....that area of the world.

Not one immigrant from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc. We know for a fact ISIS is trying to infiltrate in with refugees and since there is no way to Vet these refugees, no way to know who is safe and who isn't for security and safety sake of our country we shouldn't allow anyone in.

Anyone who thinks it is wise and safe for Americans to bring in refugees from Syria is just delusional and is suicidal. There's no way to know if they are safe or not, it is putting Americans in danger to bring them in.

Checkmate!

Thats what reasonable people think. Plus, what exactly is so valuable about Muslim immigrants that Europeans couldnt get from eslewhere? If the EU needs cheap labor, get it from Eastern Europe not North Africa or the Middle East.

So send them back to die?

Your argument has no merit.

The role of the government is to protect the citizens of the United States. Syria is thousands and thousand of miles away.

By your logic everyone, unknown person in every country on the planet should be ushered into the U.S. and the security of our citizens is irrelevant.

You have no refuted anything. Known murderers and butchers are know (FACT) to want to kill U.S. citizen and are known (FACT) to be hiding in with refugees and it is known (FACT) that there is no way to Vet them and know who is safe and who isn't and it is known (FACT) that most of these refugees are young men.

It is a duty of the government to keep our citizens safe from harm abroad. You are boldly declaring you believe our citizens should be put at risk, to ship in people living on the other side of the planet, knowing killers will come in with them and they will kill. You are insane. Your disregard to the lives of women and children living in the U.S. is almost evil.

They can flee to all of the neighboring countries in their own region.

It is really hard to deal with people like this who can, with a straight face, say they don't care when it is a fact ISIS killers are coming into our country when large numbers of Syrians are brought in from several 1,000 miles away and that there is NO WAY to know who is safe and who is a killer and they don't care and want our government to ignore our safety and roll the dice and bring them in anyway.

Rational, common sense people out there. Is this poster not insane?
We basically know this endangers our lives and he doesn't care and still wants to endanger us and cause the deaths of our own loved ones, wives, mothers and children. The lack of wisdom is unimaginable.

I asked you a question: you could have just answered it rather than invent all that nonsense.

You asked a loaded question.

Aside from being an informal fallacy depending on usage, such questions may be used as a rhetorical tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda. The traditional example is the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Whether the respondent answers yes or no, they will admit to having a wife and having beaten her at some time in the past. Thus, these facts are presupposed by the question, and in this case an entrapment, because it narrows the respondent to a single answer, and the fallacy of many questions has been committed.

You have presupposed the only choice is death or remain. Not so.

The OP could still have answered it, rather than invent all that nonsense. Possible sample answer:

"Death isn't the only option, they could find another country to go to".

It really isn't difficult to answer such questions...for people other than you, apparently.

And you could not have asked such fallacious questions too.

The fact that you did shows either a) you were too ignorant to realize you did or b) you were attempting to be deceptive.

Are you on the autistic spectrum?

And now you go ad hominen.

Eh? That isn't an insult at all. It's just that you seem to focus a lot on rules and miss what is really being said, which is one of the hallmarks of Asperger's that my sister and many other people have.

lol...I think you just hit on the either-or fallacy.

A false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, false binary, black-and-white thinking, bifurcation, denying a conjunct, the either–or fallacy, fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses, the fallacy of false choice, the fallacy of the false alternative, or the fallacy of the excluded middle) is a type of informal fallacy that involves a situation in which only limited alternatives are considered, when in fact there is at least one additional option. The opposite of this fallacy is argument to moderation.[citation needed]

The options may be a position that is between two extremes (such as when there are shades of grey) or may be completely different alternatives. Phrasing that implies two options (dilemma, dichotomy, black-and-white) may be replaced with other number-based nouns, such as a "false trilemma" if something is reduced to only three options.

False dilemma can arise intentionally, when fallacy is used in an attempt to force a choice or outcome such as, in some contexts, the assertion that "if you are not with us, you are against us."

It's possible I can understand exactly what's really being said while also calling you out on your ongoing logical fallacies. It doesn't have to be an either/or proposition.

That's possible, but you haven't shown any evidence of it. I'm ending this discussion now since you seem to have nothing to say on the topic of the thread. Feel free to have the last word.

Now you are just playing games. Your playing word games and you don't appear to even want to discuss this matter maturely. You're playing the "it depends on what the meaning of "is" is." game.

I'll give you want reply then I'm finished with your silly semantics game. They aren't sent "back", they never come here to begin with.

