Paris attacks

[Creighton Duke]

Obviously there should be a reasonable safeguard to determine that refugees are actually refugees. What's absolutely not in doubt is the scale of suffering happening there right now. It's a humanitarian crisis. There are a great many victims who have committed no sin other than not having the fortune of being born in America, something we happen to enjoy.

These people need help. Figure out a way to get it to them. Everybody has to step up to the plate. It's going to be us someday. Today is our day to be the helpers.

Zoogs, I respect your opinions and your tactful take on many issues. But watch the video above and tell me if these people are so helpless. Do you really want such incidents to be taking place in our country?

My heart goes out to the real victims who, like you say, become victims through no fault of their own, but in light of the kinds of activities that have taken place throughout the crisis, I side with caution to protect the best interests of my friends and loved ones.

 

[zoogs]

I don't, and I appreciate your sentiments too. I don't want actions to result in harm to friends, family, and fellow citizens here.

It is going to be better for the entire world if/when stability can return to that region. I'm not sure anybody has any idea how it can happen. As long as it keeps spiraling downwards, not only will people there suffer and groups like ISIS flourish, but the rest of us can't be shielded from the fallout of the goings-on there forever.

 

[BigRedBuster]

I am perfectly fine with refugees coming to America. That is what this country was built on and what makes us great.

However, somehow, there needs to be some type of due diligence to figure out if these people are Muslim extremists wanting to do harm here. I actually was thinking about this last night. A situation like what we had with Ellis Island would work. Bring them here, take care of them, feed them, shelter them, give them medical treatment..etc. But, keep them separate until some type of further investigation can be done. When people are (reasonably) found to be true refugees and safe, allow them in.

We've had tons and tons and tons and tons of refugees come to America since 9/11

None have been arrested for terrorism

And you see no difference now when we have one example of ISIS infiltrating a country and committing a horrible attack and then them claiming their next target is the US.

Hmmmmmm

 

[NebraskaShellback]

My heart goes out to the French people, my prayers too.

 

[Creighton Duke]

I don't, and I appreciate your sentiments too. I don't want actions to result in harm to friends, family, and fellow citizens here.

It is going to be better for the entire world if/when stability can return to that region. I'm not sure anybody has any idea how it can happen. As long as it keeps spiraling downwards, not only will people there suffer and groups like ISIS flourish, but the rest of us can't be shielded from the fallout of the goings-on there forever.

I definitely agree with you and I think that this these sentiments relate back to what I was talking about regarding cultural differences.

In the West, we want to believe that our accepted form of government makes sense for everyone else in the world. As such, we are receptive to those who would "agree" to implement such regimes while we assist with those in power whose ruling styles are not to our liking. When such disagreements lead to force, existing power structures, no matter how "backward" they may seem to Western eyes, are toppled, allowing groups like ISIS to rise. I think that if we can accept that our standards are not compatible with the beliefs and cultural nuances of others (which is a form of respecting other cultures), we will begin to see more stability throughout this region and other troubled regions.

...I'm skeptical, though.

 

[knapplc]

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

- Stevie Wonder

It could be argued that if people think there is nothing wrong with bringing refugees over here without figuring out who they are first could fall into the same category. Blindly trusting this situation could result in more attacks here. How would those of you feel, that support bringing the refugees here, if an attack did occur, and it was found out they were part of the refugees that came over here? I don't support the idea and I see it from my perspective as I'm the one seeing the problem along with those who don't support this move. The ones that are blind are the ones who support it in my opinion. My bleeding heart ran out a long time ago considering all the issues we're facing as a country. No, I'm not going to break those down, but some of the moves we've made as a country are pretty concerning.

It's a damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don't scenario, isn't it? You bring them over, one commits an act of terrorism, and we're the suckers for letting the wolf in amongst the sheep. Or, if we close the borders, these people likely die, and the vast majority of them are innocents, just screwed because a war erupted where they live.

The humanitarian thing would be to bring the refugees here. It's what America once stood for. Personally, if we're going to err, I'd prefer to err on the side of saving people, and if that bites us, we'll deal with it.

I'd far rather gather in refugees than bomb some nebulous "enemy," which seems to have the icky track record of creating yet more enemies.

 

[VectorVictor]

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

- Stevie Wonder

It could be argued that if people think there is nothing wrong with bringing refugees over here without figuring out who they are first could fall into the same category. Blindly trusting this situation could result in more attacks here. How would those of you feel, that support bringing the refugees here, if an attack did occur, and it was found out they were part of the refugees that came over here? I don't support the idea and I see it from my perspective as I'm the one seeing the problem along with those who don't support this move. The ones that are blind are the ones who support it in my opinion. My bleeding heart ran out a long time ago considering all the issues we're facing as a country. No, I'm not going to break those down, but some of the moves we've made as a country are pretty concerning.

It's a damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don't scenario, isn't it? You bring them over, one commits an act of terrorism, and we're the suckers for letting the wolf in amongst the sheep. Or, if we close the borders, these people likely die, and the vast majority of them are innocents, just screwed because a war erupted where they live.

The humanitarian thing would be to bring the refugees here. It's what America once stood for. Personally, if we're going to err, I'd prefer to err on the side of saving people, and if that bites us, we'll deal with it.

I'd far rather gather in refugees than bomb some nebulous "enemy," which seems to have the icky track record of creating yet more enemies.

Not to mention that the policy of publicly not saving people and/or willfully and publicly withholding humanitarian assistance would also assist in creating yet more enemies too.

 

[BigRedBuster]

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

- Stevie Wonder

It could be argued that if people think there is nothing wrong with bringing refugees over here without figuring out who they are first could fall into the same category. Blindly trusting this situation could result in more attacks here. How would those of you feel, that support bringing the refugees here, if an attack did occur, and it was found out they were part of the refugees that came over here? I don't support the idea and I see it from my perspective as I'm the one seeing the problem along with those who don't support this move. The ones that are blind are the ones who support it in my opinion. My bleeding heart ran out a long time ago considering all the issues we're facing as a country. No, I'm not going to break those down, but some of the moves we've made as a country are pretty concerning.

It's a damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don't scenario, isn't it? You bring them over, one commits an act of terrorism, and we're the suckers for letting the wolf in amongst the sheep. Or, if we close the borders, these people likely die, and the vast majority of them are innocents, just screwed because a war erupted where they live.

The humanitarian thing would be to bring the refugees here. It's what America once stood for. Personally, if we're going to err, I'd prefer to err on the side of saving people, and if that bites us, we'll deal with it.

I'd far rather gather in refugees than bomb some nebulous "enemy," which seems to have the icky track record of creating yet more enemies.

Somehow, you have to get these people out of the mess they are in. Get them to a safe place where they are being taken care of, fed, sheltered, medical attention...etc.

Then, you have time to figure out who is who and move on from there.

 

[BIGREDIOWAN]

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

- Stevie Wonder

It could be argued that if people think there is nothing wrong with bringing refugees over here without figuring out who they are first could fall into the same category. Blindly trusting this situation could result in more attacks here. How would those of you feel, that support bringing the refugees here, if an attack did occur, and it was found out they were part of the refugees that came over here? I don't support the idea and I see it from my perspective as I'm the one seeing the problem along with those who don't support this move. The ones that are blind are the ones who support it in my opinion. My bleeding heart ran out a long time ago considering all the issues we're facing as a country. No, I'm not going to break those down, but some of the moves we've made as a country are pretty concerning.

It's a damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don't scenario, isn't it? You bring them over, one commits an act of terrorism, and we're the suckers for letting the wolf in amongst the sheep. Or, if we close the borders, these people likely die, and the vast majority of them are innocents, just screwed because a war erupted where they live.

The humanitarian thing would be to bring the refugees here. It's what America once stood for. Personally, if we're going to err, I'd prefer to err on the side of saving people, and if that bites us, we'll deal with it.

I'd far rather gather in refugees than bomb some nebulous "enemy," which seems to have the icky track record of creating yet more enemies.

I agree it's a possible lose/lose situation, but if it does bite us I'd just hope my family wasn't the one who was bit. Just saying........

 

[knapplc]

Too bad there isn't some spare island somewhere, complete with shelters & wifi, that we could take these people to. Fix up their country, get rid of Daesh (the name for ISIS that ISIS hates) and Assad, then let them go back to rebuild and get on with their lives.

 

[RedSavage]

I didn't read most of this thread but wanted to post this and preface it with my opinion. If we could take care of the people we already have in this country that deserve priority for assistance (Homeless Vets), I would but much more in favor of letting in the refugees. This is the other reason (and IMO a few bad eggs have ruined it for all of them):

Reports: Eight suspected ISIS militants, posing as refugees detained in Turkey

Associated Press, news source6:28 a.m. EST November 18, 2015

(AP) -- Turkey's state-run news agency says authorities have detained eight people at Istanbul's main airport who they suspect could be Islamic State militants planning to make their way to Germany, posing as refugees.

http://www.wcsh6.com/story/news/nation/2015/11/18/reports-eight-suspected-isis-militants-posing-refugees-detained-turkey/75977926/

 

[wiby_NU]

I didn't read most of this thread but wanted to post this and preface it with my opinion. If we could take care of the people we already have in this country that deserve priority for assistance (Homeless Vets), I would but much more in favor of letting in the refugees. This is the other reason (and IMO a few bad eggs have ruined it for all of them):

Reports: Eight suspected ISIS militants, posing as refugees detained in Turkey

Associated Press, news source6:28 a.m. EST November 18, 2015

(AP) -- Turkey's state-run news agency says authorities have detained eight people at Istanbul's main airport who they suspect could be Islamic State militants planning to make their way to Germany, posing as refugees.

http://www.wcsh6.com/story/news/nation/2015/11/18/reports-eight-suspected-isis-militants-posing-refugees-detained-turkey/75977926/

Helping out our vets and taking care of our own countries problems should be a first priority. A lot of people voice this opinion as a rebuttal for taking in additional refugees (which I personally disagree with). Unfortunately, many of those who share this view also want additional troops/military presence in the middle east. Resulting in a greater deficit, more money being spent on the military, and additional vets to take care of years down the road. Its truly a double edged sword. Not saying you have this view, just adding to what you have already stated.

 

[BigRedBuster]

Well, in my opinion, reality on what should be done is somewhere in the middle. We obviously can't leave the true refugees there to die, starve, be brutalized...etc. That is not the humane thing to do.

We also need to do everything we can to make sure militants are not let into other countries to do what militants did in Paris.

So, honestly, my mind keeps going back to the reasonable thing to do is to figure out some place these people can go to be taken care of while we figure out who they are and where they should go.

That place might be exactly where they are but bring in enough protection, infrastructure, housing, humanitarian aid...etc. to allow them to be as comfortable and safe as possible.

I personally would be willing to support our government giving very large amounts of money and support for this effort.

This would do a lot of things. It would prevent this from being an entry point for Muslim extremists into our countries. It would give needed help to these people who need it desperately. It would show the good people there that the rest of the world cares about them and will go to great lengths to help them...etc.

Once we know who these people are, I have no problem opening up our country to these people to find a better life.

 

[RedSavage]

Well, in my opinion, reality on what should be done is somewhere in the middle. We obviously can't leave the true refugees there to die, starve, be brutalized...etc. That is not the humane thing to do.

We also need to do everything we can to make sure militants are not let into other countries to do what militants did in Paris.

So, honestly, my mind keeps going back to the reasonable thing to do is to figure out some place these people can go to be taken care of while we figure out who they are and where they should go.

That place might be exactly where they are but bring in enough protection, infrastructure, housing, humanitarian aid...etc. to allow them to be as comfortable and safe as possible.

I personally would be willing to support our government giving very large amounts of money and support for this effort.

This would do a lot of things. It would prevent this from being an entry point for Muslim extremists into our countries. It would give needed help to these people who need it desperately. It would show the good people there that the rest of the world cares about them and will go to great lengths to help them...etc.

Once we know who these people are, I have no problem opening up our country to these people to find a better life.

I'm in agreement as far as something needs to be done to help these people but realistically, I'm not sure what. Why does America have to be the one's at the forefront to help? Why can't a well developed European country such as Germany step in and help out? Do you not think we should be focusing on the people in our own country who need help first and foremost?

 

[knapplc]

I'm in agreement as far as something needs to be done to help these people but realistically, I'm not sure what. Why does America have to be the one's at the forefront to help? Why can't a well developed European country such as Germany step in and help out? Do you not think we should be focusing on the people in our own country who need help first and foremost?

In a lot of situations (especially militarily) we are expected to bear the brunt of things, but in this case Europe is far outpacing us in their response. Tens of thousands of refugees are in Germany, France, ...all over Europe.