to repel a foreign invasion; it's one thing if it's a foreign country's military rolling in with armed foot soldiers, tanks, cavalries, etc., but no one expects the US government to resort to the use of deadly force to repel unarmed men, women, and children trying to sneak into the country for peaceful financial & economical purposes.

We are quite accommodating to them by immediately providing them with food, shelter, providing baby formula and changing diapers, rescuing them from the desert or from drowning, providing emergency aid, treating illnesses, etc.

In some cases armed escorts for smugglers & traffickers are involved, and unless they get violent, I think the policy is to deal with them through law enforcement channels as opposed to resorting to military actions.

I don't think the US government would resort to utilizing military actions against unarmed, peaceful men, women, and children trying sneak into the US the way the USSR did with anyone trying to sneak out of it through the Iron Curtain & I wouldn't label such action by the US as genocide per se, but it would be just as reprehensible.

 

[anotherneil]

Well, Trump has floated that he would like a 3rd term.

Well, presidents have had 3rd terms or the ability to serve a 3rd term in the past. I'm rather undecided about actually having it as a matter of policy now, but in general I'm not a fan of career politicians being in public office (same or different) for decades, which is what Biden is.

I might be willing to support a POTUS having a 3rd term along with a change in policy to permit it (that would require amending the constitution), whether it's Trump or someone else, if they do a good enough job to warrant it, but if Trump's ok with genocide, then I'm not willing to vote him back in even for a 2nd term.

 

[wellwisher]

I'm a libertarian opposed to the crony good old boy establishment, so I voted for Donald Trump for POTUS, both times; this time, however, I may have to go back to voting 3rd/independent party for POTUS.

I voted for Donald Trump because he was going to drain the swamp, and I liked that he said he wouldn't pledge to support the Republican nominee for POTUS. He was viciously attacked by the mainstream media (still is), and that indicated to me that he was directly over the target.

I want to know where he stands on the issue of genocide - does he support it? Is he for funding it and sending weapons to support it?

If anyone knows, please provide me with a source; if he hasn't addressed it, I'd like to see someone from the mainstream media confront him about it. He's so fearless; let's see if he's brave enough to clearly state where he stands on genocide.

Trump is pro-peace via the Ronald Reagan theory of peace through strength; Reagan Conservative. This approach is not about stereotyping people via ethnicity and then taking a side, but separating all the players into good and evil, going after the bad guys, and helping the good guys. When Reagan said tear down that wall he wanted to let the good people out and in and disrupt the evil empire players.

The way I look at it, there are good and bad guys in both Palestine and Israeli. It is naive to lump one group as 100% good and the other as 100% evil. Instead, if we assume there are good and bad in both, we know who to help, and who to deal with. Peace through strength then makes the bad guys blink or get a bloody nose. What is left are the good guys from both sides, making a secure peace possible. If you take an ethnic side, and leave some rotten apples, the feud never ends. One rotten apple can spoil the bushel of good apples, while a bushel of good apples can never make one rotten apple, good again. You need to clean out the rotten and have a clean bushel.

When Trump had to pick up the pieces of the Arab Spring War, created by Obama and Biden, he did not take sides along ethnic lines. He went after the trouble makers, who were brutalizing otherwise good Arab people, and gave humans aid to the good people stuck in the middle. One of the wild cards is Hamas uses human shields and therefore is willing to sacrifice the good people to preserve the bad. All that means is we need to use other forms of strength to achieve peace.

If you look at Trump and immigration, Trump is concerned about the bad guys using the good immigrants like shields, to come in and hide among us. So he says he will hunt the bad guys, deport them, and also make it harder to enter. Biden uses the Democrats party way of ignoring good and evil and lumps all by ethnicity; all are immigrants legal or illegal.

The DNC was the party that wanted to institute slavery and racism; defined by skin color and ethnicity. The Civil War ended that. They have not evolved, since using the criteria of good and evil would require they admit the evil in their own party that runs these scams.

 

[anotherneil]

Loaded question?

Seriously?

Your mother comes from a legal culture, and she’s told you stories about my wife, who comes from an illegal culture.

What am I missing, here?

Your mother has never even met my wife.

Yet, your worldview has some very strong opinions about her.

It is my assertion that those opinions are cultural in nature, and a result of history.

We could talk about royalism as well, if you’d like, but then we’d have to get into history.

Not a big problem, really, since we’re already talking about that history.

You're mentioning your wife in this thread from out of nowhere; I never brought up your wife yet you purport to have knowledge of what my mother says about your wife. I didn't even know you have a wife, until just now.

Furthermore, how could you possibly know that my mother has never met your wife? You'd have to know who I am in order to know who my mother is, and you'd have to know everyone your wife has ever met (that, in itself, would be challenging for anyone with a wife).

None of this has any relevance to the thread topic, anyways.

The only way that I can see culture relating to the issue of genocide is if there's a group that considers genocide to be an acceptable part of its culture, or something to that effect; regardless of whether or not genocide is part of a culture (or religion, etc.), it's a behavioral act that I consider unacceptable, and I definitely won't support it by endorsing the funding or providing of weapons to such a behavioral act; that includes who I'll vote for based on their stance on the issue.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

Yes, it is - remember, my mother was one of those strangers who was welcomed into the US. She did so by going through the proper channels to get here like all other immigrants from throughout the world who come here legally, not by sneaking into the US like a burglar breaking into someone's home.

I, for one, welcome your mother to the land of my birth.

But if she came to my country with the intent to displace people like me just because she doesn’t like who I married, you can understand why we might have some conflicts, can you not?

Why should I be the one who has to leave the country?

I was born in this country.

 

[crossfire]

There is ambiguity, here. There are two different issues with Gaza.

One issue is the Oct. 7th invasion where many people in Israel were attacked, kidnapped, killed, etc. In this case, I'm for Israel taking action to rescue them and going after the attackers - and just to be clear, I don't mean all Gazans as "attackers", only the actual individuals who entered into Israel to attack and kidnap people & you can include other active participants who knowingly played a role in it such as those who masterminded it, provided logistical support, etc. If any active intentional help was provided by any outsiders or anyone who wasn't a Gazan, then those individuals also need to be apprehended (BTW Israel's security agencies also need explain why they dropped the ball by failing to prevent the Oct. 7th attack). No individual who's of sound mind or reasonable would consider referring to this as genocide. It could be that this is what Trump is referring to, here.

The other issue involves the high-intensity indiscriminate destruction of Gaza, which includes slaughtering many children, blowing up hospitals full of healthcare providers and patients, targeted destruction of international vehicles providing humanitarian aid, in the guise of rescuing hostages and going after the Oct. culprits. Any individual who's of sound mind or reasonable would recognize this as genocidal. If Trump is ok with this, then he deserves to be condemned as a supporter of genocide; same goes for Biden or anyone else who's ok with this.

You might want to google up "Trump Rohingya genocide" to do some investigating as to where he stood during his presidency. Doing so might clarify why there is so much "tension" between Trump and Nikki Haley. You should read several sources to get the full picture because Trump always skirted the issue and refused to call it a genocide. You will need to get out your discernment glasses for this.

 

[Banach-Tarski Paradox]

I don't think anyone's calling for re-fighting any wars

You voted for a dude twice who wants to re-fight centuries-old battles with 21st century technology in the name of white supremacy.

And you did so openly wielding blatant racial epithets like the I-Word to dehumanize others, as has been done throughout the centuries.

You want to talk about genocide?

Or do you want to encourage it?

Drop the I-Word. Don't Feed the Hate Machine​

 

[F1fan]

Yes, it is - remember, my mother was one of those strangers who was welcomed into the US. She did so by going through the proper channels to get here like all other immigrants from throughout the world who come here legally, not by sneaking into the US like a burglar breaking into someone's home.

Like the pilgrams.

 

[metis]

All one has to do is review early footage of Biden as a senator to tell on just how crooked the man is. Particularly on how he ranted that he should be paid more.

That's being "crooked"?

 

[metis]

There is ambiguity, here. There are two different issues with Gaza.

One issue is the Oct. 7th invasion where many people in Israel were attacked, kidnapped, killed, etc. In this case, I'm for Israel taking action to rescue them and going after the attackers - and just to be clear, I don't mean all Gazans as "attackers", only the actual individuals who entered into Israel to attack and kidnap people & you can include other active participants who knowingly played a role in it such as those who masterminded it, provided logistical support, etc. If any active intentional help was provided by any outsiders or anyone who wasn't a Gazan, then those individuals also need to be apprehended (BTW Israel's security agencies also need explain why they dropped the ball by failing to prevent the Oct. 7th attack). No individual who's of sound mind or reasonable would consider referring to this as genocide. It could be that this is what Trump is referring to, here.

The other issue involves the high-intensity indiscriminate destruction of Gaza, which includes slaughtering many children, blowing up hospitals full of healthcare providers and patients, targeted destruction of international vehicles providing humanitarian aid, in the guise of rescuing hostages and going after the Oct. culprits. Any individual who's of sound mind or reasonable would recognize this as genocidal. If Trump is ok with this, then he deserves to be condemned as a supporter of genocide; same goes for Biden or anyone else who's ok with this.

I hate to say this, but you clearly don't know what you're talking about, plus you seemingly change definitions when convenient, such as with the word "genocide".

 

[metis]

The DNC was the party that wanted to institute slavery and racism; defined by skin color and ethnicity. The Civil War ended that. They have not evolved, since using the criteria of good and evil would require they admit the evil in their own party that runs these scams.

Again and again and..., the parties reversed polarity starting during the Great Depression under FDR, and prior to this period it was the Republicans were the "leftists", relatively speaking. The most significant crossover in terms of numbers in the South was during the 1960's under LBJ.

 

[fantome profane]

I want to know where he stands on the issue of genocide

If you really sincerely want to know where Trump stands on the issue of genocide I suggest that perhaps he is leaving little clues around.

Trump says to expect a "unified REICH"

Trump posted a video (it has since been deleted due to backlash). In it, it is asked, What can we expect? Here is EXACTLY what he said: "INDUSTRIAL STRENGTH SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED... DRIVEN BY THE CREATION OF A UNIFIED REICH." Unfied Reich. Okay. We now know what to expect. We need to...

www.religiousforums.com