[QUOTE=Vengeful Falcon;49151443]Holy shit, have you actually seen what happens in Syria? Does anyone praising this suspension as some brave move actually realize that the people who are refugees are fleeing from genocide and old school brutal slavery? Go and fight IS and Assad yourself, maybe if you get captured you'll understand why people are running away. But of course, Syrian men are just mindless ungrateful cowards that should be thrown at the enemies without experience, weapons or training. That sounds fucking fantastic.
What happened to facepunch? About a year ago people would be tearing into this shit, is it the anti-Political correctness shit translated into anti-humanitarianism?
Also, deal with our own problems before we deal with others is the most blind attitude. If America was going to deal with homelessness and extreme poverty it would have done it by now, the homeless vets and Americans is just a smoke screen and flimsy justification for not stepping in and fulfilling their international role if it should even possibly negatively affect America. But fuck Syrians right, they're not Americans.[/QUOTE]
Because men are only good for war really.
[QUOTE=Trekintosh;49147600]Good. We're laughably incapable of dealing with our own poor and homeless. What are we supposed to do with Syria's?[/QUOTE]
Strange how it's only now we've all suddenly become [I]so interested[/I] in taking care of our poor and our veterans. I mean shit, that could legit be a serious concern for you, I don't know you, but I've been seeing this same sentiment blooming on a huge scale on social media from people who routinely display ignorance or vitriol towards the same subjects they now suddenly want to champion. [I]What about [U]our[/U] poor people? What about our VETERANS?"[/I] Of course, it's not like we're actually going to [I]do[/I] anything to improve the situation for our economic lower classes as a nation, because we don't really care. They're just a convenient excuse to hide behind so nobody has to know that we're [I]really[/I] just afraid of allowing more Muslims in our country. If we permanently came out and said "no refugees for us!" these folks would breath a sigh of relief and then go right back to making ignorant comments about "lazy poor people leeching off the welfare system."
Refugees are an economic burden, that's definitely true, but the massive backlash against the refugee crisis has very little to do with concerns over long-term economic viability. The simple timing of this is evidence enough of that. Were these European refugees, we'd all be patting each other on the back for doing everything we could to help them during their crisis, but instead we cite security concerns and cultural distaste over the .03% of the refugee population that the other 99.97% are actively trying to get away from. Hell, even if the concerns over refugees [I]are[/I] 100% economic for you personally, I would still vehemently argue that it's not an optional cost. This is a global crisis, and it [U]must[/U] be dealt with, and it's on the shoulders of every major nation to do their part in helping to alleviate the strain on our neighbors. Why should Germany take in hundreds of thousands, potentially even millions, while the US balks at the idea of a few thousand? Not only are we substantially wealthier, we're several orders of magnitude larger.
The only other acceptable alternative to the US directly housing refugees, in my opinion, is sending the equivalent costs of supporting what we would otherwise be capable of to the nations that are [I]actually doing their part[/I], and large numbers of volunteers and security forces (if accepted), to help lessen their burdens and bulk up their security against what few threats do break through.
[QUOTE=TheTalon;49150912]The majority of these refugees are men. Not women and children and elderly. They should be over there fighting for their country, not running[/QUOTE]
Every article I've read (which has been a sizable amount) has stated the exact opposite; that 2% of refugees are single teen/adult men.
Definitely need to see a credible source for this hearsay.
[editline]20th November 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Tudd;49151202]Cool, sounds really awesome you can totally disregard the fact that they were obviously radicalized by certain factors growing up related to their background.
Doesn't matter when it happens with when they get radicalized, if anything the fact they became radical later even though they lived for years in America suggests that integration failed.[/QUOTE]
You need to read the bio of Tamerlan. Because your post has no credible substance to it because what you said have been 1/2 truths at best.
Bill passed in the house, it does not have enough votes to pass the Senate without a filibuster, and even if they did get them they'd have a tough time overturning a veto
[QUOTE=Code3Response;49151865]Every article I've read (which has been a sizable amount) has stated the exact opposite; that 2% of refugees are single teen/adult men.
Definitely need to see a credible source for this hearsay.
[editline]20th November 2015[/editline]
You need to read the bio of Tamerlan. Because your post has now credible substance to it because what you said have been 1/2 truths at best.[/QUOTE]
Are you just really going to nitpick that he traveled back and forth and became radicalized that way, and somehow that makes your argument better?
You are the one who declared our refugee system has never failed yet came up with that fact out of nowhere.
