Is this crazy? No travel to countries where….

[Anonymous]

Anyone can claim asylum, so I don't understand the question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Not every person coming from developing country (3rd World? Really?) can claim asylum. Economic hardship is not the same as being persecuted.

Well, they CAN all claim it, and even go home for vacation, because no one is stopping them.

This is a bonkers response. I can claim a million bucks, but that doesn’t mean I’m getting it. It’s very hard to get asylum claims granted or U.S. citizenship by any other means.

But the Mexico border crossers claim asylum to enter the US (most lie), maybe get their court date 5 years out, and travel on to, say, NY where they get free housing, cell phones, food, 10K debit cards and jobs under the table. And like PP said, no one is stopping them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd think about it differently.
- Countries where we have no or very poor diplomatic relationships
- Countries with active violent conflict

There are lots of beautiful places in the world without feeling compelled to visit North Korea, Syria, Iran, Russia and so on.

I would probably also avoid visiting places with high crime rates and potential for kidnapping and murder.

I would love to visit Russia someday. But not right now, especially not with my family situation — a woman married to a woman. Same goes for a lot of the Middle East unfortunately. But I don’t think that should necessarily prevent others from visiting.

I would completely support a boycott on rthe one hand on the other even Saudi Arabia is okay with this now ("as long as you don't flaunt it")

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The US boycotted South Africa over to apartheid (Reagan actually vetoed the act, but congress over rode him), and that included travel.

I would not travel to a country that does not allow women to drive, for example.

PP again. What country doesn't allow that? Saudi didn't until 2018 but there aren't others as far as a I am aware.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd think about it differently.
- Countries where we have no or very poor diplomatic relationships
- Countries with active violent conflict

There are lots of beautiful places in the world without feeling compelled to visit North Korea, Syria, Iran, Russia and so on.

I would probably also avoid visiting places with high crime rates and potential for kidnapping and murder.

I would love to visit Russia someday. But not right now, especially not with my family situation — a woman married to a woman. Same goes for a lot of the Middle East unfortunately. But I don’t think that should necessarily prevent others from visiting.

I'm PP to clarify my reasoning is similar to the PP on the next page who mentions the rule of law in those countries. Think of Otto Warmbier in North Korea, Brittany Griner in Russia, the Americans who decided to go hiking in Iraq in 2009 and wandered into Iranian territory and were imprisoned.

Bad choices. In Brittany's case it was carrying drugs into the country. In the case of Otto and the hikers, these were flat out bad choices for the excitement and bragging rights of visiting high risk places. They absolutely did not deserve what happened to them (especially in the case of Otto which was horrific), but there was no reason to be there. Choose other vacation spots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Not every person coming from developing country (3rd World? Really?) can claim asylum. Economic hardship is not the same as being persecuted.

Well, they CAN all claim it, and even go home for vacation, because no one is stopping them.

This is a bonkers response. I can claim a million bucks, but that doesn’t mean I’m getting it. It’s very hard to get asylum claims granted or U.S. citizenship by any other means.

But the Mexico border crossers claim asylum to enter the US (most lie), maybe get their court date 5 years out, and travel on to, say, NY where they get free housing, cell phones, food, 10K debit cards and jobs under the table. And like PP said, no one is stopping them.

You clearly have a political axe to grind that has nothing to do with OPs question.

As another PP said, any foreign national can seek asylum, few receive it, so OPs test is not a useful one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone can claim asylum, so I don't understand the question.

This. OP knows nothing about filing an asylum application in the US. The vast majority of asylum applicants (affirmative and defensive) are from Venezuela, El Salvador, Mexico, Guat, and Honduras. I travel to Mexico all the time and see no reason not to. Same with Guate. Colombia is also a top 10 country of origin and I'd recommend that for travel.
China also makes up a large pool for affirm/def cases, but Chinese are also the largest recipients of H-1b, O-1, and other employment based category recipients (Eb1, Eb2, and Eb3). I've also been to China.

I think OP is likely referring to refugees, which is a separate designation.

[Anonymous]

Yes, anyone from any country can try to claim asylum in the US. For 2022, the top ten countries whose citizens who received grants of asylum, either from USCIS or from an immigration court, included (from most to least):

China (PRC)
Venezuela
El Salvador
Guatemala
India
Honduras
Afghanistan
Turkey
Russia
Mexico

[Anonymous]

I won't even go to FL and give them my $.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, anyone from any country can try to claim asylum in the US. For 2022, the top ten countries whose citizens who received grants of asylum, either from USCIS or from an immigration court, included (from most to least):

China (PRC)
Venezuela
El Salvador
Guatemala
India
Honduras
Afghanistan
Turkey
Russia
Mexico

I've been to more than half of these between work and vacation trips and would likely go back to most. But I would be careful about how and where I'm spending time and money within county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP is saying we should not visit any 3rd world countries lol! Are you xenophobic OP?

m
Not every person coming from developing country (3rd World? Really?) can claim asylum. Economic hardship is not the same as being persecuted.

Well, they CAN all claim it, and even go home for vacation, because no one is stopping them.

This is a bonkers response. I can claim a million bucks, but that doesn’t mean I’m getting it. It’s very hard to get asylum claims granted or U.S. citizenship by any other means.

But not hard to enter the country on an asylum claim and remain here.

[Anonymous]

I care about safety, and I also have zero desire to be a rich tourist surrounded by poor people. So that rules out most of the world.

[Anonymous]

I feel the US is a third world country if all our roads are falling apart while so many other countries have the fastest train and we are still riding on the slowest trains in the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel the US is a third world country if all our roads are falling apart while so many other countries have the fastest train and we are still riding on the slowest trains in the world.

Trains don't work here. Country is too huge and things too spread out for it to make sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US boycotted South Africa over to apartheid (Reagan actually vetoed the act, but congress over rode him), and that included travel.

I would not travel to a country that does not allow women to drive, for example.

There are no countries in the world that ban women from driving. Saudi Arabia was the only country that did, and they changed their law in 2018. So women can drive now.

Afghanistan?

Since the Taliban took over, they have stopped issuing new driver's licenses to women, but those with licenses already may still drive:
https://english.alarabiya.net/News/world/2022/05/03/Afghan-women-defend-right-to-drive-as-Taliban-stops-issuing-licenses-for-women