Why do Liberals INSIST on Endangering our National Security When There Is NO Need To Do So?

[easyt65]

Syrian Refugees are in danger and need protection, shelter, food, and clothing.

ALL of that can be provided to them WITHOUT ever bringing them to the United States, which would mean NO RISK to our National Security.

So WHY do Liberals INSIST we MUST bring the Syrian Refugees - that could very well include ISIS members / terrorists as ISIS promised - to the United States, thereby putting our National Security and American lives at risk?!

Option 'A' - NO RISK
Option 'B' - RISK

 

[Arianrhod]

Syrian Refugees are in danger and need protection, shelter, food, and clothing.

ALL of that can be provided to them WITHOUT ever bringing them to the United States, which would mean NO RISK to our National Security.

And your plan is -?

 

[The Great Goose]

It's their unofficial alliance with Cuckservatives.

 

[easyt65]

ALL of that can be provided to them WITHOUT ever bringing them to the United States, which would mean NO RISK to our National Security.

And your plan is -?[/QUOTE]

How can I explain it any more plainly?
- Do NOT bring them into the United States.
- Provide them with protection, shelter, food, etc

This type of stuff is what the U.N. was designed to take care of. The U.n. is doing NOTHING during this international crisis. As suggested by Germany and France already, an area within Syria could even be 'carved out' / identified as a 'Safe Zone' for refugees. U.N. Peacekeepers could provide protection, No-Fly zone established, world-wide assistance/action could be energized to provide all of this....but they are sitting on their asses and expecting us to endanger our citizens.

 

[Arianrhod]

- Do NOT bring them into the United States.
- Provide them with protection, shelter, food, etc

Where?

 

[easyt65]

- Do NOT bring them into the United States.
- Provide them with protection, shelter, food, etc

Where?

Anywhere except the US. As I mentioned, keeping them in SYRIA is a possibility. Saud, Oman, UAE, GAZA....

 

[Arianrhod]

- Do NOT bring them into the United States.
- Provide them with protection, shelter, food, etc

Where?

Anywhere except the US. As I mentioned, keeping them in SYRIA is a possibility. Saud, Oman, UAE, GAZA....

Keeping them in the middle of a war zone is your first choice. Okay, moving on...

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Syrian Refugees are in danger and need protection, shelter, food, and clothing.

ALL of that can be provided to them WITHOUT ever bringing them to the United States, which would mean NO RISK to our National Security.

So WHY do Liberals INSIST we MUST bring the Syrian Refugees - that could very well include ISIS members / terrorists as ISIS promised - to the United States, thereby putting our National Security and American lives at risk?!

Option 'A' - NO RISK
Option 'B' - RISK

They believe they will play an important role in the Caliphate they help create.

But the only roll they'll get is their heads bouncing a few times.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Add to that list the thousands of Somalis being let in who also have an affinity for terrorism.........

 

[Moonglow]

- Do NOT bring them into the United States.
- Provide them with protection, shelter, food, etc

Where?

Anywhere except the US. As I mentioned, keeping them in SYRIA is a possibility. Saud, Oman, UAE, GAZA....

You do know the difference in Muslims, don't cha?

 

[Moonglow]

Add to that list the thousands of Somalis being let in who also have an affinity for terrorism.........

Yeah....One was speeding down the street the other day, they usually drive slow...

 

[Manonthestreet]

Add to that list the thousands of Somalis being let in who also have an affinity for terrorism.........

Yeah....One was speeding down the street the other day, they usually drive slow...

Marginalized Young American-Somalis Look East To Join ISIS Even NPR has to admit it

 

[easyt65]

Keeping them in the middle of a war zone is your first choice. Okay, moving on...

Hey LIBTARD,

1) Who said keep them in the MIDDLE?
...oh that would be YOUR DUMBMASS!

2) Who said that was my FIRST choice?
...oh, that would be YOUR DUMBMASS!

MY 1st choice was 'ABH' - ANYWHERE BUT HERE, moron!

 

[Moonglow]

Add to that list the thousands of Somalis being let in who also have an affinity for terrorism.........

Yeah....One was speeding down the street the other day, they usually drive slow...

Marginalized Young American-Somalis Look East To Join ISIS Even NPR has to admit it

Many here just hang on Main street, like the Mexicans before them and before them it was the whites...

 

[easyt65]

You do know the difference in Muslims, don't cha?

Yep, but the different types of Muslims don't factor much into the equation of 'ANYWHERE BUT HERE'.

Like they say at closing time at the bar, 'Ya don't have to go home, but you can't stay HERE!'

 

[easyt65]

So, I noticed no Liberals have actually stepped up to the plate and answered the questions, of WHY they are so determined to endangered American lives and our national security when there is no need to do so...


(Sending our boys to go fight for these people is 'none of our business' and we shouldn't be doing it', according to Liberals...but when it comes to bringing them here, putting our citizens in danger when we don't have to, they are all for it. hmmmmm)