No, but I’m not about to go cannibal on syrian refugees either and it’s entirely pathetic to compare human lives to sugary snacks. It’s vile and yes, it’s extreme cowardice.
You are totally right and **Clothahump **is totally wrong. ISIS is trying to turn run of the mill Muslims against the US by whipping up anti-Muslim sentiment in the US and Europe. ISIS could easily sneak terrorists into the US using student or work visas; there is no reason for them to use the migrant stream for this purpose as it is slow and unsure. But if they can get us to declare a war on Islam or a war on Arabs in general, then they have won. Right now the majority of people in the middle east are against ISIS, but this could change with the typical Republican Jingoistic strategy toward ISIS (i.e. all Arabs are suspect and we should nuke them till they glow and shoot them in the dark).
Didn’t you already do this metaphor?
And didn’t we already eviscerate it?
Well, if you can’t trust ISIS at their word, who can you trust, am I right?
Exactly.
Clothahump repeats terrorist propaganda like it’s gospel. I find it disgusting.
France and Turkey are both at ~2.2% based on at least one set of numbers I’ve seen.
Well, it currently is.
Technically, it can’t be eviscerated as Clothahump has no guts.
I’m going off this, maybe it’s out date, even though it’s only from five months ago.
Not really, they’ve been bombing ISIS for like ten days and when you see their President bitching at us to ramp up the war it’s obvious they aren’t actually doing what they’d want in the Middle East, if they were they’d not be asking us to do it for them.
And plus, my focus on spending at least was more focused on Canada, which is very low on the list of NATO countries by spending as a portion of GDP. France (if they truly have gone above 2%) was the next highest spending country after Estonia (the lowest country that was meeting the 2% threshold, at exactly 2%.)
My point for France is, regardless of their spending, they’re wanting the United States to essentially engage in escalated military activity because they either lack the resources to do it themselves or they simply don’t want to spend said resources. There needs to be a point where if European countries want to engage in overseas military activity they need to commit to increasing their military spending as a percentage of GDP.
I know this isn’t Great Debates…but I did not expect to see a bad Facebook meme used as an anti-refugee argument. When can I expect to see the one about rattlesnakes?
>.<
I know, right ? And radical socialists and bomb-throwing anarchists, too. They come only to cause trouble and destabilize our god-given society as best they can. It’s all part of their evil global plot.
Oh, wait, no, I’m sorry, that’s the Jews and that was 1938. Carry on.
[QUOTE=Martin Hyde]
I mean, I don’t care if we take 50,000 Syrian refugees from a safety perspective. My concern is more along the lines of why is it our responsibility?
[/QUOTE]
Because these people need our help, and we can easily afford to give it. Simple as that. Besides, don’t you guys have some sort of greenish statue somewhere or other, with a poem underneath it ? You must have heard of her, holds a big torch, probably doesn’t have any underwear underneath the toga on account of she’s really French ?
What’s the poem say, again ? I think it’s some sort of mission statement.
(emphasis mine)
Outside of, y’know, massive quantities of oil without which society and the economy would revert to its state circa the 1700s. Details !
Y’all are harping on Clothahump, but at least he’s scared. Martin here is saying he doesn’t think there’s a security problem. He’s not scared, and he’s not giving any downside. It’s literally just “It’s not happening to us. Why the fuck should we care?”
I get people like Clothahump. He’s scared, and there are people out there that are playing right into that fear. He’s emotionally attached. He has an inherent distrust of anything liberal. It makes sense that he might ignore the evidence. It makes sense that he’s subconsciously looking for reasons not to accept these people he’s scared of. Hell, it’s an urge I actually had to fight.
But Martin Hyde? The fucking Objectivist standard that everyone should only do what’s best for themselves? The guy who actually thinks having ideals and morals is a down side? The one who thinks when he sees suffering “Not my problem”?
Hell, even Objectivism understands humanitarianism to some degree. It twists itself in knots to allow for people to help other people out, if that’s they consider to have value. Rand herself advocated for humanitarianism and argued it fit her idea of rational self interest.
Martin here doesn’t even have that. He’s given me two types of people that I can be less angry at, because at least they think they’re doing what’s right. So, thanks, I guess?
You are quite well named, Mr. Hyde. Would that we could change you back.
Chickenshit pissant coward.
Which states aren’t letting them in?
This country was founded on ideals that it still touts to the rest of the world as being admirable, even when they are more aspirational than actual. Taking in refugees is the right thing to do, both for humanitarian and moral reasons. You may discount it, but the U.S. does bear enormous responsibility for invading Iraq and making a place for DAESH (ISIS) to thrive in the process.
Not to mention that whining about taking in 25,000 or 50,000 refugees is disingenuous at best, when there are something over 2,000,000 refugees hanging around in Turkey and Lebanon and trying to get into Europe.
Rather than worrying about the “best interests” of our country (however you might define them) we should be trying for a foreign policy that doesn’t cover us with shame and embarrassment. This administration is doing better at that than the previous one, but there is a long, long way to go.
Yeah and he is going to make weed legal and everyone is going to sing kumbaya by the camp fire.
Sorry, not going to happen
Sunshine boy, may desire to take in a certain amount of people, but its not going to happen by the end of the year. I seriously doubt that we are going to take in 2500 in total. I would guess that from your naive attitude toward liberal politicians, that you do not live in Ontario.
I would hazard from your said belief in Liberal politicians, that you are not old enough to remember the original Trudeau.
At least America is getting rid of its problem in about a year, at best we might hope for is to have a back bench revolt and a vote of no confidence for sunshine boy.
You want those people over here, you fuckin pay for it.
Otherwise , that individual in Ottawa wants to move 5 divisions of Syrians over here by Christmas, he is going to need the entire Air Canada lift, Our C-17’s and other suitable military lift and and still need to rent more airplanes, all during the Christmas season rush for air travel.
We dont have medical people in Lebannon right now making sure that they dont bring over TB or any other illness, They have not set up any kind of arrangement with the relavent people to bring over women and children first, blah blah afterwards.
In short he loves making statements, but not so forth coming on details.
Dont worry about what Americans think, they are simply gonna pat sunshine boy on the head and send him over to the kids table.
Declan
Yeah it’s not like we had the whole world bent over a kitchen sink with our giant nuclear cock ready to pound and we just put it back in our pants, shook hands with everyone, and let them get on their merry way.
Go to hell, Canadian prick. You don’t know the first fucking thing about leadership. The post-WW2 global landscape has been the most prosperous and innovative in history. You can trade that for a couple thousand Syrian refugees (and the few dozen radicalized jihadists camouflaged among them) all you want you whiny sack of shit.
Such a whiny baby had to create two threads to double the whine. Pathetic.
That made me laugh out loud and scare the cat! Well done…!
Why are there still two versions of this thread? Get your shit together, Mods! 
There’s a chart in this story.