"surge operation" to process 10,000 Syrian refugees and get them here by Sept 30

[platoonDaddy]

The POS will do everything in his power to destroy this country before he leaves office. The lame friggin congress will let he get away with this!


The administration has established a "surge operation" in Jordan to process 10,000 Syrian refugees and get them to the United States by President Obama's deadline of September 30, according to a new report on the temporary processing center in Amman.

The report said that some 600 interviews are being conducted every day, suggesting that 36,000 refugees are being targeted for entry into the United States.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/u.s.-surge-operation-to-clear-10000-syrian-refugees-in-just-3-months-600-interviewed-a-day/article/2588019

[MountainRaven]

Meh.

Last year, 24,579 refugees came into the US from that region. That's of the 70,000 refugees that entered the US, last year. And annual immigration into the US has been averaging over 1,000,000 people per year.

So I'm extremely skeptical that 36,000 Syrian refugees can destroy this country. As though we need the help....

[Firefly]

Why, again, can they not stay in Jordan?

There are literally 10,000 South Americans who would love legal immigration, English lessons, and would be far more assimilable than these Syrians. There are a LOT of English speaking, educated people who would love to come here but can't.
I feel bad for these people but we have enough of our own problems.

I'm all for training them to retake their country, but I don't think all 10,000 of them are angels.

[Jellybean]

So, to ask the glaringly obvious questions;

Why this magical 10k number?
And why is there a deadline?

Those two items seem to make some sort of sense separately, but not together.
:confused:

[JoshNC]

Why, again, can they not stay in Jordan?

There are literally 10,000 South Americans who would love legal immigration, English lessons, and would be far more assimilable than these Syrians. There are a LOT of English speaking, educated people who would love to come here but can't.
I feel bad for these people but we have enough of our own problems.

I'm all for training them to retake their country, but I don't think all 10,000 of them are angels.

Amen, brother.

[SteyrAUG]

Can we make sure they all go to Chicago at least?

[Moose-Knuckle]

Why is Obama and Western European leaders barring ethnic minority Christians from Syria, Egypt, and Iraq from entering?

Why does wealthy islamic states like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar not taking their "brothers" in?

Cultural Marxism and social engineering.

[Primus Pilum]

Destruction of the USA. Why have dhs and Intel agencies when ur leaders import our enemies right to our neighborhoods?

Good thing the job market is so strong here that we can import more people to take jobs and eat up welfare benefits. Blacks and Hispanics should be rioting in the streets, it's their jobs they are going to take away.

[Primus Pilum]

Why is Obama and Western European leaders barring ethnic minority Christians from Syria, Egypt, and Iraq from entering?

Why does wealthy islamic states like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar not taking their "brothers" in?

Cultural Marxism and social engineering.

The Muslim in chief is trying his best to destroy this country, that's what it is. 100% treason and we all know how traitors should be dealt with.

[gunrunner505]

Can we make sure they all go to Chicago at least?

Shit man, I don't want them. Let them stay home.

Let's welcome a problem into the country with arms open and eyes shut.

We've gone from a nation to a soup kitchen.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

This is literally insane. In the wake of Paris attackS, Brussels and their interest in nuclear material- it is crazy to bring in that many, that quickly, and expect a different out come.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Shit man, I don't want them. Let them stay home.

Let's welcome a problem into the country with arms open and eyes shut.

We've gone from a nation to a soup kitchen.

Put them on the South side and they'll beg to go back..... It's dangerous there...

[SomeOtherGuy]

So, to ask the glaringly obvious questions;
Why this magical 10k number?
And why is there a deadline?

September 30 is well ahead of the typical 30-day deadline to register for an election. Obviously none of these people will be citizens or able to LEGALLY vote, but that's no longer much of an impediment in major cities, and we've all been bludgeoned with the batshit-insane claim that it's somehow "racist" to require ID to vote.

10k is arbitrary, I expect. Maybe the resettlement district(s) are forecast to have dems losing by 3 or low 4-digit numbers and this plus voting fraud will let them "win."

Call this tinfoil all you want, I don't care. It's much more plausible than a dozen things that have been proven to have actually happened in the last 8 years.

[gunrunner505]

Put them on the South side and they'll beg to go back..... It's dangerous there...

Maybe they will kill each other off. Still don't want them though......

[SilverBullet432]

Terrible, so many other folks out there who would benefit more.

[SteyrAUG]

Shit man, I don't want them. Let them stay home.

Let's welcome a problem into the country with arms open and eyes shut.

We've gone from a nation to a soup kitchen.

I was thinking Cabrini–Green.

[MountainRaven]

This is literally insane. In the wake of Paris attackS, Brussels and their interest in nuclear material- it is crazy to bring in that many, that quickly, and expect a different out come.

Unless I missed something, those attacks were all planned and executed by native-born French and Belgian citizens and none of the attacks in the US have been carried out by refugees.

ETA: I vote that those who voted for the invasion of Iraq should be made to personally bear the burden of these refugees.

[Averageman]

I was thinking Cabrini–Green.

Sadly it doesn't exist anymore.
I say sadly because many of the residence were distributed all over rural Illinois. That area of Chicago has been Gentrified and is now full of very expensive houses and apartment buildings.
There is something to be said for keeping such residence in one area.

[SteyrAUG]

ETA: I vote that those who voted for the invasion of Iraq should be made to personally bear the burden of these refugees.

So the US, after attempting to have the UN establish the weapon capabilities of Saddam, wasn't entitled to neutralize a continuous and ongoing threat from Iraq?

Additionally, ISIS isn't a symptom of the invasion of Iraq, but of Obama attempting to destabilize the Assad regime. So anyone who voted for Obama should have to personally bear responsibility of Syrian refugees. I just prefer Obama and his supports go bear that responsibility IN Syria.

[SteyrAUG]

Sadly it doesn't exist anymore.
I say sadly because many of the residence were distributed all over rural Illinois. That area of Chicago has been Gentrified and is now full of very expensive houses and apartment buildings.
There is something to be said for keeping such residence in one area.

Been awhile since I was there.

[Firefly]

See....when America has Civil War II, which countries are going to go out of their way to airlift displaced Americans and put them up in housing and free shit?

[MountainRaven]

So the US, after attempting to have the UN establish the weapon capabilities of Saddam, wasn't entitled to neutralize a continuous and ongoing threat from Iraq?

Additionally, ISIS isn't a symptom of the invasion of Iraq, but of Obama attempting to destabilize the Assad regime. So anyone who voted for Obama should have to personally bear responsibility of Syrian refugees. I just prefer Obama and his supports go bear that responsibility IN Syria.

What the US has been doing in Syria is simply a continuation of US efforts to keep the Middle East in a perpetual state of disorder... which began with the invasion of Iraq.

[Firefly]

What the US has been doing in Syria is simply a continuation of US efforts to keep the Middle East in a perpetual state of disorder... which began with the invasion of Iraq.

I dunno man. It's been pretty shit for a long while. I remember older folks telling me about Iran being pretty westernized in the 70s to the point where they were almost poised to be the next Israel(their words not mine). Brought them over for training and gave them US gear. Then they had the Islamic revolution so....

Nothing new. S.S.D.D.

[Averageman]

I'm not sure how we owe these guys some sort of safe haven and path to citizenship.
I've all the sympathy in the world for some War Orphan, but that doesn't work if you're old enough to fend for yourself. I'm not seeing some four and six year old's, I'm seeing a lot of grown men.
I've paid my taxes all year, next week I get to throw another two k down to square up last years debt to the Federal Government.
All the while, I'm wondering, am I paying for these Mopes to get a ride here? I ask because I really don't see the point and I could actually use the money for something a lot better. I shouldn't be paying for someone else's bad feeling about what happened in Syria, Iraq, Iran or anyplace outside of my house.
I'm reminded of the speech Negan gave to Rick on The Walking Dead. "All I want is half of your shit and you're going to give it to me."

[SteyrAUG]

What the US has been doing in Syria is simply a continuation of US efforts to keep the Middle East in a perpetual state of disorder... which began with the invasion of Iraq.

Nonsense.

We went out of our way in the 80s to form an alliance with Iraq and Saddam and support his war against Iran because we were interested in ****ing Iran over as much as possible for the Iranian Embassy and hostage taking. Same reason we supported Afghanistan as payback to Russia for supporting the North Vietnamese against us during the Vietnam war.

Then Kuwait began to laterally drill oil from reserves over the border that Saddam considered to be the property of Iraq. This was compounded by the fact that Kuwait was using US technology to accomplish what Saddam considered theft. Saddam first sought resolution with Kuwait who told him to go pound sand. Then Saddam turned to the UN who basically did nothing and said it was between Iraq and Kuwait. Then Saddam turned to the US and we really didn't want to get involved.

At the time Iraq was having difficult economic times as a result of a drawn out war with Iran and Saddam felt since he was fighting "our enemy" as well we should be providing more support than we were. Problem is we were more interested in buying Kuwaiti oil at bargain prices.

Enter complete dipshit diplomat April Glaspie who told Saddam "We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait." and "We are only interested in stability in the region" which a military dictator like Saddam interpreted as a green light to "do what you have to do, but don't upset the apple cart." Believing he had US approval to invade Kuwait so long as oil supply was not interrupted Saddam invaded Kuwait and took possession of their oil fields and other resources.

Enter Bush (41) who then had the nerve to act surprised and backdoored Saddam with an ultimatum to leave Kuwait or face consequences. This was the start of our "modern problems" in the region and it happened a decade before the "invasion of Iraq" that you blame. It was also started by a conflict over oil between two arab states, it wasn't started by the US, but the argument can be made that the Bush Administration baited Saddam into military action and betrayed him.

What followed, not surprisingly, was a series of aggressive actions by Saddam against the US, one of which was severe enough to motivate Clinton to send a couple cruise missiles his way as a message.

Following 9-11 the US finally woke up to the idea that our enemies don't need ICBM's to deliver weapons to us. Then a few people remembered Saddam had a chemical weapon capacity (just ask the Kurds) and that he was on friendly terms with a few terrorist groups who would likely be more than willing to bring them to the US. We wasted some time while Saddam played a shell game with Hans Blix as he attempted UN sanctioned compliance inspections with no reliable results.

And that is why we invaded Iraq.

The only thing we did wrong was imagine we could turn it into some kind of western style democracy. Iraq was already the closest thing to a modern, secular Arab state that existed. Bush (43) was actually a big enough retard that he believed if he removed Saddam and the Baath Party from power that everyone would form a new western style government, sell us cheap oil and build statues of him everywhere.

Instead the entire thing collapsed and we had to babysit it for 10 years so it wouldn't become western Iran. But it wasn't a carefully planned Machiavellian operation, it was one retarded move after another from people who seriously did not understand how things work in the region.

The invasion of Iraq didn't need to bring everything down. We could have grabbed Saddam, determined his weapons inventory and production capacity and then gone down the list and put somebody in charge and then LEFT. Iraq would still be capable of defending itself and would have figured out to not screw with the US. Unfortunately Bush (43) thought he was going to build Iraqi Disneyland so he does share part of the blame for the current situation, but we elected a guy who was kind of a retard simply because he was the better option than Gore and Kerry.

Conflicts between Shia and Sunni Muslims were contained within Iraqi borders, Syria was opened up by Obama and a combination of arrogance and empty threats. Having learned NOTHING from Bush in Iraq, Obama thought he could bring the "arab spring" to Syria, and he mostly enjoyed the same results that we saw in Iraq.

At the end of the day, due to weak leadership, Iran will probably have a controlling influence in Iraq and Putin will form a strong alliance with Assad and Syria. This will of course be Iranian and Russian "payback" for our "payback." So one could argue that this goes all the way back to Vietnam, but in reality, this really got started with Iraqi invasion of Kuwait which led to the Persian Gulf War in 1990. Everything else has just been a continuation.

[Moose-Knuckle]

Unless I missed something, those attacks were all planned and executed by native-born French and Belgian citizens and none of the attacks in the US have been carried out by refugees.



Sent back to bomb Brussels: Outrage as Turkish president reveals they arrested ISIS fanatic in June and deported him BACK to Belgium - and even warned authorities he was a militant

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3505610/Brussels-airport-suicide-bombers-Belgian-brothers-accomplice-white-remains-run.html


As for the "native-born" muslim terrorists . . .

