Obama's response to the current ISIS situation

Granite_StateYou should probably educate yourself...
"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it"

Ya, this cascade of Middle Eastern turmoil was started thousands of years ago by the United States. Good point dude. Sweet quote too, I think you're qualified to be a pretentious middle school teacher now. Use more ellipses to paint a picture of your frustration and speak in generalities that illustrate the fact that you are a fucking douche white kid who doesn't know shit about the rest of the world. If you have free time after that, go fuck yourself.

Dustin.Ya, this cascade of Middle Eastern turmoil was started thousands of years ago by the United States. Good point dude. Sweet quote too, I think you're qualified to be a pretentious middle school teacher now. Use more ellipses to paint a picture of your frustration and speak in generalities that illustrate the fact that you are a fucking douche white kid who doesn't know shit about the rest of the world. If you have free time after that, go fuck yourself.

Love it! The amount of butthurt in this post is astounding, especially from a member such as yourself. I love how you come out swinging with insults and no actual substance to your post! If you dont believe that the US had a hand in the creation of ISIS you are tragically uninformed. Enjoy your blissful existance

Dustin.Ya, this cascade of Middle Eastern turmoil was started thousands of years ago by the United States. Good point dude. Sweet quote too, I think you're qualified to be a pretentious middle school teacher now. Use more ellipses to paint a picture of your frustration and speak in generalities that illustrate the fact that you are a fucking douche white kid who doesn't know shit about the rest of the world. If you have free time after that, go fuck yourself.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Pg.-291-Pgs.-287-293-JW-v-DOD-and-State-14-812-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf?V=1

onLINEIf JFK airport can screen 53,254,362 people in 2014, why do you think your government cant screen 100,000 refugees?

nothing to do with my beliefs on the situation, but you can't really believe it's the same type of screening, right? They would screen people for ties to ISIS and terrorism, not sneaking a pocket knife into the U.S.

BROLFnothing to do with my beliefs on the situation, but you can't really believe it's the same type of screening, right? They would screen people for ties to ISIS and terrorism, not sneaking a pocket knife into the U.S.

Take this for what it's worth, as it's from Facebook, but the guy writing it is (claims to be) an immigration lawyer and he says the following about the vetting process of refugees:

https://www.facebook.com/BryanScottHicks/posts/1187326084630475?fref=nf

"Most of my friends know I practice Immigration law. As such, I have worked with the refugee community for over two decades. This post is long, but if you want actual information about the process, keep reading.
I can not tell you how frustrating it is to see the misinformation and outright lies that are being perpetuated about the refugee process and the Syrian refugees. So, here is a bit of information from the real world of someone who actually works and deals with this issue.

The refugee screening process is multi-layered and is very difficult to get through. Most people languish in temporary camps for months to years while their story is evaluated and checked.

First, you do not get to choose what country you might be resettled into. If you already have family (legal) in a country, that makes it more likely that you will go there to be with family, but other than that it is random. So, you can not simply walk into a refugee camp, show a document, and say, I want to go to America. Instead, the UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees) works with the local authorities to try to take care of basic needs. Once the person/family is registered to receive basic necessities, they can be processed for resettlement. Many people are not interested in resettlement as they hope to return to their country and are hoping that the turmoil they fled will be resolved soon. In fact, most refugees in refugee events never resettle to a third country. Those that do want to resettle have to go through an extensive process.

Resettlement in the U.S. is a long process and takes many steps. The Refugee Admissions Program is jointly administered by the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) in the Department of State, the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and offices within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) within DHS conducts refugee interviews and determines individual eligibility for refugee status in the United States.

We evaluate refugees on a tiered system with three levels of priority.

First Priority are people who have suffered compelling persecution or for whom no other durable solution exists. These individuals are referred to the United States by UNHCR, or they are identified by the U.S. embassy or a non-governmental organization (NGO).

Second priority are groups of "special concern" to the United States. The Department of State determines these groups, with input from USCIS, UNHCR, and designated NGOs. At present, we prioritize certain persons from the former Soviet Union, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, Iran, Burma, and Bhutan.

Third priority are relatives of refugees (parents, spouses, and unmarried children under 21) who are already settled in the United States may be admitted as refugees. The U.S.-based relative must file an Affidavit of Relationship (AOR) and must be processed by DHS.

Before being allowed to come to the United States, each refugee must undergo an extensive interviewing, screening, and security clearance process conducted by Regional Refugee Coordinators and overseas Resettlement Support Centers (RSCs). Individuals generally must not already be firmly resettled (a legal term of art that would be a separate article). Just because one falls into the three priorities above does not guarantee admission to the United States.

The Immigration laws require that the individuals prove that they have a "well-founded fear," (another legal term which would be a book.) This fear must be proved regardless of the person's country, circumstance, or classification in a priority category. There are multiple interviews and people are challenged on discrepancies. I had a client who was not telling the truth on her age and the agency challenged her on it. Refugees are not simply admitted because they have a well founded fear. They still must show that they are not subject to exclusion under Section 212(a) of the INA. These grounds include serious health matters, moral or criminal matters, as well as security issues. In addition, they can be excluded for such things as polygamy, misrepresentation of facts on visa applications, smuggling, or previous deportations. Under some circumstances, the person may be eligible to have the ground waived.

At this point, a refugee can be conditionally accepted for resettlement. Then, the RSC sends a request for assurance of placement to the United States, and the Refugee Processing Center (RPC) works with private voluntary agencies (VOLAG) to determine where the refugee will live. If the refugee does have family in the U.S., efforts will be made to resettle close to that family.

Every person accepted as a refugee for planned admission to the United States is conditional upon passing a medical examination and passing all security checks. Frankly, there is more screening of refugees than ever happens to get on an airplane. Of course, yes, no system can be 100% foolproof. But if that is your standard, then you better shut down the entire airline industry, close the borders, and stop all international commerce and shipping. Every one of those has been the source of entry of people and are much easier ways to gain access to the U.S. Only upon passing all of these checks (which involve basically every agency of the government involved in terrorist identification) can the person actually be approved to travel.

Before departing, refugees sign a promissory note to repay the United States for their travel costs. This travel loan is an interest-free loan that refugees begin to pay back six months after arriving in the country.

Once the VOLAG is notified of the travel plans, it must arrange for the reception of refugees at the airport and transportation to their housing at their final destination.
This process from start to finish averages 18 to 24 months, but I have seen it take years.

The reality is that about half of the refugees are children, another quarter are elderly. Almost all of the adults are either moms or couples coming with children. Each year the President, in consultation with Congress, determines the numerical ceiling for refugee admissions. For Fiscal Year (FY) 2016, the proposed ceiling is 85,000. We have been averaging about 70,000 a year for the last number of years. (Source: Refugee Processing Center)

Over one-third of all refugee arrivals (35.1 percent, or 24,579) in FY 2015 came from the Near East/South Asia—a region that includes Iraq, Iran, Bhutan, and Afghanistan.
Another third of all refugee arrivals (32.1 percent, or 22,472) in FY 2015 came from Africa.
Over a quarter of all refugee arrivals (26.4 percent, or 18,469) in FY 2015 came from East Asia — a region that includes China, Vietnam, and Indonesia. (Source: Refugee Processing Center)

Finally, the process in Europe is different. I would be much more concerned that terrorists are infiltrating the European system because they are not nearly so extensive and thorough in their process."

nocturnalhttp://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/11/tsa-airport-screeners-ability-to-detect-weapons-declared-pitiful/

With that stupid post set aside we're not screening them for bringing water bottles and knifes into this country.

With that stupid response aside, with your logic, any of these refuges can just fly to the states as a tourist and get through these lax screening processes and commit a terrorist act. You should we be scared of tourists with middle eastern decent as you have no faith in your countries screening processes.

I used that comparison (maybe stupid, but valid imo) to give you guys an idea of how easy it will be for your government to screen these refugees. If you think otherwise please lets discuss your concerns with the screening process besides water bottles and pocket knifes.

onLINEWith that stupid response aside, with your logic, any of these refuges can just fly to the states as a tourist and get through these lax screening processes and commit a terrorist act. You should we be scared of tourists with middle eastern decent as you have no faith in your countries screening processes.

I used that comparison (maybe stupid, but valid imo) to give you guys an idea of how easy it will be for your government to screen these refugees. If you think otherwise please lets discuss your concerns with the screening process besides water bottles and pocket knifes.