[QUOTE=FFStudios;49148758]no and extra fucking no
45 million Americans are below the poverty line and about half a million are homeless across the country. our geographic size prevents us from enjoying the policies that tiny-ass European countries put in place and since we're divided into 50 states, nobody can ever agree on what the fuck we should be doing.[/QUOTE]
this fucking american exceptionalism logic
you completely contradict yourself in the space of one sentence - you say that your geographic size prevents you from implementing 'european' policies, and then state that because you're split into 50 states, there's no national consensus on direction, meaning that you have 50 different states with state law
you can't complain that your geographic size prevents you from implementing liberal policies, and then in the next breath complain that because america is split up into separate governing entities (because your geographic size would make governance of individual areas nearly impossible) making it difficult to have agreement between all of them, but allowing you to have european policies (you know like gay marriage at state level? like legalisation of marijuana at state level? )
it's interesting to me that you get some americans who boast about america's place as a superpower and wealthiest nation on Earth, and then you get americans using that as a shield to excuse ills that occur in the country ("It's so easy for Europe to have a higher quality of life, there's fewer people!")
[QUOTE=Tudd;49152068]Are you just really going to nitpick that he traveled back and forth and became radicalized that way, and somehow that makes your argument better?
You are the one who declared our refugee system has never failed yet came up with that fact out of nowhere.[/QUOTE]
Prove me wrong then. Show me a list of terrorists that have entered the US under the false-flag of a refugee. All my sources cannot find a single one. I'm open to being shown otherwise.
As awful as it sounds, I'm absolutely down for a temporary suspension on taking in refugees. If we can bolster our economy to the point to where we can take care of our own poor and homeless, along with the refugees? Sure, awesome, take them in. When we're at a point where America can't even take care of it's young, poor, or veterans though? Where it's actively shitting on people trying to get started? Taking in more people to an already growing and unhappy population is going to be an undisputed recipe for catastrophe.
[QUOTE=kyle877;49152228]As awful as it sounds, I'm absolutely down for a temporary suspension on taking in refugees. If we can bolster our economy to the point to where we can take care of our own poor and homeless, along with the refugees? Sure, awesome, take them in. When we're at a point where America can't even take care of it's young, poor, or veterans though? Where it's actively shitting on people trying to get started? Taking in more people to an already growing and unhappy population is going to be an undisputed recipe for catastrophe.[/QUOTE]
Shame saying that in Europe makes you a racist.
[QUOTE=kyle877;49152228]As awful as it sounds, I'm absolutely down for a temporary suspension on taking in refugees. If we can bolster our economy to the point to where we can take care of our own poor and homeless, along with the refugees? Sure, awesome, take them in. When we're at a point where America can't even take care of it's young, poor, or veterans though? Where it's actively shitting on people trying to get started? Taking in more people to an already growing and unhappy population is going to be an undisputed recipe for catastrophe.[/QUOTE]
Poverty in the richest countries in the world is not out of inability. It's lack of political will and social conscience. The homeless and poor will be forgotten as soon as the refugees have been fought off.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49152250]Shame saying that in Europe makes you a racist.[/QUOTE]
We're in a terrible and backwards age where having any opinion against a group of another race automatically condemns you as being a terrible racist.
[I]Especially if you're white.[/I]
edit:
[QUOTE=Vengeful Falcon;49152258]Poverty in the richest countries in the world is not out of inability. It's lack of political will and social conscience. The homeless and poor will be forgotten as soon as the refugees have been fought off.[/QUOTE]
That's a perfect example of the greed inherent in our system. It's a very rare occurrence where politicians make a decision that's not backed by some sort of greed, or power gain. The people that are supposed to be for the people more often than not are for themselves.
10000 people is nothing. Canada is taking 25000 and we have the population of California lol. I don't understand why some of you Americans, living in a country founded by refugee separatists are so against helping fellow refugees fleeing a terrible war.
[QUOTE=billibobc;49152296]10000 people is nothing. Canada is taking 25000 and we have the population of California lol. I don't understand why some of you Americans, living in a country founded by refugee separatists are so against helping fellow refugees fleeing a terrible war.[/QUOTE]
I think a lot of people have it in their minds that we are going to open the doors like Europe did and let millions of people in.
Also it's a good excuse to bash Obama. That's really popular these days. People are still asking "What has Obama done in 8 years???"
[QUOTE=billibobc;49152296]10000 people is nothing. Canada is taking 25000 and we have the population of California lol. I don't understand why some of you Americans, living in a country founded by refugee separatists are so against helping fellow refugees fleeing a terrible war.[/QUOTE]
Just because something was founded by immigrants does not mean that a few decades later you should be open to more immigrants.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49152456]Just because something was founded by immigrants does not mean that a few decades later you should be open to more immigrants.[/QUOTE]
[I]"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"[/I]
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;49152485][I]"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"[/I][/QUOTE]
Is that supposed to be an argument or make some sort of point? Because it's doing a poor job if so.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;49152491]Is that supposed to be an argument or make some sort of point? Because it's doing a poor job if so.[/QUOTE]
do you even know the reason that people know that poem
judging by your response, i'm guessing no because otherwise you might have addressed it as some sort of 20th century idealism or something
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;49151749]Strange how it's only now we've all suddenly become [I]so interested[/I] in taking care of our poor and our veterans.[/QUOTE]
You act like nobody has felt this way about our homeless and vets. Everybody that is pro-immigration has been saying this bullshit. It's been a big deal for years, people have been angry about it for years. The problem instead lies with a government that would rather spend money nation building half way across the globe instead of their own country.
It's as crappy a strawman as Obama's own statements in regards to all this, marginalizing the dissenter's opinion and calling them heartless bastards instead of wary people looking at recent events and determining there is a risk.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;49151749]Strange how it's only now we've all suddenly become [I]so interested[/I] in taking care of our poor and our veterans. I mean shit, that could legit be a serious concern for you, I don't know you, but I've been seeing this same sentiment blooming on a huge scale on social media from people who routinely display ignorance or vitriol towards the same subjects they now suddenly want to champion. [I]What about [U]our[/U] poor people? What about our VETERANS?"[/I] Of course, it's not like we're actually going to [I]do[/I] anything to improve the situation for our economic lower classes as a nation, because we don't really care. They're just a convenient excuse to hide behind so nobody has to know that we're [I]really[/I] just afraid of allowing more Muslims in our country. If we permanently came out and said "no refugees for us!" these folks would breath a sigh of relief and then go right back to making ignorant comments about "lazy poor people leeching off the welfare system."
Refugees are an economic burden, that's definitely true, but the massive backlash against the refugee crisis has very little to do with concerns over long-term economic viability. The simple timing of this is evidence enough of that. Were these European refugees, we'd all be patting each other on the back for doing everything we could to help them during their crisis, but instead we cite security concerns and cultural distaste over the .03% of the refugee population that the other 99.97% are actively trying to get away from. Hell, even if the concerns over refugees [I]are[/I] 100% economic for you personally, I would still vehemently argue that it's not an optional cost. This is a global crisis, and it [U]must[/U] be dealt with, and it's on the shoulders of every major nation to do their part in helping to alleviate the strain on our neighbors. Why should Germany take in hundreds of thousands, potentially even millions, while the US balks at the idea of a few thousand? Not only are we substantially wealthier, we're several orders of magnitude larger.
The only other acceptable alternative to the US directly housing refugees, in my opinion, is sending the equivalent costs of supporting what we would otherwise be capable of to the nations that are [I]actually doing their part[/I], and large numbers of volunteers and security forces (if accepted), to help lessen their burdens and bulk up their security against what few threats do break through.[/QUOTE]
It's really fucking weird that people are proposing market solutions to the refugees crisis, it feels the same kind of weird that i get of thinking about how the church use to sell indulgences.
You can just pay your way out of your responsibilities, so I mean, refugees are just becoming another commodity, tradeable, saleable, whatever.
I guess that I'm saying that no, their is no other morally acceptable alternative for the US than welcoming it's share of refugees.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;49152128]Prove me wrong then. Show me a list of terrorists that have entered the US under the false-flag of a refugee. All my sources cannot find a single one. I'm open to being shown otherwise.[/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/11/19/the-viral-claim-that-not-one-refugee-resettled-since-911-has-been-arrested-on-domestic-terrorism-charges/[/url]
Is your source facebook wall feeds?
Look nobody is arguing the risk is not small (super fractional in reality), but let's be real, suspension of letting them in will only help the ones that come over eventually when we can actually debate this issue out for proper procedure since this is a special case.
The failed cases of refugees in America is obviously not false-flag people nor would it be refugees from Syria that make it through the process, but that is the point, you can't catch dissatisfaction that comes later if they fail to integrate, such as the case of the Boston brothers, or the others listed in the article.
This isn't dumb racist level/dont give a fuck shit where we turn away a boat full of Jewish people in 30's. There is legitimate concerns and with recent events should be considered.
[QUOTE=Tudd;49152724][url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/11/19/the-viral-claim-that-not-one-refugee-resettled-since-911-has-been-arrested-on-domestic-terrorism-charges/[/url]
Is your source facebook wall feeds?
Look nobody is arguing the risk is not small (super fractional in reality), but let's be real, suspension of letting them in will only help the ones that come over eventually when we can actually debate this issue out for proper procedure since this is a special case.
The failed cases of refugees in America is obviously not false-flag people nor would it be refugees from Syria that make it through the process, but that is the point, you can't catch dissatisfaction that comes later if they fail to integrate, such as the case of the Boston brothers, or the others listed in the article.
This isn't dumb racist level/dont give a fuck shit where we turn away a boat full of Jewish people in 30's. There is legitimate concerns and with recent events should be considered.[/QUOTE]
So 3.
3 people who were planning terrorists attacks abroad. In 40 years and a 3 million people later... we have 3 that were caught before they did anything.
I feel like a broken record of explaining the Boston Bombers and 3 others.
3 people in 3 million over 40 years. And now its suddenly a concern.
[QUOTE=billibobc;49152296]10000 people is nothing. Canada is taking 25000 and we have the population of California lol. I don't understand why some of you Americans, living in a country founded by refugee separatists are so against helping fellow refugees fleeing a terrible war.[/QUOTE]
They acknowledge that their country wouldn't to be able support refugees effectively. If anything, those posters have a lot of empathy for the refugees since they realize domestic issues will badly impact immigrants.
[QUOTE=CoolKingKaso;49152815]They acknowledge that their country wouldn't to be able support refugees effectively. If anything, they have a lot more empathy for refugees because they realize their domestic issues will also impact the refugees as well.[/QUOTE]
Thats some bs, of course the US has the resources to house refugees as well as helping every poor vet and homeless person, they government would rather keep that money for themselves tho because i want 15 Lamborghinis
Honestly my take on the whole issue is that I'd rather export foreign aid and help Syrians in Syria than import conflicting cultures en-masse and create a catalyst for far-right extremists to gain massive influence.
If we have to put boots on the ground in Syria to distribute food and provide relatively safe areas for Syrians to take shelter in I find that preferable to letting terrorists get boots in the U.S. with ease.
It's the people IN syria that need our help the most anyways.
I mean fuck we're spending all that money on the military budget anyways, why not use it?
[QUOTE=Ridge;49149532]Are you seriously blaming Syria's troubles in 2015 on actions that took place 66 years ago???[/QUOTE]
Iran still blames the US (for stuff it actually did do) for stuff that happened 50 years in state addresses, apparently you don't realize not everyone in the world is your age?
Guys it's URGENT. So we'll deal with it after our 5 day weekend
Good, send them to Europe. We can't even take care of our own homeless and our healthcare for our own citizens suck.
If the refugee's came here and got better services then what our own people are getting could you imagine the fucking outrage that would ensue.
[QUOTE=soulharvester;49152929]Honestly my take on the whole issue is that I'd rather export foreign aid and help Syrians in Syria than import conflicting cultures en-masse and create a catalyst for far-right extremists to gain massive influence.
If we have to put boots on the ground in Syria to distribute food and provide relatively safe areas for Syrians to take shelter in I find that preferable to letting terrorists get boots in the U.S. with ease.
It's the people IN syria that need our help the most anyways.
I mean fuck we're spending all that money on the military budget anyways, why not use it?[/QUOTE]
That's actually a good idea, use the military for foreign aid for the people displaced by war. I could see it appealing to the conservatives to make us look strong and liberals because we're helping the refugees.
[QUOTE=LtKyle2;49153000]Good, send them to Europe. We can't even take care of our own homeless and our healthcare for our own citizens suck.
If the refugee's came here and got better services then what our own people are getting could you imagine the fucking outrage that would ensue.[/QUOTE]
Maybe it'd be the wakeup call you fucking tools need to realise you're not special, you are being constantly shafted by your politicians and the media. Your quality of life, on average, is questionably low for a western nation, in particular, a superpower that claims to be "THE BEST".
Oh no! How dare a country have some fucking humanity and treat people fleeing persecution, torture and death on a daily basis well. It wouldn't be hard to treat them better than a sizeable amount of poor people in the US, just three simple meals and a decent water supply.
Don't get pissed off that refugees "have it better" (despite living in shithole camps most of the time, barely involved in the society that is claiming to be helping), get pissed that you let your government stop caring about it's citizens to such an extent that it got this bad in the first place.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;49153038]Maybe it'd be the wakeup call you fucking tools need to realise you're not special, you are being constantly shafted by your politicians and the media. Your quality of life, on average, is questionably low for a western nation, in particular, a superpower that claims to be "THE BEST".
Oh no! How dare a country have some fucking humanity and treat people fleeing persecution, torture and death on a daily basis well. It wouldn't be hard to treat them better than a sizeable amount of poor people in the US, just three simple meals and a decent water supply.
Don't get pissed off that refugees "have it better" (despite living in shithole camps most of the time, barely involved in the society that is claiming to be helping), get pissed that you let your government stop caring about it's citizens to such an extent that it got this bad in the first place.[/QUOTE]
I agree completely, so I don't get why you're typing like you're having a fucking shit fit.
Maybe if we had a different political system we'd actually get shit done since the republicans and democrats wouldn't bicker so fucking much.
Easy to criticize our political systems from the U.K. innit?
Our governments and political systems are nothing alike so please don't act like just rushing social programs into it would fix everything.
Do you have something thoughtful to bring to the debate other than "america take your share! Don't let us jump off this bridge by ourselves!"?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
