Page 1 of 13 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 128

Thread: States' Stance on Taking in Refugees

  1. #1
    Senior Member Rusty Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    3,936
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)

    States' Stance on Taking in Refugees

    I don't think it's necessary for me to post an article here; we all know what's going on: some states are refusing to take them, other states are welcoming them in.

    But I gotta tell you: I love the hypocrisy I see. If someone is poor and needs help, they're slammed as "lazy" and looking for "entitlements," "handouts," and "free stuff." Or they're told that minimum wage jobs weren't designed to live off of.

    But as soon as the talk of taking in refugees comes up, it's "We've got too many of our own going without! We need to take care of our own first!"

    I'm seeing this on facebook on the local news fb pages, and it's the exact same people!

    Clearly, people who do this shit aren't being completely honest about their motives behind the stance that they're taking.
    "Well... Uber's going to "driverless" cars soon, and their research probably shows that they're a natural fit (when it comes to getting paid for doing nothing)."
    -Rainmaker, referencing black males

  2. #2
    Senior Member giggawatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    England
    Posts
    447
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    I've seen it a lot as well but mostly about homeless vets. But I think the bigger message I've seen lately is the terror threat.
    Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop, TSgt, USAF
    Deputy Executive Assistant for the Assistant Deputy Chief
    HQ COBRA
    867-5309
    :ranger

    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do taskers on their behalf.

    "The man who views the world at 50 the same as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life." -- Muhammad Ali

    "Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer!"- Arnold Schwarzenegger

  3. #3
    Senior Member Rainmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on a Marl Road
    Posts
    3,882
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Jones View Post

    Clearly, people who do this shit aren't being completely honest about their motives behind the stance that they're taking.
    Back in September Rainmaker was in Europe and watching the local Television Programming device.

    The European media kept on showing pictures of these photogenic white women and Children making their journey to progressive Utopias like Sweden. The realty though is much different.

    70% of the refugees are young men in their 20s and 30s. Why are they not in their own country fighting for their women and Children?

    80% of the American public wanted us to stay the fuck out of Syria.

    So, should they now be forced to pay for housing and feeding a 100,000+ Migrants with a potentially hostile background?

    If we have to take them, they should all be housed inside the Beltway.
    Last edited by Rainmaker; 11-17-2015 at 04:40 PM.

  4. #4
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,964
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    @Rusty Jones does bring up a good point. There is hypocrisy in many of the arguments, both for and against relocating refugees into the U.S.

    Yes, some paint anyone who receives public benefits / assistance as lazy or only looking for a handout. In some cases it is true, in some it is not.

    Yes, there are too many in the U.S. who need help and don't or cannot get it. In some cases it is the bureaucracy, in some cases it is being caught between feuding politicians. But, in our country there is plenty of opportunity, the vast majority of that opportunity is open to anyone willing to work for it' there is also ample opportunity for people to do the bare minimum (even less in some cases) and still get by. They may never be as comfortable as some, but they won't be out on the street.

    I agree, there are too many in our country that go without, too many children who are captured in a poor situation of their parent's making and too many people staring at incredibly difficult situations. There are also too many sitting back waiting for someone to make it happen for them, waiting for the next free thing and expecting that the role of the government is to provide the 'thing' rather than the opportunity to provide for yourself.

    As far as the refugees, I would be careful about wide admission of refugees from both a cost and security concern. First and foremost we should figure out how to properly screen and evaluate those refugees who we will take in, how we will keep track of them and what we are going to do with them once they come here. If we are talking someone who is going to be another enrollee onto public assistance, it may not be in our best interest ... but I don't think turning all of them away is the right thing to do either. No doubt, no matter how many we take there will be bad apples, maybe a good apple that later goes bad ... who knows.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Rusty Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    3,936
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    You know... I have no problem expressing SOME reservation about taking in the refugees, mostly because I'm not the one to wait until situations like this before saying "we need to take care of our own!" Nope, I've said this long before.

    To piggyback on what Rainmaker said... I'm not feminist, in either direction. You'll never hear me complain about women not having to register with the Selective Service or having to be able to run as fast on the PT test.

    With that being said, I'd find it very disturbing if his stats are true. I'd be all for limiting refugees to women and children, or allowing only allowing men who are accompanied by wives and/or children. I agree that the men should be fighting.
    "Well... Uber's going to "driverless" cars soon, and their research probably shows that they're a natural fit (when it comes to getting paid for doing nothing)."
    -Rainmaker, referencing black males

  6. #6
    Senior Member Rainmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on a Marl Road
    Posts
    3,882
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    First and foremost we should figure out how to properly screen and evaluate those refugees who we will take in, how we will keep track of them and what we are going to do with them once they come here.
    Who's going to get that contract? How many Green on Blue attacks have we seen in the AOR in the last decade of this shit-show already?

    Not to mention, We can't even properly vet our own TCNs coming in to the secured areas in theater and we're going to give access to thousands of Military aged Males and let them have unlimited access to our civilian communities?

    Boy, what a Great fucking idea! What could go wrong?
    Last edited by Rainmaker; 11-17-2015 at 05:00 PM.

  7. #7
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,984
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    It doesn't matter if some states don't take them. Once they are in the U.S, they can travel to whichever states they want.

    As far as Rusty's point, he's absolutely right. People should just be honest and say that they don't want them here because of the real reasons: Security, xenophobia, and a smell worse than kimchee. The financial reason is pretty lame.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Rainmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on a Marl Road
    Posts
    3,882
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Jones View Post

    With that being said, I'd find it very disturbing if his stats are true. I'd be all for limiting refugees to women and children, or allowing only allowing men who are accompanied by wives and/or children. I agree that the men should be fighting.
    It no longer matters what any of us thinks. Much like Obamacare and Granting de facto Amnesty (which the majority of the public was against), This is going to happen. It's been planned for years. It must be clear that the elected Representatives of the country no longer respects the will of the Citizenry. Enter Donald Trump.

  9. #9
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,964
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    Who's going to get that contract?
    Probably some benevolent contracting agency with no profit motive whatsoever.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rainmaker View Post
    How many Green on Blue attacks have we seen in the AOR in the last decade of this shit-show already?
    Too many; one is too many. But realistically we can't think that there won't be any either. We can't think that every refugee from anywhere (Syria, South America, Africa, the Balkans etc.) is going to be spotless or will not run afoul of the law (large or small) somewhere down the road.

    I think it would be much easier to close the border and say that we will take none; I don't think that is the right thing for us to do.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  10. #10
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Kadena AB
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Can someone point me to the reference that 70% of the Syrian refugees are middle aged men? I keep seeing that spouted in various social media, but I haven't seen where that number has come from. Not trying to be snarky...just want to see a reliable source.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •