Go back and read the very first comment I posted. It was a comment and nothing more. If it adds nothing to the debate then feel free to ignore it. If you think there is something in there worth commenting on then please do so but at least quote it and ask a question directly. Otherwise I have no idea what your problem is with what I’ve written.
This is indeed a thread about the stupid nonsense of opposing to help in an humanitarian crisis because the Terrorist propaganda is claiming that they can do the same in the USA.
Stupid indeed, the problem with Europe is complicated and curiously there has not been much reporting that a lot of the bad screening that took place in Greece was thanks in big part to the austerity measures demanded by the rest of Europe. (I do bet that many Geeks suffering with unemployment are resorting now to smuggling people too).
Not enough money or resources to properly screen, IMHO the big picture shows to me that the European case was due to the old Penny wise, Pound foolish mode that ignored how bad the austerity measures in a country would affect a humanitarian crisis, a lot of what took place would not had occurred if Greece had not been accepted into the union until a lot of issues had been solved. There would had been then a more secure border between Greece and the rest of Europe.
Getting back to subject, nothing like that is happening to the USA and the screening is way up to muster.
Exactly. Bringing up the possibility of terrorists exploiting the refugee situation in “western countries” does nothing but muddy the waters.
Ya know, the idea that ‘they wouldn’t do that because there are cheaper and easier ways to get people into the USA, so they ain’t going to do it’ that some people in this thread are saying is really fucking stupid.
If their goal is to put a few people into a specific country, to carry out a specific plan, then, yes, there are easier, more reliable, and/or cheaper ways to do it. But if their goal is to put lots of people into lots of places to cause general mayhem some time in the future (actual plans to be developed later) there’s no better way than hiding a few thousand people in amongst a few million refugees that are going to be placed far-and-wide everywhere they want to stir up shit.
It’s not something I’m going to lose any sleep over, but it’s really fucking idiotic to claim that they wouldn’t ever even think of doing it, and aren’t trying to do it. Of course they are. It’s certainly reasonable to consider the possibility. Yeah, ‘The stupid - it burns’, but the stupid is on the part of the idiots who are denying the possibility, not the ones who are considering the possibility.
I doubt their game plan calls for a 18-24 month wait.
Why not? If they want to stir up shit some time in the future, why would they not be willing to wait? They think they will be around for a few years (hell, they think they will be around until Allah ends the world). What makes you think they wouldn’t be happy with launching a long game if it’ll kill a few kaffirs?
While I’m sure you’re not calling me an idiot, I can’t help but think this is directed at least somewhat at me, from your word choice and all.
So - I’m not denying it’s possible. It is very possible. Much like Isil infiltrators dressing up in elephant suits and parachuting into he U.S. in a pretend re-make of “Operation Dumbo Drop”. Possible. Just very inefficient. The whole points are the odds, the risk and the time. The odds of success are at best 1 in 50. So to get “a few thousand” placed, they need to have a few hundredthousand attempt it. The whole time they are exposed to people who bear them more than just a grudge, while being under serious U.S. scrutiny, while taking at least a year and a half before even possibly getting to the U.S. Sure, they could still do this despite there being many more efficient and quicker methods available to them. But it doesn’t make sense.
So this is not the threat, no matter how easy it is to imagine them doing it. The real threat, as proven in attacks in London and Paris, and in prevented almost-catastrophes in Belgium, Germany and other places, is Isil getting people already in-country - with citizenship, jobs, cars - to identify with Isil, and to come up with their own nefarious plans and act on them.
No, I wasn’t pointing at you. My point was that it’s not easy to, for example, get yourself into the US and blow oneself up at the Superbowl, if that’s your plan, but if you want to get into anywhere, put yourself into a crowd, and blow yourself up, it really doesn’t matter much where you do it. They want to stir up shit. They really don’t have to do it anywhere specific to accomplish that goal. So they really don’t have to get anywhere specific to do that. And they can achieve that by getting anyone into any country and blowing themselves up in any crowd. Hiding the suicide bombers in a crowd of refugees would work just fine for that.
Again, that applies more to Europe and their failure to screen properly, as this thread is about the USA you have still not showed that we have the same issues as Europe regarding refugees.
I haven’t been trying to show that they are trying to get here. I merely point out that it’s not unreasonable to think that they might (and probably will) think of it and try it. I’ll not be targeted by them, but it’s not unreasonable to suspect that the refugees from Syria might include a few terrorist plants. It is, in fact, bloody likely, and so it’s not unreasonable to worry about the possibility.
If we ban Muslims, only terrorist will have them…
Sorry, I have seen the hoops Syrian refugees have to go through, and my wife that is not a refugee is still jumping through a similar process to get to the USA.
Keeping things in perspective one can worry, but it is just as the worry one should have about getting into an airplane and worrying that it would crash and kill you.
I may worry that my wife could be an ax murderer, but I was so many times with her that I don’t think that is the case nowadays.
Idiot.
That would be my point. It’s stupid to worry too much about the Syrians are INVADING, but it’s not at all unreasonable to think ISIL might be inserting terrorists into the refugee stream. They almost certainly are. It’s just not anything to worry about. They are rather ridiculously unlikely to kill the average person.
Terrorists have no need to actually infiltrate refugee groups bound for North America. They’re doing just fine with making people think they’re infiltrating refugee groups bound for North America.
Not even a little bit an idiot. That was fucking funny.
Especially with the support of certain people here, who just seem to LOVE to help ISIS achieve their goals of fear.
Every time some blowhard says they want to keep Muslim refugees out, ISIS gives a cheer.
I agree 100%
The reason why these are not good analogies is that you have a benefit to traveling on airplanes and having a wife. You can travel to far away places and you have companionship and a life partner. When you do a risk/benefit analysis, you see that the positive attributes of those two things far outweigh the minuscule risk of dying in a plane crash or misjudging the character of your spouse and being murdered.
What is the equivalent benefit that western countries gain by having thousands of people coming into the countries that will at best be on the government dole and be a financial burden, or at worst be terrorists? There is absolutely zero benefit to admitting these people other than puffing up our chests about how “compassionate” we are.
Millions of people in the world are suffering, but we don’t help them all; we have to be selective. I don’t see the reason to help these particular people at the expense of others when its only purpose is to fulfill some left wing masturbatory fantasy about showing how much we really, really don’t hate all Muslims, when there is a very real, non-zero, chance of causing the death of our own innocent civilians.
I’m sure you believe that makes me bigoted, but once again that word gets in the way of honest debate about a lot of things.
[QUOTE=UltraVires;18879888 thousands of people coming into the countries that will at best be on the government dole and be a financial burden, or at worst be terrorists? There is absolutely zero benefit to admitting these people other than puffing up our chests about how “compassionate” we are.
[/QUOTE]
Positing facts not in evidence. While they no doubt will need some assistance at first, refugees tend to ultimately add to the development of their host nation. Centuries ago when Spanish Sephardic Jews and French Huguenots contributed to the economic might of tiny Holland, all the way to more recently the refugees from Cuba into the U.S.- one son if which is making a credible run for president.
The benefit of allowing refugees is that is is concrete evidence that our way of life is something to aspire to. Proof that certain ideas are important enough to set aside fear (especially irrational, stupid fear) for. And showing some hope that as a nation we still aspire to be “as a city upon a hill”.