Two “Boeing countries” on Trump’s no-fly list

Jan. 30, 2017, © Leeham Co.: Two of the seven countries on President Trump’s own “no-fly” list of travelers coming to the United States committed to 108 Boeing airplanes.

One of the governments is an ally of the United States: Iraq.

Iraq remains on the US government list of a terrorist state. Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Libya Yemen and Syria were targeted in Trump’s Executive Order Friday as presenting terrorist threats to the US.

Airline flight crews who come from these countries, even if flying for airlines not of these nations, are affected, said the International Air Transport Assn. (IATA), an industry trade group.

Iraq Orders

Iraq ordered 10 Boeing 787s and 30 Boeing 737s after the country was freed from dictator Saddam Hussein. These are firm orders listed on Boeing’s website. The 787 and 18 of the 737s remain undlievered.

Iran signed a final commitment for 80 Boeing jets. These weren’t added to Boeing’s backlog because of the uncertainty cast by then President-Elect Trump over the future of Iran relations.

Iran Orders

The Boeing commitment, for $16bn at list prices, is for 50 737 MAXes, 15 777-300ERs and 15 777-9s.

Ambiguities in the Executive Order and adverse reaction to implementation immediately raised the prospect Iran might cancel the order. Conceivably Iraq could, too.

Not targeted toward Muslims

The White House said the Executive Order was not targeted at Muslims, whom Trump and his aides criticized throughout the presidential campaign. The seven nations are major-Muslim.

The White House aid the countries were chosen because they are on a list created by the US government pre-dating the Trump Administration as sponsors of terrorism.

North Korea is also on this list, but was not included in the Executive Order.

Expanding the list

Trump’s chief of staff, Reince Priebus, said it is possible the list might be expanded to include other states that are known to have terrorist cells. Mentioned during his appearance on the TV show Meet the Press were Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

Not mentioned was Qatar.

Each is a Boeing customer.

137 Comments on “Two “Boeing countries” on Trump’s no-fly list

  1. Hmmm – the Trump policy is similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months. The seven countries named in the Executive Order are the same countries previously identified by the Obama administration as sources of terror.

    Hope the facts don’t upset too many [edited].

    • Suspending refugee applications from one country for a number of months (while terrible) is not remotely close to banning *all* citizens from a large number of countries that share a religion.

      This will affect Boeing, and it will affect many other American businesses and citizens.


      • A few facts — What really happened

        But Giuliani then disputed the notion that the president’s sweeping executive order barring refugees and people from seven predominantly Muslim nations amounts to a ban on Muslims.

        “I’ll tell you the whole history of it: When he first announced it, he said ‘Muslim ban,'” Giuliani said on Fox News.

        “He called me up, he said, ‘Put a commission together, show me the right way to do it legally.’”

        Giuliani said he then put together a commission that included lawmakers and expert lawyers.

        “And what we did was we focused on, instead of religion, danger,” Giuliani said.

        “The areas of the world that create danger for us, which is a factual basis, not a religious basis. Perfectly legal, perfectly sensible.”

        Giuliani reiterated that the ban is “not based on religion.”

        “It’s based on places where there are substantial evidence that people are sending terrorists into our country,” he said.


        • If I understand your story, Trump promised a ban on Muslims but when it came time to implement it, they had to couch it in terms to make it not seem like it was a ban on Muslims, right?

        • hilarious in context of the US being the biggest “terrorist cell” around.

        • Despite today’s outrage over President Donald Trump’s refugee executive order, many liberals in 1975 were part of a chorus of big name Democrats who refused to accept any Vietnamese refugees when millions were trying to escape South Vietnam as it fell to the communists.

          They even opposed orphans.

          The group, led by California’s Gov. Jerry Brown, included such liberal luminaries as Delaware’s Democratic Sen. Joe Biden, former presidential “peace candidate” George McGovern, and New York Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman.

          The Los Angeles Times reported Brown even attempted to prevent planes carrying Vietnamese refugees from landing at Travis Air Force Base outside San Francisco. About 500 people were arriving each day and eventually 131,000 arrived in the United States between 1975 and 1977.

          • Those moves regarding US government planes bringing Vietnamese refugees were to ‘stop the Federal government dumping the people in California’, they wanted them to use other airbases not only Travis ( outside SanFrancisco)

    • Don,

      Uhh no, not the same. The Obama Administration did not detain folks or send them back, or outright deny valid visa/green card holders entry to the US. And Obama’s action was to allow other agencies to catch up on the biometric checks becasue 2 Iraqis in Kentucky were later discovered to have been involved in an IED attack that killed US forces. So they suspended visas, but those already in the system were not turned around or detained in airports being coerced to give up their visas or green cards, and being held indefinitely.

      Try again.

  2. [edited]

    I don’t think the US has any connecting flights to NoKo, and travel to/from would appear to be restricted for US citizens. I’m not sure that 2/7 is a high correlation for an aviation-related news piece either. Iraq has certainly become a mess since it was a “success story” 7 or so years ago. It’s too bad aviation would likely be a very minor concern as relates to that discussion.

  3. I fathom the principle of reciprocity will apply. President Trump himself and people of his team whereof consular staff, government executives and what have you will soon be hand-picked as Personae Non Gratae by the seven countries’ Foreign Affairs. Holding an American Passport will not anymore be a sinecure if you intend to be or are involved business-wise or on a personal plan with any of those seven black-listed countries ?

