PEW Research has a "history/political science" quiz in which it attempts to inform the public as to the differences in opinion, or fact. The only problem is, they are either wrong, lying, or worse..
The PEW Research Center is partisan, alternative history-pushing: balderdash. Do yourself a favor: if you passed it's "5 Facts or Opinions" test, particularly about the US role in Syria, report to the nearest cult déprogrammer, immediately.
The "fact" that ISIS lost 70% of it's territory in 2017 is blatantly pro Trump partisan crap. This is a fallacious assertion, and has a ulterior motive set behind it.
First, ISIS was the name that the US gave it. The UN recognized that it was ISIL, and ALL resolutions about it refer to it by this name. Fact.
Also, in 2015, it changed its name to Islamic State, IS. Anyone using ISIS, while passing itself off as political science based research, must be regarded with suspicion.
ISIS was created by the four nations of the US, UK, S Arabia, and Israel. For this reason, the ENTIRE US Congress permitted Emailgate to escape criminal charges. But, the secret leaked, anyway. And that, and not "lost 70% of "their" land", was, and continues to be FACT.
WE MADE ISIS! FROM KURDS! Therefore, IS is not even real....it is a group of Kurdish factional militias, armed, and protected by the Allies, that had no factual right to Syrian land, never owned any, and therefore, never lost any, either. The land they held in Northern Iraq was also provided to them by the US. And, with the three other nations I mentioned, they continue being materially supported; in concert with Israel, Saudi Arabia, UK, and, of course, the US.
It is a myth that these billions of dollars worth of arms, and training advisors, simply appeared from out of nowhere. But, this is the most basic fallacy presumed in the dialogues of the US Government, and in particular, its intelligence and military communities. By presuming in such definite fashion that this is a belief held by all sides of the political spectrum, PEW research reveals that it is nothing more than a hired gun think tank. The same kind of efforts that involved the US public being FOR Vietnamese Conflicts, and in the hunt for WMD's in Iraq.
And as such, PEW research represents the worst kind of evil in modern society.
When the current president has stated as much, "We should arm Arabic-speaking people, and let them fight in the region..." (4-17-18, DJT, televised speech) its not a suggestion. It is preparing the US public to face the truth.
IS is US made, unwelcomed in most sovereign nations, and never held land outside the land given to it by the US in Northern Iraq. IS was sponsored by the 4 allies as a means for accomplishing Israeli mandated regime-change throughout the Arab world. But most importantly: Syria.
IS murdered its way into small territorial controls outside of N Iraq, but never held this land in any sustainable measure of sufficient territorial rule as to have been able to lose any. These are the facts.
Now, how is HISTORIC FACT called, "..opinion..." in other than negligent, possibly unscrupulous fashion?
Immigrants in the US illegally present a host of problems to a raided social security apparatus designed to be paid into. If you can call illegal drugs an economic menace, which they are (the money officially vanishes from the economy, raising interest rates) then the monies being provided to illegals through these programs has a much more severely nose-diving chart of aggregate damage. Now, add that it only takes one of these people and a small test tube of Ebola: and that's a problem.
Referring to this as an opinion means that we are still believing the myth that the US cannot be attacked, and, as a result of just such an attack, sustain damage.
Statistically negating this as a possibility is fallacy-based spin. Since this hasn't ever happened, statistics favor that it all such attacks came from either US citizens, or legally verified foreign persons. Using this to validate the pro immigration stance being taken is negligent at BEST....at worst, it is pure evil.
We must enforce both our laws, and our sovereignty. This is perfunctory. So, if some agent provocateur does manage to do some harm, we will not have a clearly Globalist-inspired PEW type "open border" to blame, but will be able to have done the best we could in managing, not flinging open, any of our borders.
Think tanks like PEW are based in Pro-Israeli Lobby bias, and are staffed almost entirely by Jews. Jews are not loyal to the United States, but to Israel, THEN the United States. And with deep appreciation for the Jewish people whom refuse to support the modern atrocity of Israel, and are therefore, loyal citizens (and there are a few who understand just why the entire paradigm of superimposing Israel upon Palestinians is in every way wickedness...)
these Jewish people I salute as kindred spirits.
I advise folks to take ANYTHING they push with a grain of salt.