Obama Directs Administration to Accept 10,000 Syrian Refugees

a reply to: enlightenedservant

So your saying it's Ok if a few terrorists get through and kill thousands of people because there could be the next Shakira in your midst. Hahaha get a grip

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Government will do whatever. In this case the refugees should mainly consist of women, children, elderly. Those most vulnerable in war.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical
You broke it...you fix it.

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck
a reply to: jadedANDcynical
You broke it...you fix it.

Unless someone took direct action that lead to this situation not only did nobody on this board break it, they are under no way required to fix. But will. For that the r refugees better come humble and grateful, and women , children, elderly should make up 95% of the refugees entering

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

How about sending them to California to mingle with the illegal immigrants.

Is it fair to say most of the immigrants who established the U.S. were from Western Europe? Both sides of my family came from England/Wales. Arabs and Muslims did not establish the country, so of course there is the potential for wild clashes of culture and religion, and we must be realistic about that.

But we must provide a sanctuary for those whom we can. Syria is a horrible, almost unsurvivable war zone, and we have to do our part in providing a safe haven for some. Like it or not.

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting
Is it fair to say most of the immigrants who established the U.S. were from Western Europe? Both sides of my family came from England/Wales. Arabs and Muslims did not establish the country, so of course there is the potential for wild clashes of culture and religion, and we must be realistic about that.

But we must provide a sanctuary for those whom we can. Syria is a horrible, almost unsurvivable war zone, and we have to do our part in providing a safe haven for some. Like it or not.

Why?

2nd...

a reply to: jheated5

Why?

Very simply, because it is the right thing to do. To assist in alleviating human suffering - in whatever way we can - is always the right thing to do.

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting
a reply to: jheated5

Why?

Very simply, because it is the right thing to do. To assist in alleviating human suffering - in whatever way we can - is always the right thing to do.

Makes you kind of wonder though on the we must help level. I mean in all honesty we must all admit they will come with very little. They will need food, housing, clothing, medical and basically help on on all needs for sometime. They will get it as you can't drop them off and say good luck.

Gotta wonder how that would look to existing citizens in the country that are homeless, hungry, in dire need of medical assistance, etc and don't get it. But I guess it comes down to priorities, as far as the resources for these 10,000 our existing citizens lost out.

Pretty brutal call to be the ones making that call.

a reply to: marg6043

Do you want that for the Christian refugees that need help too?

a reply to: Reallyfolks

And this is when it becomes obvious that the whole thing is politics and nothing more.

People in need are people in need and we have plenty of them already in this country without bringing in more.

I'm not heartless to their plight, if we can help we should but there is enough to do at home that isn't being done.

Again, it goes back to the string pullers and the fact that the ones on whom consequences should fall will not have such happen.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: marg6043

Do you want that for the Christian refugees that need help too?

Of course they should. Not because of religion but because of fairness. Everyone knows the wealthy should pay more. Why reverse course ? The refugees should go to the wealthiest states, they have more money and can better afford the costs.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: Reallyfolks

And this is when it becomes obvious that the whole thing is politics and nothing more.

People in need are people in need and we have plenty of them already in this country without bringing in more.

I'm not heartless to their plight, if we can help we should but there is enough to do at home that isn't being done.

Again, it goes back to the string pullers and the fact that the ones on whom consequences should fall will not have such happen.

Yep the hungry and homeless in our country already put on hold for the hot new topic of the day. In that case it's easy for the morally superior among us to forget them to concentrate on this. It's not really about helping for these people, it about showing the proper outrage, giving the proper lectures, identifying the proper hate filled, so long as you come down on the right side of the current story in the news. Then on to the next and so on. Never about a solution, it's about using the hot trend to feel good., and keep repeating. Pretty amusing if it wasn't adding to and gathering more problems over time. Have to shake your head at these people.

a reply to: Sremmos80

Illegal immigrants from across the border are Christian, they will mingle just fine. Or you prefer that we create an Islamic state in the US for them.

a reply to: marg6043

Yes I was implying we should make a Islamic state....

Just want to make sure we are sending all the people to the same place.

To assist in alleviating human suffering - in whatever way we can - is always the right thing to do.

Hasn't that been what the US leaders claim they do all over the world? From the results, it is cease and desist time. But we know rich corporations won't allow it.

a reply to: Sremmos80

Is not going to happen because US is not a theocracy and is not established religion by law.

Also the biggest immigrant population of Arabs in the US is located in Michigan , but the Islamic ones have to share with the Christian with Arabs ancestry. Bring some more in and let them fight for tribal rivalries, after all it seems that in certain cities in Michigan Americans of none Arab decent are no longer considered part of the population.

That is what you want for every state in the US.

a reply to: marg6043

Nope, and would appreciate you not telling me what I want, I know what it is just fine.
My Christian comment was a bit tongue in check aboout another thread.

And what you think about Deerborn or what ever the city is called is false. Been shown show as well.

originally posted by: anticitizen

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: crazyewok

What business do we have being there in the first place. Let the oil companies support the MIC and they can do their own dirty work. The mid east has been to broken to be fixed for too long.

It seems too many Americans love war.

it's more like america NEEDS war. to preserve itself.

Yep. It's because too many people here would rather invest in the military industrial complex instead of investing in clean energy, upgrading infrastructure, desalination plants, domestic manufacturing, etc.

Too many people have been brainwashed to think we have to spend the money on defense or jobs will be lost; even though that same money could be spent on other domestic industries which could sustain the same amount of jobs.

originally posted by: Lukied
a reply to: enlightenedservant

So your saying it's Ok if a few terrorists get through and kill thousands of people because there could be the next Shakira in your midst. Hahaha get a grip

No, I didn't say that at all. Don't put words in my mouth.

And my point was very clear; if we're going to base decisions on negative hypotheticals, why can't we also base decisions on positive hypotheticals?