---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote :
So Anne , how many refugees is Canada taking in? How many illegal immigrants from central America is Canada dealing with? The fact is that non of this, people fleeing Syria, would be happening if a force of 40,000 troops had been left in Iraq, just as we did with Germany and Japan after WW2 and are still in place. Iraq would not be joined at the hip to Iran and Syria would be stable and ISIS non existent. Hundreds of thousands of lives wouldn't have been lost or entire populations disrupted and on the move. Europe wouldn't be overwhelmed with refugees. There are some that say America can't be the policeman of the world, and I agree, but then neither can the United States be the worlds *home, away from home*.< ISIS has vowed to put their flag over The White House and if you think that's just rhetoric, you're crazy! They and Iran will take advantage of these great migrations to move their people into strategic places for the future.Weakness and naivety got us into WW2, some people just don't learn from history. The world and the refugees would be far better served if Europe, the United States and other countries in the region stood up to ISIS and destroyed them and allowed the refugees to go back to their homes. Interesting article about Canada and refugees. In short, they don't do enough IMO: We can bring in 200,000 refugees in the next year. Here's how. - Macleans.ca http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/we-can-bring-in-200000-refugees-in-the-next-year-heres-how/ http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/we-can-bring-in-200000-refugees-in-the-next-year-heres-how/ We can bring in 200,000 refugees in the next year. ... http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/we-can-bring-in-200000-refugees-in-the-next-year-heres-how/ We have the capacity to welcome many more refugees to Canada than our leaders are pledging. What’s lacking is the political will. View on www.macleans.ca http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/we-can-bring-in-200000-refugees-in-the-next-year-heres-how/ Preview by Yahoo And I also agree that the mere fact of people needing asylum is a travesty, that offering a country not their own and certainly not ideal in any sense is simply a band aid for those fleeing danger in their own country. A better solution is to eliminate the reason for the fear and the running but that is a very complicated subject. Getting rid of ISIS? More complicated still. I am neither a statesman, a philosopher or a soldier. From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 8:43 AM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] 1200 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : Actually he wants to bring 70,000 per year. No way to know who they are. How do you screen 70,000 refugees? You take their word they'll do no harm? A whole bunch of Boston Marathon bombers sneaking into the country, Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges! I heard 10,000 per year but even that number is laughably low so 70K sounds a lot better. You certainly assume a whole lot of bad about people, Mike. "Boston Marathoner Bombers"? WTF? These are not people who are looking to kill anyone. They're hoping to escape a hideous situation in their own country and are far more concerned about finding a safe haven for themselves and their families than making bombs to maim and kill your fellow Americans. Get real. From: "awoelflebater@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 9:00 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] 1200 So, I hear on NPR tonight driving home from work that the US, currently, will take 1200 refugees per year. Luckily, Obama is seeking to increase that amount to 10,000 per year. But really? For the whole US of A they can only accommodate 10,000 people in need? It's got to be some demented joke, eh Mike?
