Kerry says US will take 85,000 refugees next year; 100,000 in '17

Ok...so this story is not likely going to be headlining the news, but I thought this was a bold statement to be made about the refugee issues and how the US is handling it. I don't agree with the "decision" made, but I am not in charge and did not vote for the current administration. While they may beef up the screening process, the other side is also beefing up their ability to cross boarders without being detected....as evidenced in the article.

Source

Scrambling to address a growing Syrian refugee crisis, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry announced Sunday that the United States would significantly increase the number of worldwide refugees it takes in over the next two years, though not by nearly the amount many activists and former officials have urged.

The U.S. will accept 85,000 refugees from around the world next year, up from 70,000, and that total would rise to 100,000 in 2017, Kerry said at news conference with German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier after they discussed the mass migration of Syrians fleeing their civil war.

Many, though not all, of the additional refugees would be Syrian, American officials have said. Others would come from strife-torn areas of Africa. The White House had previously announced it intended to take in 10,000 additional Syrian refugees over the next year.

At least he states the obvious in this quote:

Asked why the U.S. couldn't take more, Kerry cited post-Sept. 11 screening requirements and a lack of money made available by Congress.

"We're doing what we know we can manage immediately," he said, adding that the U.S. cannot take shortcuts on security checks.

And then states the "why" part with this:

Congressional approval is not required for the Obama administration to expand resettlement slots, though Congress would have to appropriate money to pay for the additional effort, Kerry pointed out. Intelligence officials and Republican lawmakers have expressed concerns that ISIS militants could seek to slip into Europe or the U.S. posing as refugees.

In 2011, two Kentucky residents who had been resettled as Iraqi refugees were accused of being Al Qaeda members. They were convicted of terrorism charges after their fingerprints were linked to roadside bombs in Iraq. That led to new steps to screen refugees, a process that has been criticized as slow and bureaucratic.

So to those that say terror organization are not doing these things, it would seem they are. Maybe not in massive numbers, but it does not take many. I would worry more for European areas at this point, but with that many refugees crossing borders, it is bound to be easily done.

Anywho....like I said, I don't think the majority of refugees are harboring any ill will or bad intent towards their hosting countries, but I am positive there are some, and because it has happened before, typically means it will happen again. Only this time there are millions crossing borders with little in the way of security checks that can be accomplished.

The US of A should take all the refugees since the US created this.
100k in one year right? LOL. We will see maybe 400k this year alone in Sweden thanks to this BS.

Thank you america.

a reply to: yeahsurexxx

First response blame America it gets old shooting you all down. The blame America first crowd, when you go to sleep at night do you check for Uncle Sam underneath your bed? You don't think that the Middle East wars and discriminatory and genocidal evils have been going on now for over 1000 years? Sectarian violence rules the place. But blame America first!

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: yeahsurexxx

First response blame America it gets old shooting you all down. The blame America first crowd, when you go to sleep at night do you check for Uncle Sam underneath your bed? You don't think that the Middle East wars and discriminatory and genocidal evils have been going on now for over 1000 years? Sectarian violence rules the place. But blame America first!

Oh, and the US needs to end middle eastern wars? See, I did not know that.
Tell me again why the US are in Syria? Al-qaida wasn't enough of a proxy gruop?
Ah, ofcourse, Assad, the most evil man alive right? Like Ghadaffi?

Some ppl.

a reply to: yeahsurexxx

Yea so to escape western tyranny and aggression head west, makes sense.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

What criteria will form the basis of refugees being approved for entry?

Who chooses which refugees will be processed?

What entry visas will they be afforded - permanent / temporary / other?

What happens to these refugees once Syria is "fixed" - will they be sent home again?

many, many more questions.

Kerry says US will take 85,000 refugees next year; 100,000 in '17

Yes, US is always promising to offer humanitarian aid, down the road. They also promised to rebuild the regions destroyed by the military where all the refugees are streaming from.

Remember that? We 'helped' Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan. Those poor, oppressed, starving, women and children that were being systematically slaughtered by their respective "Evil Regimes".

Yah, we 'fixed' those places real good.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Hopefully Women and Children first? Then families.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breath free..."

Let's just put our faith in that vetting system, shall we? (sarcasm)

I see RFID chips in their futures...and ours.

originally posted by: TechniXcality
a reply to: yeahsurexxx

First response blame America it gets old shooting you all down. The blame America first crowd, when you go to sleep at night do you check for Uncle Sam underneath your bed? You don't think that the Middle East wars and discriminatory and genocidal evils have been going on now for over 1000 years? Sectarian violence rules the place. But blame America first!

Nothing wrong with blaming the USA for the current refugee crisis, they are in the main responsible for it...supported of course by my own UK government.
Obama spoke recently about 'unintended consequences' with regards to Iraq and the emergence of ISIS. I don't think the idea of 'blaming America first' was his motivation.
The Middle East wars, genocidal evils and sectarian violence over there are none of your business. In all fairness you should be taking in any and all refugees from the countries you have destroyed. Perhaps you should be apologising to them too and offering some sort of reparation.

a reply to: TechniXcality

you know man...it would be rather difficult to blame America for everything...if you just stayed at home. That's the reality of the situation. You guys are acting as if there is no reason what so ever to make the claim...when there is plenty.

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: Vasa Croe

What criteria will form the basis of refugees being approved for entry?

Who chooses which refugees will be processed?

What entry visas will they be afforded - permanent / temporary / other?

What happens to these refugees once Syria is "fixed" - will they be sent home again?

many, many more questions.

Great questions....I can't wait to see how they are addressed by the administration prior to letting the refugees in....

originally posted by: midicon
Perhaps you should be apologising to them too and offering some sort of reparation.

Now why in the world would he want to do that? Why would most of us want to do that?

I didn't choose to go anywhere. Your average citizen didn't choose to go anywhere or do anything to anyone. We are not our government, just as you are not yours.

Those who did not commit the crime should not be liable for an apology or reparations.

Most folks I know think that we should indeed let the world burn as long as the flames aren't licking at our own shores. I tend to agree with that sentiment whole heartedly. Unfortunately the "little people" don't get to make those decisions.

For every dollar of debt we have, I can think of a better way to spend money than on war with anyone. Most sane folks don't want their tax money being spent on blowing things up to begin with, then add insult to injury and spend more tax money to rebuild what we just blew up. Be assured that most all of us see the insanity.

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Hopefully Women and Children first? Then families.

I think that all depends on which ones make it here. It isn't like we are going to go pick them up in their home country. At this point it is more men than anything else coming in and most are leaving the women and children behind with a promise to come back for them.

It's a smaller number than it looks. It's really only 15,000 additional in the first year, and 30,000 in the second. And you can't trust that second year number, because another administration will be in the White House. And there's a good chance they won't even follow through with the first year number.

originally posted by: Kangaruex4Ewe

originally posted by: midicon
Perhaps you should be apologising to them too and offering some sort of reparation.

Now why in the world would he want to do that? Why would most of us want to do that?

I didn't choose to go anywhere. Your average citizen didn't choose to go anywhere or do anything to anyone. We are not our government, just as you are not yours.

Those who did not commit the crime should not be liable for an apology or reparations.

If you are not responsible for your Governments actions, who is? I could say the same but our 'average citizens', put ours in power so in a way we are responsible. At least responsible enough to see the damage our overseas adventures have caused and suck it up when we have to give something back.
If we as a nation destroyed some countries for no reason whatsoever, then we as a nation are duty bound to all those refugees.

Anyone who thinks America alone is to blame for middle eastern issues have obviously never picked up a history book..

The line of countries that have screwed up this region is long and in some cases far pre-dates the USA, we are just the latest to try and deal with a tribal, deeply religious group of people as if they were just like us.. And it doesn't work obviously.

As I have said in other threads and other sites...

Once we fix our homeless issue, our starving and huddled masses problems I am all for helping the world's.

But hoe the heck are we supposed to help others when we can't help ourselves.?

Well, since the USA is the one most reponsible for arming ISIS, right wingers should be happy to take a couple refugees!

You know, for responsibility's and accountability's sake.

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: Vasa Croe

What criteria will form the basis of refugees being approved for entry?
You don't need to know.

Who chooses which refugees will be processed?
Democrats working in Democrat Agencies for a Democrat Administration

What entry visas will they be afforded - permanent / temporary / other?
It doesn't matter, they won't be tracked

What happens to these refugees once Syria is "fixed" - will they be sent home again?
Of course not! What are you thinking? They won't be tracked to begin with.

many, many more questions.

Short answer!

But wait there's more! How are schools funded where you live? Property taxes? State Income Tax? State Sales Tax? A combination of all three? Hang on to your wallet because if your "working" and "working" in the documented economy, you're taxes are going to rise year over year by orders of magnitude.

originally posted by: theMediator
Well, since the USA is the one most reponsible for arming ISIS, right wingers should be happy to take a couple refugees!

You know, for responsibility's and accountability's sake.

Why only right wingers? I don't follow?