-
Hello!
Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.
Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....
Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.
Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.
pOTUS
- Thread starter tsst
- Start date
Nanci
Alien Lover
I feel like we can hardly provide for our own poor. Will many/most of the refugees be able to support themselves in a reasonable amount of time? (I was listening to NPR, and the person being interviewed was saying the refugees included "normal" people like IT professionals, and the like.) Will we be able to screen them effectively? I don't want to paint all foreigners with the same brush, and I realize that the refugees are _mostly_ fleeing the terrorist regime- they have the same enemies we do, and yet, how many people with bad intentions are going to sneak through because of the urgency of rehoming all the refugees?
On the radio last week, the morning show was talking about how to choose which Republican candidate to support. Who do you want answering the phone call at 3AM when our country is attacked? Which one of the candidates would best be able to deal with it? Maybe the economy, while important, shouldn't be the deciding point. And then, this morning, there we go. Had the US experienced terror attacks, who would best be able to respond?
There has been too much pussyfooting around by the current party in control, and particularly the POTUS. No- it is not workplace violence- it is an act of terrorism when a soldier opens fire at Ft. Hood. No, ISIS is not "junior varsity."
I think France responded correctly and in a timely manner to an attack.
On the radio last week, the morning show was talking about how to choose which Republican candidate to support. Who do you want answering the phone call at 3AM when our country is attacked? Which one of the candidates would best be able to deal with it? Maybe the economy, while important, shouldn't be the deciding point. And then, this morning, there we go. Had the US experienced terror attacks, who would best be able to respond?
There has been too much pussyfooting around by the current party in control, and particularly the POTUS. No- it is not workplace violence- it is an act of terrorism when a soldier opens fire at Ft. Hood. No, ISIS is not "junior varsity."
I think France responded correctly and in a timely manner to an attack.
If acts of terrorism increase in this country, the populace will, of course, demand SOMETHING be done about it. Which will mean more power granted to the same people who allowed this to happen in the first place.
If they can't find a disaster to take advantage of, they will create the opportunity for one.
If they can't find a disaster to take advantage of, they will create the opportunity for one.
Karl_Mcknight
Common Sense Holder
one of the so called Refugees helped to carry out the massive attack on Paris a few days ago.
I say Hell no
I say Hell no
tsst
Deuce is watching!
I don't even know how to respond to statements like your friend made. How do they win?
Nanci
Alien Lover
I guess by making us afraid to carry on with our daily lives? Think how many billions of dollars are wasted by increased airport 'security" (aka false sense of security, because we all know TSA is pretty ineffective). That's kind of a win for terrorism, too.
tsst
Deuce is watching!
I agree with that but how does she think they win if we turn away refugees?
Does anyone know if there is any way to tell friends from foes when it comes to terrorists?
And a pretty interesting definition of the term, via Google:
So if you fight for your freedom or are a "gunman" (these two will probably go hand in hand), you are considered as being a terrorist?
Anyone here who wouldn't be terrified to have IRS agents knocking on their door? Anyone doubt that higher levels of our own government use the IRS to further political goals?
And a pretty interesting definition of the term, via Google:
So if you fight for your freedom or are a "gunman" (these two will probably go hand in hand), you are considered as being a terrorist?
Anyone here who wouldn't be terrified to have IRS agents knocking on their door? Anyone doubt that higher levels of our own government use the IRS to further political goals?
tsst
Deuce is watching!
Add to that our pOTUS wants to have more and stricter background checks on AMERICANS wanting to exercise their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT, and no FBI background check on Syrian "refugees" because it would place ...
on them. :headbang:
These are folks coming from a terrorist hotbed whom are trusted more by Obama then are US citizens following the US Constitution. :angry01:
Obama said:
on them. :headbang:
These are folks coming from a terrorist hotbed whom are trusted more by Obama then are US citizens following the US Constitution. :angry01:
Dragonling
Doesn't do "casual"
I've no doubt that's among their goals. These are people who want to bring about their own special version of the apocalypse. They want to divide Muslims and non-Muslims to bring on the final war. By encouraging westerners to outright reject refugees out of fear, since it's impossible to tell friend from foe at face value, these people will have no where to turn but to their fellow Muslims who offer protection if they conform to their ideals. It's a major problem with no easy solution. Opening the borders could be inherently dangerous, but turning them all away may be signing millions of death warrants. And now people are using the excuse that we have our wounded and aging vets to care for and can't afford to house refugees...NOW we care about the vets, eh? :eyeroll: Yet I doubt any actual good will come of that.
kathylove
Pragmatic & Logical
Yes - what Dragonling said. ISIS wants to turn ordinary Muslims to their cause. If we turn the refugees away in their time of need, they (and their surviving kids) will be ripe for believing the propaganda spread about us by ISIS, and more willing to join their ranks - now, and in the future. Not to mention that hundreds of thousands will die if US and European (and maybe other) nations DON'T help them.