      • Just buy a Canuck Flag. When traveling as a youth ( 30 years ago ) I was surprise about the number of Canadians abroad. ( flag on backback and all that )
        … until I fathomed that the majority came from a country with a different flag and used the Maple Leaf as mimikry.

        • I met an American masquerading as a German once. And truth be known for safety reasons I have sometimes been forced to hide my Australian past during middle east troubles, and I have not even been in any of Mr Trump’s ban countries.

          • Well Trump once masqueraded as being of Swedish descent- it was in one of his early books

    • Visit historic Yemen! (Just currently bring your flak jacket, helmet, personal protection devices–AK/9MM of choice, grenade launcher with attachments, etc.) And forward renting an up-armored Toyota pickup with crew might not be a bad idea! LOL

  4. Just returned from COSTCO Redmond, WA. Did not expect, observe, nor hear any Muslim backlash whatsoever. Still buying, buying, buying like US.

    What is Boeing’s return policy? Perhaps friendly IRAQ AIR will say, regarding 737s, “IT DOES NOT SUIT US.” I am okay with cultural differences, just bake ‘returns’ into negotiated pricing….Can not argue with COSTCO’S success.

  5. It’s time for a full analysis of what kind of damage China could realistically do to Boeing should a trade war erupt! So far President Trump has done pretty much what he said he would do during his campaign, so I think it’s overdue with an analysis that take him at his word and not one that discounts Trump’s remarks as campaign rhetoric. (Prior analysis have given great discount to ‘election rhetoric’, imho.) 45% tariffs is a very serious threat against China, and China isn’t known as a country that retaliates with subtleties. Just cancelling current Boeing orders seems like a slap on the wrist given the magnitude of this, so I can’t imagine China’s retaliation stopping there. What else could China realistically do? And what effects would it have on Boeing? (Statements coming out of Beijing indicates that Boeing is on China’s ‘hit-list’ should a trade war erupt.) Obviously a pretty complex analysis, but one that I think is extremely necessary right now.

      • Thanks for that Flying Panda. Yes, there’s lots of things to retaliate with, although few countries like to cut off their food supply. (China has alternatives…) My main point is that the travel ban shows that the Trump administration just did exactly what they said they would do during the campaign. Yet down this thread people are still acting as if Trump’s promise of a 45% tariff on Chinese goods and the inevitable retaliation from China will never happen! I find that very naive! I am also posting this here because I don’t think neither Richard Aboulafia nor Dominic Gates have the balls to write such an analysis. But Scott Hamilton might…

  6. I am assuming this is not aimed at Boeing and that it is merely coincidence.

    • Look at what Trump signs when attention is focused elsewhere.
      Things that get no initial public attention or comment.
      ( or get hidden as payload in other legislation.)

      • Thats right. People ahould be wary of distraction. But what the media didnt report on Friday was Trumps executive orders to ban lobbying by outgoing whitehouse officials for 5 years after they leave office.

        Re: airline industry affects, its marginal. Throughout Trumps tenure I would expect an increase in internal domestic flight business, and a plateau in long haul thay was coming anyway.

  7. Boeing may or may not have been counting orders from places like Iran, Iraq as firm, but they’d still prefer to have booked, built and billed for them.

    It would be astonishing if these countries continued with their orders. Apart from anything else, how would Boeing’s Iraqi and Iranian customers come and collect their purchases, attend the necessary training sessions, etc? It would be utterly impractical to buy Boeing if your airline’s staff cannot go to the USA to learn how to operate, maintain and fly Boeing aircraft.

    • Airline staff training is a good point, I had forgotten about that, but also it will dampen down demand from some of these countries as many of their nationals travel to USA for one thing or another. Then don’t forget that they rely on oil income, a lot of knowhow is not native but comes from USA or Europe, so paying for their orders will be harder. Not surprisingly it is a gift to the fracking fraternity as well.

      • A general reduction in “welcomeness” beginning during the Bush43 reign redirected students to Europe but also money bearing medical “tourists previously taking their business to the US to Europe.

      • They do rely to oil income to a large extent, but that doesn’t necessarily translate into a dependence on the USA buying their oil. In fact, the US now produces a large proportion of its own oil, so the amount being shipped from the Middle East to the USA isn’t what it was. The country most at risk from the over supply is Russia.

        Nor do such places necessarily depend on know how from the USA or Europe. For example Iran, due to the economic isolation resulting from sanctions, established it’s own semiconductor expertise. OK, so they’re not up there with Intel, but to be able to do it at all is notable. And China these days has a lot of expertise to offer as well, never mind the Japanese, Malaysians, Australians. Japan in particular is looking to do more business abroad, and has a very large amount of technology and expertise of its own to offer.

        American isolationism wouldn’t so much leave an unfillable void, but would make it easy for everyone else to profit.

        Also the sovereign wealth funds operated by some Middle Eastern countries have been buying into properties and businesses all over the Western world, so they own us anyway.

        • hi Matthew, believe me, a lot of the know how and equipment, and the necesary training to use it, comes from the USA, esp on-shore. I believe Iran has a lot of home grown know how but the are currently trying to get foreign oil companies interested, which says something.

  8. It’s turned out OK, the precedent has declared it a”massive success” The state visit the UK might not be.

  9. Well, in addition to Iran, Iraq and China, Boeing can probably soon say goodbye to orders from Mexico, as well.

    • How happy is Mexico with their “M-Force-1” Dreamliner?

    • If “Made in America” becomes a toxic brand in various parts of the world, it’ll be more than just Boeing who will be impacted. Lots of American cars are sold in the Middles East, arms, technology, etc.

      Of course, the vast majority amongst the populations in the Middle East and elsewhere are decent people and know that Trump does not represent the totality of American opinion. So perhaps not much will come of this in economic terms straight away; there’s a good chance that Trump will be obliged to back down before permanent economic damage is done.

      However if Trump and his cohorts succeed in forcing things like this through Congress and the courts and they start becoming permanent, at some point people all over will start questioning their purchase choices. Then the market for all things American will inevitably start drying up. For the working classes in the USA, who Trump promised to help, that would be a disaster.

      • As a South American resident I can say the majority of Latins don’t regard any government as representative of it’s people, so excluding government sanctions on US goods I suspect US brands will not be as affected as people fear.

      • No offense but its realy NBC, ABC and in particular CNN that will contribute most to the US being seen as a toxic brand. If America stops production at home, even the cyborgs of the future wont need to fly to the US to work.

  10. As every Muslim, by definition, believes the same basic tenets…the Koran as the direct immutable unalterable word of Allah…and the primacy of Muhammed as their moral standard bearer and ethical exemplar….is there anyone on this thread, or in the press, or in politics who can reliably discern which Muslims will suppress or reject Muhammad’s jihad theology (which would be apostasy) and which will engage in jihad?

    Paris, London, Munich, Frankfurt, Madrid, Bali, Mumbai, San Bernardino, New York, Orlando, Bangkok, Israel, Nigeria, Mali, Little Rock…and on and on….why couldn’t we discern which Muslim would commit these attacks against Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Christians and even the wrong kind of Muslim?

    It is The Islamic World War. Our magnificent aviation industry needs to recognize this and factor this into their business model. Regrettably….as it will not end any time soon. Does anyone here know when or how it will end?

    ~ The Infidel Alliance

    • There are some strange effects by this idiocy.
      An Iranian can not renounce his citizenship.
      Nadhim Zahawi, Member of British parliament:
      Omid Nouripour, Member of German parliament:
      It gets even more weird. Nouripour is a member of the Atlantic Bridge Board:
      Atlantic Bridge is the leading private non-profit association to promote German-American understanding.
      Both members of a NATO alley parliament are not allowed to travel to the US.

      The US should start to fight against what really kills people in the US :
      cigarettes, soft drinks, hamburger, weapons (Second Amendment I know), …

      • MHalblaub,

        Absolutely correct. The tobacco, soft drink and fast food, and gun manufacturers are linked to far more deaths and dangers than any “terror” threat.

        But you say that and someone will scream “FREEDOM!”

        • @MHalblaub,

          Don’t ever forget that it was Marlboros, Guns and Cheeseburgers that made America Great. That’s why people allover the world envy America and want to smoke a cigarette, eat a cheese burger, and shoot a gun: it is the American Dream.

          Or…in the immortal words of Country Singer Lee Greenwood:

          And I’m proud to be an American
          Where at least I know I’m free
          And I won’t forget the men who died
          Who gave that right to me

          And I gladly stand up
          Next to you and defend her still today
          Cause there ain’t no doubt I love this land
          God bless the USA

          • There was also something else that did made US great.
            “Give me your tired, your poor,
            Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
            The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
            Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
            I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

            Washington state is going to litigate the presidential order.

        • Yep, nobody killed in Orlando or San Bernadino over jihad. Tut, tut, just a few “light” casualties. And the powerful O-man? He wouldn’t/couldn’t even utter the words “radical Islamic terrorism”. Yeah, there’s a real leader! (The best part of his presidency was the end–slinking off to Palm Springs in the dead of night.) LOL

    • especially in the US the Christian Right Neo Fundamentalists
      appear to think the same. Up to now they are more or less contained by the legal system only. Burning someone on the stake just has too many legal repercussion.
      But that is not different to Fundi Islam. conformance based on external force and not personal insight.
      If I take criminal incidence of refugees here as anything to go by the ready to go fundies are a very small minority.
      The stress lines between Germans and refugees is dominated by arsonry _done by Germans_ .

    • @TIA

      What tosh, I live next door to a Muslim family, I employ a number of muslims both on payroll and freelance, a mix of UK born and immigrant stock. They are all without exception wholly accepting of other faiths in spite of in most cases being very pious. To suggest that we should fear jihad from each and every person of Islamic faith is just plain nonsense and very provocative. The extremist fringe occurs in many aspects of society and normally relates to disaffection and loss of ownership in wider society. A junior whose parents hail from Pakistan started at 16 with us 6 years ago. He went to Egypt to study in a mudrassa or Islamic school for a year, when he came back I found a way to employ him. We will never be close socially but I value his work ethic and ability. The Islamic world war is being waged within Islamic nations and fanned by the quite mad policies and funding of predominantly western nations.

      I could list off the gun crime stats of American loners in the same manner and what would it prove

      • Hi @Sowerbob,

        I never said individual Muslims were incapable of accepting/tolerating other faiths, etc. I suggested that there is no reliable way to discern between the peaceful Muslim and the potential jihadist, as they both believe the same tenets of Islam. This is true. If you have some method, besides gut instinct, please let us know.

        The problem is with Islam itself, which is explicit in its jihad theology. You recognize this yourself with you acknowledgment of the Islamic World War. And you are right…it is an internal conflict….but it is also, and primarily, external. This is why there are Islamic terror groups in every country that has an notable Islamic population. The Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, India, Russia, China, Nigeria, Somalia, Libya, Egypt….and on and on…all have organized jihadist groups.

        That most Muslims aren’t active jihadists, as explicitly mandated by Muhammed, is a blessing of our common humanity. Yet, the peaceful Muslim still, by definition, propagates jihad theology himself.

        Like you, I have Muslim friends, Muslim business associates, have had Muslims in our home, have traveled to Islamic countries. I’m not afraid of individual Muslims. But this doesn’t erase the fact of Islamic jihad theology.

        Again, Boeing needs to factor this all into their business model. The Islamic World War is real and it will not be ending any time soon. If ever. How will it end? How can it end?

        Thanks for the dialogue.

        ~ The Infidel Alliance

        • Way, way off topic I know but while researching all the various claims about this subject, I discovered that interestingly the 3rd most deadly terrorist attack on US territory was committed by Mormons.

        • What about right wing radical Christians?

          Oh, and ever heard of the Crusades or other atrocities committed in the name or on the behalf of Jesus Christ?

          • Hi @Aero Ninja – Lol. The age of D.B. Cooper is long gone, and the wave of ‘right wing radical Christians’ skyjacking planes, using them as missiles, blowing them up and blowing up airports is long gone. Actually it never happened.

            Every airport in the world is now essentially a military airport or police state franchise because of the Islamic shoe bomber, the Islamic underwear bomber, the Islamic liquid bomber, the Islamic computer bomber, and of course the 9/11 Islamic aero-jihadists.

            Current security policy has everything to do with Islam, and nothing to do with the Crusades (which incidentally were also a security policy measure of the day, also because of the attacks of Islam), or ‘right wing radical Christians’….or Buddhist Brigades….or Hindu hit-men…or Jewish janissaries. It’s all about Muhammeds Islamic Jihad.

            How much damage to our airlines and aviation industry has already been wrought by Islam? When will the risk end?

            Wake up and smell the Arabica, Sir.

            ~ The Infidel Alliance


          • And how do we sort Timothy McVeigh out of the mix of that population we can’t sort out.


            There goes all the white people.

    • There is an obvious answer though probably not one you would like: Almost all atrocities against other Muslims were instigated by Sunni and probably only one attack against the West was instigated by Shiite – and one could argue that attack (against the Marines and French in Beirut) was an act of war not terrorism. (Note my careful use of ‘almost all’ and ‘probably’ since I was too lazy to stagger off an research in full before replying!)

  11. Bye bye Boeing (and Airbus by extension of export rules), hello COMAC and Sukhoi.
    With many of the actions of these administration it is good to stop and think who finally benefits.

    • But would it affect airbus if the export rules are not changed, orders may or may not be cancelled at boeing, but those clever people in europe would just sell you a jet put together in china, or outsource the current usa made parts to china etc

  12. Boeing apparently needs a delivery center in Canada.

  13. Another Trump thing that may affect aerospace is his proposed 20% “Wall Tax” on imports from Mexico. The WTO exists to stop discriminatory barriers like this. Imposing this tax could see the end of the WTO as an effective trading system and indeed of rule-based international trading. Trump has said he doesn’t want to deal with multilateral bodies.

    • I would be interesting in seeing just how well that rule based trading works.

      Its seems its violated egregiously on all fronts.

      While I have nothing against holding your country best interest, smashing it all up in a month causes disruption that can ricochet around the world t like a Tsunami.

      Petulant children should not be put in charge of things.

  14. Yep, Mr. Chaos strikes. 2 year old throwing a tantrum in the China shop (figuratively and literally)(

    How long he last at this is anyone’s guess.

    Also note that the countries he ahs business ties in but are also hotbeds of Terrorism (Egypt) are just fine.

    Can you say Emulants?

    Bannon on the NSC staff. Unhinged is too kind.

    Folks, this is the gift that keeps on giving.

    The good news, none of that underhanded Racism (and other hidden agenda) we have seen, its up front, in your face with nothing hidden.

    No plausible denasality on any of it.

    He is a very stupid person and its out up front and in our faces.

    God Have Mercy on the United States of America.

  15. No doubt serious thought is going into removing US content from Airbus. It wouldn’t be easy, maybe for the A320neo and A330 neo replacements. I think it would be a good idea to at least have the option on 2 models.

    • If it’s America first, Airbus will get caught up in the crossfire of the maverick President’s unique style of governing. Time to dump US parts?

  16. Time for all you wet pinkos to pipe down. Trump has scored a major triumph by personally negotiating the next batch of F35s down by $600 million. Just imagine what he’s going to achieve when he’s been in power for more than a couple of weeks!

    • Don’t be so sure, Grubbie. Lot 10 was going to be less than Lot 9 anyway. Trump has a habit of taking credit for something that was already in the works.

        • The lowest form of wit, we are experts in it. Cynicism and silent despair, a wonderful combination. A key British export in the post Brexit era

      • What President doesn’t take credit for something that was already in the works?

        The killing of Osama Bin Laden comes to mind as one small example of many.

        Actually Presidents are generous when it comes to assigning blame however. 🙂

      • Well, Scoot, I guess you’ve given up on the “political policing” previously fervently promised on this blog.

    • I suspect he just gave Lockheed what they wanted, a bigger order to improve economies of scale. No indication of how many are in it, and as Scott pointed out, getting teh price down by 10M each was already in the plan.

      • Long planned order for 90 planes.
        Always planned to come down by 6/7%.Expert opinion is that it’s about the price it was always going to be. It’s difficult to say exactly what is included for that money.
        Listening to Trumps version of events is disturbing. Basically he says he single handedly renegotiated the deal starting 2weeks before he was president because no one else could do it.
        I’m all for giving LM, Bae etc a good kick up the arse but this is just fantasy.
        Such comments are going to be banned from tomorrow Scott says. So I’ll repeat it, Trump has a serious mental disorder. I was a bit sceptical but now I’m convinced, the symptoms are exactly as the psychiatrists described them.

  17. We who read leeham tend to take an interest in defence procurement, and have a rough idea what’s going on with the F35.
    Listen to Trumps statement about the latest deal and then read about the opinion of lots of mental health professionals that he suffers from a severe mental disorder. I am now convinced, this is much more than a bit of waltyness

  18. I am appalled by Trump’s insistence that a 2000-mile-long wall be built at the US-Mexican border to keep illegal immigrants out. That is a shame. I am for riding the US of illegal immigrants, but you don’t need a wall to do it. A proven solution was enacted in the late 50’s by the Eisenhower administration that worked then, and will work today – very quickly and with no hysterics or hurt feelings.

    So we don’t need a wall, unless someone is making political statement with that wall – and I think that’s just what’s going on here. And it’s the same impulse to make an ill-conceived and hurtful political statement against many Mideast countries – none of whose citizens have ever committed an act of terror on American soil.

    I can’t speak for the other people of the world, but I would bet the credibility of the US just dropped a notch-or-two in eyes of a great number of them. (and yeah…I really believe it will somehow reduce potential aircraft orders from American builders)

    • HEY !– how did we get to walls, jihad, anti POTUS, anti ( insert name/org/protest/city/state/ ad naseaum here ) from an article re Boeing and no fly list, etc. ????

      Makes this forum look like any one of the dozens of blogs/social media sites trolled by anti or pro whomevers.

      • Don,

        You aren’t really surprised by this are you? There has been an undercurrent of rant in this forum for a long time, mostly in the comments section, and largely from the left although not exclusively. It seems several regular commenters here are barely able to control the impulse to spout their political views. The recent presidential campaigns and especially the election results were bound to embolden the commenters here, and we see the results.

        I’ve learned a lot about commercial aviation from regularly reading this blog including the many well seasoned comments, which for me translates into enjoyment. Not nearly as much lately though as the undercurrent has been allowed, and dare I say even encouraged, to come to the surface.

      • @Don,

        I don’t know what you are talking about. Could you please explain? Your statement reads like you’ve written a curmudgeon piece in an attempt to vent frustration.

        If that is so…then that is not my fault nor is it the fault of the people abused by the policy described. Nor does bringing this policy to light degrade this forum as you insist that it may.

        In short, may I suggest that you re-wire your attitude? For I think you need some help.

        • It seems like Scott opened it up to discussion….

  19. Here’s an interesting take. Not sure I completely buy into the causation, because there have been those in Europe advocating for a stronger defense for some time, but it’s something to consider.

    Particularly interesting quote from James Sherr:

    “Trump’s rash, ill-mannered threats about NATO have immediately produced a change of attitude in Europe and a consensus that defense spending in Europe must rise. He’s been able to do this, through his bad behavior, more quickly and more effectively than two previous administrations that were more reliable from a European standpoint. So the United States continues to matter profoundly to Europe, and this will be particularly the case if the dynamics of disintegration continue inside the EU.”

    • The war faction has been on the rise in Europe for some time now. ( With the destruction wreaked by the US some Euros would like to go for some loot too. See France intervention drive in Libya.)

      This is not really a Trumpism.

      The last 4..5 years have been rife with pre WWI language ( just like then very fitting for political views not only condoning but pushing for armed conflict to achieve more or less imperialistic goals.)

      This was crowned by Conservative Europe successfully frustrating Turkey moving towards and into the EU “Leitkultur” debate.
      Outcome : Turkey looked for other peers finding them in Saudi Arabia Quatar, the US.

      All the little political closet sociopaths coming out of their holes and gleefully breaking the household chinaware.

      • “This was crowned by Conservative Europe successfully frustrating Turkey moving towards and into the EU “Leitkultur” debate. Outcome : Turkey looked for other peers finding them in Saudi Arabia Quatar, the US. ”

        Come on, that’s ridiculous. The EU is not responsible for Erdogan’s erratic behaviour.

        Recent moves by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan represent a “stunning rejection of the values of Europe” and make any discussion of Turkey becoming a member of the EU “effectively impossible,” European Parliament President Martin Schulz said in an interview published Monday.

        “We see that Turkey under Erdoğan is on the way to a one man state,” Schulz told the Cologne daily, Kölner Stadt-Anzeiger, citing last week’s lifting of parliamentary immunity for opposition MPs. He also took aim at changes in the prime ministership, after Ahmet Davutoğlu stepped aside and was replaced by Erdoğan ally Binali Yıldırım.

        Furthermore, Article 301 of the Turkish penal code, on “insulting Turkishness” — which, among other things, is being used to prosecute prominent writers who highlight the mass killings of Armenians a century ago — doesn’t seem to square well with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.

    • @MB

      I think there is something in James Sherr’s view. Whatever your politics, Trump will question the status quo and say the unsayable. Given the lack of conviction politicians for many years this probably needed to happen. In this time of heightened tension (read Vladimir Putin flexing his muscles) the NATO alliance looks like having a single capability in the US war machine plus a few token troops from everyone else. It’s a bit like the trade argument, Trump will achieve results, unfortunately the manner in which it is done is likely to do more damage than the benefits that arise.

  20. @Montana and @Don note that I’ve let political commentary run amok on this post, contrary to my usual policing. This is true, and it is an exception. This Muslim ban (and make no mistake, that’s what this is) is so controversial and it is directly on point to the “Boeing countries” of this post, that I concluded the conversation is relevant.

    Why wasn’t Saudi Arabia included? All but one of the 9/11 hijackers came from here. Why not Egypt? Terrorism has been a source of concern. One and possibly two airliners were blown out of the sky by terror bombs. Or Turkey or Indonesia?

    When Bjorn does the next post overnight Tuesday, it will be on a topic that is not conducive to such commentary and the discussion (if any) will be enjoined from this type of political comment.


  21. “This Muslim ban (and make no mistake, that’s what this is) is so controversial…”

    You claim, as many in the press do, that this temporary travel ban is essentially a Muslim ban and not really about preventing terrorist import. To support that you ask why Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, and Indonesia were not included in the temporary ban.

    Well, I contend the fact that so many Muslim majority countries (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, Indonesia, as well as at least 36 other Muslim majority countries) were not included in the temporary ban proves that it is not a Muslim ban.

    Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Yemen, Syria. Besides being majority Muslim, I wonder what these countries have in common that they would end up on temporary travel ban list? Hmm.

    • “Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Yemen, Syria. Besides being majority Muslim, I wonder what these countries have in common that they would end up on temporary travel ban list? ”

      All are in a position unable to effectively complain nor does the ban create significant commercial damage.

      Bullying tactics.

      • Bullying could very well be part of it, but I don’t think that’s the only reason.

        I think it has more to do with the level of credible terrorist threat, something that the public (myself included), as well as the press, really doesn’t understand well. In my limited understanding, threat level is not just about the presence or amount of terrorist elements, but it is also about the level of the target nation’s ability to see into the countries where those elements are, and the level of influence in those countries to keep those elements in check.

        • In comparison it is interesting to see how PiS in Poland pushed its agenda. When they get a bit too much blowback ( currentlly: abortion laws and such ) they retarget and open another tin of imbecility elsewhere.

          Lets see what happens the next days, weeks.
          ( my guess is adrenaline levels will stay up in the unhealthy red)

          • Thanks to Scott for letting us rant for a bit to reduce the blood pressure, it’s hard not to despair.
            I have stocked up lots of red wine to try and help me through the coming ordeal. Nothing has actually gone properly wrong yet.

        • I forgot to mention another factor, the ability of the host country to control/limit terrorist elements.

        • “Bullying could very well be part of it, but I don’t think that’s the only reason.”

          @Mike Bohnet,

          Sure it is. Otherwise, Lebanon would have been on that list, too. Of course, we all know why Lebanon was left off that list (nod-nod, wink-wink…say no more).

          • Mike B:

            Lets see, exempted countries all have business ties to the Petulant One.

            Selective extreme vetting.

            We have had one (a bit iffy6 but call it one) Terrorist act externally since 9/11 (Boston Bombing)

            So, rather than come up with a well crafted well though out and then execution and implantation, we have the Petulant One throw this out causing massive chaos, destroying the image of the US in the world (and yes that is important) not to mention no thought, no input, nada that is involved in a complex decision.

            So with one stupid move he gives everyone sane in the world reason to distrust the US as it now functions on whims and right wing lunatics.

            I could go on, and its only the first week.

            So yes, the man is stupid, he is petulant, he is a narcissist and he has fascist leanings.

            Be afraid, very afraid.

          • TransWorld,

            Oh really, so Trump has business ties in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Algeria, Morocco, Malaysia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Niger, Burkina Faso, Mali, Senegal, Tunisia, Guinea, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Sierra Leone, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Chad, Lebanon, Kuwait, Albania, Mauritania, Oman, Kosovo, Gambia, and Bahrain? …..Who knew?

            These are all Muslim majority countries with Muslim populations above 1 million, that are not included in the temporary travel ban and where Trump has NO business ties.

    • @Mike Bohnet

      “Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Yemen, Syria. Besides being majority Muslim, I wonder what these countries have in common that they would end up on temporary travel ban list? Hmm.”

      What these countries have in common is that none of their citizens where involved in the September 11 attacks.

      Meanwhile, the American perpetual “War on Terror” continues unabated.

      The number of civil wars in Muslim countries has increased in recent years but the present level is not historically unprecedented. Simultaneously, there has been quite a drop in the number of civil wars outside the Muslim world (i.e. ref. in link below).

      Thus, quite a few citizens of western countries have seemingly too easily developed an exaggerated sense that collapse of the Muslim world is a central feature of the last decade and a half.

      It’s also quite obvious that Faux News and alt.right. (etc.) news consumers have been ripe targets for fear mongering over the threat of Islamic terrorists since 9/11.

      It’s pretty obvious, therefore, that the US — and particularly the GOP and its cohorts — have cornered the market on overreaction to terrorism.

      In 2015, Barack Obama made a pertinent comment, bemoaning America’s tolerance for widespread gun violence mixed with a disproportionate fear of terrorism:

      “If you look at the number of Americans killed since 9/11 by terrorism, it’s less than 100. If you look at the number that have been killed by gun violence, it’s in the tens of thousands”.

      In recent years, most civil wars have taken place in Muslim countries. Are Muslim countries more war-prone? Not necessarily, if we look at data for the whole period after World War II. But in the post-Cold War era, most wars are civil wars. Muslim countries have a disproportionate share of these – not because such conflicts have increased but mainly because other conflicts have declined. We list several hypotheses for why this pat-tern has emerged.

      • Addendum

        Thanks to Trump — China, Europe, India, Latin-America etc., may soon realise that the GOP is perhaps the most dangerous organisation* in the world today.

        While the US have long since been on a full steam ahead war footing with its perpetual faux war on terror, the rest of the world will have to deal with the real issues facing mankind. Perhaps one day, the GOP and other climate-change deniers who’re exercising political influence will be prosecuted as simple war criminals by the International Court of Justice.


        • Well, because Noam Chomsky said it, it must be true… right?

          Straight out of far left handbook.

          • Dammm- you must be reading HRC favorite author- Sol Alinsky- the DNC bible when they lose – or did you get a copy of one of her term papers she wrote about meeting her hero .

            But Yalies are ike that . . .

            Boola Boola-

        • @Mike Bohnet

          American exceptionalism is detrimental and ugly when Americans mistakenly believe that they are somehow exceptional — not bound by the limits accepted by much of the rest of the world regarding what can be done. It’s pretty pathetic, therefore, to dismiss the opinion from one of the leading Western intellectuals, as something “straight out of far left handbook”. Why don’t you instead try to debunk what he’s saying. Is your lack thereof, because you can’t?

          While there are climate deniers across the globe, this anti-science stance is a particularly American phenomenon. Elected GOP climate deniers are commonplace; with the “Supreme Leader” now among them. It’s a different story in other industrialised nations, however. All over the world, climate change denial is seen as the preserve of the crackpot.

          The GOP’s climate denial, buoyed by a massive social, financial and political machine oiled by conservative think-tanks and activist groups, has created a potentially disastrous situation in which climate change — arguably the most pressing global issue of our time — has also become one of the most polarising topics in an America (first) that looks a lot like America alone.

          Republicans have become a radical insurgency — ideologically extreme, contemptuous of the inherited policy regime, scornful of compromise, unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence, and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of their political opposition. The evidence of this asymmetry is overwhelming.

          • “Why don’t you instead try to debunk what he’s saying. Is your lack thereof, because you can’t?”

            My lack thereof is because I don’t need to. I wasn’t the one making assertions that condemn the opinions of an extremely large group of people. You were responding to my post in which I was stating why I disagreed with Scott’s characterization for the executive order as a Muslim ban. You really didn’t address my response to Scott so much as you took every opportunity to make weakly supported wild claims about people you obviously don’t agree with. The onus was on you to demonstrate why I shouldn’t dismiss you assertions.

            Wild claims require extraordinary backup and parroting the opinion of Noam Chomsky doesn’t do it for me. It’s been done by many on the far left for some time now and is tiresome. Hence the handbook comment.

    • Uhh mike- if you persist in using FACTS and data to support your comments- you may be invading the ‘ safe space ‘ of the illiteratti and cause them severe discomfort. ( i’ve been banned from using the term ‘ snow…. ‘ )

      And besides, a simple question is why did Obama not ‘ ban’ ( which is not the issue ) the saudi states who are/were prime movers on 911- but POTUSis now hammered cuz he didn’t ??

      And with all the whining about the executive order being a ‘ ban’ on travel , etc ( not true ) I’ve yet to find any article by those same groups- state AGs, etc that spells out just what portion of the Constitution was violated- instead just a ‘ moral ‘ issue that did not apply to Obama and previous administrations.

      ( The above written to hopefully avoid censorship and discomfort equivalent to waterboarding for the more sensitive posters here )

      • @Don

        And besides, a simple question is why did Obama not ‘ ban’ ( which is not the issue ) the saudi states who are/were prime movers on 911- but POTUSis now hammered cuz he didn’t ??”

        Hmm, why didn’t you direct that question to the George W. Bush Administration 15 years ago?

        As for your alternate “facts”, you seem to be ruefully unaware of Article II, Section 2, Clause 2* of the United States Constitution, and that the US senate has long since ratified the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, also known as the 1951 Refugee Convention**.



        The contracting states shall not

        – discriminate against refugees (Article 3)

        take exceptional measures against a refugee solely on account of his or her nationality (Article 8)

        – expect refugees to pay taxes and fiscal charges that are different to those of nationals (Article 29)

        – impose penalties of refugees who entered illegally in search of asylum if they present themselves (Article 31)

        – expel refugees (Article 32)

        – forcibly return or “refoul” refugees to the country they’ve fled from (Article 33). It is widely accepted that the prohibition of forcible return is part of customary international law. This means that even States that are not party to the 1951 Refugee Convention must respect the principle of non-refoulement.[11] Therefore, States are obligated under the Convention and under customary international law to respect the principle of non-refoulement. If and when this principle is threatened, UNHCR can respond by intervening with relevant authorities, and if it deems necessary, will inform the public.

        Thus, any reasonably informed citizen of the US should be able to grasp that it’s highly likely that Trump’s executive order on refugees is in conflict with both federal and constitutional Law.

        • OV-099,

          It’s not so cut and dry, but I’m no lawyer (don’t think you’re one either).

          How about:
          The contracting states shall
          – be able to take provisional measures against a refugee if needed in the interest of essential national security (Article 9)

          • @Mike Bohnet

            Under international law, the US cannot expel asylum seekers at the US border just because Trump says so.


            Also, it may look as if Trump’s preference for Christians is not constitutional.

            According to the Supreme Court, “the clearest command of the Establishment Clause is that one religious denomination cannot be officially preferred over another.” Larson v. Valente, 456 US. 228, 244 (1982). But that command is apparently not clear enough for President Donald Trump. On Friday he signed an Executive Order on refugees that imposes a selective ban on immigration from seven Muslim-majority countries, and at the same time establishes preferential treatment for refugees seeking asylum who are identified with “minority religions” in their country of origin. In case there was any doubt about the latter provision’s intent, Trump told Christian Broadcast News that it was intended to give priority to “Christians” seeking asylum over “Muslims.”


          • OV-099,

            Again, it’s not cut and dried. The alllaw link you posted seems to highlight that the inspections officers have considerable power and latitude to apply the “summary exclusion” procedure which “can be applied to anyone except people entering the United States under the Visa Waiver Program (according to a 1999 decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals).”

            I think a couple of laymen arguing the legalities of immigration procedures intersecting with new executive orders on an aviation related internet site is pretty much pointless.

          • OV-99:

            I would refrain from invoking international law.

            Under international law China can’t claim the South China sea territory but has.

            I do agree there is a constitutional issue and that is being addressed (sadly the impact on people and the world goes on)

            There is a stron feeling in the US and with a great deal of justiaion, that so called internation law has no place in the US and treaties abroaggin constiaonl rights are illegal.

            I recall some years back that a gasoline additive (MCB?) was forced down the US throat by a Canadian company under one of the trade agreements.

            Said stuff is grossly toxic, a number of municipal water supplies were contaminated by it and even minute amounts are toxic.

            Attempts were mad to force the US to keep using it.

            It will take some time to find out the outcome.

            Alaska forced it out and defended it successfully.

          • See why we have no interest in chlorinated chicken?
            Or anabolic beef at that.

            Topping on the cheese is arbitration courts for alleged loss of profits. Guess the outcome each time.

          • @Mike Bohnet

            The point is that asylum seekers under US law have the constitutional right to have their asylum claims examined. Trump’s decree completely disallows that right.

            Btw, it’s interesting to note that after having taken a swipe at Scott Hamilton for allowing political posts, you seem to have gladly entered into the freewheeling debate about the dictatorial habits of the “Supreme Leader”. 😉

          • “Btw, it’s interesting to note that after having taken a swipe at Scott Hamilton for allowing political posts, you seem to have gladly entered into the freewheeling debate about the dictatorial habits of the “Supreme Leader”. ?”


            I took a swipe at Scott because I thought he deserved it for the way he’s gone about enforcing the rules while at the same time breaking them.

            I have no problem criticizing Trump, the GOP, the Dems, Boeing, Airbus, or whatever, but if you’re going to do it, do it with class, without taking purposeful subtle swipes at and disrespecting people who may disagree with your point of view.

          • @Mike Bohnet

            “I have no problem criticizing Trump, the GOP, the Dems, Boeing, Airbus, or whatever, but if you’re going to do it, do it with class, without taking purposeful subtle swipes at and disrespecting people who may disagree with your point of view.”

            Why, then, didn’t you call out Don when you took a swipe at Scott. If you believe you’re taking the high road, it would probably boost your credibility if you started to call out people you’re in accord with that are not “classy” (i.e. using your term), instead of trying to point out the lack of “classiness” among those that may be harbouring radically different opinions.

          • OV-099,

            Don was already “called out” by Scott for what he said while stating his opinion. What would be the point of me doing it again.

            Don’t ask me to do something you’re not willing to do yourself. I’ll worry about my credibility, you worry about yours.

  22. @Don

    Trump’s executive order cannot displace domestic legal obligations. So those who, with great difficulty, manage to reach the US will have to have their asylum claims examined.

  23. Well I am so glad that after 126 responses it is all so clear and obvious. I think we have managed to resolve the main geopolitical issues of our age. Grubbie have you a spare bottle of red to assist my perspective please?

  24. @Mike and Don,

    It amazes me that you have not the perspective to put yourself in the shoes of a Latin American, an Arab, or an Asian and consider that they may feel very offended by Trump’s Executive Order and all the Grandstanding that goes with the order. And their perspective as to what as just happened (i.e., the Exec Order) and their reaction to it is really the main and rightful topic. Because it makes a difference to American Aircraft Sales…Period.

    • Golly- I didnt know you were a ranking constitutional lawyer- and am surprised you were not picked for SCOTUS.

      Now if you can just convince the AG and Supremes to put money above security and reason we would all be appreciative

      And your personal experience with latin amercan, asian, and semitic cultures must be better than mine.

      In my college days, I had frat brothers in the house from Syria, ( his uncle was named Shishackly ), Chile, Allepo ( my roomate for a year – french syrian ) – but only worked for an asian ( japanese) , including ( gasp ) a new yorker..


      • @Don,

        Thank you for replying. No further discussion is needed.

  25. OK, children. This is done. Comments are closed.

  26. Pingback: Pontifications: Boeing's risk if Trump goes wild - Leeham News and Comment