Paris Attacks

PJ_Soul

PP193448 said:

PJ_Soul said:

dignin said:

PP193448 said:

PJ_Soul said:

BS44325 said:

PJ_Soul said:

bootlegger10 said:

PJ_Soul said:

BS44325 said:

PJ_Soul said:

BS44325 said:

The correct policy is to take in refugees over here AND kick Islamist ass over there with a long term presence. Doing both is how you win...generosity and might.

I agree in theory. I'm not sure about the ass kicking part though. I want ISIS's ass kicked obviously. Of course. Bunch if motherfuckers.... I'm just not convinced that waging the same kind of war that keeps failing is the way to do that. In fact, I suspect it will just make things worse (again). I don't know if there is any way to do it at all in terms of military action. Seems more like a massive social problem to me. Plus prevention, which is especially tough when we value freedom.

It doesn't keep failing. It is just not the same as getting fast food. The problem with society today is we expect instant results. We want "peace" as fast as it takes to load this webpage. Change takes time. Security takes time. Osama bin laden called this the 100 Year War. Those who share his ideology understand this and we need to understand it as well.

So you are advocating a perpetual, indefinite state of war and occupation. Mmmmkaaayy. Can't really say anything if that is where your head is.

Do you think it will be possible for Syria to become a safe country without Western involvement? Unfortunately the West is going to need to come in, secure the region for 100 years while these punk-ass bitches die off, and reasonable Muslims can then have their land back when they have demonstrated for a few decades that they won't blow each other up. An old fashioned 'timeout' from the parents.

Reasonable Muslims can have their land (their homelamd, their independent nations) back when they promise to do what they're told by Father Knows West? Oh gee, how generous. Can they also get some chocolate ice cream if they eat up all their spinach?
The US just might get itself nuked if it does what you guys are talking about. The people in the middle east aren't fucking going to stand for that shit. You are talking about World War III. I don't see that as a good solution at all. It is the kind of xenophobic thinking that ISIS depends on to keep growing.

That is an incorrect understanding of how ISIS keeps growing. It grows because it proselytizes about what is "Allah's will" and it uses its victories as evidence that they and their followers are on the right path. Victories over the west results in recruitment. As bin laden said people will tend to follow the "strong horse". When ISIS is handed losses through direct engagement numbers dry up...the surge and the anbar awakening proved this point.

But dude, ISIS isn't going to dry up if the US swoops in and starts another disastrous war like that. They will spread out even more, building independent cells, and attracting alienated Muslim youth (and Muslim converts) from all over the world. It's pretty fucking easy to have "victories" over the west when a victory is a handful of homegrown guys strapping on homemade bombs and walking into some Starbucks during the morning rush.

You know your comment can probably be used as concern for taking in refugees into other countries, especially Western, right??

Not if your informed and have a basic understanding of how the refugee process works.

Exactly. And also, I said homegrown. That specifically means not refugees by definition. So I suppose it could be used as concern if the person in question is refusing to use basic reasoning skills.

So I guess if you apply those non reasoning skills you would also say that there would never ever be a refugee to make terror in your country. Great completely naive reasoning. So you blindly trust your government vetting process. I live in the US and don't trust the US government to do its job correctly. Example: Maybe explain to me why the IRS can't stop billions of dollars distributed to fraudulent tax claims, with so many identity theft issues where my local county sheriff dept actually carries tax ID theft forms in the police cars. How do I know... Cause my wife and I were victims. Now what kind of fucking IRS idiot would not red flag the fact that we haven't filed an EZ form in the past 12 years and that we have never direct deposited any refund. We had to prove to them that we didn't file a fraudulent claim. We spent more money to our CPA, more lost time filing forms and waiting in IRS office than worth the measly $350 tax return.
Plus no one is held to blame for incompetence in government here. There is so much waste in the US government. Just keep throwing tax money into programs that are not working properly, increase more government jobs, spend spend spend. Politicians are corrupt. People are paid off by lobbyists for votes Democratic and Republican alike. So I'm supposed to believe that the US government vetting process will be done the way they say it will, even if on paper it looks like overkill. Give me a fucking break.
Plus I never said that I wouldn't take refugees because of humanitarian issues. Take them all in Canada if you believe so strongly about it.

Nope, never said any of that and you guess wrong (and i have to assume you aren't paying any attention). As rgambs has been discussing, I don't put Canadian lies over the loves of non-Canadians. I have also already said that IF bringing in refugees somehow results in any of them being involved in a terror attack, I would have absolutely no regrets, because I know that if t hadn't happened that way, it would have been done some other way. Blocking refugees will prevent nothing. It will only increase suffering.

Of course, I have no direct hand in refugees coming to Canada, so don't know why you would suggest that I take them all in, but I completely support and champion the 25,000 that are coming before the new year (although I think they'll get backed up and will still be working on it come Jan 1st, despite all efforts), and I believe Canada will welcome more after that.

Oh, and sorry, there is no way getting around this being a humanitarian issue, no matter how you try to make yourself feel better about rejecting people in need.

mcgruff10

mickeyrat said:

mcgruff10 said:

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

mcgruff10 said:

rgambs said:

mcgruff10 said:

I guess a lot of Americans feel the same way as I do: why do we have to compromise our safety to let even more refugees in, especially one's with possibly terrorist ties (even though it's the vast minority)? Why can't Muslim countries or any other country take these people in? Why does the United states always have to get involved with international problems when we have a plethora of domestic issues to solve? I.e. Thousands of homeless american vets yet we are going to provide housing and education for those emigrating to the united states from the middle east. I guess everyone has their breaking point and this seems to be it.

The countries in the region are hosting millions of refugees, you are just echoing a right wing disinformation point. It is ironic too, considering it has clearly been the conservatives who block veterans bills every time they come up.

I m no conservative; I ve voted democrat every time since 1996. However I did live through 9/11 like many other people and have learned not to be so trusting of people. I agree no one is against law abiding Syrian refugees but you can not guarantee an Isis fighter won't slip in with them.
See by not allowing any of them in you do guarantee that a terrorist won't slip through.

So let me get this straight... You aren't willing to gamble any American lives, but Syrian lives, they can be gambled with?

This makes no sense- its an unfair question.

Not that 'gambling' is the operative term for this situation... would you flip a coin to determine the well being of your child versus another, RG? Does your child hold a special place in your heart?

I'm assuming from this post that your child holds no more value than any other child. This is why I ask. If I am wrong... you should retract your rather arrogant statement where you challenged another for holding such a selfish position.

Of course it makes sense. Refusing to accept any refugees makes a virtual certainty that some Syrian lives (children?) that would have been saved will be lost, that refusal, on the chance that some strangers might be killed as a result in this country, is a gamble on Syrian lives.
That is placing less value on Syrian lives than American lives any way you slice it.

The business of flipping a coin over my child is the unfair question that lacks sense. In an acute scenario where I have to choose my child over another, of course I won't flip the coin. That has nothing to do with flipping the coin to allow refugee children into this country with the infinitesimally small chance that another refugee will harm my son... I will flip that coin all day long.
Yes, my own son takes precedence, but strangers sons are all of equal value to me, whatever color and origin they happen to have.

So you and McScruffy feel the same- instinctually protective of your own versus another: you in more 'acute' scenarios... him in more 'broader' scenarios.

That's a fair assessment, but I think the distinction you made makes all the difference. We are talking about lives hanging in the balance, denying all refugees entry will surely cause death and massive suffering of them, letting them in might cause death and suffering for us.
The risk to us is a risk that many are willing to take, and many others are not willing to risk American lives but they don't seem to have a problem with the inevitabilcity of suffering among Syrians.
I think it's fair to point out this is inherently placing less value on foreign lives, especially since most of the people I have seen expressing this sentiment don't seem to have thought it through to it's conclusion.

How exactly are Syrian refugees suffering or dying If they are settling in another country that is willing to take them in?

Lets see..2 million in Turkey , where the pool of people are we are begining the process of vetting for resettlement.

Est 3 million more on the move mostly to Europe. Another est 7 million more internally displaced within Syria.

So considering those in Turkey where they have been under armed guard for quite some time for settlement seems dangerous?

Why exactly are they under armed guard? And again, where s the death and suffering in all these countries you speak of?

PJ_Soul

mickeyrat said:

mcgruff10 said:

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

mcgruff10 said:

rgambs said:

mcgruff10 said:

I guess a lot of Americans feel the same way as I do: why do we have to compromise our safety to let even more refugees in, especially one's with possibly terrorist ties (even though it's the vast minority)? Why can't Muslim countries or any other country take these people in? Why does the United states always have to get involved with international problems when we have a plethora of domestic issues to solve? I.e. Thousands of homeless american vets yet we are going to provide housing and education for those emigrating to the united states from the middle east. I guess everyone has their breaking point and this seems to be it.

The countries in the region are hosting millions of refugees, you are just echoing a right wing disinformation point. It is ironic too, considering it has clearly been the conservatives who block veterans bills every time they come up.

I m no conservative; I ve voted democrat every time since 1996. However I did live through 9/11 like many other people and have learned not to be so trusting of people. I agree no one is against law abiding Syrian refugees but you can not guarantee an Isis fighter won't slip in with them.
See by not allowing any of them in you do guarantee that a terrorist won't slip through.

So let me get this straight... You aren't willing to gamble any American lives, but Syrian lives, they can be gambled with?

This makes no sense- its an unfair question.

Not that 'gambling' is the operative term for this situation... would you flip a coin to determine the well being of your child versus another, RG? Does your child hold a special place in your heart?

I'm assuming from this post that your child holds no more value than any other child. This is why I ask. If I am wrong... you should retract your rather arrogant statement where you challenged another for holding such a selfish position.

Of course it makes sense. Refusing to accept any refugees makes a virtual certainty that some Syrian lives (children?) that would have been saved will be lost, that refusal, on the chance that some strangers might be killed as a result in this country, is a gamble on Syrian lives.
That is placing less value on Syrian lives than American lives any way you slice it.

The business of flipping a coin over my child is the unfair question that lacks sense. In an acute scenario where I have to choose my child over another, of course I won't flip the coin. That has nothing to do with flipping the coin to allow refugee children into this country with the infinitesimally small chance that another refugee will harm my son... I will flip that coin all day long.
Yes, my own son takes precedence, but strangers sons are all of equal value to me, whatever color and origin they happen to have.

So you and McScruffy feel the same- instinctually protective of your own versus another: you in more 'acute' scenarios... him in more 'broader' scenarios.

That's a fair assessment, but I think the distinction you made makes all the difference. We are talking about lives hanging in the balance, denying all refugees entry will surely cause death and massive suffering of them, letting them in might cause death and suffering for us.
The risk to us is a risk that many are willing to take, and many others are not willing to risk American lives but they don't seem to have a problem with the inevitabilcity of suffering among Syrians.
I think it's fair to point out this is inherently placing less value on foreign lives, especially since most of the people I have seen expressing this sentiment don't seem to have thought it through to it's conclusion.

How exactly are Syrian refugees suffering or dying If they are settling in another country that is willing to take them in?

Lets see..2 million in Turkey , where the pool of people are we are begining the process of vetting for resettlement.

Est 3 million more on the move mostly to Europe. Another est 7 million more internally displaced within Syria.