I have read the vetting process, which includes interviewing family members together and separately to see if stories mesh and look for red flags - much like the interviews couples go through when an American marries a foreigner. They are also fingerprinted and databases are searched. It is very true that a terrorist could slip through. But from what I have read, crossing our southern border illegally is probably easier and quicker than the refugee processing. Or terrorists could come legally on tourist or educational visas - or don't need a visa at all if they have a European passport.
It is a difficult decision, fraught with danger either way. Perhaps there could be some sort of parole system with check ins for a few years, until they are established and suspicions have been allayed?
This country has always had a reputation for generosity during catastrophes. How can we not help, and still retain our feelings of humanity?
I have read the vetting process, which includes interviewing family members together and separately to see if stories mesh and look for red flags - much like the interviews couples go through when an American marries a foreigner. They are also fingerprinted and databases are searched. It is very true that a terrorist could slip through. But from what I have read, crossing our southern border illegally is probably easier and quicker than the refugee processing. Or terrorists could come legally on tourist or educational visas - or don't need a visa at all if they have a European passport.
It is a difficult decision, fraught with danger either way. Perhaps there could be some sort of parole system with check ins for a few years, until they are established and suspicions have been allayed?
This country has always had a reputation for generosity during catastrophes. How can we not help, and still retain our feelings of humanity?
kathylove
Pragmatic & Logical
Yes, it is certainly possible to fake it. I posted a long description of the international vetting process (from an immigration attorney) on my FB page the other day. It sounded more difficult than just coming in some other way, such as crossing illegally from the south, or coming in on tourist or educational visas as the 9/11 terrorists did. If they really want to get here, they will. But this doesn't seem the easiest route for them. So it seems like condemning tens or hundreds of thousands of innocents to die because a few bad apples could be hiding amongst them is not a reasonable prioritizing of risk vs benefit. Seems like we could do something to decrease that risk even further, while giving those refugees some hope of a decent life. I wouldn't be against only accepting families, rather than single men. That alone would decrease risk, I think.
Karl_Mcknight
Common Sense Holder
at some point in time we have to ask, how many is too many?
There are already approximately 13 million people in this country illegally. They are enjoying our freedoms, eating our food, consuming our electricity, our resources, our health care, and working at jobs "under the radar" for cheaper wages than an American would work for. Meanwhile, there are about 30 million "Legitimate Citizens" out of work, and have actually given up looking for work because there is none, and they have found they can live better on welfare than by even working part time. So we now have more people on food stamps than ever before.
And now we want to let between 10 thousand and 350 thousand "Refugees" in that don't speak our language. Don't know our ways, and they really have no desire to be American Citizens, they are simply running from a war zone. A war in their own country that they don't even want to fight or defend themselves in. This only adds to "Our Problem" here.
At some point the canoe will tip over.
There will be more "takers" than "givers." There will be not enough food to go around, not enough money to go around, and America won't be able to pay her bills. We already have 18 Trillion in debt that "Somebody" has to cover???? Our children and grandchildren and generations to come.
This president is Insane and his policies are insane and people who have no basic math skills and no understanding of economics or the American form of government should not even be allowed to vote (in my opinion).
They put us in the place we're in now.
And no, you can't "Blame Bush" for any of it. Obama has been president for 7 years now and we still have to struggle through 1 more. Everything that has happened is on Him. The economy, the terrorists, the unwillingness to win a war, the falling behind on the world stage, the dominance of Russia, the ability for Iran to obtain Nukes,.... and on and on and on and......
And if we let many thousands of these so called Refugees into this country because we are compassionate and have a heart and 10 of them go off and kill a few hundred Americans at Theaters and Restaurants, then who will be to blame? What if it's you or your child or your neighbor?
Stop the Insanity!
There are already approximately 13 million people in this country illegally. They are enjoying our freedoms, eating our food, consuming our electricity, our resources, our health care, and working at jobs "under the radar" for cheaper wages than an American would work for. Meanwhile, there are about 30 million "Legitimate Citizens" out of work, and have actually given up looking for work because there is none, and they have found they can live better on welfare than by even working part time. So we now have more people on food stamps than ever before.
And now we want to let between 10 thousand and 350 thousand "Refugees" in that don't speak our language. Don't know our ways, and they really have no desire to be American Citizens, they are simply running from a war zone. A war in their own country that they don't even want to fight or defend themselves in. This only adds to "Our Problem" here.
At some point the canoe will tip over.
There will be more "takers" than "givers." There will be not enough food to go around, not enough money to go around, and America won't be able to pay her bills. We already have 18 Trillion in debt that "Somebody" has to cover???? Our children and grandchildren and generations to come.
This president is Insane and his policies are insane and people who have no basic math skills and no understanding of economics or the American form of government should not even be allowed to vote (in my opinion).
