“Battening down the hatches is often an impulsive and politically expedient response to terrorism attacks. Predictably, the harrowing scenes of carnage in Paris on Friday are fueling calls to shut down borders and halt the resettlement of Syrian refugees in Western nations.Senator Marco Rubio, a leading Republican presidential candidate, said the United States should stop taking in Syrian refugees. Jeb Bush, another Republican candidate, suggested, idiotically, that it might be O.K. to admit only Christians. Several governors announced that their states would not accept Syrian refugees. Republicans on Capitol Hill are expected this week to push for legislation that would block President Obama’s initiative to admit 10,000 Syrian refugees next year.”
This is a good editorial by the NYT, until the end when they write: “Surely America can offer a smarter and more generous response than Mr. Rubio’s fearmongering. In a televised interview over the weekend, he warned, darkly, that “you can have 1,000 people come in and 999 of them are just poor people fleeing oppression and violence, but one of them is an ISIS fighter.” That’s nonsense. America last year admitted 1,682 Syrian refugees — an embarrassingly small number for the largest refugee crisis since World War II.”
I’m not sure what it means, or that it makes any sense. Rubio’s point is not nonsense, but perhaps it plays into what the terrorists want.
The great points before this paragraph still stand. I will add my two cents. I think the terrorists want the world to stop accepting Syrian refugees. They need these young men and their families in Syria, where they can support the war economy, and be forced to become soldiers and or terrorists. ISIS needs their population, and plenty of out of work young men. For the world to help them escape ISIS, we are depriving ISIS of these people and protecting them, as long as we don’t so mistreat these refugees, as to turn all the young men into future terrorists.