So considering those in Turkey where they have been under armed guard for quite some time for settlement seems dangerous?

It's not just dangerous. There are food shortages. Children are becoming malnourished, and now Turkey has been forced to withdraw free medical services, while the refugees have no money at all and zero opportunity to work, so people are now literally dying because of simple lack of medical care. Meanwhile, more refugees arrive every day, with no space for them, now no medical care, not even for children who have been trekking on foot for god knows how long... plus it is now winter, and they are starting to freeze.
Oh yeah, no biggie. No need to get them the fuck ot of there NOW to relieve their fear, stress, and suffering. They're just Syrians after all.

PP193448

Good luck in here Mcgruff... To many people riding around on their self righteous high horses acting like no one with any opinion other than theirs give a rats ass about humanitarianism. No one knows anything at all about what each other donates, votes, or even does for a living. But yet comment like you are a better person. Ridiculous. Later.

brianlux

PP193448 said:

Good luck in here Mcgruff... To many people riding around on their self righteous high horses acting like no one with any opinion other than theirs give a rats ass about humanitarianism. No one knows anything at all about what each other donates, votes, or even does for a living. But yet comment like you are a better person. Ridiculous. Later.

Really? I would say the vast majority of those who post here have concern for others but show or express it in different ways. Just as one example, Mr. McGruff and I have had differing opinions on issues here on AMT but we do show respect for each others opinions.

I don't see the usefulness is harshly bashing a group of people with one broad stroke of the brush.

PJ_Soul

FWIW, I don't always respect the opinions of others - that depends on the opinion in question. But i ALWAYS respect others' right to their opinion, and their right to express it any way they see fit. That includes opinions about opinions about opinions about opinions.

brianlux

PJ_Soul said:

FWIW, I don't always respect the opinions of others - that depends on the opinion in question. But i ALWAYS respect others' right to their opinion, and their right to express it any way they see fit. That includes opinions about opinions about opinions about opinions.

Yes, that's even closer to what I was trying to get to. Thank you for keeping me on my toes, YET AGAIN! PJ_Soul.

mcgruff10

PJ_Soul said:

mickeyrat said:

mcgruff10 said:

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

mcgruff10 said:

rgambs said:

mcgruff10 said:

I guess a lot of Americans feel the same way as I do: why do we have to compromise our safety to let even more refugees in, especially one's with possibly terrorist ties (even though it's the vast minority)? Why can't Muslim countries or any other country take these people in? Why does the United states always have to get involved with international problems when we have a plethora of domestic issues to solve? I.e. Thousands of homeless american vets yet we are going to provide housing and education for those emigrating to the united states from the middle east. I guess everyone has their breaking point and this seems to be it.

The countries in the region are hosting millions of refugees, you are just echoing a right wing disinformation point. It is ironic too, considering it has clearly been the conservatives who block veterans bills every time they come up.

I m no conservative; I ve voted democrat every time since 1996. However I did live through 9/11 like many other people and have learned not to be so trusting of people. I agree no one is against law abiding Syrian refugees but you can not guarantee an Isis fighter won't slip in with them.
See by not allowing any of them in you do guarantee that a terrorist won't slip through.

So let me get this straight... You aren't willing to gamble any American lives, but Syrian lives, they can be gambled with?

This makes no sense- its an unfair question.

Not that 'gambling' is the operative term for this situation... would you flip a coin to determine the well being of your child versus another, RG? Does your child hold a special place in your heart?

I'm assuming from this post that your child holds no more value than any other child. This is why I ask. If I am wrong... you should retract your rather arrogant statement where you challenged another for holding such a selfish position.

Of course it makes sense. Refusing to accept any refugees makes a virtual certainty that some Syrian lives (children?) that would have been saved will be lost, that refusal, on the chance that some strangers might be killed as a result in this country, is a gamble on Syrian lives.
That is placing less value on Syrian lives than American lives any way you slice it.

The business of flipping a coin over my child is the unfair question that lacks sense. In an acute scenario where I have to choose my child over another, of course I won't flip the coin. That has nothing to do with flipping the coin to allow refugee children into this country with the infinitesimally small chance that another refugee will harm my son... I will flip that coin all day long.
Yes, my own son takes precedence, but strangers sons are all of equal value to me, whatever color and origin they happen to have.

So you and McScruffy feel the same- instinctually protective of your own versus another: you in more 'acute' scenarios... him in more 'broader' scenarios.

That's a fair assessment, but I think the distinction you made makes all the difference. We are talking about lives hanging in the balance, denying all refugees entry will surely cause death and massive suffering of them, letting them in might cause death and suffering for us.
The risk to us is a risk that many are willing to take, and many others are not willing to risk American lives but they don't seem to have a problem with the inevitabilcity of suffering among Syrians.
I think it's fair to point out this is inherently placing less value on foreign lives, especially since most of the people I have seen expressing this sentiment don't seem to have thought it through to it's conclusion.

How exactly are Syrian refugees suffering or dying If they are settling in another country that is willing to take them in?

Lets see..2 million in Turkey , where the pool of people are we are begining the process of vetting for resettlement.

Est 3 million more on the move mostly to Europe. Another est 7 million more internally displaced within Syria.

So considering those in Turkey where they have been under armed guard for quite some time for settlement seems dangerous?

It's not just dangerous. There are food shortages. Children are becoming malnourished, and now Turkey has been forced to withdraw free medical services, while the refugees have no money at all and zero opportunity to work, so people are now literally dying because of simple lack of medical care. Meanwhile, more refugees arrive every day, with no space for them, now no medical care, not even for children who have been trekking on foot for god knows how long... plus it is now winter, and they are starting to freeze.
Oh yeah, no biggie. No need to get them the fuck ot of there NOW to relieve their fear, stress, and suffering. They're just Syrians after all.

