The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

D. Trump's travel ban. Is it a necessary measure or a hasty decision?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
yahyaodatallah has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/20/2018 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 538 times Debate No: 113024
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




First af all, the main point of this prohibition is that D. Trump signed an order banning people from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days and suspending all refugee entry.
The measure, which also banned Syrian refugees indefinitely, prompted protests and multiple legal challenges.
And the issue, that I want to raise here is: Is it a necessary measure or a hasty decision?
In this debate I'm going to defend an opinion that Trump's decision is deliberate and might be.

To start with, according to the very first article of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights all people were born free and equal, regardless of religion, race, gender, skin colour, sexual orientation. All people are endowed with some unalienable rights, but I think, that there should be some limits to human rights implementation.

As for the D. Trump's travel ban, it can't be said, that he infringe upon rights of refugees, I would say, that he probably protect and stand up for people's rights of his country, for national security, which undoubtedly must do every president. Can we say in this situation, that he is hostile to Muslims and have a strong bias towards them? It"s a controversial issue.

Furthermore, Trump has an example of connivance of refugees from Germany, which resulted in the insecurity of native Germans from violence by refugees, fear of people for their future, possibility of losing their values. He must prevent such things in the country for which he is responsible.

Some people condemn Trump and consider that such a great country as USA should give refugees and people who need support in this particular period of time an extra boost and provide moral support for oppressed people. Well, I can assume that some kind of support should be provided to the needy, but I don"t think that he should nullify a law, maybe Trump should ratify an amendment to this Travel ban and hand down a decision acceptable to the majority of people.

Undoubtedly, we live in a modern world, where great importance to human rights is attached. But there should be a limit to human rigths implementation in order to maintain order ot only in given country, but also all over the world.

Can't wait to debate :)


Well, on my side of the debate, I believe that the travel ban was an awful decision.

D.Trump said that "when it comes to terrorism, we will do whatever is necessary to protect our nation.". First of all, that is 100% Islamophobic. Banning seven Muslim countries from entering America to protect Americans from terrorism is absolute baloney. Do you even know what Islam teaches? Islam, like every other religion, teaches peace. Not terrorism or violence! Trump making a decision based on a few terrorist attacks is just plain stupid. Did you know that if you were to divide all the supposedly Muslim terrorists by the entire Muslim population, you get 0.006 which, according to all studies, is insignificant. Real terrorist threats are caused by certain individuals, not the 150 million people banned from the U.S. because of Trumps stupidity. Trump trying to ban all the Muslims from the U.S. is just a dumb decision. Why is he focusing on terrorist attacks from people like ISIS, but ignoring all the attacks from non-Muslims like the KKK or other Christian or Atheist terrorists. In fact, he should ignore them because not all atheists are heartless killers, and Christianity doesn't teach violence.
Debate Round No. 1


Hello! First of all, thank you for answering.

You are absolutely right, that there is no religion that teaches cruelty, violence and Islam is no exception. At the heart of every religion are such ideas as to be merciful to each other, it teaches kindness, wisdom, not anger and envy. Despite all this, if it's all about peace, than why people wage wars for many years, maim&kill each other, destroy their lives and completely don't think about what awaits their children in the homeland in the future?

Moreover, when people face such a situation in their own country, when they are forced to survive, than people become cruel, heartless, ruthless, inhuman, because the mental state is damaged, and they usually begin to see every person as a potential enemy, even if it is not really the case.

From my point of view, it can't be said that a terrorist attack is something insignificant. When it comes to death, whether it's intentional or accidental, it never goes without a trace.

But if we even abstract from terrorism and return to the situation that takes place in Germany. I mean, not only terrorism attacs associated with refugees. I literally stumbled upon such an article on the Internet which is about violence on streets, and from which I draw conclusions that it's a big question, whether it is good or bad, that Merkel is not Islamophobic( saying that I don't mean that she should be for 100%). Once Germany could boast of its tolerance, now this country is forced to look for a way out of the current situation. Natives are afraid to go on the streets, they don't feel protected. It all can lead to ethnic criminality, predominance of parallel peace in the life of the country, since the inhabitants of Muslim countries are too different from the Germans in their mentality and, unlike them, are not tolerant in their customs and way of life.

I still hold the position that Trump is just looking for ways to protect the nation. A person occupying such a high position should think not only with the heart, but primarily with the head and calculate the possible consequences in advance. Germany didn't do that, and now it is what it is.