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1615/26341012825_b9f95b783f.jpg

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

If you want to blame anyone, you have to go with FDR. His determination to end the European empires and colonies is at the genesis of every conflict since WWII, outside of Korea. FDRs concept of self determination is lock step with Bush43- but on a global scale. Everyone blames GW43- as if the world were all fairies, unicorns and blow jobs before 2000. Maybe to millennials who have no reference point, or burned out hippies who short circuit over contemplating who is worse- Nixon or Bush this is difficult- but without FDRs setting the stage and Truman continuing the process the world would be much more stable and far less people would have been killed.

If you think that FDRs stand was right for self determination of peoples- which I can see being ably defended- then you can't blame GW for assholes acting like assholes- like they have all over the world since 1945.

If stability is the goal, democracy is the worst way to start. Protection of individual rights should have come first. Religion isn't the answer or the real problem. China and India are both relatively peaceful compared to the rest of the world- even with gini coefficients that would make non-gluten vegan Progressives puke up their soy organic lattes- and one is godless and the other very religious.

Want stability, put in strong men the brutalize their people just enough, but not too much. That won't work in the long run, because they eventually die, except Castro. The only long term stability comes from participatory governance with low corruption and respect for individual rights. Getting there is messy because everyone thinks they have the better answer till you bleed it out of them that compromise works better.

[gunrunner505]

Been awhile since I was there.

You aren't missing anything. Chicago has some nice areas but it's bad areas are sooooo bad. If you managed to end up in Cabrini after dark, and you were not native to the area, stop signs are red lights meant nothing till you got away from the DMZ.

[Averageman]

You aren't missing anything. Chicago has some nice areas but it's bad areas are sooooo bad. If you managed to end up in Cabrini after dark, and you were not native to the area, stop signs are red lights meant nothing till you got away from the DMZ.

I remember the train going in to Indiana let you out in an extremely sketchy area and the one going to the 'burbs on the west side was five blocks away.
Look crazier than anyone else and move at a nice jogging pace after dark.

[gunrunner505]

I remember the train going in to Indiana let you out in an extremely sketchy area and the one going to the 'burbs on the west side was five blocks away.
Look crazier than anyone else and move at a nice jogging pace after dark.

Back when Jayne Byrne was mayor she lived In a Cabrini apartment for about a week to prove a point that it wasn't nearly as dangerous there as its reputation. She of course had a division o armed security so I'm sure she felt fine.

If you remove the criminals, you'll see your crime rate drop. But that's not consistent with the narrative of blame whitey.

[26 Inf]

What the US has been doing in Syria is simply a continuation of US efforts to keep the Middle East in a perpetual state of disorder... which began with the invasion of Iraq.

Actually, much earlier - go back to the Suez Crisis and how it began.

[Benito]

Why is Obama and Western European leaders barring ethnic minority Christians from Syria, Egypt, and Iraq from entering?

Why does wealthy islamic states like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar not taking their "brothers" in?

Cultural Marxism and social engineering.

The whole point is to spread jihad and Islam into non-Muslim lands. It would defeat the purpose to just put them in lands that have already been conquered by Muslims.
Western traitors (European leaders) and Muslim infiltrators in the West (Obama) invite in the enemy for various reasons, but they are all complicit in trying to destroy the West for their ideological and/or personal gain.


The Muslim in chief is trying his best to destroy this country, that's what it is. 100% treason and we all know how traitors should be dealt with.

100% correct.


This is literally insane. In the wake of Paris attackS, Brussels and their interest in nuclear material- it is crazy to bring in that many, that quickly, and expect a different out come.

They don't expect a different outcome, though. More jihad, Sharia, Islam, and decay of the West is exactly what they want.


Unless I missed something, those attacks were all planned and executed by native-born French and Belgian citizens and none of the attacks in the US have been carried out by refugees.

ETA: I vote that those who voted for the invasion of Iraq should be made to personally bear the burden of these refugees.

The geographical location of the terrorists' births matters about as much here as the color of the terrorists' socks.



https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1615/26341012825_b9f95b783f.jpg

Damn, that is good!

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

The geographical location of the terrorists' births matters about as much here as the color of the terrorists' socks.

Socks and sandals; I knew I hated them for all the right reasons...

[gunrunner505]

This is as good a place as any for this. 38844


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk