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.
The problem is that a lot of the countries that are closer to home are beyond the saturation point now. Expecting Jordan or Lebanon to take in more refugees when they've already taken in millions and not thinking that there is a very real risk of it leading to the type of social unrest that upsets the balance in a country is folly. And you may think that the stability of Western-friendly Arab countries in the Middle East does not matter, but you would be absolutely wrong.
It is not realistic to RESETTLE an entire country. Period. Accommodation must be made closer to home. Again, the money spent to resettle ONE in the United States can help keep ELEVEN safe closer to home. THAT'S the goal. To keep people safe so that they can return home one day, rebuild and get Syria back on its feet. Not resettle 9 million people elsewhere throughout the world. You try to do the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Otherwise you're just making yourself feel good.
BTW: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran, the Emirates... all can take in millions of people combined.
Hell, the Arabian peninsula ships in labor from bangladesh and India, etc. because they have labor shortages, and you're trying to say they don't have room? No, Saudi Arabia instead offers help in the form of building more Wahabbi oriented mosques in Europe!!!!
Fact is the "refugees" trying to storm Europe are looking for benefits and free money handouts. It's why they skip several safe, not-warring countries to get to GerMONEY and $weden. All the comforts of the social welfare system that took a century for Europe to build up on the back of progressive free culture. Frankly it will be interesting to watch it all crumble going forward as joi de vivre is replaced with hijab du jour.
Oh, and Lebanon is a PERFECT example of why CULTURE and DEMOGRAPHICS matter. Compare Beirut before it became majority Muslim to today: The "Paris of the Middle East" to the... well, Middle East of the Middle East. In the span of about 50 years. Same people, same race, same ethnicity. Different ideology. Different results.
Choose Love? Love has nothing to do with relocation of refugees. She should not be treated any different than the rest of them because of her "beauty" .
Relocating them to another country is an awful idea. They need to have safe zones in place that protect them.
Once the war is over, then they can return to help rebuild their homes as every other nation has in it's past after wartime. Importing them to another country does not help anybody.
I wasn't referring to her specifically, I was stating that as a whole, it seems there are many Americans who choose hatred and xenophobia over compassion and love, especially when it comes to muslims. I will advocate peace and empathy over cynicism and disgust anytime, anywhere, any circumstance.
Regardless, 10,000 is, to me, a shamefully low number of people to bring in considering America's ability to receive more. Of course it would be a better situation for everyone if it were practical for Syrians to remain in Syria - I don't think there is a Syrian who disagrees with that. Believe me, no one who I talked to wanted to leave their country. I didn't go to Syria, so I don't know what the situation is exactly, but the feasibility to safely house Syrians effectively seems doubtful. Sadly I suppose there are people who, if they were honest with themselves, would rather have a couple thousand woman and children die in Syria if that meant none would be received into America.
Choose Love? Love has nothing to do with relocation of refugees. She should not be treated any different than the rest of them because of her "beauty" .
Relocating them to another country is an awful idea. They need to have safe zones in place that protect them.
Once the war is over, then they can return to help rebuild their homes as every other nation has in it's past after wartime. Importing them to another country does not help anybody.
Funny..., in these "war zones" and backward countries where even the most fundamental of infrastructure, water supply, police protection and the likes are essentially not possible, let's just get out the magic wand and create "safe zones." Really funny when you consider how the international community can hardly manage bare-bones refugee camps to provide temporary food and shelter!
My guess would be that if you surveyed the people left in Syria and asked them, they'd probably say the US was robbing them of their best and brightest if we are bringing over highly educated people like engineers.
Do you believe the people in Syria favor such people leaving their country most likely for good?
Why is it any concern to the peopleof Syria why someone made a personal choice to leave. You can't rob the willing.
Yup you have a clear head, and good mind. That is part of that Agenda on Obama's part. Part of the Change he was talking about, which in a lot of American minds, is not good, and all we can do now is hope, the next president, has some sense.
We cannot even take care of the citizens we have, what about homeless, our elderly, our vets, what middle class!
He is an arrogant pompas person, talk about someone having to get his way! That is all he is about, doing it his way, and hit the hwy, if you don't agree.
Interesting to see how the two of you make such good sense to one another, though the two of you combined make about as much sense as suggesting Bush had 9/11 as part of his agenda.
I wasn't referring to her specifically, I was stating that as a whole, it seems there are many Americans who choose hatred and xenophobia over compassion and love, especially when it comes to muslims. I will advocate peace and empathy over cynicism and disgust anytime, anywhere, any circumstance.
Regardless, 10,000 is, to me, a shamefully low number of people to bring in considering America's ability to receive more. Of course it would be a better situation for everyone if it were practical for Syrians to remain in Syria - I don't think there is a Syrian who disagrees with that. Believe me, no one who I talked to wanted to leave their country. I didn't go to Syria, so I don't know what the situation is exactly, but the feasibility to safely house Syrians effectively seems doubtful. Sadly I suppose there are people who, if they were honest with themselves, would rather have a couple thousand woman and children die in Syria if that meant none would be received into America.