Okay, first of all, that was a very good source. I congratulate you on that. i liked it very much. But now i would like to step away from if it is a fact that inviting refugees/ Muslims in general to the U.S. would be dangerous or not. Let's look at the innocent people being affected by this. for example:

At the New York City cell phone shop where he does his homework, nine-year-old Ahmed Alhuthaifi says he misses his mom a lot.

"Sometimes, I feel like I am going to cry," he says. "Trump won't let her in."

After a years-long effort, his mother, who is stuck in Saudi Arabia, was denied a visa due to President Trump's restrictions on immigration and travel from certain countries, including Yemen. She and Ahmed's four younger siblings, who live with her, missed Ahmed's birthday celebrations on April 3.

"He expected them to be here, all his brothers and sisters; he's depressed all the time," says Fathi Alhuthaifi, his father. "I need my wife and kids. We are in a bad situation."

An innocent nine-year-old separated from his family, all because of Trump. Just imagine that for a second. Having your mother, your MOTHER, and four younger siblings, all the way in Saudi, just because of Trump's decision! Also, look at the refugees themselves! Their country is in war, air raids in Syria from places like America itself! They need a safe place to stay!

And now for the rebuttal. You talked about the Germany, antisemitism thing with the Muslim refugees. Yes, that is a fair point, but let's look at another country with refugees. Canada. There are SO MANY Syrian refugees in Canada, And take it from me, I live in Canada. They are SO respectful, and grateful to live in a peaceful place. They are excited to finally go to school! They get to live their dreams. And Canada is doing really well. You rarely see Canada on the news because of a bad thing, and nowadays, every time something is on the news, it's usually something bad. And there is certainly no news stories about Syrians doing bad things.
To conclude, I would like to say that it is not fair to ban people from certain countries, mainly Muslim countries, from the U.S., because it doesn't protect some people, like the citizens Trump is so worried about protecting, or the Syrian children who are in war and have no food. It ruins their lives.
Debate Round No. 2


Thank you for such heart-stirring examples. I totally agree with you, that such laws shouldn't separate a child and his mother, whole families. That's why I said at the very beginning, that Trump should ratify an amendment to this Travel ban and hand down a decision acceptable to the majority of people. Such situations must not occur! Moreover, I can not dispute the fact that maybe Trump is too conservative in his decisions. Each general rule has exceptions. Each law should have them too, because twists and turns of human life can't be shoved into the legal boundaries.

It's very interesting, that you compare the situation with refugees in Germany and Canada, especially since you live there and you can assess the situation without bias. You can be proud of your country!

To conclude, apparently, not everyone can take such a bold decision immediately and Trump just needs a little more time to make the right one. I believe that the situation will change for the better, and a compromise will be reached.

P.S. It seems like I'm an opponent, amenable to persuasion :) But why not, if all of the arguments, that you have provided are valid and have grounds. Besides, I am a person who has a soul, therefore I fully understand that these children are not to blame for nothing, and they have the right to a happy life, and when I see all these terrible pictures on the Internet, my
heart shrinks... Let it be peace all over the world!

Good luck in your final round. And thanks for such an exciting debate!
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Rabban 3 years ago
Trump's presidency has been one mistake after another. In fact, generals normally can't say anything because they have to support whoever is president regardless of their political preferences however, one retired general, whom isn't one anymore (obviously) and is one of the most decorated generals in American history, spoke of Trump as being a threat to national security. This probably isn't intentional, but his lack of political sense is obvious. Also, why would he be a good political leader with no previous political office or education? He rules like a dictator because he is a businessman, not a politician. Having said that, the best presidents in history have always had previous military experience. Let's face it- in the military you have to make tough calls, just like a president. They also know how to follow protocol on things rather than base everything on their own strategic thinking like a businessman. Strategy and business sense is valuable to a presidency, but not alone. One must also have the ability to balance strategy with morality. Trump has put up a great effort given his education and experience, but he is not political leader material because what he is good at is business strategy, and only business strategy. We can't expect a wolf to act like a lion. No matter how great the wolf is, he will never be a lion.
Posted by ZzRanger 3 years ago
Actually I'm lazy, if no one accepts then I'll prob accept later this week xD
Posted by ZzRanger 3 years ago
I'll accept around 9 so I have time to do this tomorrow.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.