swisssteeze1. There hasen't been any fatal terrorist attacks by refugees in the US since 1980...
2. The "Islamic terrorists" (ISIS's doesn't follow the Quran in many ways... so calling them islamic isen't really correct even though they think they are) threat of using the refugee system is to be taken serious though, i agree.
3. In my eyes that threat is just them having a big mouth to spread fear and chaos in the world. That threat is not enough to ban 7 entire countries from entering america. This "temporary" restriction divided thousands of familys.
4. My point is that the terrorists that have caused a lot of deaths and destruction already were americans NOT refugees. So either control the refugees more strictly or just say "nah i dont like those countrys, they have some bad poeple".
1. There are hundreds of "refugees" under surveillance in the US for ties to terrorism, "refugees" have been arrested for planning acts of terrorism in the United States, one of the reason Obama froze Iraqi immigration in 2011 (If my memory serves me). Furthermore, just because there haven't been any deaths yet is not a reason to not act.
"Refugees" in Europe have already committed acts of terrorism. If an attack occurred in Austria, would you think it wrong for Switzerland to take measure against a similar attack, even though there had not yet been any deaths attributed to "refugees" in Switzerland?
2. The fact remains that ISIS is very much Islamic. Al-Baghdadi earned a bachelor’s degree, a master’s degree and a PhD in Islamic Studies from the Islamic University of Baghdad in Adhamiya, a Baghdad suburb. I would assume he understand his own religion and ideology to a greater extent than you do. You'd be hard-pressed to find anything that ISIS does that is not sanctioned by Islamic texts.
Now you could say that Baghdadi follows a different "interpretation" of Islam. I'd agree, he follows the "prophet" Mohammed's interpretation.
3. They've proven a few times already that they are perfectly capable of carrying out acts of terrorism and mass carnage. That's reason enough to take preemptive precautions. Frankly, all muslim countries should receive a very high level of scrutiny, as the vast majority of organized terrorism is carried out by muslims.
4. No, they were mostly Saudis on students visas. Even so, that is a separate issue, that should also be dealt with.
And lastly, yes, I don't like any of those countries. If you import enough people from countries (and cultures) with problems, you'll get those same problems. No thanks.
And to conclude, do you think immigration should act be a de facto welfare program? What is the point of letting people migrate from these countries?
What benefits do they provide?