They put us in the place we're in now.
And no, you can't "Blame Bush" for any of it. Obama has been president for 7 years now and we still have to struggle through 1 more. Everything that has happened is on Him. The economy, the terrorists, the unwillingness to win a war, the falling behind on the world stage, the dominance of Russia, the ability for Iran to obtain Nukes,.... and on and on and on and......
And if we let many thousands of these so called Refugees into this country because we are compassionate and have a heart and 10 of them go off and kill a few hundred Americans at Theaters and Restaurants, then who will be to blame? What if it's you or your child or your neighbor?
Stop the Insanity!
I guess what I have a problem with is who pays to take care of all these refugees? Where does the money come from? Are they going to get health care? Food stamps? Housing? Transportation? Obviously they don't have jobs waiting for them here, and they will have to eat, will get sick, and need to get from one place to another somehow. Many USA citizens are already struggling, so is it fair to open up the borders and allow people to come in that will get services that USA citizens who cannot afford them are NOT getting? Does the USA have unlimited resources? Certainly not. So what happens with limited resources when the number of people needing to use such resources increases dramatically?
Quite frankly, can this country AFFORD the expenses? When the government just prints up more money to cover the expenses, as seems to be the status quo lately, who really gets hurt by that? WE get hit with strained resources getting more expensive AND our money becoming worth less, both at the same time. What will that do to US citizens already now right on the brink of financial failure?
Yeah, I know the question of humanitarianism comes up, but if the lifeboat is already filled to capacity, is it really wise to just keep on adding more people till it sinks, dooming everyone? Is that someone who just says "ENOUGH!" really the bad guy? Is someone in a decision making capacity necessarily having to be a realist or a humanitarian mutually exclusive states? Sometimes really tough and necessarily unpopular choices just need to be made.
This country is already pretty much in bankruptcy right at this moment and acting like some miracle is going to happen tomorrow to fix all of the problems if they just keep their eyes shut long enough and pray hard enough. It's pretty easy for people to be humanitarian when they don't have to worry about putting food on their own table. But when there is only one meal, and two hungry bellies who want it, well, probably not so much.
Quite frankly, can this country AFFORD the expenses? When the government just prints up more money to cover the expenses, as seems to be the status quo lately, who really gets hurt by that? WE get hit with strained resources getting more expensive AND our money becoming worth less, both at the same time. What will that do to US citizens already now right on the brink of financial failure?
Yeah, I know the question of humanitarianism comes up, but if the lifeboat is already filled to capacity, is it really wise to just keep on adding more people till it sinks, dooming everyone? Is that someone who just says "ENOUGH!" really the bad guy? Is someone in a decision making capacity necessarily having to be a realist or a humanitarian mutually exclusive states? Sometimes really tough and necessarily unpopular choices just need to be made.
This country is already pretty much in bankruptcy right at this moment and acting like some miracle is going to happen tomorrow to fix all of the problems if they just keep their eyes shut long enough and pray hard enough. It's pretty easy for people to be humanitarian when they don't have to worry about putting food on their own table. But when there is only one meal, and two hungry bellies who want it, well, probably not so much.
Last edited:
Dragonling
Doesn't do "casual"
I don't understand this part. Enjoying our freedoms? Do you mean equal protection under the law? Allowing illegal immigrant children to attend public school? I get that these things cost taxpayers money, but I'd rather pay for an innocent child who can't help the circumstances of his birth get an education than pay for some new weapons testing so we can be that much more threatening to those countries we already massively overshadow militarily. Eating our food? What, are they stealing it out of the mouths of our homeless? How about the ~133 billion lbs. of food that went to waste in 2010? The estimated retail value was $161.6 billion. Consuming electricity and resources? Hm, maybe that's how to get Fox News behind climate change... But really, are they getting electricity and gas for free somehow? Don't get me wrong, there is definitely a growing imbalance in supply and demand causing a rise in commodity prices, but are lower-middle-class taxpayers like me any less to blame for resource shortages?
In the US, when it becomes apparent that someone is a member of the armed services, suddenly everyone around them feels compelled to thank them for their service, myself included. I can't speak for anyone else, but for me it's honestly because I would never even consider joining any branch of military. I'm willing to bet the overwhelming majority of people in the US would refuse to serve, probably most of them out of fear. If I faced the same threat these refugees face, I would cut and run, too. So maybe I don't deserve to be here either.
kathylove
Pragmatic & Logical
I agree with what Rich and others have said about it being expensive, and we have lots of people who need our help at home. That is why I was TOTALLY against Bush spending billions of dollars (not to mention lives) going to Iraq. I expected it to end up exactly the way it is now. Saddam was a horrible person, but from what I read, the average Iraqi was better off then, compared to now.