Hey Rachel Maddows, I want you to read an article my high school buddy sent to me. I am not a veteran but this guy was a navy seal for around ten years. He was in afghanistan, iraq and every other shit hole on this planet and he says the author is spot on. it's definitely a good read and gives a point of view that many of us have not experienced.
http://www.unprecedentedmediocrity.com/what-gwot-veterans-really-think-about-middle-eastern-refugees/

dignin

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

dignin said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

mcgruff10 said:

rgambs said:

mcgruff10 said:

I guess a lot of Americans feel the same way as I do: why do we have to compromise our safety to let even more refugees in, especially one's with possibly terrorist ties (even though it's the vast minority)? Why can't Muslim countries or any other country take these people in? Why does the United states always have to get involved with international problems when we have a plethora of domestic issues to solve? I.e. Thousands of homeless american vets yet we are going to provide housing and education for those emigrating to the united states from the middle east. I guess everyone has their breaking point and this seems to be it.

The countries in the region are hosting millions of refugees, you are just echoing a right wing disinformation point. It is ironic too, considering it has clearly been the conservatives who block veterans bills every time they come up.

I m no conservative; I ve voted democrat every time since 1996. However I did live through 9/11 like many other people and have learned not to be so trusting of people. I agree no one is against law abiding Syrian refugees but you can not guarantee an Isis fighter won't slip in with them.
See by not allowing any of them in you do guarantee that a terrorist won't slip through.

So let me get this straight... You aren't willing to gamble any American lives, but Syrian lives, they can be gambled with?

This makes no sense- its an unfair question.

Not that 'gambling' is the operative term for this situation... would you flip a coin to determine the well being of your child versus another, RG? Does your child hold a special place in your heart?

I'm assuming from this post that your child holds no more value than any other child. This is why I ask. If I am wrong... you should retract your rather arrogant statement where you challenged another for holding such a selfish position.

Of course it makes sense. Refusing to accept any refugees makes a virtual certainty that some Syrian lives (children?) that would have been saved will be lost, that refusal, on the chance that some strangers might be killed as a result in this country, is a gamble on Syrian lives.
That is placing less value on Syrian lives than American lives any way you slice it.

The business of flipping a coin over my child is the unfair question that lacks sense. In an acute scenario where I have to choose my child over another, of course I won't flip the coin. That has nothing to do with flipping the coin to allow refugee children into this country with the infinitesimally small chance that another refugee will harm my son... I will flip that coin all day long.
Yes, my own son takes precedence, but strangers sons are all of equal value to me, whatever color and origin they happen to have.

So you and McScruffy feel the same- instinctually protective of your own versus another: you in more 'acute' scenarios... him in more 'broader' scenarios.

I shouldn't even have to tell you how ridiculous this argument is.

You probably don't understand what's being said, Dig.

In the event you don't... I'm just speaking to the slight hypocrisy in RG's rather pompous post that made Scruffy out to be an asshole.

Lately... any counter position to the Liberal left free flow is met with scorn and disdain. I'm not necessarily saying I disagree with the sentiments behind what is being expressed from the aforementioned... I'm more saying I disagree with the lack of efforts to understand and acknowledge the varying perspectives.

Who's right in this discussion? I feel it is the side advocating for meaningful assistance, but I'm not so arrogant to think that any position to the contrary is completely out to lunch (excluding the extreme nonsense that pokes its head out periodically- which Scruffy's wasn't).

Maybe I missed the gist of what was being said. If I did, I apologize.

I don't see how this is a Liberal vs. Conservative issue. I know a lot of conservatives (religious) who see this as a humanitarian issue and they want to help. Most of the organizations sponsoring refugees in my area are religious ones.

I see people getting pissed at the misinformation happening around here and everywhere. I am always willing to discuss in a polite way with someone who has an informed opinion. It's frustrating discussing an issue with someone when they are not informed.

I understand that is a very emotional issue. But I still find it hard to believe that someone, given all the facts, can still be rationally afraid of these refugees. I can see where this irrational fear comes from, the media and politicians with an agenda. I'm just disappointed that so many fall for it. It reminds of just after 9/11. How that shock and fear after the attacks was used to make bad decisions.

mcgruff10

PP193448 said:

Good luck in here Mcgruff... To many people riding around on their self righteous high horses acting like no one with any opinion other than theirs give a rats ass about humanitarianism. No one knows anything at all about what each other donates, votes, or even does for a living. But yet comment like you are a better person. Ridiculous. Later.

thanks bud. This thread reminds me of the "america's gun violence" thread. there's definitely some really cool people that I'd love to sit down with and actually discuss an issue in an intellectual way (brian, del, bad brains!, PP) and there's other's that are simply not worth replying to. They are the The kind that you present evidence too but they ignore it or it's their way or the high way or you are an obvious racist with no compassion. Actually my favorite is when people counter a question with a question.

mcgruff10

PJ_Soul said:

mickeyrat said:

mcgruff10 said:

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

mcgruff10 said:

rgambs said:

mcgruff10 said:

I guess a lot of Americans feel the same way as I do: why do we have to compromise our safety to let even more refugees in, especially one's with possibly terrorist ties (even though it's the vast minority)? Why can't Muslim countries or any other country take these people in? Why does the United states always have to get involved with international problems when we have a plethora of domestic issues to solve? I.e. Thousands of homeless american vets yet we are going to provide housing and education for those emigrating to the united states from the middle east. I guess everyone has their breaking point and this seems to be it.

The countries in the region are hosting millions of refugees, you are just echoing a right wing disinformation point. It is ironic too, considering it has clearly been the conservatives who block veterans bills every time they come up.

I m no conservative; I ve voted democrat every time since 1996. However I did live through 9/11 like many other people and have learned not to be so trusting of people. I agree no one is against law abiding Syrian refugees but you can not guarantee an Isis fighter won't slip in with them.
See by not allowing any of them in you do guarantee that a terrorist won't slip through.

So let me get this straight... You aren't willing to gamble any American lives, but Syrian lives, they can be gambled with?

This makes no sense- its an unfair question.

Not that 'gambling' is the operative term for this situation... would you flip a coin to determine the well being of your child versus another, RG? Does your child hold a special place in your heart?

I'm assuming from this post that your child holds no more value than any other child. This is why I ask. If I am wrong... you should retract your rather arrogant statement where you challenged another for holding such a selfish position.

Of course it makes sense. Refusing to accept any refugees makes a virtual certainty that some Syrian lives (children?) that would have been saved will be lost, that refusal, on the chance that some strangers might be killed as a result in this country, is a gamble on Syrian lives.
That is placing less value on Syrian lives than American lives any way you slice it.

The business of flipping a coin over my child is the unfair question that lacks sense. In an acute scenario where I have to choose my child over another, of course I won't flip the coin. That has nothing to do with flipping the coin to allow refugee children into this country with the infinitesimally small chance that another refugee will harm my son... I will flip that coin all day long.
Yes, my own son takes precedence, but strangers sons are all of equal value to me, whatever color and origin they happen to have.

So you and McScruffy feel the same- instinctually protective of your own versus another: you in more 'acute' scenarios... him in more 'broader' scenarios.

That's a fair assessment, but I think the distinction you made makes all the difference. We are talking about lives hanging in the balance, denying all refugees entry will surely cause death and massive suffering of them, letting them in might cause death and suffering for us.
The risk to us is a risk that many are willing to take, and many others are not willing to risk American lives but they don't seem to have a problem with the inevitabilcity of suffering among Syrians.
I think it's fair to point out this is inherently placing less value on foreign lives, especially since most of the people I have seen expressing this sentiment don't seem to have thought it through to it's conclusion.

How exactly are Syrian refugees suffering or dying If they are settling in another country that is willing to take them in?

Lets see..2 million in Turkey , where the pool of people are we are begining the process of vetting for resettlement.

Est 3 million more on the move mostly to Europe. Another est 7 million more internally displaced within Syria.

So considering those in Turkey where they have been under armed guard for quite some time for settlement seems dangerous?

It's not just dangerous. There are food shortages. Children are becoming malnourished, and now Turkey has been forced to withdraw free medical services, while the refugees have no money at all and zero opportunity to work, so people are now literally dying because of simple lack of medical care. Meanwhile, more refugees arrive every day, with no space for them, now no medical care, not even for children who have been trekking on foot for god knows how long... plus it is now winter, and they are starting to freeze.
Oh yeah, no biggie. No need to get them the fuck ot of there NOW to relieve their fear, stress, and suffering. They're just Syrians after all.

seems like turkey has been a pretty good host according to this article: (i'm not finding any articles saying syrian refugees are freezing (aren't all people outside freezing when the weather drops?) due to the impeding weather. can you share a source?)
source: http://www.thenation.com/article/why-syrian-refugees-in-turkey-are-leaving-for-europe/
Nasser is one of over 2 million Syrian refugees in Turkey, which has accepted more than any other state. According to a recent 72-page report issued by Turkey’s Republican People’s Party, only 270,000 refugees are living in camps near the border. The rest are scattered across Turkey’s 81 provinces. Istanbul is a popular destination for many of them, who like Nasser are trying to establish a new life. Some estimates peg the Syrian population in Turkey’s most populous city at nearly half a million.
Turkey—currently the world’s largest refugee-hosting nation—has been widely praised for its welcoming attitude. On a visit marking World Refugee Day in June, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, António Guterres, called Turkey “a great example for other countries in a world where borders are becoming unpassable for refugees.” The Turkish government says it has spent nearly $8 billion on humanitarian assistance for Syrian refugees alone. It also recently announced that Gaziantep University, less than a two-hour drive from Aleppo, would offer 28 majors in Arabic, including biology, mathematics, economics, literature, and engineering. However, the Turkish Parliament has yet to act on the issue of work permits for refugees, which it has punted until after the snap parliamentary elections to be held in November.

mcgruff10

wait pj soul.....i found this which is the same problem we have in the district i teach in:
Syrian refugees in Turkey in dire need of language teachers: UNICEF official
NOV 22, 2015
source: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/11/22/national/syrian-refugees-turkey-dire-need-language-teachers-unicef-official/#.VlJeMKaTSZN
A Japanese working at UNICEF’s office in Turkey says there is an urgent need to teach Turkish to the young Arabic-speaking Syrian refugees there to help them integrate with society.

“More than half of school-age Syrian refugee children in Turkey whose native language is Arabic have been unable to go to school,” Chiharu Kondo, 43, said in a recent interview in Tokyo.

“To help Syrian refugees build a stable society with hope for their future, it is urgent to teach them the Turkish language to overcome the language barrier,” she said.

The number of Syrian refugees in Turkey stood at about 2 million last month, UNICEF says. While 708,000 of them are between 6 and 18 years old, around 400,000 do not attend school.

In 2014, the Turkish government gave all registered Syrian refugees the right to receive free education at its public schools. But Turkish and Syrian children are taught separately in morning and afternoon classes due to the language differences.

Such a situation “will not facilitate mutual understanding,” Kondo noted, adding that there also is a serious shortage of classrooms and teaching staff.

Kondo said there is risk that refugees may turn to terrorism or other dangerous activities if they fail to receive adequate education.

“Syrian refugees, who are unable to return home any time soon due to the prolonged civil war, must receive education and become integrated into society so that they can live with hope for the future. That will increase stability in host nations” she emphasized.

dignin

mcgruff10 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mickeyrat said:

mcgruff10 said:

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

rgambs said:

mcgruff10 said:

rgambs said:

mcgruff10 said:

I guess a lot of Americans feel the same way as I do: why do we have to compromise our safety to let even more refugees in, especially one's with possibly terrorist ties (even though it's the vast minority)? Why can't Muslim countries or any other country take these people in? Why does the United states always have to get involved with international problems when we have a plethora of domestic issues to solve? I.e. Thousands of homeless american vets yet we are going to provide housing and education for those emigrating to the united states from the middle east. I guess everyone has their breaking point and this seems to be it.

The countries in the region are hosting millions of refugees, you are just echoing a right wing disinformation point. It is ironic too, considering it has clearly been the conservatives who block veterans bills every time they come up.

I m no conservative; I ve voted democrat every time since 1996. However I did live through 9/11 like many other people and have learned not to be so trusting of people. I agree no one is against law abiding Syrian refugees but you can not guarantee an Isis fighter won't slip in with them.
See by not allowing any of them in you do guarantee that a terrorist won't slip through.

So let me get this straight... You aren't willing to gamble any American lives, but Syrian lives, they can be gambled with?

This makes no sense- its an unfair question.

Not that 'gambling' is the operative term for this situation... would you flip a coin to determine the well being of your child versus another, RG? Does your child hold a special place in your heart?

I'm assuming from this post that your child holds no more value than any other child. This is why I ask. If I am wrong... you should retract your rather arrogant statement where you challenged another for holding such a selfish position.

Of course it makes sense. Refusing to accept any refugees makes a virtual certainty that some Syrian lives (children?) that would have been saved will be lost, that refusal, on the chance that some strangers might be killed as a result in this country, is a gamble on Syrian lives.
That is placing less value on Syrian lives than American lives any way you slice it.

The business of flipping a coin over my child is the unfair question that lacks sense. In an acute scenario where I have to choose my child over another, of course I won't flip the coin. That has nothing to do with flipping the coin to allow refugee children into this country with the infinitesimally small chance that another refugee will harm my son... I will flip that coin all day long.
Yes, my own son takes precedence, but strangers sons are all of equal value to me, whatever color and origin they happen to have.

So you and McScruffy feel the same- instinctually protective of your own versus another: you in more 'acute' scenarios... him in more 'broader' scenarios.

That's a fair assessment, but I think the distinction you made makes all the difference. We are talking about lives hanging in the balance, denying all refugees entry will surely cause death and massive suffering of them, letting them in might cause death and suffering for us.
The risk to us is a risk that many are willing to take, and many others are not willing to risk American lives but they don't seem to have a problem with the inevitabilcity of suffering among Syrians.
I think it's fair to point out this is inherently placing less value on foreign lives, especially since most of the people I have seen expressing this sentiment don't seem to have thought it through to it's conclusion.

How exactly are Syrian refugees suffering or dying If they are settling in another country that is willing to take them in?

Lets see..2 million in Turkey , where the pool of people are we are begining the process of vetting for resettlement.

Est 3 million more on the move mostly to Europe. Another est 7 million more internally displaced within Syria.

So considering those in Turkey where they have been under armed guard for quite some time for settlement seems dangerous?

It's not just dangerous. There are food shortages. Children are becoming malnourished, and now Turkey has been forced to withdraw free medical services, while the refugees have no money at all and zero opportunity to work, so people are now literally dying because of simple lack of medical care. Meanwhile, more refugees arrive every day, with no space for them, now no medical care, not even for children who have been trekking on foot for god knows how long... plus it is now winter, and they are starting to freeze.
Oh yeah, no biggie. No need to get them the fuck ot of there NOW to relieve their fear, stress, and suffering. They're just Syrians after all.

seems like turkey has been a pretty good host according to this article: (i'm not finding any articles saying syrian refugees are freezing (aren't all people outside freezing when the weather drops?) due to the impeding weather. can you share a source?)
source: http://www.thenation.com/article/why-syrian-refugees-in-turkey-are-leaving-for-europe/
Nasser is one of over 2 million Syrian refugees in Turkey, which has accepted more than any other state. According to a recent 72-page report issued by Turkey’s Republican People’s Party, only 270,000 refugees are living in camps near the border. The rest are scattered across Turkey’s 81 provinces. Istanbul is a popular destination for many of them, who like Nasser are trying to establish a new life. Some estimates peg the Syrian population in Turkey’s most populous city at nearly half a million.
Turkey—currently the world’s largest refugee-hosting nation—has been widely praised for its welcoming attitude. On a visit marking World Refugee Day in June, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, António Guterres, called Turkey “a great example for other countries in a world where borders are becoming unpassable for refugees.” The Turkish government says it has spent nearly $8 billion on humanitarian assistance for Syrian refugees alone. It also recently announced that Gaziantep University, less than a two-hour drive from Aleppo, would offer 28 majors in Arabic, including biology, mathematics, economics, literature, and engineering. However, the Turkish Parliament has yet to act on the issue of work permits for refugees, which it has punted until after the snap parliamentary elections to be held in November.

http://www.trust.org/item/20151120081047-niq9m/

http://www.turkishweekly.net/2015/11/20/news/syrian-refugees-in-lebanons-beqaa-brace-for-cruel-winter/

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/02/winter-is-coming-the-new-crisis-for-refugees-in-europe

http://www.vice.com/read/talking-to-syrian-refugees-about-surviving-in-lebanon-916

mcgruff10

.

http://www.trust.org/item/20151120081047-niq9m/

http://www.turkishweekly.net/2015/11/20/news/syrian-refugees-in-lebanons-beqaa-brace-for-cruel-winter/

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/02/winter-is-coming-the-new-crisis-for-refugees-in-europe

http://www.vice.com/read/talking-to-syrian-refugees-about-surviving-in-lebanon-916

your first article is from denmark. no shit it's cold there and it's not turkey,
your second article is from lebanon. yeah its cold but no deaths and pretty standard suffering due to cold.
your third article is about refugees in europe and if exposed to the elements they'll get hypothermia. again, no shit when exposed to the elements. you could write that same article across the globe about homeless people. so far nothing about turkish camps and deaths and suffering. now onto article four.
your fourth article is about refugees in lebanon again. um yeah, neighbor next door. pretty much the same as your second article. and again no death and suffering on this huge scale that the left is talking about.

so where's the article about all this suffering in turkey?

and yeah winter is coming, but this the 3rd, 4th or even 5th winter these refugees have endured. I'm sure all of you have been vocal these past couple of years about how winter has impacted these people. please don't tell me this is the first time it has caught your attention since it is now national news.

dignin

mcgruff10 said:

.

http://www.trust.org/item/20151120081047-niq9m/

http://www.turkishweekly.net/2015/11/20/news/syrian-refugees-in-lebanons-beqaa-brace-for-cruel-winter/

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/02/winter-is-coming-the-new-crisis-for-refugees-in-europe

http://www.vice.com/read/talking-to-syrian-refugees-about-surviving-in-lebanon-916

your first article is from denmark. no shit it's cold there and it's not turkey,
your second article is from lebanon. yeah its cold but no deaths and pretty standard suffering due to cold.
your third article is about refugees in europe and if exposed to the elements they'll get hypothermia. again, no shit when exposed to the elements. you could write that same article across the globe about homeless people. so far nothing about turkish camps and deaths and suffering. now onto article four.
your fourth article is about refugees in lebanon again. um yeah, neighbor next door. pretty much the same as your second article. and again no death and suffering on this huge scale that the left is talking about.

so where's the article about all this suffering in turkey?

The first article wasn't about refugees in Denmark. It was about the work the DRC is doing (Danish Refugee Council) in camps all across the middle east. No surprise you didn't read the content, based on all your other ignorant comments.

You win, it's paradise in the Turkey camps....you make it sound so nice maybe you should move there. And the other refugees all across Europe and the middle east, well who gives a fuck eh....after all it's winter, what do you expect.

What a waste of time.

PJfanwillneverleave1

.

mcgruff10

dignin said:

mcgruff10 said:

.

http://www.trust.org/item/20151120081047-niq9m/

http://www.turkishweekly.net/2015/11/20/news/syrian-refugees-in-lebanons-beqaa-brace-for-cruel-winter/

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/02/winter-is-coming-the-new-crisis-for-refugees-in-europe

http://www.vice.com/read/talking-to-syrian-refugees-about-surviving-in-lebanon-916

your first article is from denmark. no shit it's cold there and it's not turkey,
your second article is from lebanon. yeah its cold but no deaths and pretty standard suffering due to cold.
your third article is about refugees in europe and if exposed to the elements they'll get hypothermia. again, no shit when exposed to the elements. you could write that same article across the globe about homeless people. so far nothing about turkish camps and deaths and suffering. now onto article four.
your fourth article is about refugees in lebanon again. um yeah, neighbor next door. pretty much the same as your second article. and again no death and suffering on this huge scale that the left is talking about.

so where's the article about all this suffering in turkey?

The first article wasn't about refugees in Denmark. It was about the work the DRC is doing (Danish Refugee Council) in camps all across the middle east. No surprise you didn't read the content, based on all your other ignorant comments.

You win, it's paradise in the Turkey camps....you make it sound so nice maybe you should move there. And the other refugees all across Europe and the middle east, well who gives a fuck eh....after all it's winter, what do you expect.

What a waste of time.





yeah i read all the articles and the first thing that strikes me is: Vulnerable refugees face fifth winter without adequate food and clothing
Danish Refugee Council (DRC) - Denmark - Fri, 20 Nov 2015 08:10 GMT
denmark. harsh winters. holy cow it seems like the author is talking about refugees in denmark. but then we have a sleight of hand and he's talking about snow in the middle east?

Last winter snow blanketed refugee camps and urban areas, and freezing temperatures created concerns about the health of refugees, who lacked access to warm clothing and secure shelter. In early January, three Syrian refugee children froze to death in Lebanon and a snow storm in Syria killed two children caught in the elements. Temperatures throughout region drop below ten degrees from November – March, with snow common.

you could replace these cities names with any other cities across the globe. wait let me try:
source http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/24/us/cold-weather-hits-midwest-and-east-coast-causing-several-deaths.html?_r=0
Since Saturday, the authorities have reported at least four deaths related to the cold in the Midwest, including a 70-year-old man found frozen in his unheated home in Des Plaines, Ill., on Sunday, according to The Associated Press.

Forecasters said the cold weather could be accompanied by several inches of snow in portions of Illinois, Iowa, Michigan and Wisconsin, and snowfall is expected to extend east to New York and as far south as Virginia on Friday.