You wrote a lot in that comment but you didn't really say anything about my post you just rambled.

I'm not quite sure how you think it'll be super easy to screen a bunch of people from a foreign country we had the same problem during Vietnam. It's not like we can just check their facebook.

nocturnalYou wrote a lot in that comment but you didn't really say anything about my post you just rambled.

I'm not quite sure how you think it'll be super easy to screen a bunch of people from a foreign country we had the same problem during Vietnam. It's not like we can just check their facebook.

Exactly, he seems to think they'll just walk through a metal detector like at the airport. They aren't similar screening processes at all. Comparing those numbers was completely irrelevant.

Onenerdykid explains the screening process above in great detail.

I ofcourse would expect better screening than just metal detectors for these refugees. My original post was to just put it into perspective for OP, Screening 100000 refugees properly should be no problem for the US government. I'm sorry if you didn't like my comparison to airport screening. If you can think of a better comparison Im all ears. The Vietnam war in 1955 is not a better comparison, technology and screening people have come along way since 1955.

Lets forget about the airport screening numbers vs refugees. Lets go back to the original concern.

OP, and I assume Nocturnal and Fatmilf don't think the US government can properly screen these refugees.

Can you guys say why you think this? Why do you think there is no way to properly screen these refugees?

onLINEOP, and I assume Nocturnal and Fatmilf don't think the US government can properly screen these refugees.

Can you guys say why you think this? Why do you think there is no way to properly screen these refugees?

I'm not saying there isn't a way, I think it would be very extensive and time consuming. I would say a better comparison would be background checks involved with being employed by a government agency. My good friend's cousin was applying to be in the CIA and they interviewed his childhood neighbors. The concern isn't about objects they would bring. The concern would be that a terrorist would be let in to the U.S. and to prevent that, extensive research would have to be done on these individuals. I'm not saying letting in refugees puts us at great risk for letting in terrorists; it's just that with everything that's happened recently, people would be quite scared to let in refugees without an extensive screening process.

Your comparison to government employee screening is good and likely more similar to the refugee screening process already in place.

There's no reason for me to copy and paste onenerdykids post above. There are screening processes in place already. Here's another link with a very attractive very easy to understand visual for you guys.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/11/20/infographic-screening-process-refugee-entry-united-states

My concern would not be isis members sneaking in as refugees, but coming into the US as regular travellers/tourists or extremists that are already in the US.

onLINEWhy do you think there is no way to properly screen these refugees?

Because Syria itself does not have a lot of information on these people, and on top of that, we don't have the best relationship with Syria as it is. Do you think the Syrian government monitors and keeps records on it's people even near the extent the US govt does?

Israel wants a destabilized Middle East and it wants western powers to destroy its enemies for it.

Israel wants a weak Shia crescent (Iran-Lebanon-Syria) because it doesn't want Iran and the Shi'ite nations to exist as a regional power. This is why Syria and Lebanon must be destroyed, leaving Iran politically and militarily isolated from its fellow Shia regional allies.
Israel and Saudi Arabia often work together against Iran. Hence why Israel and Saudi Arabia have secret agreements to allow Israeli jets to use Saudi airspace to hit Iran in case war ever breaks out.

Sunnis killing Shi'ites and Sunnis killing other Sunnis is always okay with Israel.
Middle East chaos guarantees an excuse for US money to flow into Israel's pockets for 'defense' purposes.

Israel absolutely benefits from ISIS.

Moreover, a few years ago the US (now admittedly) and Israel (almost certainly) started funding rebel groups in the Middle East mainly in order to topple Bashar Assad who had already been weakened during protests and insurrection during the Arab Spring.Howeve, DoD documents from 2006 have been leaked proving that the US government as far backs 2006, before the ‘Arab Spring’ wanted to create a Salifist state in Eastern Syria.

Outside funding and weapons shipments allowed ISIS to coalesce as a semi-organized force and repeated "mistakes" dropped many more US weapons and supplies into their hands.

The US spent a year+ bombing them to little effect because after all, they are still trying to topple Assad. The Russians offer help and accomplish more in a month, with a smaller force than the US and allies did in a year because they target ISIS and other anti-Assad forces, not empty dessert and abandoned bases. Remember, whether or not the bomb accomplishes anything, the bomb maker still gets paid.

