CC the document of those refugees to have come in was already approved but not in the number recently just approved. Now about only women and children, show me a document that proves that only women or children are coming, but this is not the point. The point is: We can have those refugees, just be very careful that non of them are coming in disguised as refugees. So far there are more states that reject the idea.
I beg to disagree. Where do you want us to start? In 1991, Saddam Hussein killed a lot of people invading Kuwait for their oil. The only reason we came in was because of the unfair invasion. Helped Kuwait.
But it is true, G Bush chose to go to war against Iraq thinking it was holding a WMD as a response to the terrorist attack of 9/11.
Now here is the problem. Obama, who made an irresponsible decision of pulling completely the troops there and made it the haven for all the terrorist to build their stronghold. Now what are we to do?
In the name of the wars against terror, this war is going.
Of course there are many casualties involved but going back to your claim that we started it, I personally feel you are not right.
I know we had about 250 already approved which took years to research CC but the new influx is now by 10,000.
The point is when we want to make sure that attacks don't happen, then lessen the possibility of them coming in. We don't undermine our charitable obligation to help them by putting them in a more contained place like Gen Mcafee said.
Thanks for being here. The intensity of US involvement is because it's part of check and balance but more so on wars against terrorism. Having pointed out where they operate iz of course the target
That is a question which no one seem to be able to answer Love.
Now I can't for the life of me, understand why Saudi with all its wealth never attempt to contribute and in fact there was a video posted on my thread, "Germany, sympathetic to all Syrian Refugees" that they offer all the millions of dollars to build mosques in Europe but not take a single refugee?
In fact when we do keep them close to home, it doesn't undermine our commitment to help them, nor will it make their life any worse while at the same time keeping up our safety as the top priority.
being compassionate and being stupid don't have to be the same thing.”
Kid, I am sure that is shared by most of the governors in my country as a reflection of the rejection of that proposal and so far half of the union already did.
You are so right in presenting these reasonable and logical alternative. I am so amazed that Obama can't see the advantage of keeping the safety of our countries by lessening the chances of having these terrorists imported with them pretending they are refugees and at the same time, they are tended with the monies allotted for their needs. Like I said, we, in the US, already gave 4.1 billion specifically for their assistance. That is a lot of money to start. This is a global concern and all the countries must and should pitch in. My take.
I do for emphasis, like that of the treatment of the citizens versus these refugees, that definitely, to me needs emphasis. If it bothers you, I apologize but passion in expressing these points are very well needed to be understood. I am stirring the pot for understanding. I am not sure if it does give credibility in seriousness or not but so far the elements of ideas shared on in here are to me, very serious.
Now on your input, I am so touched about the things that I am so ignorant about in details.
I am not concerned of the numbers of refugees still on here, to tell you the truth but the point of Gen. Macafee is that for easy return to their country once the war is over.
If part of the acceptance of these refugees to live here forever, I have no qualms about that as long as it is part of a very specific plan in order to prepare us for long term effect.
Rohaan, yes indeed and I hear you. We have been given the number (Americans) of 10,000 as we speak which is not a very big number in my estimates. Why only us? Not really, Europe has a large share of these people, but the problem is, the number of the true refugees is confusing as there are more economic migrants than refugees.
Now Obama announced on the G20 summit the other day that the House release $4.1 billion dollars to assist them.
If all the countries of the world would account to this expense, I am sure it is a fair responsibility.
I have been employed for the last 35 years, contributed much and much of taxes and I know we are maxed like you said. But the money is already allocated whether you and I and all the US citizens have approved it or not.
Now would you agree on the camps and or Turkey and Jordan as suggested by General Macafee?
The proposal of majorities of the governors are now being discussed and most choose two countries like Turkey and Jordan, then easy way back home when the war is over. So my true immediate suggestion is to end this war once and for all. Not dragging it to 27 years like Afghanistan.
Question is: What does it take to finish this war?
I thought you'd say something like that CC<. I have the feeling you don't care anymore who runs the system, I heard you once said, they are all the same.
I am not sure if you are aware of the dangers they are saying CC. But so far 26 states must have united the same reasons why they don't approve them. I have already mentioned so many good reasons. These are difficult times. If the primary objective is to protect America from these heinous acts then we must be very thorough and rigorous in their processing. The director of Homeland Security, used that word many times, to assure the public that they are not importing these terrorists with them.
It was proven that among the migrants in Europe were so many of these terrorists. Maybe you are not listening to the news and or you don't believe.
I welcome them, but alternative suggestion of General Mcaffee, already said that we should stabilize them in two countries, end the war and put them back home.
online today!lindsyjones Forum Posts (8,532)
Should we take these refugees?
CC the document of those refugees to have come in was already approved but not in the number recently just approved. Now about only women and children, show me a document that proves that only women or children are coming, but this is not the point. The point is: We can have those refugees, just be very careful that non of them are coming in disguised as refugees. So far there are more states that reject the idea.