Terrorism is a barbaric act that always ends up in a world wide tragedy, so of course people want to take preventive measures against this. Right now, no one wants to be in France's shoes, with the coordinated terrorist attacks that killed 130 people. Leaders don't want to be next, and when they see that one terrorist snuck in with a Syrian refugee passport, they want to take measures to prevent that, such as, not letting in Syrian refugees. With all this gray area, Should Obama let refugees into our country, our backyard, with the chance that one of them might be a terrorist? The U.S will let Syrian refugees in even if the general populous doesn’t want to. Syria is in horrible condition. In 2011, a peaceful protest went awry when the government open fired on protesters, starting a civil war which is still waging on today, for four years. Syria has vastly deteriorated with both sides violating human rights by torturing and waging chemical warfare. When their home became a battle ground, half of the population of Syria fled, and all in all 12.6 million need humanitarian help. With Turkey and Lebanon taking most of the burden, other countries still need to help, and Obama understands that, …show more content…
The House passed a bill that will make the refugee process more thorough, and the white house threatened to veto the bill. On a vote of 289-137, the house called for a higher screening process for refugees after the Paris attacks; 47 democrats joined 242 republicans for the vote. The process will have the top 2 F.B.I agents check off each refugee, creating a 10,000 paper stack for them to check off. This means that the white house isn't making false promises that will look good for press, but are taking measures to ensure that refugees will be let into the country. Just like with an eraser, we can write down lies and erase them, acting as if we never wrote them, but the eraser will be shorter like our trust will be less after each
The United States fails to protect its borders, while Australia sacrifices human rights in order to do so. Traditionally, first-world countries and their citizens assist those in less developed countries. Many of the island nations in the south pacific suffer from poverty and frequent natural disasters. Most would agree that, as the most developed country in the region, it is Australia’s responsibility to advocate for human rights and contribute to humanitarian efforts for the island nations. To its credit, Australia normally satisfies this role. However, when asylum-seekers come by boat, Australia draws a forceful line. The United States is also tasked with protecting its borders, but takes a more appropriate approach. In 2012, the PEW research
Empathy is not always easy to achieve. Currently as a nation we are debating whether or not we should allow the Syrian refugees into our country. After the attack on Paris and the ISIS threat against America next, it is easy to see why Americans would not want to let Syrian refugees into our country. It is a difficult decision to make, especially since most of the refugees are women and children. These refugees are trying to escape the terrors and wars that are going on in their home country. However, United States officials must remain cautious with who we are letting into our country at this time. Many citizens are nervous to let so many people into our country. The challenge that the United States officials face is if we
Humanitarian intervention can be defined as the right or duty of the international community to intervene in states with certain causes. The causes can be that the state has suffered a large scale loss of life or genocide due to intentional actions by its government or even because of the collapse of governance (Baylis, Owens, Smith 480). One of the main arguments in the article was president Obamas decision not to bomb Syria after many of his Allies and people believed he would’ve after making so many plans and decision to carry out the bombing. Obamas decision can be expressing in some of the key objections to humanitarian intervention. For example, the first key is that states do not intervene for primarily humanitarian reasons. This means that humanitarian intervention would be unwise if it does not serve the states national interests. President Obama did not want to risk taking a shot while there were United Nations inspectors on the ground completing work (Goldberg
“If the protecting of our borders requires the incarceration of babies, the sexual abuse of children, the rape of women and the murder of men, then we are of all nations the most depraved.” This emotive statement from a man of the church, Father Rod Bower, touches a nerve with many of Australians. It is an acid test on our national consciousness. The shock of disturbed beliefs pushes us to reassess the foundation of our values.
Syrian refugees who are in desperate need of emotional, physical, mental support will feel disrespected and betrayed from not only their own country but America as well, which will lead to irrational actions. Maybe even joining terrorist groups to get back at America. In the past year there has only been four ISIS attacks in the United States. Most would agree the number would increase if Refugees are allowed into the States. On the other hand, some agree the numbers will increase if the refugees aren’t allowed in America, refugees will build hatred and eventually want to put that pain on America for denying them to enter the States. Although the United States has the option to deny Syrian refugees, the States has already increased the screening process for those incoming. Security has expanded and is being trained to their top performance if a security guard feel as though a refugee is sketchy they have to right to deny the incoming
During the Israeli War of Independence in 1948 an Arab refugee crisis began, and there is still not a clear answer of what caused it. As inhabitants of Israel Arabs were greatly affected by the establishment of a Jewish State, because their home was governed by others. Nonetheless, the Palestinian Arabs contributed in the making of the refugee crisis. The Arabs were given the choice of becoming equal citizens of Israel and refused. The United Nations came up with Partition Plan for Palestine, but it was rejected. Therefore, instead of having their own country the Arabs fled to neighboring Arab countries to avoid the crossfire of impending war. Arabs were thrown out of their homes by the Haganah (pre-state army), and placed
An extraordinary 65.3 million Refugees have been displaced around the world. In 2015 Australia took 12,000 of them. But where are Australians placing these Refugees? Australia is deporting these Refugees to a third country, either on Manus or Nauru Island. These Islands have reports of inhumane and cruel treatment towards Refugees For those who aren’t fully aware of what Refugees are; they are people whom come to Australia illegally without the appropriate visas. They cannot obtain these visas because of the reasons they are fleeing their country … their Government. None the less it should be the Australian Government they fear. The concepts of refugees are kept hidden away from us by our own Government in reflection of their Governments own self-interest. This tragedy is classified as a modern day witch hunt.
Thirty-one states are not welcoming refugees, seven are welcoming refugees, and twelve are not making a commitment to either side. Governors cannot legally deny entry to refugees but they can make it extremely difficult to gain access. Michigan governor Rick Snyder stated the following ‘It’s also important to remember that these attacks are the effects of extremists and do not reflect the peaceful ways of Middle Eastern descent here and around the world.’ (CNN). Mister Snyder does not welcome refugees to his state because the safety of his citizens is his number one priority but he does not want people to look down on refugees. American citizens do not want refugees in their communities. This is a prime example of xenophobia and could lead to backlash, discrimination, and violence directed towards refugees. Refugees would be targeted and become victims of hate
The question we bring before you is one that has caused controversy, anger, fear, and even prejudice around every corner of America. One that the United States government has asked themselves again and again with no real answer, should immigrants be allowed into our country freely? The United States have dealt with illegal immigrants ever since this country was founded in 1776. This country was built on immigrants. And yet, the US government still will not allow immigrants into America. They keep asking themselves, should we, should we, and should we? Our answer is yes, they should, pending, however, a background check, blood test, and be required to take ESL classes, because there are certain stipulations that are needed. If they have a
The U.S. govemment has faced the struggle for various decades to put an end to unauthorized immigration from Mexico and into the United States. Immigration as a whole has increased from 71,877,120 in 1960 to 213,316,418 in 2010 according to the data created and also reported by the World Bank. The government has made multiple attempts to stop the immigration process by implementing harsher measures along the U.S. and Mexico border and at work sites across the entire country. These measures however, have failed to end unauthorized immigration as a whole as immigrants still find a way to sneak by, settle, and make a living.. Americans who have a reason to oppose immigration argue that the safety and the strength of the nation’s economy are greatly threatened. However, strong supporters argue that instead of damaging and putting the economy at risk they provide a more stable environment.
Maybe they don’t notice, maybe they don’t care, but for the most part people never think things will go as far as they do. So as more and more Syrian refugees try to escape their country, and ISIS becomes more and more powerful, we start realizing that things are beginning tog et seriously out of hand. We can help put an end to this now. Learn from our mistakes and do what we know is the humane thing to do. They say that the United States regretted not letting Jewish refugees in sooner. By the time they did, it was too late for millions of people. If we put aside our fears, we can help save so many people. They’re lives depend on these decisions. Their lives and the American citizens’ lives are at risk. It’s all about taking chances and trying to see the best in people. Ye, there might be one terrorist among the million refugees we accept, but are we not willing to take that chance for those millions of people for something that might or might not happen. The refugees will die without us. Terrorist are already a threat to America, so why not take a chance on a minimal to risk to save what could’ve been millions of
SUMMARY: The Syrian Civil War between the Syrian government, and the insurgents, as well as the Free Syrian Army has been escalating since early 2011. The United States, and our allies have faced difficulty in sending aid to Syria, and continue to deal with obstacles in sending even basic medications to Syrian civilians. However, the United States and its allies have also contributed to the lack of organization and the disparity in Syria by sending aid and artillery to individuals based only on political connection, and ignoring organization, local alliances, and without a true understanding of the reality of the Syrian localities to best protect the Syrian protestors. The question addressed in this memo will be defining the viable options to be pursued in Syria, how to pursue them, and assessing the most beneficial path of least resistance when offering aid, funds, and artillery to specific groups in the country. The recommendation will be that although the best alternative action item would be to choose a Syrian group with the least oppositional values comparative to the United States to fund, supply with arms, and train; that the United States should do nothing for the time being. Given the physical and financial risk involved with the Syrian Civil War, it would be prudent for the United States to simply observe how the war progresses over the next several months, as well as complete some research to truly understand the state of affairs in local areas of Syria to determine the extent to which the United States could identify a group to provide aid to, as well as the extent to which the United States involvement would be within Syria.
President Trumps ban on other countries with people that have proven track records of being licentious, terroristic, and cruel from entering our country has many pros and cons. Most people would not agree with anything that President Trump is saying about his executive orders because there are many people that want to just consider him to be nothing but racist or imbecilic from what others talk about him, or what the media says. Not many people want to see the benefits of what he is trying to do. Sure it seems a little harsh to a point but what’s currently happening is that it is a short term ban for example the refugee proposal has been put on hold for up to 120 days and traveling from the countries that have
Humanitarian intervention can be costly; if military force is used, it may result in a big number of casualties (Krasner, 2017, 197). The US has been split on its thoughts regarding intervening in Syria. While President Trump referred to the responsibility to protect, he has also has expressed his desire to remove the troops from Syria, as he said that the US “had spent too much time and money in Syria and now had other priorities” (Kreps & Maxey, 2018). His views have also been referred to as the “‘America First’ approach” (Kreps & Maxey, 2018). This also aligns with “‘realist tradition in American public opinion’” (Kreps & Maxey, 2018) as realism puts national interests first.
Another casual night: the air is sticky, and the water is scarce, all throughout the country the sound of gunshots are ringing through the air. For most people, this “casual” night is beyond their wildest imagination, but for Syrians it is an ongoing nightmare. Faced with the trauma of a civil war, Syrian refugees seek protection and a more promising future than the life they currently live in their oppressive country. Many seek refuge in other Middle East countries like Turkey and Jordan, but others search for hope in the icon of freedom, the United States of America. However, in America, there is an ongoing debate about whether or not Syrian refugees should be accepted. America needs to accept the Syrian refugees because if they do not, the