Syrian refugees

[stconquest]

I don't view it as an absolute, I view the risks being to high to put our people in danger. I mean the chances are incredibly high, given that they even managed to terrorize France, but the risks of it is too much at the moment. And I also don't recall throwing out the idea of helping the refugees at all/entirely. It is unwise and unsafe to let them in at the moment, when we can't do anything to vet them and make sure there aren't radicals coming in to kill innocent Americans—even if we bring in 60k refugees and lose 200 Americans in the process. And there isn't really a "probably" about it. Israel and the U.S are the countries Jihadists want to destroy above all else at the moment. And I hate this argument! Why do so many leftists/equivalents use it? I don't have to understand where that hatred comes from because from the perspective of a terrorist, it means crap. They were perfectly fine with U.S involvement when we were giving billions of dollars away to Osama Bin Laden and helping them fight back the Russians. In fact, they were perfectly okay with hiding their hatred against us so long as we filled their pockets or gave them weapons to terrorize their own people with (like they were okay in Iran until the Revolution).

     I would care more about why the innocent people in Iraq etc etc had distaste for us (like our presence, though intended to help, only sets off their oppressors etc or Obama's usage of drones kills them and they hate us for it), not what crazy militant morons think about us—because their reasons for hating us is because we represent something they despise and fight against due to their interpretation of the Qu'ran and Ahadith; equality, change, peace and humane treatment. Our existence threatens theirs and if they can destroy us, they keep their power. Trying to make me understand terrorists is giving them a sense of normalcy, as if they are just regular Muslims angered by injustices done by the U.S or other western nations (and Israel) when they aren't.

     I'm not even going to direct that "supporting Israel to the absurd extent that it is" comment because I'm sick of the anti-Israel discussions that arise constantly due to one-sided hatred, but I do want to know what in the world makes you think I or any other sane person should stop and think about Jihadists (all Jihadists and Islamics are all radical, mind you—Muslims aren't) and "why" they hate us. Their views and their "reasons" should never be considered and are unimportant because they are radical.

     And it doesn't matter if letting in the Syrian refugees is a good thing when letting them in at the risk of Americans is not a good thing. We owe our citizens first above all else, which means not letting in thousands of people from a country that has out sourced radicals to Paris we cannot vet. I wish I could let them all in without worry, as I believe in immigration (my family immigrated) but America lives in a time where we know that is just naive and dangerous for us. We don't want to hand them a passport to repeat 9/11on us or something. I understand it would be the right thing to do, but we have more to think about than what is right for the refugees.

 

No, it isn't factual. It is garbage spewed by anti-U.S try-hards. Just because we show a sense of responsibility and logic most countries don't—like knowing just letting immigrants flow across our borders without IDs or proper entry is incredibly stupid—doesn't mean we don't care about "non U.S lives". People take complicated situations and twist them to their liking to fuel their own hatred whilst hypocritically stating they don't hate anyone or value all life. But I guess the millions of dollars we donate to humanitarian aids mean jack to the rest of the world (like the near 500 million we have given to Syrian Refugees).  We just help the world differently and the best we can with what we have (because we still have our people to think about too), it is just ignored or twisted because we're "'MURICA" (unless you don't count aid to people and countries across the sea as "beneficial to others"?). I'm not saying the U.S hasn't done things that were for its own good, but what country hasn't? Denying that would be absolutely stupid, yet for some reason the whole world seems to think America invented it or something...but that's besides the point of the discussion, so let's get it back on topic please. I'm not in this to discuss the intentions of America/Americans but why we should or shouldn't let in Syrian refugees at the moment.

 

That is a load of horseshit if I have ever read it.

 

Let's try this:  Terrorists, militant morons, radicals, hatred for others, religious militarists/jihadists (I know that one is a bit weak).  You could be describing groups like ISIS using these words, or you could use the same word in nearly the same context to describe the US military and their conduct on foreign soil.

 

The US military is no better than ISIS in many ways.  They have more in common that most people like to think.

 

I won't even get into the history of Isreal because from the way you misunderstand foreign affairs makes you so perfect to be a US politician.  <<<Look I insulted you, happy now?

 

 

Now, let's get another 500 words of bullshit from you...

[Albatross]

That is a load of horseshit if I have ever read it.

 

Let's try this:  Terrorists, militant morons, radicals, hatred for others, religious militarists/jihadists (I know that one is a bit weak).  You could be describing groups like ISIS using these words, or you could use the same word in nearly the same context to describe the US military and their conduct on foreign soil.

 

The US military is no better than ISIS in many ways.  They have more in common that most people like to think.

 

I won't even get into the history of Isreal because from the way you misunderstand foreign affairs makes you so perfect to be a US politician.  <<<Look I insulted you, happy now?

 

 

So you are saying the terms for religious Islamics (terrorists) is interchangeable for the U.S soldiers and Americans? You really wish to compare U.S soldiers to the same men who go around cutting the heads off of people, even other Muslims for not believing as they do? The same people who rape babies and sell little boys and girls to Iraqi "lords" for sex toys at night and whilst on travel? I just want to be clear that you have the view the U.S military is on the same level as people who have no regard for any life other than other radicals, because I want to then ask you to explain how they are "more alike" than most people think etc etc (I bet you will bring up isolated cases that goes against the military's code and majority of soldiers). I could see you saying the U.S Military has done evil and or questionable things, but to compare them to ISIL etc etc? Ridiculous.

 

Misunderstanding foreign affairs? How so?

(and yes, actually, I appreciate the directness. I'm not so thin skinned an "insult" is going to deter me or upset me.)

[stconquest]

So you are saying the terms for religious Islamics (terrorists) is interchangeable for the U.S soldiers and Americans? You really wish to compare U.S soldiers to the same men who go around cutting the heads off of people, even other Muslims for not believing as they do? The same people who rape babies and sell little boys and girls to Iraqi "lords" for sex toys at night and whilst on travel? I just want to be clear that you have the view the U.S military is on the same level as people who have no regard for any life other than other radicals, because I want to then ask you to explain how they are "more alike" than most people think etc etc (I bet you will bring up isolated cases that goes against the military's code and majority of soldiers). I could see you saying the U.S Military has done evil and or questionable things, but to compare them to ISIL etc etc? Ridiculous.

 

Misunderstanding foreign affairs? How so?

(and yes, actually, I appreciate the directness. I'm not so thin skinned an "insult" is going to deter me or upset me.)

 

OMG, they cut someone's head off?  Wow you are right.  The US military never hurts innocent civilians.  You win.

 

What was the rate of rape and sexual assault against women in the US military last year?

 

I have view based on reality.  I don't give a fuck what flag you fly or what god you believe in.  If you do shitty things that hurt innocent people, than you are a piece of shit to me.

 

Nah, I am saying the US military has done worse than ISIS... they have been at it longer. 

 

Do you know how Isreal was founded?  Go look it up, if that story does not explain itself then you are as indoctrinated into a culture of corruption as much as I am starting to suspect.

[Picklenuttz]

Little update regarding Canada and the process of bringing 25,000 Syrians here by years end.

 

Women, Children and Families only.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-refugee-plan-women-children-families-1.3330185

[Albatross]

OMG, they cut someone's head off?  Wow you are right.  The US military never hurts innocent civilians.  You win.

 

What was the rate of rape and sexual assault against women in the US military last year?

 

I have view based on reality.  I don't give a fuck what flag you fly or what god you believe in.  If you do shitty things that hurt innocent people, than you are a piece of shit to me.

 

Nah, I am saying the US military has done worse than ISIS... they have been at it longer. 

 

Do you know how Isreal was founded?  Go look it up, if that story does not explain itself then you are as indoctrinated into a culture of corruption as much as I am starting to suspect.

 

Worse than ISIL? You have to be trolling me here, stconquest.

 

It is like you didn't read anything I said but wanted to rampage against the U.S in whatever way that you could. The U.S soldiers do not go around cutting people's heads off or raping people etc etc in masses following a code that condones it; individuals, mentally unstable individuals, within it have done so against the larger population of people who don't. That doesn't make the U.S soldiers comparable to ISIL/terrorists. ISIL altogether does each and every horrible crime and inhumane thing you can think of daily, and to anyone they can find, because they dare to think and be different. Comparing the two is truly ridiculous and the fact that you think it makes perfect sense and is the truth is just sad. You have gone right through bias and into total anti-American sentiments and have blinded yourself to the point where you defend and support terrorists, making it very difficult to take you seriously at all.

 

And of course I do! A whole bunch of Zionists wanted their home back and came in to murder man, woman and child alike indiscriminately to further Jewish propaganda and to control the world—just like Iran says all the time. But I don't see how this means I am misunderstanding foreign affairs and how you came to that? Please stop jumping all over the place and answer the question instead of jumping to something else or throwing another question on top of the one you ignored. Otherwise, don't brings up you don't intend to explain or debate please.

 

Now if you are through with your joking, can we get back to serious discussion? 

[stconquest]

Worse than ISIL? You have to be trolling me here, stconquest.

 

It is like you didn't read anything I said but wanted to rampage against the U.S in whatever way that you could. The U.S soldiers do not go around cutting people's heads off or raping people etc etc in masses following a code that condones it; individuals, mentally unstable individuals, within it have done so against the larger population of people who don't. That doesn't make the U.S soldiers comparable to ISIL/terrorists. ISIL altogether does each and every horrible crime and inhumane thing you can think of daily, and to anyone they can find, because they dare to think and be different. Comparing the two is truly ridiculous and the fact that you think it makes perfect sense and is the truth is just sad. You have gone right through bias and into total anti-American sentiments and have blinded yourself to the point where you defend and support terrorists, making it very difficult to take you seriously at all.

 

And of course I do! A whole bunch of Zionists wanted their home back and came in to murder man, woman and child alike indiscriminately to further Jewish propaganda and to control the world—just like Iran says all the time. But I don't see how this means I am misunderstanding foreign affairs and how you came to that? Please stop jumping all over the place and answer the question instead of jumping to something else or throwing another question on top of the one you ignored. Otherwise, don't brings up you don't intend to explain or debate please.

 

Now if you are through with your joking, can we get back to serious discussion? 

 

Man, and I thought I did drugs a bit too much in high school. 

[Albatross]

Man, and I thought I did drugs a bit too much in high school. 

 

Yea right! I wish I had drugs.  B) 

[rjfaber91]

I don't view it as an absolute, (...) what is right for the refugees.

 

No, it isn't factual. It is garbage (...) refugees at the moment.

 

You may say you don't view these things as an absolute, but then you proceed to talk about the matter in terms pretty much limited to "a good thing" and "not a good thing", with no shades of grey in between. It seems to me that if that is the way your reasoning on this issue goes, then that is not taking a relative view of things.

 

Frankly, I'm negatively surprised at your complete disinterest in the motivations of radical Islamists. Surely, if your aim is to decrease terrorism, understanding the motives of terrorists is the very first thing to do; there's not much point in endlessly arresting or killing the guys when they just keep recruiting more of them. The only way to defeat Islamic extremism is to get to the core of what makes it exist in the first place, and willful ignorance about that certainly isn't going to help anyone or anything.

 

I do find it quite funny that after calling me anti-US for doubtable reasons, you've quickly followed up by declaring me to be anti-Israel as well. As a matter of fact, I'm not. I do believe it's a good thing that Israel exists, and I absolutely stand by any military and economic support to sustain its continued existence in hostile surroundings (albeit not nearly as hostile as they once were). However, when Israel creates settlement after settlement on Palestinian soil, and happily commits war crimes in every other war it enters, all the while being continually supported by the US, that's when I think the US' support of Israel moves from reasonable to absurd. Just because they're your allies doesn't mean you can let them get away with such blatant disregard for international law...

[Albatross]

You may say you don't view these things as an absolute, but then you proceed to talk about the matter in terms pretty much limited to "a good thing" and "not a good thing", with no shades of grey in between. It seems to me that if that is the way your reasoning on this issue goes, then that is not taking a relative view of things.

 

Frankly, I'm negatively surprised at your complete disinterest in the motivations of radical Islamists. Surely, if your aim is to decrease terrorism, understanding the motives of terrorists is the very first thing to do; there's not much point in endlessly arresting or killing the guys when they just keep recruiting more of them. The only way to defeat Islamic extremism is to get to the core of what makes it exist in the first place, and willful ignorance about that certainly isn't going to help anyone or anything.

 

I do find it quite funny that after calling me anti-US for doubtable reasons, you've quickly followed up by declaring me to be anti-Israel as well. As a matter of fact, I'm not. I do believe it's a good thing that Israel exists, and I absolutely stand by any military and economic support to sustain its continued existence in hostile surroundings (albeit not nearly as hostile as they once were). However, when Israel creates settlement after settlement on Palestinian soil, and happily commits war crimes in every other war it enters, all the while being continually supported by the US, that's when I think the US' support of Israel moves from reasonable to absurd. Just because they're your allies doesn't mean you can let them get away with such blatant disregard for international law...

 

Potential loss of American life isn't a good thing even if letting in Syrian refugees as the risk is too much, and that is all I am saying. That's just dealing with the fact that I don't think it is a win just because we saved Syrian lives if American ones were lost. Say we let them and just seven of them commit terrorist acts on our country and against our people, killing only three hundred Americans...would that be worth it to you? Is it so wrong to think of a risk like that in your eyes?

 

Ah, come on...I gave motivations/reasons (well, some of them) and any "disinterest" shown was for the fact that knowing why (religious and political radicalism is not so hard to understand) crazy people end up committing terrorism against even their own is not going to end terrorism or help bring it down—because believe it or not, it has already been attempted (especially so by Liberals in America) and it has done nothing...well, unless we somehow eradicate religion entirely. I just don't care to understand them now because that's not going to stop terrorism, like you suggest it will. So at the moment we pretty much know why they want to go about murdering people (as if they could give logical reasons or something that we could end realistically) and it hasn't helped at all, because they are crazy.

     They aren't an average Muslim who picks up a gun to fight for their country—that would be something worth stopping for to understand motivations of because it could lead to an end of it—they are people with mental instabilities and or people who have radical thoughts that tells them people who don't think the same are a problem that can only be solved by their total destruction. Their motivation is for the progression of their political and religious views established as law because they believe the Qu'ran gives them the right (and even orders it by Allah), not because some actual horrible injustice was done to them by the western world or by Israel. But please explain to me why these people do what they do—as it now seems paramount to our discussion and I am very much interested to see where this goes/what you have to say—and what it takes for westerners to stop doing to make them stop or decrease their terrorist activities. And please also share evidence that shows that understanding terrorists like ISIL/Al-Qaeda and the reason for their terrorism has ever decreased it/stopped it.

 

híŋyaŋkÁ! I never said you were anti-Israel.   I said I don't want to get into an Israel discussion because it always somehow turns into an anti-Israel discussion built from one-sided hatred—which, surprise surprise, started immediately after our replies. I thought I made it clear with the following: "I'm sick of the anti-Israel discussions that arise constantly due to one-sided hatred" but I'll say it again so that we can move pass it/come to an understanding: I'm not going to discuss Israel here, because it isn't the topic's point and it only causes a war, not a debate, due to one-sided hatred.

[stconquest]

Potential loss of American life isn't a good thing even if letting in Syrian refugees as the risk is too much, and that is all I am saying. That's just dealing with the fact that I don't think it is a win just because we saved Syrian lives if American ones were lost. Say we let them and just seven of them commit terrorist acts on our country and against our people, killing only three hundred Americans...would that be worth it to you? Is it so wrong to think of a risk like that in your eyes?

 

Ah, come on...I gave motivations/reasons (well, some of them) and any "disinterest" shown was for the fact that knowing why (religious and political radicalism is not so hard to understand) crazy people end up committing terrorism against even their own is not going to end terrorism or help bring it down—because believe it or not, it has already been attempted (especially so by Liberals in America) and it has done nothing...well, unless we somehow eradicate religion entirely. I just don't care to understand them now because that's not going to stop terrorism, like you suggest it will. So at the moment we pretty much know why they want to go about murdering people (as if they could give logical reasons or something that we could end realistically) and it hasn't helped at all, because they are crazy.

     They aren't an average Muslim who picks up a gun to fight for their country—that would be something worth stopping for to understand motivations of because it could lead to an end of it—they are people with mental instabilities and or people who have radical thoughts that tells them people who don't think the same are a problem that can only be solved by their total destruction. Their motivation is for the progression of their political and religious views established as law because they believe the Qu'ran gives them the right (and even orders it by Allah), not because some actual horrible injustice was done to them by the western world or by Israel. But please explain to me why these people do what they do—as it now seems paramount to our discussion and I am very much interested to see where this goes/what you have to say—and what it takes for westerners to stop doing to make them stop or decrease their terrorist activities. And please also share evidence that shows that understanding terrorists like ISIL/Al-Qaeda and the reason for their terrorism has ever decreased it/stopped it.

 

híŋyaŋkÁ! I never said you were anti-Israel.   I said I don't want to get into an Israel discussion because it always somehow turns into an anti-Israel discussion built from one-sided hatred—which, surprise surprise, started immediately after our replies. I thought I made it clear with the following: "I'm sick of the anti-Israel discussions that arise constantly due to one-sided hatred" but I'll say it again so that we can move pass it/come to an understanding: I'm not going to discuss Israel here, because it isn't the topic's point and it only causes a war, not a debate, due to one-sided hatred.

 

You must be somewhat slow, no wait I forgot... brainwashed...

 

The USA has been destabilizing their countries for the better part of a century.  The US military has murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians (a lot happen to be muslim).  The leaders of fundamentalist groups (non-american fundamentalists) use devices like the Qur'an to recruit, but the recruits themselves have a lot of the time only seen this side of the USA... bombing their country and killing their friends and family.

 

Solution?  Go the fuck home and defend your borders.... IDK, I am wasting my breath here.   <_<  

[Albatross]

You must be somewhat slow, no wait I forgot... brainwashed...

 

The USA has been destabilizing their countries for the better part of a century.  The US military has murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians (a lot happen to be muslim).  The leaders of fundamentalist groups (non-american fundamentalists) use devices like the Qur'an to recruit, but the recruits themselves have a lot of the time only seen this side of the USA... bombing their country and killing their friends and family.

 

Solution?  Go the fuck home and defend your borders.... IDK, I am wasting my breath here.   <_<  

 

You really think the terrorists kill and maim westerners and even their own people because big evil America destabilized their country? It has absolutely nothing to do with their radical views of Islam and that they are just seeking a way to use it as a means to control and to act? As I said, I can stop to understand how the innocent people in the countries feel when we meddle in their countries (even when our intentions are good) and I would treat that seriously as a way we could improve our relations with them as well (stopping anti-western sentiments), but out of terrorists? You have some strong and sad delusions if you think terrorists like ISIL form because of (actual) injustices done to them or their country by America/western countries or Israel and not because they have perverted Islam and wish to take out their "Allah ordained enemies". Or hell, you even have some strong delusions if you just think the majority of Jihadists/terrorists are good-hearted Muslims seeking a way to end their people's suffering.

 

 

Get real dude.

[stconquest]

You really think the terrorists kill and maim westerners and even their own people because big evil America destabilized their country? It has absolutely nothing to do with their radical views of Islam and that they are just seeking a way to use it as a means to control and to act? As I said, I can stop to understand how the innocent people in the countries feel when we meddle in their countries (even when our intentions are good) and I would treat that seriously as a way we could improve our relations with them as well (stopping anti-western sentiments), but out of terrorists? You have some strong and sad delusions if you think terrorists like ISIL form because of (actual) injustices done to them or their country by America/western countries or Israel and not because they have perverted Islam and wish to take out their "Allah ordained enemies". Or hell, you even have some strong delusions if you just think the majority of Jihadists/terrorists are good-hearted Muslims seeking a way to end their people's suffering.

 

 

Get real dude.

 

Do they offer Reading Comprehension where you live?

 

 

The way you understand the situation there is only one course of action:  Killing.  You might be ethical diseased.

[Albatross]

Do they offer Reading Comprehension where you live?

 

The way you understand the situation there is only one course of action:  Killing.  You might be ethical diseased.

 

Okay...and what was your point, if I so missed it? I noticed you do this a lot when in debates. You enter, say something (most oft completely unrelated to the discussion or to your prior/initial post) and then beat around the bush/refuse to explain yourself (even after stating something was misconstrued or missed) through whatever methods you can achieve. 

 

And oh, that's certainly what I said the only solution is...

[stconquest]

Okay...and what was your point, if I so missed it? I noticed you do this a lot when in debates. You enter, say something (most oft completely unrelated to the discussion or to your prior/initial post) and then beat around the bush/refuse to explain yourself (even after stating something was misconstrued or missed) through whatever methods you can achieve. 

 

And oh, that's certainly what I said the only solution is...

 

No, you have no solution (as stated previously). 

 

You just a scared little girl with a big ego in a big bad world... /s

 

I try to explain things, but you seem to not get it... unless it fits into your narrow perspective.

 

Actions have consequences is the moral of the story in regards to US foreign policy.  When you act against others, there will be a reaction.  I am not going to connect dots because you are not capable of understanding the context to which those dots are founded.

 

I beat around the bush (as you say) sometimes, as I am willing to first listen to other points of view instead of bombarding a thread with my personal views right away.   I want to be proven wrong, almost as much as I would want to be right.

 

I have now realized I am twice your age.  I have had twice the amount of time to study, research and live.  Let's try this:

 

In my early teens I was "graced" with the idea that inflicting pain through violence is sometimes okay.  I was athletic, and quite physically capable.  If the situation called for it, I was mentally ready to whoop some ass.

 

As time went on I found my self getting into fights, up until the age of 17 or so.  A few incidents, with about a dozen different individuals.  As I reflected on what those situations entailed, I realized something:  I truly, deep inside, did not want to inflict pain... even when some people would view it as "justified".  See, in all those fights (some involved more than one assailant at a time, some even involved weapons) I had never thrown a single punch.  I did not inflict pain on any one of those dozen people that were trying to inflict pain on me.  I did not have to.  I would wait for the attack, then counter and contain them... every time... stupid easy and sometimes dangerous.

 

I know now that if I had chosen to carry out my motivated ass whoopings, as was promoted by people around me... I would be a different person today.  I would have done things to people that I could never take back and a lot of the time it was I that instigated it.

 

The USA is like me if I had not been smart enough to realize the threats to me could be thwarted without reactionary violence.  They are me in an alternate universe where I am a scumbag.  That is why I am so hard on your way of thinking.  The USA buried themselves in this mess using violent means, directly and indirectly.

 

My story might sound lame, but do you at least understand it. 

[ALwin]

Listen to John Oliver

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mtc5trma1NQ

 

http://time.com/4123965/john-oliver-syrian-refugees-last-week-tonight/

[Albatross]

No, you have no solution (as stated previously). 

 

You just a scared little girl with a big ego in a big bad world... /s

 

I try to explain things, but you seem to not get it... unless it fits into your narrow perspective.

 

Actions have consequences is the moral of the story in regards to US foreign policy.  When you act against others, there will be a reaction.  I am not going to connect dots because you are not capable of understanding the context to which those dots are founded.

 

I beat around the bush (as you say) sometimes, as I am willing to first listen to other points of view instead of bombarding a thread with my personal views right away.   I want to be proven wrong, almost as much as I would want to be right.

 

I have now realized I am twice your age.  I have had twice the amount of time to study, research and live.  Let's try this:

 

In my early teens I was "graced" with the idea that inflicting pain through violence is sometimes okay.  I was athletic, and quite physically capable.  If the situation called for it, I was mentally ready to whoop some ass.

 

As time went on I found my self getting into fights, up until the age of 17 or so.  A few incidents, with about a dozen different individuals.  As I reflected on what those situations entailed, I realized something:  I truly, deep inside, did not want to inflict pain... even when some people would view it as "justified".  See, in all those fights (some involved more than one assailant at a time, some even involved weapons) I had never thrown a single punch.  I did not inflict pain on any one of those dozen people that were trying to inflict pain on me.  I did not have to.  I would wait for the attack, then counter and contain them... every time... stupid easy and sometimes dangerous.

 

I know now that if I had chosen to carry out my motivated ass whoopings, as was promoted by people around me... I would be a different person today.  I would have done things to people that I could never take back and a lot of the time it was I that instigated it.

 

The USA is like me if I had not been smart enough to realize the threats to me could be thwarted without reactionary violence.  They are me in an alternate universe where I am a scumbag.  That is why I am so hard on your way of thinking.  The USA buried themselves in this mess using violent means, directly and indirectly.

 

My story might sound lame, but do you at least understand it. 

 

You never explained anything. You keep getting upset only to continue getting upset when presented with a question or request to explain yourself further (in which several times you outright just said no to) when you accuse me of not getting a point (or whatever else you might say towards me). You are even doing it now with your presumptions of my character/life and your "story".

 

Your point is that we created the terrorists and that if we just stop murdering them ("reacting with violent means directly and indirectly") or being violent "reactionaries", they'll go away/decrease in number because they're just regular Muslims trying to fight for their country. Your point wasn't missed, it was argued, as I said these people aren't people who use those sorts of reasons—fighting to end U.S bombings or mistreatment of their country and people (in which I agreed to several times/is something that could be understood)—to become terrorists, which is what you initially claimed. It isn't how they were made and therefore trying to understand them to come to some sort of agreement through ceased activities on our end will not erase them from the face of the planet nor convince them to stop because their real reasons are radical in nature due to an interpretation of the Qu'ran and or violent nature, NOT because they are fighting for some greater good of their people/country like you claim...you know, that whole "The leaders of fundamentalist groups (non-american fundamentalists) use devices like the Qur'an to recruit, but the recruits themselves have a lot of the time only seen this side of the USA... bombing their country and killing their friends and family." comment you made.

 

So next time, instead of beating around the bush (as you have admitted doing) and when you think your point is being "missed" after doing so, just say what you have to say directly. Don't' waste time by dancing around it and then freaking out because your point is getting lost in a sea of irrelevance that you yourself have created. So if you are through...

 

 

 

 

Listen to John Oliver

http://time.com/4123965/john-oliver-syrian-refugees-last-week-tonight/

 

 

First of all, although the first video is hella funny (haven't gotten to the second yet), I can't help but wonder why people keep thinking Islamophobia = racism. Muslims are not a race. Also he said there has been no credible example of refugees having an ISIL/terrorist member hidden inside...well that is absolutely wrong. Paris. But I suspect the videos are older than the Paris incidents, in which case (I haven't loaded into youtube yet to see nor do I watch the show)...

 

Also, I was really surprised to see how Denmark etc etc reacted to the Syrian Refugee crisis.

 

(that little girl is so adorable.)

 

edit 2

 

now I wish I hadn't loaded up the second video. Good god, Jeb Bush. also, it answered my question so definitely scratch the above. I'm actually surprised Oliver didn't completely throw out reason to worry for risk. as for the vetting...how did Obama hope to bring in the refugees within a year or less if the vetting process is so long and tough?  :huh:

[stconquest]

@Albatross

 

You are an increasingly difficult person to deal with.

 

 

[Blade of Grass]

.

As to the decision for states, due to federalism (separation of powers between the state and federal government) they technically have the choice whether or not to accept refugees.

Just to keep things factually accurate, they actually do not have the power to refuse refugees. Why? Well, as you said, Federalism.

The ability to grant refugee status (as well as citizenship, etc) is solely granted to the federal government. Once someone has been granted refugee status, states have no legal ability to refuse their entrance. Refugees, similar to citizens, have a freedom of movement garunteed to them by your constitution, and if a state were to not let them in they would be violating the constitution.

[Praesi]

The USA is the main Reason this Shit is fucked up. Of course they should take refugees. But not in Tortureprisons this Time.

[iamdarkyoshi]

This thread got massively popular, holy crap.

[adman29]

Just to keep things factually accurate, they actually do not have the power to refuse refugees. Why? Well, as you said, Federalism.

The ability to grant refugee status (as well as citizenship, etc) is solely granted to the federal government. Once someone has been granted refugee status, states have no legal ability to refuse their entrance. Refugees, similar to citizens, have a freedom of movement garunteed to them by your constitution, and if a state were to not let them in they would be violating the constitution.

Fair point, but the states always want to have the feeling that they have power, therefore they state they won't take any in. Yay states rights (Sarcasm implied) but yes, you are right, states don't actually have the right to deny this. 

[stconquest]

http://www.democracynow.org/2015/11/24/nativist_hysteria_against_syrian_refugees_echoes

 

Scared people are scared people.  They can use any logic they want to justify their, sometimes irrational, fears... but they just scared.  Nothing new.

 

On average, about 100 people are killed by unwarranted violence every day in the USA.  Those a near "Paris Attacks" numbers every freaking day. 

[alicskysareblue]

Okay here is an example.

Imagine there are 10 refugees outside your house and your house is a country. There is a chance that one of those people are a Muslim extremist, and if they get in they will kill every one in your house. Will you let the ten refugees in?

Your basing this off of a random and very high chance, when you don't know know. The actual. Statistical. Chance what if it was more like 1/1000 people, are you going to deny a thousand innocent people. Just for the chance that one is a terriost.

Lets not forgot a lot of them are children, and yet they get thrown into this, shouldn't we treat families diffrrnt ? What about orphan refugees ?

I think we are basing our decision out off fear, but we need to only lol into the last 100 years when we chose not to get involved, anyone remember the Rwanda blgenocide ? What could have happened had we accepted Jewish refugees during world war 2, in both cases a lot of lives.

[sgtcool]

Lets not forgot a lot of them are children, and yet they get thrown into this, shouldn't we treat families diffrrnt ?

 

Most of them are young men in their 20s

[stconquest]

Most of them are young men in their 20s

 

You have counted?

 

Work for refugee relief in your government?  Private organization?

 

How do you know?