OK, if you don't want to discuss why your idea is morally wrong, we'll say no more.

You are not an honest debater. You seem immature and spin to lies.

It is absolutely 100% morally right for our government to protect the citizens of the United States from threats abroad. It is absolutely morally expedient to not bring in refugees from 5,600 plus miles away, from regions on the other side of the planet when it is a known fact that ISIS terrorist are infiltrating these refugees and our government has no way to know who is safe and isn't.

I have spoken VERY clearly, VERY PLAINLY on this subject. Honest discussion is welcome. HONEST. TRUTHFUL.

It is morally wrong to refuse help to refugees fleeing a war zone, especially since your country (and mine too actually) was a major player in causing the problems which led to the rise of ISIS.

YOU are changing the subject.

Help them THERE.

YOU are making the false, very false mandate that the only form of help is to bring these people to the United States to live even though we don't know if they are safe.

Help them there. Bringing them here is not the first option.

That is YOUR error. My OP point still stands 100%.

You've basically just indirectly stated that our citizen's safety shouldn't be the priority of our U.S. government. You probably aren't from the U.S. anyway so who cares what you think.

Help them there. Bringing them here is not an option.

No, I'm not changing the subject I am directly addressing it. Your stance is immoral on this and if you thought it through properly there is a slim chance you might understand why.

Hitler tried to get every country he could to take in the German Jews, but no one would take them, including the US. So he resorted to the final solution. Do we really want blood on our hands yet again?

What are you talking about? Syrians don't live here. Why are you talking about people that LIVED IN Germany? They don't live here. Our government should not bring them here. We really have to go out of our way to bring people from 5,600 away (the other side of the planet) and bring them into our country with our own citizens.

Some of you really like to deflect and spin and never address the actual point. It is dangerous to our citizens to import refugees from 5,600 plus miles away and allow them in when we can never know who is a threat and who isn't.

It is dangerous to our citizens to import refugees from 5,600 plus miles away and allow them in when we can never know who is a threat and who isn't.

We never know who is a threat among American citizens either. What's the difference? For example: Timothy McVeigh, Dylan Roof or all the shooters everyday in Chicago or LA. People are people, are we need to let go of this ape tribalism crap.

You see, right there you just totally minimized that there is even a threat or any danger at all and make this stupid comparison. You make it sound almost as if it is their right to come here.

You seem like you have your head in the sand so your hopeless. You don't seem to have noticed but that area of the world is overflowing with terrorists. That is ISIS's home turf. There are bombings and terrorists atrocities daily there. There are thousands upon thousands of extremists there and they've pledged to attack us. Are you blind to that? Thousands of killers there, pledging to kill in America, they are hiding their operatives within the fleeing Syrians and you are blind that the concept of: Hey you know what, maybe no isn't the best time to import a bunch of unknown, un-vetted, young men from Syria.

Why do you act as if they have a right to come into our country? Why do you not even act as if you care when some attack results a couple of years from now.

Why are you so anxious to bring them to the United States? You don't seem concerned at all about them just going to Turkey or Jordan or Saudi Arabia or Egypt. No, let's just import 100,000 unchecked men from Syria and just trust there's not a bunch of ISIS members in there.

Seriously, that just about the most dangerous spot on the planet, death everywhere, hate of anything or anyone that isn't part of their death cult, they hate Christians and who just want to import 100,000 and just hope it's only the 100,000 good ones.

How naïve. No danger at all there.
Oh but, of course one of our own citizens did something bad 20 years ago that that justifies importing 100,000 folks from terrorist, suicide bomber, death to non-believers central.

You don't seem to have noticed but that area of the world is overflowing with terrorists. That is ISIS's home turf. There are bombings and terrorists atrocities daily there. There are thousands upon thousands of extremists there and they've pledged to attack us.

Yes, and 99% of the refugees are simply trying to escape from that horror. Do you realize how insanely racist it is to imply that all of those refugees are terrorists, or that we should throw the baby out with the bath water? You sound like Joseph McCarthy.

Why do you act as if they have a right to come into our country?

They don't, but the humane thing for us to do is help them. I know that I would greatly appreciate it if I were in their situation.

Yeah, please send me back to Pakistan and send a drone around an hour later.

I'm a Muslim but I despise IS and I pose no danger to anyone in the UK. I work damn hard and pay my taxes. But you're right. By virtue of the colour of my skin (even though I was born in this country), I should go back to Pakistan where you can send a drone to blow me up.

Does that appease you?

It's not your skin color that they're talking about.

But what's wrong with living in the country where you were born? What's different about where you live now?

>>26
Did you not read his post? He was born in the UK.

>>27
Still doesn't make him British, He will always be a Paki, no matter what his passport says, Brown or Black never British.

>>27
Yes, you're right, I did not see that clearly. My query was based on false thinking.

I saw where he said "send me back to" and thought right off he was from there. My error, but why say "send me back to" then? It doesn't make sense.

He was referring to the colour of his skin and the fact that his heritage was of Pakistani origin.

Did someone say something about throwing out citizens? Not allowing more immigrants =/= exile of citizens.

Another dishonest speaker. You just start babbling meaningless drivel about nothing.

Are you a refugee from Syria? If not then what the hell are you talking about?

But, I'll cut to the chase. Those days should be over.

The U.S. shouldn't allow anymore people from these countries immigrate here. Since we can't confirm who has extremist ties or not.

Were you born here? How did you get here? When did you come here? I'm in 100% favor of not letting anyone else from Pakistan immigrate here.

The safety of U.S. citizens should always trump whether someone says they want to come here. I want to pick up and move to Russia. Well, guess what? Russia has something to say about that. That isn't just up to me. Russia has to check me out and grant me PERMISSION to move there.

This France attack, ISIS fighters being discovered via a Syrian refugee, ISIS making it known they want to and are infiltrating immigrant communities from this area of the world is reason to stop all immigration from these countries.

The safety of the citizens of the United States of America is the absolute number one priority of the government. The government can help them over there but under no circumstances bring them here.

If you want to discuss this topic than be an honest poster? Why do you spin and deflect from the truth? Do you fear the truth? This thread is about bringing in refugees and immigrants from these dangerous lands.

If you were born in your country than why do you lie?
Why do you lie?

Tell me? Stop lying. The post is CLEARLY about bringing in refugees. You aren't a refugee. You say you were born in your country, so why are you trying to make this about YOU? That is a lie. This topic isn't about you so quit lying to make it about you. Where are you from...England? Why do you seem more concerned with people in Pakistan who want to suddenly come here now than you are the safety of your British citizens?

If you weren't born in Pakistan then what does Pakistan have to do with you at all?

This was a very dishonest response to try and make this thread about you. You're not a Syrian refugee so what is your point?

How slow are you?

That's a 100% serious question: how f'cking dumb are you?

Refugees are fleeing ISIS because they DON'T agree with what they are doing and represent. Many of them are victims of rape and torture.

I am all for medeival action against the Islamic State: 24/7 carpet bombing, and fire bombing...non stop artillery. But you don't victimize victims. That is sheer idiocy.

I served in the military and I would not try to justify any action against refugees. They just want to live in peace.

You look at these images of baby washing up on a beach tough guy...w t f did he ever do to you?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/02/shocking-image-of-drowned-syrian-boy-shows-tragic-plight-of-refugees

Refugees are fleeing ISIS because they DON'T agree with what they are doing and represent. Many of them are victims of rape and torture.

They never leave FROM Syria. So they come from a place where they already have refuge.

You look at these images of baby washing up on a beach tough guy...w t f did he ever do to you?

That drowned Syrian boy's parents were economic migrants.

I'm all for taking in LGBT refugees, or ex Muslims. But Islam should be considered an undesirable trait for potential immigrants.

I'm not sure who you are responding to and what your "bottom line" point is.

In case you are saying "well because of this or that we should import them into the USA even though we have no idea if they are safe or not"

If that is your point I reject it 100%. Help them there.

They should not be allowed to immigrate here. There are too many terrorists infiltrating them and it is a DIRECT threat to the safety of the United States. Prosperous Western nations can set up safe zones and areas in that region to protect them but they should absolutely not be allowed to immigrate to the U.S.

Since you KNOW ISIS fighters are hiding among them I can not conceive how any person can willingly say yes, let ISIS attackers come into our country because it is a FACT they are infiltrating.

Unless our government only lets women and children flee here and ZERO men.

there is no way to Vet these refugees

Not agreeing or disagreeing, but I don't know that to be true.

How do you know it to be true?

Because it is widely reported first off. Are you not following the news.
Mainly, there is no stable, credible, functioning government in that area that can be consulted to verify any info about them. Syria is a shambles, there is no one to vouch for them. They just show up with whatever story they give.

Once again, we aren't talking about tons of women and children...it is 70% young men.

As another poster said, they are already out of Syria when they try to get here. They don't fly directly from Syria here. They are already OUT of Syria, they just WANT to come here.

Just like Germany, they have to travel a 1,000 miles to get to Germany and cross 4-6 countries to get there. They are already free of Syria, they CHOOSE to go 1,000 miles out of their way to get to Germany.

Besides, one is too many. It is already a FACT one of the mass murderers in Paris was a Syrian refugee. That is a slam dunk.

Imagine that you have just got out of Syria into, say, Lebanon. Do you fancy spending the rest of your life there, or would you rather be in, say, Britain? What would YOU do?

It wouldn't be up to me. It's up to the US government and my "feelings" aren't the priority. Their own citizens and laws are.

You just answered you're own question and debunked your entire argument.

"JUST GOT OUT OF SYRIA"

That's the truth. They are out. There's not even a need to try and fly 5,600 miles away.

...you make it rather too obvious. Try again:

Would you rather stay in Lebanon or try to get to Britain? Those are your only options, think carefully before answering.

It wouldn't be up to me. It's up to the US government and my "feelings" aren't the priority. Their own citizens and laws are.

No, of course. White american, probably male lives are the number one priority of the US government, therefore of the whole world, right?

You are just a spectacularly vile human being. There's no need to write endless posts and run to the logical fallacies dictionary whenever someone doesn't agree with you. Your OP was limpid.

You, have stooped to name calling. Great, another mature poster.

What exactly are you taking issue with? No, seriously, resist your normal urge to just spout off some insult and incoherent rant. Resist your normal urge and write an articulate, precise, rational point by point counter argument?

First, we must establish some factual starting point. You must either accept these facts and if you are going to try and reject them you are going to need to come up with some reason for rejecting basic fact.

There have been 1,000's of terror attacks all over the globe in the last few years and thousands upon thousands of innocent people have been slaughtered. The ISIS terror group is huge in Syria and has made it clear they are intending to and already are infiltrating their killers into the fleeing immigrants. The horrible terrorist attack in Paris Friday contained one Syrian that just fled to Europe.

Now, rationally tell me why the USA...5,600 miles from Syria (using NY as reference point (7,480 if you use LA) should allow male refugees in large numbers, refugees that are already out of Syria. Why should they be allowed into the US when it is known there are ISIS infiltrators mixed in with their population?

Why should the US government, which has taken a constitutional oath to protect the US citizens from threats domestic and abroad bring this possible threat into the country?

We don't have the same language, the same culture, the same faith so why is the US going to ship them 5,000-7,000 miles away to a foreign culture with risk to its own citizens as opposed to just helping set up relief there in Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iran, Egypt?

Tell me. Legitimate text book reasons? They can be helped there. Bringing them here is not a determining factor on whether help can be given. They are already out of Syria. Justify for me why the US citizens should be placed in danger when they can just be helped there?

Did you see what happened in Paris?
What country were you born in and what country do you live in now?

Yet another post made entirely of loaded questions.

I was born in Canada and live in Canada. You see, you don't have to be a refugee to understand what being one must be like. It's called compassion.

No, I won't answer your loaded questions. Go ahead and have a victory dance if that's what turns you on.

Your post is a bit too reactionary, don't you think? The U.S. has fairly stringent immigration policies already in place which limits the flow of immigrants. I don't see why bringing in genuine immigrants who want a better life for their family and are willing to go through the immigration process is a problem.

As for refugees, which are different from immigrants, they should be denied entry and the U.S. and the rest of the Western world should aid in the fight against ISIS, take out Assad and make Syria a democracy. And this time, avoid the error Obama made and not pull extract troops from the country too quickly.

By the way, if you are an American citizen, why do you have a German flag in your signature? Are you one of those hyphenated Americans with mixed loyalties?

you mean a million plus their dependents every year.

And we should also not ever drive a car again, because there is NO WAY to know what drunk or dangerous drivers are gonna be on the road! Go stick your head in the sand, ya pansy.

Cars provide benefits to society. Islam does not.

we should just check for card carrying members of the democratic party as well as obtain voting history on everyone and send the whole lot of lefties there too. they'll have lots of hugs to give out.

we aren't letting one person immigrate. we are letting more than 100,000 of them.

The Syrian refugees are coming and there is nothing you can do about it.

you passing out ANFO?