Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's glaringly obvious and the radicals that Obama supports have stated this is their goal. This isn't complicated stuff here, the simplest answer is the correct answer and Obama is a terrorist himself.
The 1980 Refugee Act compelled the president to set an annual ceiling for refugee ceilings in consultation with Congress. The ceiling is not a quota. The ceiling is divided into geographical areas of the world and runs along the fiscal calendar of 10/--9/30.
Refugee Ceiling by Year
1980- 230,000
1985-125,000
1990-125,000
1993-142,000
2000- 80,000
2002- 35,000
2008-80,000
2010- 80,000
2015-70,000 ( expect 1600-1800 to be Syrian)
2016-85,000 ( expect 10,000 to be Syrian)
Seems to me that there is confusion between the overall ceiling and the number of refugees from a particular region and country. Then there's intentional false information from blogs and social media that report nonsense like 10,000 Syrians resettled in New Orleans, this year. The actual number is a handful.
My own position is to put all refugee immigration on hold until the 30 year and counting challenge of illegal immigration is brought to a reasonable resolution. I would not single out Syria.
About 70 million foreigners enter the US legally each year for purposes of tourism, business and education.
The US has long maintained reciprocal VISA free entry with 38 countries including France, Germany, UK and Belgium. All of the 9/11 terrorists entered the US legally. Most had passports from long time US ally, Saudi Arabia.
Not all countries have converted to the embedded passport chip and not all countries share background information. Many countries continue to not stamp passport.
It's glaringly obvious and the radicals that Obama supports have stated this is their goal. This isn't complicated stuff here, the simplest answer is the correct answer and Obama is a terrorist himself.
It never complicates to project what you think as someone else.
Obama and leftist have a plan. The plan is to change the population and people in America.
We're bringing in 70,000 refugees/year and some sources say it's closer to 170,000 with chain immigration of relatives and other programs, 1 million legal immigrants and nearly 1 million illegals every year.
Our country cannot possibly afford this....We are already trillions of dollars in debt so even if the terrorist attacks had not happened bringing the massive amounts of immigrants to our country just does not make financial sense.
Correction: I meant to title this, Refugees are not our problem. Isis is still a threat.
Is it just me, or does it seem like the Politically Correct Police Force, are out to Shanghai the ideology of what is acceptable or not, when it comes to Syrian Refugees? I feel like I am being, for lack of a better word, mean or unfair, in my beliefs that perhaps having 10,000 people arrive here from a part of the world that has a certain percentage of people that have hostile feelings toward American, is not in the best interest of the US.
Where were we when Sudan was having their civil war? We did not lose any sleep over all of the horrible things that happened there to them. Those people were starving to death, and so they died. I do not know the ideology of the Sudanese people, but this new batch of refugees from Syria or wherever they are coming from, over there, is probably not going to end well. Have you seen some of the press/videos coming out of Europe? Yeah, I know, it is all just propaganda...right. Look at Paris!!!! This whole line of reasoning demonstrates an entire abandonment of any logic. There is NOTHING to be gained, but a lot to be lost. For those who will no doubt protest of how insensitive this can sound, this is a war. It is not our war. Why does every war have to be our war?
The only thing I can suggest is to write your congressman, senator, governor and even the president. Tell then how you feel. Remember who listened at election time.
We have vast oceans to keep everyone on the planet from walking over and setting up house keeping here in the US. The costs hosting these refugees of this will be staggering for the West. Best of all, the people we want to save, well, a large percentage of them want us all dead. Please remind me of why it is a good idea to bring these people here? Who said this is a good thing? Why don't we just rebuild their little cities over there where they came from? If we are going to have to foot the bill, why not just do that, provide them with all that they need on their turf. Either way, we are not going to come out of this ahead. Horrendous policy makers. The absolute worst, well, that I can think of at the moment.
well your incorrect title likely drove more folk to your thread!
I agree and disagree with you about the "refugees".
First of all, Yes we have idiots in charge that are in fact doing really dumb stuff that will get Americans killed. They are doing things that are NOT in Americas best interest.
however, mass migrations disrupt civilizations. period. they do and there is nothing that can stop them (mass migrations in general) from disrupting the civilizations they invade.
Therefore we DO have a national interest to insure that the civilizations that are world stabilizing are not disrupted. We DO have a national interest in insuring WE are not disrupted.
So that begs the question. What do we do? There are things that can be done that would insure that there is NO mass migration.
PS these refugees aren't families. They are 80% young men. single young men. that isn't a refugee. That's an invasion by an army intent on killing people.
So when does ISIS become our problem? After they sneak over the border into the US or blend in with the refugees being brought to the US, and in time pull of an attack and ISIS takes responsibility?
Five Syrians using stolen Greek passports that must have had a lot of money to get as far as they did. Why would anyone try to link them to the Paris attacks when they were in Honduras? Why would they want to enter the US illegally?
Quote:
TEGUCIGALPA, Nov 18 (Reuters) - Honduran authorities have detained five Syrian nationals who were trying to reach the United States using stolen Greek passports, but there are no signs of any links to last week's attacks in Paris, police said. The group of Syrian men was held late on Tuesday in the Honduran capital of Tegucigalpa on arrival from Costa Rica and they were planning to head to the border with neighboring Guatemala. The passports had been doctored to replace the photographs with those of the Syrians, police said.
You definitely confuse American best interest with conservative best interest. Sometimes they don't align.
no. that aint what I am doing here.
in fact it is JUST THE OPPOSITE.
If I were going to do what is in "conservatives" best interest, I would advocate mild opposition designed to just be on the record by saying "I don't think this is a good idea'
Then sit back.
Because these "refugees" will include monsters who will kill Americans.
THEN as a conservative, I would be in the position to say that liberals are TRYING TO KILL YOU. and the American people would see the blood in the streets and blame the liberals.
It is actually in the best interest of conservatives to simply let these killers in and blame Obama for it.
I am however opposed to that. AMERICAS interest is to fight as hard as possible to keep these people in Syria and give them safety and security THERE.
That actually is also the Opposite of Conservatives best interest because doing so will give you whacky leftists fodder to say conservatives HATE PEOPLE OF COLOR. which is yet another in a long list of lies liberals like to tell.
Our country cannot possibly afford this....We are already trillions of dollars in debt so even if the terrorist attacks had not happened bringing the massive amounts of immigrants to our country just does not make financial sense.
Financial sense?
The War in Iraq cost $6 Trillion when interest on the incremental debt and future VA benefits are factored in.
Seems to me most 2016 candidates are hell bent on a repeat.
Those not, have no, zip, nada chance of being nominated.
I hope Congress has the wood to impose a flat war tax on all income, including SS and SSDI to pay for it. No income? No problem. Your welfare benefits are reduced. Those who serve in combat areas get a pass.
Everyone needs to sacrifice and feel the pain of war.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
