[@Vilageidiotx]

As I am aware that was what the administration at the time had their policy of. In either circumstance, that does not change the fact it negatively impacted those factors I mentioned prior, which was only the concerns I was talking about or giving priority to. I have to agree without doubt that the American public's resistance to back its own global endeavors since the Korean War are a factor too; the United States is not fond of occupying or holding territory.

To refer to the vetting issue, the concerns are different both in role and execution. You are correct that Europe faces a different and unavoidable aspect of the threat, but the United States is still severely lacking in terms of proactive fundamentals of foreign national circulation control. Terrorism, by its very function and in this case as a political and ideological effort, does not need mass numbers to gain effect; you cannot equate school shootings to acts of violence which have a specific target and effect under these criteria. Radical Islam employs terrorism as a means to cow, enfeeble and panic its targets, not to cause sizable injury or loss. It affects the morale of a populace to help gain compliance.

And yes, it should be no secret the Obama administration was far from anything "peace loving" in action compared to their word.

To address the "Europe is a caliphate." comment, I explicitly and openly remarked that was not my belief or understanding. No less, I never once claimed forced Islamic conversion through means like those of coercion, duress or threats. What I said was, it is their goal to change the dynamics of the populace to be sympathetic to their cause while actively pursuing advancement of their extreme religious agenda. The "Fall of Europe" is not a literal action where these people are taking the countries by force or storm, but because they are actively subverting traditional European law and values. Radicals have no interest in integration into European, or even American, society.

With response to the perceived threat of nationalism, it isn't even on the metaphorical radar in terms of credible threats that pose catastrophic consequences for the United States and or foreign nations. In fact, some of the technologies you are alluding to are the very reason there is an environment of deterrence over that of aggression. I also need mention that these policies change with each administration, at least in the United States, but to date none of these policies since the 1960s have elevated the concern for those actually involved. In short, the danger of a World War does not lie in your superpowers like the United States, Russia, China, United Kingdom or any of those who conscribe to nationalist policies in them. Your [i]most likely[/i] conflicts to expand to a larger theatre are cliché at this point, to which I imagine you know the reference.

And by expand I mean multiple nations waging the war.

But I digress, if you want a basic level assessment of the Alt-Right and the Trump movement, they are not considered a threat to security or safety. In fact, Antifa and its associates fulfill more of those criteria and are becoming increasingly more important in that scope and spectrum. What will come of this? Likely nothing. Both factions, even politically, are not extreme enough to gain enough power to severely leverage or alter the scale. Yes, even the Trump administration is not [i]that[/i] powerful or successful despite the opinions of both sides, from those who believe he is Hitler to those who think he's the Messiah. The American pride movement is nothing that was not already present, the difference being it was mobilized by being spoken down to and socially oppressed by its peers; the pendulum now is swinging the other way.

[quote=Vilageidiotx]The left is mainly driven by a fear of pogroms in this case. Nobody wants sharia law, but not everybody sees sharia law hiding behind every fence post, so for many people this bloated threat-of-Islam rhetoric seems like the a request for another Final Solution type thing.[/quote]
And this is why there is no such thing as Islamophobia. 

This is the desired, intentional effect of a campaign of terrorism. By design, as I had mentioned earlier, acts of terror are committed to cause panic and fear. This belief and perception, as well as the propagation of the myth that people might consider this reasonable or that some large amount of the population finds it credible, is part of its finer mechanism. It is to create an "us versus them" environment where, in this case, some people sympathize with the radicals and aid them or conspire against them and become "the other extreme". This is more or less a textbook execution of that.

To answer on your closing, I agree from an economic and security angle the stagnation of any market is a danger, although a rebound and both a dip are coming in the relative future; the dip, or rather two dips I know of, are not as concerning as the past, but they do align at a bad time. The rebound I am more skeptical of because, as with others in our age group, a "promising future economy" is usually met with suspicion and rightfully so.

The division on racial lines and Right versus Left, at least in the United States, I believe to be a self-aggrandizing effort. It has been and still is being used to drive political points, of which have only become more exaggerated with time. The "Alt-Right", not to be confused with the [i]actual[/i] Alt-Right, or those you see now making up the distinctive political right that helped get Donald Trump elected, in large do not care about the matters of race; they go so far to treat it as a joke now, which further polarizes their opposition in the Far Left that believe in the tenants of social justice. 

Again, I cite my earlier concern that domestic terror, to include that political focused as in this case, is in fact likely. I legitimately fear that during some demonstration or incident there will be an attack. Based on what I know, the Far Left is the most likely attacker, which only brings ill omen from the regular right, "Alt-Right" [i]and[/i] the Alt-Right. I say this because any such transaction will only prove them "right" and with a right-leaning government, potentially lead to a heavy handed albeit needed response, which will provoke more backlash.

My mindset and talent is in defense, so it is no surprise I see it form this lens. What worries me is that I can see it at all and said, "Maybe." with any amount of reliability in the impulse. [i]That[/i] is what concerns me and [i]that[/i] is why I believe these things.