Shootouts and explosions in Paris

Maximus said:

Who's worse off? Why 10,000 Syrians and not these starving kids first? Where do we stop KI?

Click to expand...

It's not where do we stop, it's when do we start....


Again, my Republican friends.. What would Jesus do?

Maximus said:

Who's worse off? Why 10,000 Syrians and not these starving kids first? Where do we stop KI?

I know, I know...stop conflating.

Click to expand...

where did I ever say to not help starving children? I'm not the one arguing against helping people.

Mr. Orange said:

I get where you are coming from, but what if you knew you had a 100% chance of saving the lives of 10K people, but that would mean a 0.01% chance you have let someone in who would kill 20-30 people. How can you not take those odds?

Click to expand...

Sure, sign me up if you can guarantee those odds...but, you can't. That one person may put a truck bomb outside of a stadium and take out more than 10,000. And you know, way more than one person of the 10,000 is going to have bad intentions.

gourimoko said:

It's not where do we stop, it's when do we start....


Again, my Republican friends.. What would Jesus do?

Click to expand...

Would winner this post five times over if I could.

KI4MVP said:

where did I ever say to not help starving children? I'm not the one arguing against helping people.

Click to expand...

The fuq? I'm said i am all for helping them. You want to do it here. I'd just prefer to do it there until we reassess the situation.

I didn't say you weren't for helping starving people, i just asked why the Syrians first...certainly you'd agree the starving kids i showed you are worse off. My point is we can't bring everyone here. We can try do the best we can for them where they are. It's just not possible to bring everyone here.

pr26 said:

Would winner this post five times over if I could.

Click to expand...

Why not just get started. Do you have any extra cash? An unused couch or bed? Are you eating more than you should be?

By next week I'm expecting a full report from you and Gour on where you started and where you are with helping those in need.

gourimoko said:

It's not where do we stop, it's when do we start....


Again, my Republican friends.. What would Jesus do?

Click to expand...

He'd sell his M-Series beemer and feed the poor...unlike you, my hypocritical, paid to lie, democrat, one-percenter friend.

Maximus said:

He'd sell his M-Series beemer and feed the poor...unlike you, my hypocritical, paid to lie, democrat, one-percenter friend.

Click to expand...

Now I feel empty inside... thanks.

Notorious said:

Why not just get started. Do you have any extra cash? An unused couch or bed? Are you eating more than you should be.

By next week I'm expecting a full report from you and Gour on where you started and where you are with helping those in need.

Click to expand...

I give quite a bit to charity every chance I get. Just to be clear.

Maximus said:

Sure, sign me up if you can guarantee those odds...but, you can't. That one person may put a truck bomb outside of a stadium and take out more than 10,000. And you know, way more than one person of the 10,000 is going to have bad intentions.

Click to expand...

If we started making all our decisions because something may happen, we would have a police state on our hands. Show me your papers! That is no way to live. We have security for large events. At some point you have to trust things or not leave the house. Don't be afraid...be smart, but don't be afraid.

Peter Singer, in his new book, actually talks about wealth isn't a problem a lot of leftist make it out to be... As long as you use part of that wealth to make people's lives better. So if Bill Gates donates millions of dollars to efficient charities, than the most good he can do occurred because of his wealth.

[

KI4MVP said:

isn't this a humanitarian issue that is more important than political spin or a public opinion poll.

Click to expand...

I agree with that - the President should do what is right, not what the polls say.

Do we really let the terrorists win on this issue? The world collectively turning their back on these people in need is exactly what ISIS wants.

Click to expand...

Ah, so ISIS wants the West to stop letting in refugees because...uh, why, exactly?

This "no fear" argument has a limited validity but has been blown way out of proportion. This notion that ISIS wants us to take precautions that will make it harder to hit us again is ridiculous. They want us to remain vulnerable and stupid.

What they want in the short term is for us to leave them alone so they can consolidate their state in Iraq and Syria. Then they want to expand their Caliphate. And they want to use terrorism against us so thay we do not oppose those goals. These guys aren't just suicidal nutbags looking to get some publicity. They are trying to build a Caliphate - an actual empire.

So they could give a shit what else we do - other than blaspheme their prophet, obviously.. Not taking precautions because "it will show we're afraid" is something we Westerners invented. All not taking precautions does is make it easier for them to kill us. That's it.

If you think we should keep taking in refugees despite the risk because that's the right thing to do, that's a legitimate argument. But taking them in because you think it would help us defeat ISIS is bent.

What a shit show of a conversation that is being had.

Just awful religious/political pointlessness from both sides.

These internet back and forth's between opinions is such bullshit and a slap in the face of the human condition.

I'm offended by all of it.

gourimoko said:

It's not where do we stop, it's when do we start....

Click to expand...

If i have to start by saving people in tent cities, i say we start with our own here first before just making bigger ones...

jking948 said:

Out of curiosity is your position we shouldn't have taken in Jewish refugees, we should've because it was a much bigger conflict, or we should've for some other reason? It will help me understand where you are coming from. If it's the last one I ask what's the difference?

Click to expand...

I think we should have taken them in because 1) they didn't present a real risk, 2) because it was a bigger conflict, and 3) because the poor bastards had nowhere else in the world to go.

The real reason people didn't want them was basic, 2000 year old anti-semitism, which unfortunately existed in pretty much every nation on Earth.

ETA: here's part of my frustration....

1) how many members/fighters does ISIS actually have?

2) how many Arab people are there in the ME?

3) how many Muslims are there in the world?

Why the fuck can't at least group 2) take out their own trash, i.e., 1)?

The fact that people on other fucking continents have to handle this shit is messed up.