Governors all across the country are refusing to take Syrian refugees

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not stay in your home land and fight for it?

just sayin

No weapons or gear.
Outnumbered by highly trained terrorists.
Women and children don't fight and they make up more than 50%+ of the refugees.
Plus, Assad's forces will also massacre and rape them.

Are you that dense?

And with whom do you fight? Assad's side? An insurgent group that may or may not be inked with Al Qaeda or Isis? Or with Isis?

Seriously. People have no idea about the shifting allegiances in the region. Here's a list of everyone fighting - all these groups are fighting each other. Which side are the refugees supposed to fight on?

-ISIS (receiving some aid from Turkey, Saudis, and Israel)
-Al Qaeda (ditto)
-Assad loyalists (many of whom are Christian and supported by Russian military power)
-Hezbollah (backed by Iran)
-Local tribal warlords (often shifting allegiances between Assad, ISIS, and AQ)
-Kurds (some of whom are hardline Marxists, some are American supported)

So where should the Syrian refugees fight? Remember, all those groups listed above are fighting one another.

[Anonymous]

It's "Irish need not apply!" all over again.

We never learn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not stay in your home land and fight for it?

just sayin

YES! Why aren't they fighting?? I understand women and children leaving, but why aren't more men staying and fighting for their homeland? If this was in the US, I know we would fight here. No way would DH or I ever leave. And our roots in America are only a few centuries strong, unlike their 1000s of years of history in the Middle East.

Because our taxes will provide them a better life. Our shrinking middle class will feed, cloth, educate millions of poor immigrants and refugees in the hopes to become the next 3rd world country.

Did our taxes educate you?

[Anonymous]

Will these governors also be keeping out Europeans? Because after a meeting of foreign ministers, the EU's chief diplomat, Federica Mogherini, said all the attackers so far are believed to be EU citizens.

[Anonymous]

DC and surrounding areas should take as many as possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How very Christian of them.

Time for all the Muslim Goveners to step up, I suppose!

[Anonymous]

I wish we could just consider taking women and children.

[Anonymous]

At least 3 of the Paris attackers were French nationals... That tends to throw a bit of cold water on the hysteria over "Syrian refugees."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not stay in your home land and fight for it?

just sayin

No weapons or gear.
Outnumbered by highly trained terrorists.
Women and children don't fight and they make up more than 50%+ of the refugees.
Plus, Assad's forces will also massacre and rape them.

Are you that dense?

Wome and children do NOT make up most of these refuges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At least 3 of the Paris attackers were French nationals... That tends to throw a bit of cold water on the hysteria over "Syrian refugees."

Yes, so far it's believed they're all actually citizens of the European Union.

[Anonymous]

Robust vetting is a effing joke. Only a moron would believe that for a second.

[Anonymous]

It would be nice, for once, if the president listened to contrary views instead of demonizing his opponents.

[Anonymous]

Why do you fear refugees, given that the terrorists have been identified as EU citizens?

[Anonymous]

Yes, so far it's believed they're all actually citizens of the European Union.

So this is how the second generation goes? Someone above posted that they are not assimilating and that they are possibly rebelling against their parents. This is an interesting supposition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not stay in your home land and fight for it?

just sayin

No weapons or gear.
Outnumbered by highly trained terrorists.
Women and children don't fight and they make up more than 50%+ of the refugees.
Plus, Assad's forces will also massacre and rape them.

Are you that dense?

And with whom do you fight? Assad's side? An insurgent group that may or may not be inked with Al Qaeda or Isis? Or with Isis?

Seriously. People have no idea about the shifting allegiances in the region. Here's a list of everyone fighting - all these groups are fighting each other. Which side are the refugees supposed to fight on?

-ISIS (receiving some aid from Turkey, Saudis, and Israel)
-Al Qaeda (ditto)
-Assad loyalists (many of whom are Christian and supported by Russian military power)
-Hezbollah (backed by Iran)
-Local tribal warlords (often shifting allegiances between Assad, ISIS, and AQ)
-Kurds (some of whom are hardline Marxists, some are American supported)

So where should the Syrian refugees fight? Remember, all those groups listed above are fighting one another.

Well let's start with Russia supervising a force of men who otherwise would be fleeing. Perhaps relocate immigrants to be part of the force. Then let Putin run the place.