Are you for or against taking in Syrian refugees? (2 Viewers)

[The General]

Aren't we "the greatest nation on Earth" and "shinning city on a hill" and all that?

 

[moleculo]

New plan:

All refugees are welcome. Any Syrian male between the ages of 18 and 40 is automatically enrolled into the Free Syrian Army (or whatever), and sent back to fight for their homeland (with our full support).

 

[comfortably numb]

I voted yes but there are dozens of countries in the mid east Africa/Asia that are continuously ravaged by bad people.
Where/When is the line drawn?

Afghanistan?

Sudan?

North Koreans?

Mexicans?

Also,

The questions a lot of people might have.

Do they ever go back? How would that be handled?

Who would decide...OK coast is clear?

 

[Ignoramus]

No thanks. Too risky when you know terrorists will be infiltrating and even high ranking intelligence officials question if we can even properly screen them. American lives are top priority.

This is also true of non-refugee immigrants. And student visas. Hell, any visa at all. No reason a terrorist couldn't pose as someone else and obtain a business or tourism visa. Perhaps we just shut our borders completely. Nobody goes in or out without a US passport. After all, American lives are top priority.

You're just not following or acknowledging the issues with screening this group. It's not comparable to standard immigrant screening.

Since most of the terrorists have been EU residents, what are the unique issues with screening Syrian refugees?

Most? One is enough man. You actually just typed that?

We probably need to close our borders to European Nationals visiting here then, too. Never can be too safe.

 

[Skoo]

Changing who we are as a country out of fear is EXACTLY what the terrorists are aiming for. It's the whole point of terrorism.

Let's not give them their victory.

 

[moleculo]

This whole outcry to keep refugees out embarrasses me as an American.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/21/us/where-syrian-refugees-are-in-the-united-states.html

100% for it.

This is may be bit of minutia perhaps but I think we should fast track the most attractive women over the age of 18.

 

[CowboysFromHell]

How many refugees is Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Australia, New Zealand taking on? Everybody doing their share?

Agree. Same goes for fighting ISIS. I say we do our fair share, but not pick up the slack for countries like Saudi Arabia who don't want to pitch in to help solve the problems in their own backyard.

 

[The Ref]

The conclusion I keep coming back to is send in the troups, clear an area, set up a no fly zone and keep the Syrians in Syria.

And when I say "send in the troups" I mean Russia, Europe, Saudis, Iran and only for the purpose of keeping these people safe until we figure out what to do with the Isis problem.

Shouldn't be hard to build New York City and protect it in the middle of a war zone.

. Won't be easy to migrate the 4M and get them settled/fed/employed either, to say nothing of potentially letting the bad guys slip in.

There is no good answer here unfortunately and I'm trying to walk the line of doing what's right and doing what's safe.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

This whole outcry to keep refugees out embarrasses me as an American.

And the Republicans wonder why the rest of the Nation considers them to be hill people.

 

[Ignoramus]

[icon], on 18 Nov 2015 - 10:59 AM, said:

NetnautX, on 18 Nov 2015 - 09:18 AM, said:

Seems logistically problematic. Let Europe take care of their neighbors. We take in enough refugees as is from Mexico and Central America.

Yes.

IMO this is founded in two questions.

SHould we? Of course... in a perfect world we as a nation would feed and shelter all those in need. The reality is that's just not feasable. Every dollar spent on bringing in refugees is one dollar denied Americans in need (like homeless vets). The issue is that, fiscally, we are no longer in a place where we can shoulder this burden ourselves.

What is particularly frustrating is when you see neighboring nations like Saudi Arabia sit on resources like the city of Mina (vacant air conditioned tent city capable of housing 3 Million) that they refuse to open to this problem. Saudi's only contribution is $ to build mosques in Europe. OF COURSE.....

Bottom Line: This isn't a utopian environment. You can tap dance around it and sugar coat it with moral fluff pieces... but we have finite resources. Are you comfortable knowing one Homeless american vet/child starves or struggles for every Syrian refugee we take in?

Need to get our own house in order before taking on more.

So we need to cut off all expenditures outside our borders?

 

[CurlyNight]

New plan:

All refugees are welcome. Any Syrian male between the ages of 18 and 40 is automatically enrolled into the Free Syrian Army (or whatever), and sent back to fight for their homeland (with our full support).

One terrorist was a women who thankfully blew herself up during the recent raid in Paris. And there is no age limit on being a terrorist. The armed guards on our streets ready to shoot us were even 12! Not kidding.

 

[VA703]

send them to Russia or a neighboring country. not our problem

eventually this country will be 51%+ illegals

if it isn't already

Admittedly, Im a bit slow. I dont understand the correlation.

its okay

 

[jonessed]

Changing who we are as a country out of fear is EXACTLY what the terrorists are aiming for. It's the whole point of terrorism.

Let's not give them their victory.

Immigration was a hot topic well before the Syrian refugee issue.

 

[Tom Servo]

Apparently Kevin Drum of Mother Jones thinks mocking people for wanting bans/moratoriums on Islamic immigrants is a really bad idea.

Here's the thing: to the average person, it seems perfectly reasonable to be suspicious of admitting Syrian refugees to the country. We know that ISIS would like to attack the US. We know that ISIS probably has the wherewithal to infiltrate a few of its people into the flood of refugees. And most voters have no idea how easy it is to get past US screening. They probably figure it's pretty easy.

So to them it doesn't seem xenophobic or crazy to call for an end to accepting Syrian refugees. It seems like simple common sense. After all, things changed after Paris.

Mocking Republicans over this—as liberals spent much of yesterday doing on my Twitter stream—seems absurdly out of touch to a lot of people.

By the way , the Tsarnaev brothers were once youngsters who passed screening. How did that work out?

 

[moleculo]

New plan:

All refugees are welcome. Any Syrian male between the ages of 18 and 40 is automatically enrolled into the Free Syrian Army (or whatever), and sent back to fight for their homeland (with our full support).

One terrorist was a women who thankfully blew herself up during the recent raid in Paris. And there is no age limit on being a terrorist. The armed guards on our streets ready to shoot us were even 12! Not kidding.

I didn't say it was a fool-proof plan.

 

[Osaurus]

Changing who we are as a country out of fear is EXACTLY what the terrorists are aiming for. It's the whole point of terrorism.

Let's not give them their victory.

Immigration was a hot topic well before the Syrian refugee issue.

 

[CurlyNight]

New plan:

All refugees are welcome. Any Syrian male between the ages of 18 and 40 is automatically enrolled into the Free Syrian Army (or whatever), and sent back to fight for their homeland (with our full support).

One terrorist was a women who thankfully blew herself up during the recent raid in Paris. And there is no age limit on being a terrorist. The armed guards on our streets ready to shoot us were even 12! Not kidding.

I didn't say it was a fool-proof plan.

 

[Charlie Steiner]

New plan:

All refugees are welcome. Any Syrian male between the ages of 18 and 40 is automatically enrolled into the Free Syrian Army (or whatever), and sent back to fight for their homeland (with our full support).

Worked_before.

 

[MattFancy]

So this is good, Tony Dale, a legislator from Texas, doesn't want Syrian refugees to come here because it's too easy for them to get guns. The irony is, Tony Dale just voted to block mandatory background checks on all gun sales in Texas.

http://thinkprogress...ans-gun-access/

 

[moleculo]

New plan:

All refugees are welcome. Any Syrian male between the ages of 18 and 40 is automatically enrolled into the Free Syrian Army (or whatever), and sent back to fight for their homeland (with our full support).

Worked_before.

That's to fight in a civil war for a country they just got to and have no real allegiance for. I'm proposing they fight for their own homes.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

What I am hearing from this thread and others is that it is past time to consider the Saudis as allies.

 

[Skoo]

Changing who we are as a country out of fear is EXACTLY what the terrorists are aiming for. It's the whole point of terrorism.

Let's not give them their victory.

Immigration was a hot topic well before the Syrian refugee issue.

Ok....

So what does that have to do with the thread topic exactly?

 

[[icon]]

Bottom Line: This isn't a utopian environment. You can tap dance around it and sugar coat it with moral fluff pieces... but we have finite resources. Are you comfortable knowing one Homeless american vet/child starves or struggles for every Syrian refugee we take in?

Need to get our own house in order before taking on more.

So we need to cut off all expenditures outside our borders?

Answer my bolded statement please.

 

[The General]

So this is good, Tony Dale, a legislator from Texas, doesn't want Syrian refugees to come here because it's too easy for them to get guns. The irony is, Tony Dale just voted to block mandatory background checks on all gun sales in Texas.

http://thinkprogress...ans-gun-access/

That's perfect.

 

[Charlie Steiner]

New plan:

All refugees are welcome. Any Syrian male between the ages of 18 and 40 is automatically enrolled into the Free Syrian Army (or whatever), and sent back to fight for their homeland (with our full support).

Worked_before.

That's to fight in a civil war for a country they just got to and have no real allegiance for. I'm proposing they fight for their own homes.

You're right, I just thought of that scene when I read your post.

Still, I can't help but think there's some lesson from that we can use today...

 

[CurlyNight]

So this is good, Tony Dale, a legislator from Texas, doesn't want Syrian refugees to come here because it's too easy for them to get guns. The irony is, Tony Dale just voted to block mandatory background checks on all gun sales in Texas.

http://thinkprogress...ans-gun-access/

That's perfect progress.

 

[Henry Ford]

The conclusion I keep coming back to is send in the troups, clear an area, set up a no fly zone and keep the Syrians in Syria.

And when I say "send in the troups" I mean Russia, Europe, Saudis, Iran and only for the purpose of keeping these people safe until we figure out what to do with the Isis problem.

Shouldn't be hard to build New York City and protect it in the middle of a war zone.

. Won't be easy to migrate the 4M and get them settled/fed/employed either, to say nothing of potentially letting the bad guys slip in.

There is no good answer here unfortunately and I'm trying to walk the line of doing what's right and doing what's safe.

There is, actually, a good answer. The price we pay for living in something approaching a free society is a loss of the security that comes with a locked-down not free society.

There was a time in this country that citizens viewed the ideals that the country was founded on as more important than any of our individual lives. That the point of this society was to show that an enduring freedom could be built without giving up all of our rights to the government and without being controlled by fear. Remember, the vast majority of human history justified kings and other dictator regimes as benevolent, taking control and handling everything for the poor, terrified masses.

Unfortunately, the right for people already here to carry an AR15 in public appears to be a really important one right now. The right to breathe free air away from despots and civil war for millions of terrified people seems like not a big deal in comparison.

We are not completely safe with respect to any immigrants. We have never been safe in that respect. But when you give up everything this country stands for, there's no point anymore. The terrorists don't just control 1/4 of Syria at that point, they control the United States as well.

If a community of Syrians springs up in my neck of the woods, I guarantee you I'll be the first person dishing out jambalaya and welcoming the group to America.

 

[jonessed]

Changing who we are as a country out of fear is EXACTLY what the terrorists are aiming for. It's the whole point of terrorism.

Let's not give them their victory.

Immigration was a hot topic well before the Syrian refugee issue.

Ok....

So what does that have to do with the thread topic exactly?

It was your post. Debating the merits of our immigration/refugee policies isn't changing who we are. It's something that's been going on for some time.

 

[moleculo]

Bottom Line: This isn't a utopian environment. You can tap dance around it and sugar coat it with moral fluff pieces... but we have finite resources. Are you comfortable knowing one Homeless american vet/child starves or struggles for every Syrian refugee we take in?

Need to get our own house in order before taking on more.

So we need to cut off all expenditures outside our borders?

Nice straw man. Answer my bolded statement please.

I'll take a shot at it.

We have programs for the starving vets/children. They have ways out. No one dies of starvation in this country. The homeless have shelters they can get to as needed, we have a myriad of housing programs, food stamps, job help, etc. Many of those on the streets (especially vets) are dealing with chemical dependence and/or mental health issues, where they refuse treatment. There isn't a whole lot that can be done for them.

I'm not comfortable letting entire families be slaughtered. I'm not comfortable with able-bodied people being coerced to join ISIS at the tip of a saber. I'm not comfortable living in a country that allows things like this to happen, even if it is thousands of miles away.

 

[HellToupee]

One of the biggest issues surrounding the next US Presidential election is how to secure our borders to stop the influx of potentially dangerous immigrants. While we figure that out, seems like a great idea to allow 10,000 refugees from the terrorist hub of the world onto our soil. What could possibly go wrong? I mean, surely our vetting process is fool proof, and it's not like a terrorist would pretend to NOT be a terrorist, or falsify documents to fool us, or anything of that nature. Should be fine.

I agree

No.

 

[jonessed]

But when you give up everything this country stands for, there's no point anymore. The terrorists don't just control 1/4 of Syria at that point, they control the United States as well.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Look, if we didn't keep the Irish out there's no reason to keep out the Syrians.

Amirite?

 

[comfortably numb]

I will echo the facebook posts.

Even in my moments of hesitation to the thought of accepting in these people...when I read how despicable people sound on facebook about them it just makes me feel sad.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

"Liberty," in case you've forgotten, is a soul's right to breathe. When it cannot take a long breath, laws are girded too tight. Without liberty, man is a syncope.

 

[timschochet]

i think the majority of Americans, if polled, will be against.

My fear is that Donald Trump or Ted Cruz will be able to use this issue to get elected President.

 

[Ned]

I keep seeing the 'take care of our homeless first' argument being made, but I think its just something that's a convenient retort. For those making this argument, what have you been doing to help our homeless? Have you at least been voicing this tragic issue (homelessness) before the Syrian refugee issue came about?

I'm not informed enough on what programs are offered to the homeless, especially for our homeless vets, but there has to be some sort of support out there today. What more can we do to help them with the resources that are being proposed to take in the refugees?

 

[moleculo]

i think the majority of Americans, if polled, will be against.

My fear is that Donald Trump or Ted Cruz will be able to use this issue to get elected President.

that's right. "Let in the refugees" does not make for good campaign. The obvious, emotional answer is "hell no", and that's what will win the day. someone in the "R" side has got to figure out how to make the case, because the rank and file Republicans will not listen to Obama or Hillary.

 

[RBM]

New plan:

All refugees are welcome. Any Syrian male between the ages of 18 and 40 is automatically enrolled into the Free Syrian Army (or whatever), and sent back to fight for their homeland (with our full support).

One terrorist was a women who thankfully blew herself up during the recent raid in Paris. And there is no age limit on being a terrorist. The armed guards on our streets ready to shoot us were even 12! Not kidding.

I didn't say it was a fool-proof plan.

How noble of you to put them over the safety of Americans when you really just don't know how many will be terrorists.

You're embarrassed by people wanting to keep their families safe?

 

[CurlyNight]

i think the majority of Americans, if polled, will be against.

My fear is that Donald Trump or Ted Cruz will be able to use this issue to get elected President.

They did a poll and most are against denying them entry. We have very high measures in place to vet out these people compared to anywhere in the world. Sure it's not full proof but it's pretty damn impressive the process one goes to. Hell my aunt in Iran can't even get a friggin green card to come here. Dad applied for it 10 years ago for her! She's in line they say.

 

[siffoin]

"I wash born here, an I wash raised here, and dad gum it, I'm gonna die here. An no sidewindin', bushwackin', hornswaglin', slurpee slinger is gonna rouin me bishen cutter." I think this is a quote from either Gabby Johnson or Mike Huckabee

Obviously people are conflicted. I'm not a religious person. And I wouldn't call myself a Christian either. But I do try to model my life philosophically with the teaching of Jesus.

We need to accept refugees as a statement to ourselves and the world of the values we represent.

Boise has a refugee population that has grown over the years. In the past year, I've learned a lot more about refugees. I also started a small side business - where I work with a non-profit who trains people who have barriers to employment (primarily refugees, but also chronically homeless, non-violent people released from prison, battered women etc) - and through my partnership have hired refugees. I have refugees from Africa, Middle East and Central America who do work for me. I love these people. They are wonderful individuals who come from a broken place and they need help, assistance and compassion.

"Whoever has earthly possessions and notices a brother in need and yet withholds his compassion from him, how can the love of God be present in him?" John 3:17.

Bad guys with bad intentions can and will always find a way. We need to be vigilant in stopping that from happening yet at the same time we need to make sure we don't trade away freedoms, liberty and moral values out of fear.

 

[jonessed]

Bottom Line: This isn't a utopian environment. You can tap dance around it and sugar coat it with moral fluff pieces... but we have finite resources. Are you comfortable knowing one Homeless american vet/child starves or struggles for every Syrian refugee we take in?

Need to get our own house in order before taking on more.

So we need to cut off all expenditures outside our borders?

Nice straw man. Answer my bolded statement please.

I'll take a shot at it. We have programs for the starving vets/children. They have ways out. No one dies of starvation in this country. The homeless have shelters they can get to as needed, we have a myriad of housing programs, food stamps, job help, etc. Many of those on the streets (especially vets) are dealing with chemical dependence and/or mental health issues, where they refuse treatment. There isn't a whole lot that can be done for them.

I'm not comfortable letting entire families be slaughtered. I'm not comfortable with able-bodied people being coerced to join ISIS at the tip of a saber. I'm not comfortable living in a country that allows things like this to happen, even if it is thousands of miles away.

Mental health care for the homeless in this country is atrocious. It's a much more pressing issue than 10K refugees.

Not that we can't do both, but for whatever reason, we choose to spend the money elsewhere.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

"I wash born here, an I wash raised here, and dad gum it, I'm gonna die here. An no sidewindin', bushwackin', hornswaglin', slurpee slinger is gonna rouin me bishen cutter." I think this is a quote from either Gabby Johnson or Mike Huckabee

Obviously people are conflicted. I'm not a religious person. And I wouldn't call myself a Christian either. But I do try to model my life philosophically with the teaching of Jesus.

We need to accept refugees as a statement to ourselves and the world of the values we represent.

Boise has a refugee population that has grown over the years. In the past year, I've learned a lot more about refugees. I also started a small side business - where I work with a non-profit who trains people who have barriers to employment (primarily refugees, but also chronically homeless, non-violent people released from prison, battered women etc) - and through my partnership have hired refugees. I have refugees from Africa, Middle East and Central America who do work for me. I love these people. They are wonderful individuals who come from a broken place and they need help, assistance and compassion.

"Whoever has earthly possessions and notices a brother in need and yet withholds his compassion from him, how can the love of God be present in him?" John 3:17.

Bad guys with bad intentions can and will always find a way. We need to be vigilant in stopping that from happening yet at the same time we need to make sure we don't trade away freedoms, liberty and moral values out of fear.

http://ih0.redbubble.net/image.22667193.1764/ra,unisex_tshirt,x3104,gold,front-c,650,630,900,975-bg,f8f8f8.u2.jpg

 

[Andy Dufresne]

If a bad guy was embedded in the immigrant community, could he maintain his cover once they were here?

I would think that would be extremely difficult, bordering on impossible.

Further, The Paris guys succeeded because they had a large support network. That wouldn't be available here, right?

 

[CurlyNight]

I keep seeing the 'take care of our homeless first' argument being made, but I think its just something that's a convenient retort. For those making this argument, what have you been doing to help our homeless? Have you at least been voicing this tragic issue (homelessness) before the Syrian refugee issue came about?

I'm not informed enough on what programs are offered to the homeless, especially for our homeless vets, but there has to be some sort of support out there today. What more can we do to help them with the resources that are being proposed to take in the refugees?

The funds allocated for homelessness and vets is atrocious. More can be done for them and all struggling people but unfortunately our higher ups think otherwise and source the funds to other programs.

 

[Ignoramus]

Bottom Line: This isn't a utopian environment. You can tap dance around it and sugar coat it with moral fluff pieces... but we have finite resources. Are you comfortable knowing one Homeless american vet/child starves or struggles for every Syrian refugee we take in?

Need to get our own house in order before taking on more.

So we need to cut off all expenditures outside our borders?

Answer my bolded statement please.

So if we bar refugees, then the homeless and vets will get taken care of? Ok, I'm down with that plan.

 

[timschochet]

If a bad guy was embedded in the immigrant community, could he maintain his cover once they were here?

I would think that would be extremely difficult, bordering on impossible.

Further, The Paris guys succeeded because they had a large support network. That wouldn't be available here, right?

Its also important to remember that the vast majority of terrorist attempts in this country since 9/11 have been foiled due to Muslim informants.

 

[[icon]]

Bottom Line: This isn't a utopian environment. You can tap dance around it and sugar coat it with moral fluff pieces... but we have finite resources. Are you comfortable knowing one Homeless american vet/child starves or struggles for every Syrian refugee we take in?

Need to get our own house in order before taking on more.

So we need to cut off all expenditures outside our borders?

Nice straw man. Answer my bolded statement please.

I'll take a shot at it.

We have programs for the starving vets/children. They have ways out. No one dies of starvation in this country. The homeless have shelters they can get to as needed, we have a myriad of housing programs, food stamps, job help, etc. Many of those on the streets (especially vets) are dealing with chemical dependence and/or mental health issues, where they refuse treatment. There isn't a whole lot that can be done for them.

So according to you, were are successfully taking care of all Americans in need and have the leftover resources to take on refugees... and anyone who's going hungry can't be helped (Or it's not worth giving up on them to focus on refugees)?

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 49.1 million households experienced food insecurity at some point in 2013. On December 11, the U.S. Conference of Mayors released its 32nd Annual Report on Hunger and Homelessness. The report covered 25 American cities: 71% said the number of requests for emergency food assistance had increased in the last year, while only 25% said that requests for emergency food assistance had decreased. And 84% of the cities surveyed expected emergency food requests to increase in 2015, but many food banks may not have the resources to meet those requests.

Lets leave the "I'm not comfortable with suffering" dramatics out of it. Tens of Millions of Americans are starving. Nobody is comfortable with suffering... but I'm LESS comfortable with stepping over our own suffering citizens reaching out for food, in order to feed others. For most, this isn't about fear.. this is about resources.

 

[greenroom]

I voted no.. but I just don't think it is time to bring them over at this time. Why take the chance of having something go wrong. Think about how big of a mess it would be if one did do something wrong. The media/public would have a field day going over why were Americans not protected first.

On top of that why not take care of our Vets first? lets get our house in order before we go fixing everyone else's.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

If a bad guy was embedded in the immigrant community, could he maintain his cover once they were here?

I would think that would be extremely difficult, bordering on impossible.

Further, The Paris guys succeeded because they had a large support network. That wouldn't be available here, right?

Its also important to remember that the vast majority of terrorist attempts in this country since 9/11 have been foiled due to Muslim informants.

That's what I was thinking. I would guess the community would rat out the bad guys, the ones they were escaping from in the first place.