For those of you ITT requesting evidence: It is an established fact, even without solid evidence the fact that the political goals and actions of ISIS, Saudi Arabia, US, Israel, and Turkey are all extremely similar would be a dead giveaway, should be a dead giveaway. Yes, ISIS has an agenda but so doesn’t the US, Israel and Russia.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1oEoCRkLRI

https://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Pg.-291-Pgs.-287-293-JW-v-DOD-and-State-14-812-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/21/world/middleeast/suspicions-run-deep-in-iraq-that-cia-and-the-islamic-state-are-united.html?_r=1

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/21/world/la-fg-cia-syria-20130622

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/10/us-syria-crisis-rebels-usa-idUSBRE9290FI20130310

http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article147173383/Gab-die-Linke-der-PKK-geheime-Regierungsdokumente.html

http://rudaw.net/english/middleeast/iraq/171120144

kurdishquestion.com/index.php/kurdistan/west-kurdistan/ypj-commander-isis-attacked-with-turkey-s-assistance/729-ypj-commander-isis-attacked-with-turkey-s-assistance.html

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/iraq-planes-some-countries-delivering-weapons-isis-violating-airspace-1475284

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/31/combat-terror-end-support-saudi-arabia-dictatorships-fundamentalis

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/11/24/severe-blow-al-qaeda-suicide-bomber-takes-out-leadership-key-isis-brigade/?intcmp=hpbt3

No idea if that is true since it is Fox, but I would love it if it was true.

As far back as 2006, under declassified DoD documents before the Arab Spring. Whats up with the down votes, it is evidently clear that the Obama administration and as far back as the Bush administration wanted the presence of a Salafist movement in Syria, i.e ISIS. It makes absolutely no sense for the US to bomb ISIS, it does not support there foreign interests. Which have always been and always will be to undermine the legitimate government in Syria, oust Assad by any means necessary and put a puppet government in its place.

boots on the ground, weaken our PC rules of engagement, and let our boys go to work on these clowns.

lampboots on the ground, weaken our PC rules of engagement, and let our boys go to work on these clowns.

Yeah lets send another wave of Americans to die resolving a problem we are partially responsible for.



I just find it quite funny how quick conservatives are to send more troops to the middle east.
Why so hasty to get more Americans killed Faux News?

As hard as we try, you can't kill an idea with bullets and bombs. Stop people from joining Isis, show what a suicide bomber looks like after the fact, scare people away from Isis and you destroy its roots.

Then again, we gotta feed that military industrial complex

Granite_StateI just find it quite funny how quick conservatives are to send more troops to the middle east.
Why so hasty to get more Americans killed Faux News?

Because otherwise you liberal morons will get us killed over here.

Or did you miss the news today from San Bernardino?

CampeadorBecause otherwise you liberal morons will get us killed over here.

Or did you miss the news today from San Bernardino?

Gotta fuel the conservative warmachine

Oh but I love how you are jumping to conclusions the day this shooting happened. Is it because his name was Syed? If the shooters had Arab or Muslim ties its onviously terrorism right? Definitely linked to ISIS correct?

Hey maybe if there were better gun regulations this wouldnt have happened considering the AR-15's used were purchased legally in the U.S.

Also not liberal, libertarian. But I like when you call me liberal, it makes me feel special ;)

Granite_StateGotta fuel the conservative warmachine

Oh but I love how you are jumping to conclusions the day this shooting happened. Is it because his name was Syed? If the shooters had Arab or Muslim ties its onviously terrorism right? Definitely linked to ISIS correct?

Hey maybe if there were better gun regulations this wouldnt have happened considering the AR-15's used were purchased legally in the U.S.

Also not liberal, libertarian. But I like when you call me liberal, it makes me feel special ;)

Libertarian? Spare me your smoke and mirrors, you're in a Special Olympics race to the finish with SJW and Fluffy to see who's the most left-wing. A libertarian in favor of gun bans? That's a tough sell. Explain how any gun regulations that you propose would have prevented this Muslim couple from getting guns, unless of course that means banning gun sales to all Muslims (that's a gun regulation I can support).

Oh, by the way...

JUST IN: #SanBernardino suspects were looking at ISIS propaganda online, source tells CBS News https://t.co/VCykxixRWA

— CBS News (@CBSNews) December 3, 2015

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2015/12/03/cia-isis-san-bernardino-shooting/


It must really suck to be wrong all the time.

CampeadorLibertarian? Spare me your smoke and mirrors, you're in a Special Olympics race to the finish with SJW and Fluffy to see who's the most left-wing. A libertarian in favor of gun bans? That's a tough sell. Explain how any gun regulations that you propose would have prevented this Muslim couple from getting guns, unless of course that means banning gun sales to all Muslims (that's a gun regulation I can support).

Oh, by the way...

JUST IN: #SanBernardino suspects were looking at ISIS propaganda online, source tells CBS News https://t.co/VCykxixRWA

— CBS News (@CBSNews) December 3, 2015

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2015/12/03/cia-isis-san-bernardino-shooting/


It must really suck to be wrong all the time.

No I can assure you I'm most certainly libertarian. You really do have incredibly poor reading comprehension don't you? Here's a challenge you nitwit, find anywhere in my post where I say I'm in favor of gun bans.

Also, you are inadvertently furthering my point, the information you got was later on, hours and hours after you made that mind-numbingly dumb first post. Oh, by the way, I already read that article and in no way does it say they were looking at pro-ISIS propaganda. In fact, all there really is in there is one man's opinion about the situation. One man. A security analyst for CNN nonetheless. And it was stated they used ISIS tactics. What are ISIS tactics by the way? Do they fight in a way that is so different from any other group that it is distinguishable from what happened yesterday? How does this shooting differ from the 350+ shooting we've had this year?

It must suck being a shortsighted bigot all the time doesn't it?

Granite_StateNo I can assure you I'm most certainly libertarian. You really do have incredibly poor reading comprehension don't you? Here's a challenge you nitwit, find anywhere in my post where I say I'm in favor of gun bans.

Also, you are inadvertently furthering my point, the information you got was later on, hours and hours after you made that mind-numbingly dumb first post. Oh, by the way, I already read that article and in no way does it say they were looking at pro-ISIS propaganda. In fact, all there really is in there is one man's opinion about the situation. One man. A security analyst for CNN nonetheless. And it was stated they used ISIS tactics. What are ISIS tactics by the way? Do they fight in a way that is so different from any other group that it is distinguishable from what happened yesterday? How does this shooting differ from the 350+ shooting we've had this year?

It must suck being a shortsighted bigot all the time doesn't it?

The sources were meant to be separate, two pieces of evidence to support my point.
Just about all new details from this case point towards Islamic terrorism.

But for a challenged individual like yourself (in more ways that one), the truth constitutes "bigotry" and is "mind-numbingly dumb".

You claim to be a Libertarian, and now I believe you, but I realize it's of the left-wing anarcho-syndicalist persuasion (like Noam Chomsky). There's no other way to reconcile your tacit support for gun regulations (and Bernie Sanders).

The number of walls of text in this thread is dumb I'm so over these threads

Obama's behavior has been disgusting.


Honestly I loved the fact that when he came into office it was a sign to the rest of the world that we were truly democratic and a non white person could hold the highest office. But every time there is a muslim terrorist attack this asshole refuses to denounce it as such.


Trump has the election locked up because noone else has the balls to take a hard line on muslim terrorists.

PeppermillRenoObama's behavior has been disgusting.


Honestly I loved the fact that when he came into office it was a sign to the rest of the world that we were truly democratic and a non white person could hold the highest office. But every time there is a muslim terrorist attack this asshole refuses to denounce it as such.


Trump has the election locked up because noone else has the balls to take a hard line on muslim terrorists.

" ISIS does not care about mainstream opinion among Sunni scholars. They're not trying to curry favor with them — in fact, for ISIS it's a badge of honor if mainstream Sunni scholars reject their doctrine. They would point to it as proof that they are on the right path, because in their eyes all of these traditional scholars have been bought off by the state and are just repeating the state's talking points.
ISIS, in some ways, does horrible things to deliberately provoke a debate about the "Islamicisity" of their actions, and they welcome the ensuing argument that breaks out."

http://www.vox.com/2015/11/18/9755478/isis-islam

lampboots on the ground, weaken our PC rules of engagement, and let our boys go to work on these clowns.

I'd first try too cooperate with Russia, who is trying to glass the entire dessert that doesn't belong to Assad.