I think our priorities are wrong. We apparently CAN afford to spend billions to meddle in Iraq and other countries, but we can't spend far less to care for our vets, homeless, and refugees from the areas we love to meddle in. And Hillary and most of the GOP candidates would love us to go spend more money and lives in Iran or other middle eastern countries. It seems like our main accomplishment there has been to destabilize the region, and to make a few people rich from their investments in private contracting companies.
Why is the conversation always about helping refugees vs helping our own poor, instead of doing all of that vs the next military misadventure that is sure to come, and we will somehow find PLENTY of money to spend on it? Why is there always plenty of money for building private prisons, often to put away non violent drug abusers, and money for military invasions, but not enough to rebuild infrastructure here, and to help the people who need it? If there was a way for the few top investors in military and prisons to make lots of money by helping the poor and the refugees, then my guess is that we WOULD prioritize those things instead of what we are doing now with the billions that we can't afford.
I think our priorities are wrong. We apparently CAN afford to spend billions to meddle in Iraq and other countries, but we can't spend far less to care for our vets, homeless, and refugees from the areas we love to meddle in. And Hillary and most of the GOP candidates would love us to go spend more money and lives in Iran or other middle eastern countries. It seems like our main accomplishment there has been to destabilize the region, and to make a few people rich from their investments in private contracting companies.
Why is the conversation always about helping refugees vs helping our own poor, instead of doing all of that vs the next military misadventure that is sure to come, and we will somehow find PLENTY of money to spend on it? Why is there always plenty of money for building private prisons, often to put away non violent drug abusers, and money for military invasions, but not enough to rebuild infrastructure here, and to help the people who need it? If there was a way for the few top investors in military and prisons to make lots of money by helping the poor and the refugees, then my guess is that we WOULD prioritize those things instead of what we are doing now with the billions that we can't afford.
Karl_Mcknight
Common Sense Holder
I don't understand this part. Enjoying our freedoms? Do you mean equal protection under the law? Allowing illegal immigrant children to attend public school? I get that these things cost taxpayers money, but I'd rather pay for an innocent child who can't help the circumstances of his birth get an education than pay for some new weapons testing so we can be that much more threatening to those countries we already massively overshadow militarily.
I think when it comes time to pay taxes, something we all do, there should be a line on the form for those of us who do not want to support illegal aliens and yes, their schooling, and since you have no qualms about doing so, you can pay double to make up for mine. And conversely I'll be willing to pay extra taxes (your share) to bomb the hell out of people with the best weaponry we can muster.
Eating our food? What, are they stealing it out of the mouths of our homeless? How about the ~133 billion lbs. of food that went to waste in 2010? The estimated retail value was $161.6 billion. Consuming electricity and resources? Hm, maybe that's how to get Fox News behind climate change... But really, are they getting electricity and gas for free somehow? Don't get me wrong, there is definitely a growing imbalance in supply and demand causing a rise in commodity prices, but are lower-middle-class taxpayers like me any less to blame for resource shortages?
I'll be the first to admit I don't know the figures on wasted food prices in 2010. But if I pay for the food, it's really none of your business what I do with it. And yes, some people do get free gas and electricity, housing, clothing..etc... And nobody is blaming "You" for resource shortages, certainly I'm not. My point being, that these people are not Immigrants. They are Illegal Aliens and apparently you don't know the difference. If they want to become U.S. Citizens they can apply and do so legally. And I'll be the first to welcome them. On the other hand if they sneak into this country with false papers and then "Have an Anchor Baby" which by law is a Citizen, and all the bleeding hearts cry "We can't separate the Child from its parents so they all get to stay, is just plain wrong. That law should be changed, and both the parents and the child should be sent back. It's not "My responsibility" to care for or educate somebody else's child.
And let's face it, America is the greatest country on earth. "Everybody" wants to come here. Do we just allow unfettered access and let anybody in anywhere any time? Well that's pretty much what we're doing and I say Hell no.
In the US, when it becomes apparent that someone is a member of the armed services, suddenly everyone around them feels compelled to thank them for their service, myself included. I can't speak for anyone else, but for me it's honestly because I would never even consider joining any branch of military. I'm willing to bet the overwhelming majority of people in the US would refuse to serve, probably most of them out of fear. If I faced the same threat these refugees face, I would cut and run, too. So maybe I don't deserve to be here either.
Well that's the difference between you and me. If somebody broke into my house I'd blow their head off. And if somebody (A foreign government or terrorist organization) invaded my town, I'd be sitting in front of my house with my gun ready. These "Refugees" are not interested in becoming Americans and they don't even care to fight for their own Homeland. We are told that the "Radical Islamists" are a very small percentage and the vast majority are good people. Well if there are so many Good Islamists and they outnumber the bad ones, rather than running to America or another Country, they should kick the asses of the bad guys and stay in the home they love. That's what I would do.