As the frigid air moved east, local officials tried to prepare. The anticipated high on Thursday was 11 degrees in Buffalo, and around 20 degrees in Cleveland and Boston.

again, where's the turkish camps stories? of course people die because of the elements. that sucks. but don't accuse the right of the same thing you are doing which is sensationalizing a story.

mcgruff10

dignin said:

mcgruff10 said:

.

http://www.trust.org/item/20151120081047-niq9m/

http://www.turkishweekly.net/2015/11/20/news/syrian-refugees-in-lebanons-beqaa-brace-for-cruel-winter/

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/02/winter-is-coming-the-new-crisis-for-refugees-in-europe

http://www.vice.com/read/talking-to-syrian-refugees-about-surviving-in-lebanon-916

your first article is from denmark. no shit it's cold there and it's not turkey,
your second article is from lebanon. yeah its cold but no deaths and pretty standard suffering due to cold.
your third article is about refugees in europe and if exposed to the elements they'll get hypothermia. again, no shit when exposed to the elements. you could write that same article across the globe about homeless people. so far nothing about turkish camps and deaths and suffering. now onto article four.
your fourth article is about refugees in lebanon again. um yeah, neighbor next door. pretty much the same as your second article. and again no death and suffering on this huge scale that the left is talking about.

so where's the article about all this suffering in turkey?

The first article wasn't about refugees in Denmark. It was about the work the DRC is doing (Danish Refugee Council) in camps all across the middle east. No surprise you didn't read the content, based on all your other ignorant comments.

You win, it's paradise in the Turkey camps....you make it sound so nice maybe you should move there. And the other refugees all across Europe and the middle east, well who gives a fuck eh....after all it's winter, what do you expect.

What a waste of time.





my ignorant self (just because i disagree with you? geez.) posted a story, did you read it? a friend of mine who's a navy seal recommended it to me. http://www.unprecedentedmediocrity.com/what-gwot-veterans-really-think-about-middle-eastern-refugees/

PJfanwillneverleave1

mcgruff10 said:

dignin said:

mcgruff10 said:

.

http://www.trust.org/item/20151120081047-niq9m/

http://www.turkishweekly.net/2015/11/20/news/syrian-refugees-in-lebanons-beqaa-brace-for-cruel-winter/

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/02/winter-is-coming-the-new-crisis-for-refugees-in-europe

http://www.vice.com/read/talking-to-syrian-refugees-about-surviving-in-lebanon-916

your first article is from denmark. no shit it's cold there and it's not turkey,
your second article is from lebanon. yeah its cold but no deaths and pretty standard suffering due to cold.
your third article is about refugees in europe and if exposed to the elements they'll get hypothermia. again, no shit when exposed to the elements. you could write that same article across the globe about homeless people. so far nothing about turkish camps and deaths and suffering. now onto article four.
your fourth article is about refugees in lebanon again. um yeah, neighbor next door. pretty much the same as your second article. and again no death and suffering on this huge scale that the left is talking about.

so where's the article about all this suffering in turkey?

The first article wasn't about refugees in Denmark. It was about the work the DRC is doing (Danish Refugee Council) in camps all across the middle east. No surprise you didn't read the content, based on all your other ignorant comments.

You win, it's paradise in the Turkey camps....you make it sound so nice maybe you should move there. And the other refugees all across Europe and the middle east, well who gives a fuck eh....after all it's winter, what do you expect.

What a waste of time.

my ignorant self (just because i disagree with you? geez.) posted a story, did you read it? a friend of mine who's a navy seal recommended it to me. http://www.unprecedentedmediocrity.com/what-gwot-veterans-really-think-about-middle-eastern-refugees/

And this is the pause where we wait for reinforcements to bolster against you mcgruff.
You stated an opinion against the grain and the responses are crass and rude.
As someone stated before good luck.
Standby for rotten eggs and tomatoes thrown your way.

mcgruff10

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

mcgruff10 said:

dignin said:

mcgruff10 said:

.

http://www.trust.org/item/20151120081047-niq9m/

http://www.turkishweekly.net/2015/11/20/news/syrian-refugees-in-lebanons-beqaa-brace-for-cruel-winter/

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/02/winter-is-coming-the-new-crisis-for-refugees-in-europe

http://www.vice.com/read/talking-to-syrian-refugees-about-surviving-in-lebanon-916

your first article is from denmark. no shit it's cold there and it's not turkey,
your second article is from lebanon. yeah its cold but no deaths and pretty standard suffering due to cold.
your third article is about refugees in europe and if exposed to the elements they'll get hypothermia. again, no shit when exposed to the elements. you could write that same article across the globe about homeless people. so far nothing about turkish camps and deaths and suffering. now onto article four.
your fourth article is about refugees in lebanon again. um yeah, neighbor next door. pretty much the same as your second article. and again no death and suffering on this huge scale that the left is talking about.

so where's the article about all this suffering in turkey?

The first article wasn't about refugees in Denmark. It was about the work the DRC is doing (Danish Refugee Council) in camps all across the middle east. No surprise you didn't read the content, based on all your other ignorant comments.

You win, it's paradise in the Turkey camps....you make it sound so nice maybe you should move there. And the other refugees all across Europe and the middle east, well who gives a fuck eh....after all it's winter, what do you expect.

What a waste of time.

my ignorant self (just because i disagree with you? geez.) posted a story, did you read it? a friend of mine who's a navy seal recommended it to me. http://www.unprecedentedmediocrity.com/what-gwot-veterans-really-think-about-middle-eastern-refugees/

And this is the pause where we wait for reinforcements to bolster against you mcgruff.
You stated an opinion against the grain and the responses are crass and rude.
As someone stated before good luck.
Standby for rotten eggs and tomatoes thrown your way.



I am a pilgrim in an holy land. Thank you for your support. I shall continue to post articles that support my opinion as reflected in public surveys and stories that reflect opinions of Americans that fought in the region. I shall also question people that say things without backing them up. (I m ignorant yet some people post four articles that have nothing to do with the question being asked. And when disproved they get all pissed and type "what a waste of time").