Thanks for your insights and call for compassion although I can understand the emotions from all sides of this contentious problem of refugees escaping these war-torn regions. The problem for the United States in the world is something like a nutritionist trying to help people at a donut shop...
Other countries with highly questionable and/or different manner of government, at different levels of economic and social development, just can't be counted upon to do the right thing as Americans may be inclined and able, because they just have too much "baggage" of one sort or another, often beginning with no foundation that might make the likes of democracy even possible, let alone the sort of resources America enjoys.
Though anyone has to commend your efforts on behalf of others, I am curious to know how you might answer a very common question that always interests me. How do you justify the effort and resources devoted to people who are not American when right here in America there are so many in need of help and so much easier to get to? I know "people are people" in the eyes of God no matter where from (and all that sort of thing), but why help foreigners in need rather than fellow Americans in need?
Though anyone has to commend your efforts on behalf of others, I am curious to know how you might answer a very common question that always interests me. How do you justify the effort and resources devoted to people who are not American when right here in America there are so many in need of help and so much easier to get to? I know "people are people" in the eyes of God no matter where from (and all that sort of thing), but why help foreigners in need rather than fellow Americans in need?
Over the past three years, I've spent about 85% of the time abroad as a missionary, so that isn't an uncommon question, and always appreciate a persons concern when it is brought up.
As a missionary, my foremost task is to advance the gospel. While certainly there are many people in the USA who need Jesus, there is also a much greater availability to churches, Christian community, and discipleship for Americans compared to, say, Kosovars or Malaysians. Many people aren't (or think they aren't) in a position to go abroad to share the gospel with those who have never heard it, but I have both the physical ability and desire to do so. Any missionary will surely say that resources are never what is lacking in Christian missions - its workers. This alone is heavily my primary reason to be abroad. I have little interest in serving earthly needs without pairing it with a Kingdom mindset. My team in Greece was able to hand out over 700 Bibles translated into Arabic, Farci, and Persian in addition to clothing.
Aside from them missional aspect, we could get into opportunity - I spent a few months in the Zambian bush, helping plant a church while digging a bore hole for clean water for the village. Immediately from Zambia I flew to Las Vegas to meet up with my family for a couple days before returning home. I tried hard, but it's difficult not to judge a homeless (and seemingly capable) person on the Las Vegas strip after witnessing the vast amounts of poverty and brokenness that exists in rural Zambia. You could also bring up how many people, organizations, and churches are helping people in America vs, say, Swaziland. Most Americans aren't (or think they aren't) in a position to go abroad for large amounts of time, though certainly they could get involved in their community to make it a better place. Conversely, I am both able and have the desire to serve people abroad. My main passion is church planting in rural southern Africa, which I hope to do full time. I pursue the desire which God placed in my heart. And wish all would instead of believing there is nothing we can do to help.
Over the past three years, I've spent about 85% of the time abroad as a missionary, so that isn't an uncommon question, and always appreciate a persons concern when it is brought up.
As a missionary, my foremost task is to advance the gospel. While certainly there are many people in the USA who need Jesus, there is also a much greater availability to churches, Christian community, and discipleship for Americans compared to, say, Kosovars or Malaysians. Many people aren't (or think they aren't) in a position to go abroad to share the gospel with those who have never heard it, but I have both the physical ability and desire to do so. Any missionary will surely say that resources are never what is lacking in Christian missions - its workers. This alone is heavily my primary reason to be abroad. I have little interest in serving earthly needs without pairing it with a Kingdom mindset. My team in Greece was able to hand out over 700 Bibles translated into Arabic, Farci, and Persian in addition to clothing.
Aside from them missional aspect, we could get into opportunity - I spent a few months in the Zambian bush, helping plant a church while digging a bore hole for clean water for the village. Immediately from Zambia I flew to Las Vegas to meet up with my family for a couple days before returning home. I tried hard, but it's difficult not to judge a homeless (and seemingly capable) person on the Las Vegas strip after witnessing the vast amounts of poverty and brokenness that exists in rural Zambia. You could also bring up how many people, organizations, and churches are helping people in America vs, say, Swaziland. Most Americans aren't (or think they aren't) in a position to go abroad for large amounts of time, though certainly they could get involved in their community to make it a better place. Conversely, I am both able and have the desire to serve people abroad. My main passion is church planting in rural southern Africa, which I hope to do full time. I pursue the desire which God placed in my heart. And wish all would instead of believing there is nothing we can do to help.
I just knew the answer had to do with a missionary agenda, but I'm still not sure if that really answers the question, since we both know there are plenty of Americans in need of help and no doubt in need of the gospel right here in America, regardless of "availability to churches," right? Not sure churches are what advances the gospel, but I am certainly not one to judge either way...
Why do Mormons knock at my door, for example? Is it simply a numbers game? Here and/or abroad?
I would also be curious how a lot of people who comment in these threads would react to Muslims distributing 700 Korans to those in this country in need, but there again..., I know everyone has their different take, perspective and feelings about these things. Perhaps just best to leave it at that...
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.
