Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump is cancelling TPS status for Afghan refugees, including those who aided our troops for 20 years there.

I am old enough to remember the right blasting Biden for the ugly exit from Kabul after the "deal" negotiated by Pompeo and Trump.

Why would anyone help US troops again anywhere after this treatment?

Trump has made his priorities clear. He paid for military jets to take the "white refugees" out of South Africa. Anyone who has been in the military (or with a conscience) should be disgusted about how he's treated the Afghan refugees.

Our federal government is now outwardly racist. It is an embarrassment, a disgrace and will cost people their lives. I don’t understand how any military family could vote for him, but here we are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump is cancelling TPS status for Afghan refugees, including those who aided our troops for 20 years there.

I am old enough to remember the right blasting Biden for the ugly exit from Kabul after the "deal" negotiated by Pompeo and Trump.

Why would anyone help US troops again anywhere after this treatment?

Trump has made his priorities clear. He paid for military jets to take the "white refugees" out of South Africa. Anyone who has been in the military (or with a conscience) should be disgusted about how he's treated the Afghan refugees.

Our federal government is now outwardly racist. It is an embarrassment, a disgrace and will cost people their lives. I don’t understand how any military family could vote for him, but here we are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At a minimum, I think a temporary pause is a good idea. There are numerous examples of where people were not properly vetted for national security threats. The process need to be more rigorous before admitting anymore refugees.... "At the time of the evaluation, NGIC identified as many as 50 Afghan evacuees in the United States who could pose potential security concerns based on the DoD data" This OIG report only looks through 2022, how many other people did the US miss that were admitted after 2022.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/afghan-national-arrested-plotting-election-day-terrorist-attack-name-isis
https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2023-07/OIG-Response-to-NDAA-23-OAW-2023-06-23-DRS-Signed.pdf

Funny how "potential security concerns" DO NOT apply to Trump and his DUI Cabinet and Putin's lackeys in Congress

Anonymous wrote:At a minimum, I think a temporary pause is a good idea. There are numerous examples of where people were not properly vetted for national security threats. The process need to be more rigorous before admitting anymore refugees.... "At the time of the evaluation, NGIC identified as many as 50 Afghan evacuees in the United States who could pose potential security concerns based on the DoD data" This OIG report only looks through 2022, how many other people did the US miss that were admitted after 2022.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/afghan-national-arrested-plotting-election-day-terrorist-attack-name-isis
https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2023-07/OIG-Response-to-NDAA-23-OAW-2023-06-23-DRS-Signed.pdf

Anonymous wrote:Trump is cancelling TPS status for Afghan refugees, including those who aided our troops for 20 years there.

I am old enough to remember the right blasting Biden for the ugly exit from Kabul after the "deal" negotiated by Pompeo and Trump.

Why would anyone help US troops again anywhere after this treatment?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump is cancelling TPS status for Afghan refugees, including those who aided our troops for 20 years there.

I am old enough to remember the right blasting Biden for the ugly exit from Kabul after the "deal" negotiated by Pompeo and Trump.

Why would anyone help US troops again anywhere after this treatment?

Trump has made his priorities clear. He paid for military jets to take the "white refugees" out of South Africa. Anyone who has been in the military (or with a conscience) should be disgusted about how he's treated the Afghan refugees.

Anonymous wrote:200,000 refugees let in already, and additional refugees must be let in!
How about do what Trump did with Syrian refugees and arrange for nearby countries to help them. More people helped with less money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since 99% of them are men that support Afghanistan’s treatment of women, why should I care?

Prepare to be canceled for speaking the truth.

If it can be shown that a significant majority are women or young children, I will agree this is not good. But a bunch of men who support what the Taliban is doing to women? No thank you.

Spoiler alert: they won’t be women and young children.

Agree. I still remember the picture of the hangar full of fighting aged men who rushed our military plane to be airlifted out to save themselves. Nary a woman or child in sight.

Exactly. I remember wondering at the time what would happen to the wives and small children of those men, given that the men wouldn’t let the women under their control take off their veils even just to run to an escape plane. I’m not sure I saw a single woman in the pictures coming out of Afghanistan. Contrast those pictures to the airlifts out of Vietnam, which were truly tragic and had a ton of women and children (perhaps even a majority women and children).

No, I don’t want more men who support Taliban views on women coming to the US, even if they are otherwise politically opposed to the Taliban.

Anonymous wrote:Trump is cancelling TPS status for Afghan refugees, including those who aided our troops for 20 years there.

I am old enough to remember the right blasting Biden for the ugly exit from Kabul after the "deal" negotiated by Pompeo and Trump.

Why would anyone help US troops again anywhere after this treatment?

Anonymous wrote:Trump is cancelling TPS status for Afghan refugees, including those who aided our troops for 20 years there.

I am old enough to remember the right blasting Biden for the ugly exit from Kabul after the "deal" negotiated by Pompeo and Trump.

Why would anyone help US troops again anywhere after this treatment?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. These “refugees” are five massive public benefits on the taxpayer dime.

+9000000

Hey, I think Biden/Harris were awful and the border was uncontrolled chaos and they really messed things up, letting in millions via parole, TPS, fake asylum seekers and creating an absolute disaster, making our country’s laws a joke. Biden/Harris deserved to lose due to these unforced errors.

However, these Afghans are most likely bona fide refugees, whose lives really are in danger, especially if they are female.

We need good leadership to limit immigration to those who can pay their own way and preserve resources for those who are vetted, verified refugees. We didn’t have that in Biden and we aren’t going to get it under Trump. I hope I’m wrong and that in a few months we can start letting in true refugees again.

I am genuinely asking: why were there no women in the pictures of the previous escapes? It was all men of fighting age.