With all the talk of the different states refusing to allow the refugees in, what is your stance?
English
#Offtopic
-
1 답변Yes we should let Syrian refugees it is th moral thing to do We are also a country built by immigrants so why turn down these guys. Also by letting our fear control our decisions then we are doing what ISIS and other groups are hoping for. The word terror is in terrorism so by not being scared little Americans we are stopping ISIS from accomplishing its goal. Finally we created this group that is at war in Syria so we basically screwed up these refugees lives so let's be the adult and fix them. Bring them to America
-
25 답변With the majority of people on b.net being under 17, of COURSE the answer is going to be a majority 'no'. Uninformed, close minded, conservative poster children believing all of their parents bullshit and being spoon fed misinformation from the creatures on Fox News using outdated sources and using fear as a way to garner support. Heartless, gutless, brainless children.
-
There's no reason to let these people in our country. Oh they're having a civil war? Big deal United States went through that and no one helped us. Get these people out of the country. If they wanna live then they defend themselves in their own country if not they can tie the noose. I'm glad many states will not let them in if only California wasn't a bitch state.
-
24 답변작성자: FrightenedCamel 11/22/2015 1:15:32 AMNO. we don't know who they are. If there was a poisonous peanut in a bag would you take your chances and eat them all? No. Keep them away. Screening processes are NOT 100%. They don't have passports and can easily be someone else. Facts from the CIA fact book. Check it out
-
Because you opened this. you will get kissed on Friday by the person you love or like. Tomorrow will be the best day of your life. Do not break this chain. You have 2 minutes this is not a fake...apparently. Forward this to 15 people in the next 15 minutes and you WILL have the best day of your life tomorrow. You're number one crush will either KISS, ask you out, or call you. If you break this chain, the little girl named Kaitlyn who died 2 years ago on a car crash will be in your room TONIGHT! Good luck <<3, and your time starts, right know No Cheatin
-
I think we should let them in but keep them in a prison like complex. Not actually treating them like prisoners, of course, but definitely preventing them from getting hazardous materials and weaponry. This way we can keep the refugees safe and prevent the Isis ranks in them from doing anything and eventually weed them out.
-
4 답변36% are clueless idiots who probably live in suburbs and don't have to deal with them
-
5 답변Wow Offtopic. I can't even fathom why the majority would say "No"... I thought you were smarter than that.
-
3 답변Does anyone realize that we as a country are made up almost entirely of people who were oppressed and took REFUGE here hundreds of years ago? -blam!-ing seriously
-
21 답변
-
5 답변So 65% of the forum community are racist xenophobia retards who wishes to aid ISIS by hating the refugees and 35% of the community blissfully thinks the world is full of roses and there can't be a terrorist lurking behind the refugees because "omg thinks of those little kids!" ideology.
-
Take all off the countries, the people, the politics and everything else out other than the crisis. Imagine a completely blank canvas. Now Imagine the country you live in right now is in a civil war. You and your family (husband, wife, child, parent...) fled to escape the conflict and been taken in by another nation who cannot support you permanently, but its people and government are trying their hardest anyway. You have one chance at a secure, stable and safe life in another country who is more than equipped to support you. Along with many of the people you met on the way you'll return home when the conflict ends (if it is still there). It's just temporary support: food, water, shelter, only the basics. But that country says no. It would not take you in on the basis that a handful of you out of the 8,000,000 that have fled with you are a terrorist. You've walked, hitchhiked and sailed hundreds of miles from your home and the only difference between then and now is that there isn't a war. What are you going to do? I don't like quoting Stalin at all but it really is a case of 'one death is a tragedy, 1,000,000 is a statistic'. All people are seeing is numbers and not the people they represent. This is not a crisis for Syria anymore. It's for Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq (who are fighting wars of their own), Turkey, Greece, Germany, Austria, Hungary, France and so many more. Simply anyone who can help should.
-
8 답변
-
3 답변
-
16 답변For me it has nothing to do with fear, its just risk vs reward. The risk of a terrorist slipping through the cracks is not worth the "feel good" of helping others. Especially when we have so many internal problems already. Earth over Aliens United States over Other countries Acquaintance over Stranger Close Friends/Family over Acquaintance In any of the given scenarios I would always side with the left. All people should be treated equally but a strangers life is not more valuable than my own or those I care about. Its a harsh view I know but thats how I feel
-
2 답변I honestly don't care either way, I just want the two political parties to stop trying to one up each other and work together and get shit done. All this -blam!-ing arguing is only doing the terrorists' job for them.
-
3 답변
-
People we cling to our "mixing pot" heritage all the way up until it comes to whatever the mass's most recent fear word comes into play (here, it's Islam). Then they're so phobic of the idea, they'd rather bomb the problem away. I hate people.
-
15 답변Middle easterners on the run from hostility seeking refuge, turned away by Jesus loving, bible thumpers. Americans trying to close its borders to immigrants.. Native Americans are laughing their asses off right now.