Ben Carson Wants Congress To Block Syrian Refugees

Page 3 of 3 [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Adamantium
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1020
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,998
Location: Erehwon

19 Nov 2015, 12:20 am

Jacoby wrote:
How well did we vet Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev? They were came here with their family and claimed asylum.


Yeah. You can never be too careful about those 8 year olds. No telling what they might be planning.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,874
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

21 Nov 2015, 11:42 am

Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Dillogic wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I'm sure the men in the situation of running for the sake of their families would have a different perspective on it.


Send your families off for protection, fight for your country.

Seems pretty simple.


If I was a kid in that situation, you better believe I'd prefer my dad alive with me, rather than him getting killed - or maybe worse, not knowing if he was alive or dead.

^Lame excuse for cowardice right there.
Maybe study the American Revolution a little sometime.
Oh wait; if we'd stayed with the crown instead of fighting it we'd have more free stuff at taxpayer expense now.
In your case forget what all I said above.
For a moment there I forgot who I was talking to.
:roll:


Till you're in that situation, don't judge. And as far as the American Revolution is concerned, you didn't have thousands of displaced persons who were facing certain torture, rape, and death at the hands of a fanatical enemy. The British for the most part behaved reasonably well (much better than the local militias who vacillated between the two warring sides), and so no, they can't be compared to ISIS.

The more evil they are the more reason there should be to fight them by whatever means available. By your reasoning the Russians should not have fought back against the invading Nazis in WW2.

Quote:
The children of the patriots serving in the Continental Army were in touch with their fathers through letters, and were kept informed about the location of the army, so there is zero resemblance between the two situations.

Yeah, do it for the children. Where have I heard that before?
:roll:
Never mind doing a greater deed for them, albeit one with immediate costs, to secure thier homeland for them and future generations. No, someone might get hurt that way. Better to crawl away like snakes from a burning brush pile.
Sometimes I really wonder.......


If someone wants to stay and fight, then I say good for them, and go for it. But I'm not about to condemn people who choose life with their families, either. Have you ever considered how many Americans today are here because they or their ancestors had fled from somewhere else because of certain death? Were they supposed to stay where they were at?
And yes, any parent will tell you nothing comes before the welfare of their children.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,985
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

21 Nov 2015, 1:45 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
If someone wants to stay and fight, then I say good for them, and go for it. But I'm not about to condemn people who choose life with their families, either. Have you ever considered how many Americans today are here because they or their ancestors had fled from somewhere else because of certain death? Were they supposed to stay where they were at?
it depends on the situation and location. Syria is in civil war and its future undecided. In that case, taking sides and fighting would be the more noble route.

Quote:
And yes, any parent will tell you nothing comes before the welfare of their children.

Any parent, huh? Since any is an all-inclusive term that means even those who have baked thier own babies in the oven to stop them from crying, intentionally starved thier children and/or other forms of gross mistreatment always put thier children's welfare first.

Even that aside, using one's children as an excuse for cowardice (or laziness) is pathetic.


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,874
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

21 Nov 2015, 2:58 pm

Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
If someone wants to stay and fight, then I say good for them, and go for it. But I'm not about to condemn people who choose life with their families, either. Have you ever considered how many Americans today are here because they or their ancestors had fled from somewhere else because of certain death? Were they supposed to stay where they were at?
it depends on the situation and location. Syria is in civil war and its future undecided. In that case, taking sides and fighting would be the more noble route.

Quote:
And yes, any parent will tell you nothing comes before the welfare of their children.

Any parent, huh? Since any is an all-inclusive term that means even those who have baked thier own babies in the oven to stop them from crying, intentionally starved thier children and/or other forms of gross mistreatment always put thier children's welfare first.

Even that aside, using one's children as an excuse for cowardice (or laziness) is pathetic.


Taking a side in a situation like the Syrian civil war where there very well may be no good side is a no-win situation. It's like choosing between Hitler and Stalin.
As for the baby microwavers, and other assorted human monsters who mistreat or even murder their children - those are hardly representative of most parents, and are actually very few in number.
And no, choosing life with your children over the chance to kill and die for whatever cause is not cowardice, or pathetic. Have a kid, and you'll have a very different perspective.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,985
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

21 Nov 2015, 5:59 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
If someone wants to stay and fight, then I say good for them, and go for it. But I'm not about to condemn people who choose life with their families, either. Have you ever considered how many Americans today are here because they or their ancestors had fled from somewhere else because of certain death? Were they supposed to stay where they were at?
it depends on the situation and location. Syria is in civil war and its future undecided. In that case, taking sides and fighting would be the more noble route.

Quote:
And yes, any parent will tell you nothing comes before the welfare of their children.

Any parent, huh? Since any is an all-inclusive term that means even those who have baked thier own babies in the oven to stop them from crying, intentionally starved thier children and/or other forms of gross mistreatment always put thier children's welfare first.

Even that aside, using one's children as an excuse for cowardice (or laziness) is pathetic.


Taking a side in a situation like the Syrian civil war where there very well may be no good side is a no-win situation. It's like choosing between Hitler and Stalin.

Go with Hitler.
The nazis had better looking uniforms, not to mention that German food and drink are stratospheres above Russian.
Quote:
As for the baby microwavers, and other assorted human monsters who mistreat or even murder their children - those are hardly representative of most parents, and are actually very few in number.

You're the one that said any parent meaning all of them. Don't backpedal now.

Quote:
And no, choosing life with your children over the chance to kill and die for whatever cause is not cowardice, or pathetic. Have a kid, and you'll have a very different perspective.

Fortunately, not everyone falls apart and in effect cuts thier nads off after having a kid.


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,874
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

21 Nov 2015, 10:55 pm

Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
If someone wants to stay and fight, then I say good for them, and go for it. But I'm not about to condemn people who choose life with their families, either. Have you ever considered how many Americans today are here because they or their ancestors had fled from somewhere else because of certain death? Were they supposed to stay where they were at?
it depends on the situation and location. Syria is in civil war and its future undecided. In that case, taking sides and fighting would be the more noble route.

Quote:
And yes, any parent will tell you nothing comes before the welfare of their children.

Any parent, huh? Since any is an all-inclusive term that means even those who have baked thier own babies in the oven to stop them from crying, intentionally starved thier children and/or other forms of gross mistreatment always put thier children's welfare first.

Even that aside, using one's children as an excuse for cowardice (or laziness) is pathetic.


Taking a side in a situation like the Syrian civil war where there very well may be no good side is a no-win situation. It's like choosing between Hitler and Stalin.

Go with Hitler.
The nazis had better looking uniforms, not to mention that German food and drink are stratospheres above Russian.
Quote:
As for the baby microwavers, and other assorted human monsters who mistreat or even murder their children - those are hardly representative of most parents, and are actually very few in number.

You're the one that said any parent meaning all of them. Don't backpedal now.

Quote:
And no, choosing life with your children over the chance to kill and die for whatever cause is not cowardice, or pathetic. Have a kid, and you'll have a very different perspective.

Fortunately, not everyone falls apart and in effect cuts thier nads off after having a kid.


I'll give you the superiority of German beer and food.
I was speaking generally about parents. No backpedalling here.
As for your last point, I'm afraid I don't really get it.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,835
Location: Valproate Street and Thorazine Lane

23 Nov 2015, 7:31 am

Incidentally, Canada isn't taking in any single male refugees of fighting age.

Seems prudent (nice moderate stance). Women, children and families.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,985
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

23 Nov 2015, 12:44 pm

Dillogic wrote:
Incidentally, Canada isn't taking in any single male refugees of fighting age.

Seems prudent (nice moderate stance). Women, children and families.


Really?!?!
Well, you'll never hear an American liberal on this forum criticism Canada for anything. Canada is a liberal valhalla to them.


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,835
Location: Valproate Street and Thorazine Lane

23 Nov 2015, 8:31 pm

That's what I read.

It's as if they want to care about people and help, but by not being suicidal about it.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,985
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

23 Nov 2015, 8:52 pm

^ Its certainly smarter than just letting anyone in like liberals would like to do.


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley