Why do people hate Liberals?

[thanatos144]

It is not my job to justify your bent leanings just fight against it.

No, it is your job to consistently amuse us with your incredibly inane posting.

So it is true the mentally deficient is almost always happy.

 

[Samson]

It is not my job to justify your bent leanings just fight against it.

No, it is your job to consistently amuse us with your incredibly inane posting.

So it is true the mentally deficient is almost always happy.

I'll take that as your expert opinion, and appreciate that you even attempted to put any thought into a reply.

 

[Dhara]

It's not irrelevant to me. Study the history of immigraton law.

I can give you a multitude of reasons why we should not accept immigrants. I would like a list from you as to why we should. I like to measure the pros and cons.

Today, we don't have to agree on which president is most responsible for the tide of humanity crashing onto Europe's shores. Maybe you blame George W. Bush for starting a war that brought chaos to Iraq, which spilled into Syria. Maybe you fault Barack Obama for pulling out of Iraq and declining to take out Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

We don't have to agree on which president broke the region. But one or both of them had a hand in the destruction. So we can't very well pretend we have no obligation to the hordes driven from their homes. This is the biggest refugee crisis since World War II, a humanitarian emergency of the highest order, and the U.S. isn't doing enough to ameliorate it.
This Is Why America Should Take More Syrian Refugees

We caused the problem, we have a responsibility to the people affected by it.

I don't care who you want to blame. I haven't done anything to any of these people, and I feel NO obligations to them whatsoever. I notice that you avoided giving me the list of pros. Until you can give me a list of pros that outweigh the cons, then I will stick to my original position on this topic.

It's not my job to convince you of anything. I don't care if you keep your position or not. You're entitled to it. You asked me what reasons I have for wanting to admit refugees into our country as immigrants, and I gave you a major one.

The US once accepted 800,000 Vietnamese refugees. We have accepted only 1500 Syrians.

Were the South Vietnamese blowing holes in our ships or bombing or burning down our embassies and killing as many personnel as they could? Were there terrorists among them determined to explode bombs in crowds of U.S. citizens or send suicide bombers or gunners into U.S. businesses? Were the South Vietnamese trying to get a dirty bomb into the USA or were hijacking airplane to fly into buildings killing thousands of innocent Americans?

I have personally helped settle both Cuban and Vietnamese refugees over the years. And in every case those people wanted to adopt the American way of life, fit in, be Americans, and be a positive influence here. Destroying 'infidels' was the furthest thing from their minds.

Both the State Department and Defense Department spokespersons have admitted we have no way to separate out the terrorists from peaceful people among the Syrian refugees. And that there are thousands of terrorists who would take every advantage given them to get into this country, including posing as peaceful Syrian refugees. You don't see the government proposing that these people be taken in near the White House or placed in neighborhoods where government officials and their families live do you? How many are you willing to accept next door to you when you know it is possible somebody who wants to kill you would likely be among them?

By all means offer humanitarian aid to those who are suffering. Our nation has always done that. But how stupid do we have to be in order to be considered humane? And what do you tell the survivors to justify a policy when it is their loved ones being maimed and murdered?

And while most Muslims would almost surely choose peace over mayhem, there are many thousands of Muslims who will commit mayhem and murder on a large scale here the first opportunity they have to do that.

Muslims in America want the same things that Cuban and Vietnamese refugees want. I think it's a mistake to stereotype Syrians, (Christians among them) as jihadis. Just my opinon. You're entitled to yours, which differs from mine. I don't appreciate you characterizing people who see things differently from you as "stupid". Plenty of people thought America should not have interned Japanese "Americans during WWII. That was not an instance of America at our best, IMO.

We all have loved ones and want the best for our loved ones. I don't want my kids to grow up to be prejudiced against Muslims, because some misinterpret Islam as to suppport bad actions.
Trump completely is playing into ISIL's hands. He's a good recruiter for them. I want people in that part of the world to understand that America is composed of many types of people and we still are united as one America. That is what makes our country great.

 

[thanatos144]

It is not my job to justify your bent leanings just fight against it.

No, it is your job to consistently amuse us with your incredibly inane posting.

So it is true the mentally deficient is almost always happy.

I'll take that as your expert opinion, and appreciate that you even attempted to put any thought into a reply.

Tell me what do windows taste like?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[PK1]

"Liberalism"
As mentioned earlier (post 2950), the USA was founded on this ideology.
Can any conservative justify their contrarian position without exposing their hypocrisy, greed, and intolerance?
.

It was democrats that were the greedy racist not conservatives. .. do learn some history

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

---
I'm not a democrat; i'm a prosocial Libertarian. Besides, your reference to racist democrats were the Southerners who subsequently became republicans after the civil rights movement in the 60's. You're the one in need of a history lesson, as well as political science.

If you are a conservative, you have not justified a contrarian position to Liberalism.
.

So you are a lying democrat.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

---
Were you demonstrating your stupidity or avoiding my challenge?

If you are a conservative, you have not justified a contrarian position to Liberalism.

Do you need a reminder for what Liberalism is?
.

It is not my job to justify your bent leanings just fight against it.

---
I did not ask you to justify Liberalism; it's self evident in the founding of USA.

You reflect a stupid troll. Nothing more to exchange with you.
.

 

[thanatos144]

It was democrats that were the greedy racist not conservatives. .. do learn some history

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

---
I'm not a democrat; i'm a prosocial Libertarian. Besides, your reference to racist democrats were the Southerners who subsequently became republicans after the civil rights movement in the 60's. You're the one in need of a history lesson, as well as political science.

If you are a conservative, you have not justified a contrarian position to Liberalism.
.

So you are a lying democrat.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

---
Were you demonstrating your stupidity or avoiding my challenge?

If you are a conservative, you have not justified a contrarian position to Liberalism.

Do you need a reminder for what Liberalism is?
.

It is not my job to justify your bent leanings just fight against it.

---
I did not ask you to justify Liberalism; it's self evident in the founding of USA.

You reflect a stupid troll. Nothing more to exchange with you.
.

Son your brand of socialist evil has nothing to do with the founding of this country.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[thanatos144]

The founders would be repulsed that we slaughter our babies by the millions.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[ChrisL]

That is irrelevant to me.

It's not irrelevant to me. Study the history of immigraton law.

I can give you a multitude of reasons why we should not accept immigrants. I would like a list from you as to why we should. I like to measure the pros and cons.

Today, we don't have to agree on which president is most responsible for the tide of humanity crashing onto Europe's shores. Maybe you blame George W. Bush for starting a war that brought chaos to Iraq, which spilled into Syria. Maybe you fault Barack Obama for pulling out of Iraq and declining to take out Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

We don't have to agree on which president broke the region. But one or both of them had a hand in the destruction. So we can't very well pretend we have no obligation to the hordes driven from their homes. This is the biggest refugee crisis since World War II, a humanitarian emergency of the highest order, and the U.S. isn't doing enough to ameliorate it.
This Is Why America Should Take More Syrian Refugees

We caused the problem, we have a responsibility to the people affected by it.

I don't care who you want to blame. I haven't done anything to any of these people, and I feel NO obligations to them whatsoever. I notice that you avoided giving me the list of pros. Until you can give me a list of pros that outweigh the cons, then I will stick to my original position on this topic.

It's not my job to convince you of anything. I don't care if you keep your position or not. You're entitled to it. You asked me what reasons I have for wanting to admit refugees into our country as immigrants, and I gave you a major one.

The US once accepted 800,000 Vietnamese refugees. We have accepted only 1500 Syrians.

Well then, I stand with my original statement. This does nothing to help us and only hurts us.

 

[ChrisL]

It is appropriate to let in far more Syrian refugees than we have.That's my opinion.

The inscription on the Statue of Liberty reads:

“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

This is just more emotional gibberish. Means nothing.

 

[ChrisL]

That is irrelevant to me.

It's not irrelevant to me. Study the history of immigraton law.

I can give you a multitude of reasons why we should not accept immigrants. I would like a list from you as to why we should. I like to measure the pros and cons.

Today, we don't have to agree on which president is most responsible for the tide of humanity crashing onto Europe's shores. Maybe you blame George W. Bush for starting a war that brought chaos to Iraq, which spilled into Syria. Maybe you fault Barack Obama for pulling out of Iraq and declining to take out Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

We don't have to agree on which president broke the region. But one or both of them had a hand in the destruction. So we can't very well pretend we have no obligation to the hordes driven from their homes. This is the biggest refugee crisis since World War II, a humanitarian emergency of the highest order, and the U.S. isn't doing enough to ameliorate it.
This Is Why America Should Take More Syrian Refugees

We caused the problem, we have a responsibility to the people affected by it.

I don't care who you want to blame. I haven't done anything to any of these people, and I feel NO obligations to them whatsoever. I notice that you avoided giving me the list of pros. Until you can give me a list of pros that outweigh the cons, then I will stick to my original position on this topic.

---
"I feel NO obligations to them whatsoever."

That sounds really COLD.
:-(

Not very Christian-like, and i'm not even religious. Just have empathy.
.

What makes you think I'm a Christian? Sorry, I feel for the people here in this country who are struggling. I feel sorry for the children in the ME who are innocent, that's about the extent of my empathy for these people.

 

[ChrisL]

As I see images of the children cowering under rubble,
my heart bleeds for them more than the media, or maybe not more;
just the fact that massacred children won't get the coverage

How will we end this bloodshed if the majority does not know it exists? If we are not willing to witness the role we all play?
I see their blood and blown off limbs but don't hear the gun shots, but I wish the bombs were not a sound for children.

I'm not claiming to know about politics or every world event that isn't covered by the media - I don't. I can only imagine the many who pay the consequence for a minority.

There are a hundred and ninety six countries in the world, it seems all I hear about is one; occupied by 22.85 million people living in dirt; I too would want to escape the wasteland.

An article states their are 187 Syrian refugees based in the UK, survivors of torture, violence - mothers and children requiring medical care. How lucky we are to live in this first world not yet torn apart, how can we judge when I have never witnessed an air strike on this street.

I hope one day we welcome you with open arms, that you find something to cling onto other than your parents dead body.

I am sorry that the world makes this an even bigger fight to survive for you.

Shannice Thompson

What does this have to do with the United States? Can't take in every stray dog you see either. That's life. Get used to it.

 

[ChrisL]

Because they will not mind their own business. They will give you their opinion whether you ask for it or not.
More often than not, their mind are closed to any discussion. To them it is their way or the highway.

Who is "them" and "they?" Care to elaborate?

 

[ChrisL]

The one thing about this board that most baffles me is the incredible depth of hatred and contempt for liberals.

The amount of comments from people suggesting all liberals are stupid, anti-patriotic, dumb...you name it. One even suggested liberals don't know what paragraphs are.

I don't get it. And I don't see anything the like the contempt expressed by liberals towards conservatives.

Firstly, the term "liberal" could be used to describe about half of the planet. Like "leftist", it's a fairly cliched catch-all adjective that have little real meaning. It's just too general to be much use.

Secondly, I've met extremely intelligent people from right across the political spectrum - and as many idiots. I've talked to brilliant facists, idiotic conservatives, intelligent communists and brain-dead centrists. I don't see a pattern there at all.

And lastly, why hate liberals when many of the most successful and celebrated administrations have been liberal ones? Were the governments if Clinton, Wilson, FDR, JFK and Truman really so much worse than conservative governments of similar eras?

The constant attacks on liberals seems to me (as an outsider) just a sign of incredible arrogance and conceit - and I would consider attacks on conservatives the same way.

If there is a REAL reason, with facts, for hating liberals - let's hear about it.

From my perusals of the forums, I've never seen so much pathological hatred towards Conservatives. But then, American partisan divisions have reached an all time high. What happened to the "heal the world" mantra espoused by Barack Obama?

Where are all the old style Democrats who seem to have disappeared into the ether? Such as Kennedy, who could become a hawk when needed. Or Clinton, who was prepared to move to the centre, when expedient.

Present day liberals bear no relation to Democrats, IMHO.

---
I would say present day conservatives bear no relation to previous generation Republicans.
.

"Liberalism"
As mentioned earlier (post 2950), the USA was founded on this ideology.
Can any conservative justify their contrarian position without exposing their hypocrisy, greed, and intolerance?
.

That is irrelevant to me.

It's not irrelevant to me. Study the history of immigraton law.

I can give you a multitude of reasons why we should not accept immigrants. I would like a list from you as to why we should. I like to measure the pros and cons.

Today, we don't have to agree on which president is most responsible for the tide of humanity crashing onto Europe's shores. Maybe you blame George W. Bush for starting a war that brought chaos to Iraq, which spilled into Syria. Maybe you fault Barack Obama for pulling out of Iraq and declining to take out Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

We don't have to agree on which president broke the region. But one or both of them had a hand in the destruction. So we can't very well pretend we have no obligation to the hordes driven from their homes. This is the biggest refugee crisis since World War II, a humanitarian emergency of the highest order, and the U.S. isn't doing enough to ameliorate it.
This Is Why America Should Take More Syrian Refugees

We caused the problem, we have a responsibility to the people affected by it.

I don't care who you want to blame. I haven't done anything to any of these people, and I feel NO obligations to them whatsoever. I notice that you avoided giving me the list of pros. Until you can give me a list of pros that outweigh the cons, then I will stick to my original position on this topic.

---
"I feel NO obligations to them whatsoever."

That sounds really COLD.
:-(

Not very Christian-like, and i'm not even religious. Just have empathy.
.

This is part of our problem. Bleeding hearts. You don't make policy based on what "feels good." You make policy based on what is BEST for your country.

 

[PK1]

The one thing about this board that most baffles me is the incredible depth of hatred and contempt for liberals.

The amount of comments from people suggesting all liberals are stupid, anti-patriotic, dumb...you name it. One even suggested liberals don't know what paragraphs are.

I don't get it. And I don't see anything the like the contempt expressed by liberals towards conservatives.

Firstly, the term "liberal" could be used to describe about half of the planet. Like "leftist", it's a fairly cliched catch-all adjective that have little real meaning. It's just too general to be much use.

Secondly, I've met extremely intelligent people from right across the political spectrum - and as many idiots. I've talked to brilliant facists, idiotic conservatives, intelligent communists and brain-dead centrists. I don't see a pattern there at all.

And lastly, why hate liberals when many of the most successful and celebrated administrations have been liberal ones? Were the governments if Clinton, Wilson, FDR, JFK and Truman really so much worse than conservative governments of similar eras?

The constant attacks on liberals seems to me (as an outsider) just a sign of incredible arrogance and conceit - and I would consider attacks on conservatives the same way.

If there is a REAL reason, with facts, for hating liberals - let's hear about it.

From my perusals of the forums, I've never seen so much pathological hatred towards Conservatives. But then, American partisan divisions have reached an all time high. What happened to the "heal the world" mantra espoused by Barack Obama?

Where are all the old style Democrats who seem to have disappeared into the ether? Such as Kennedy, who could become a hawk when needed. Or Clinton, who was prepared to move to the centre, when expedient.

Present day liberals bear no relation to Democrats, IMHO.

---
I would say present day conservatives bear no relation to previous generation Republicans.
.

"Liberalism"
As mentioned earlier (post 2950), the USA was founded on this ideology.
Can any conservative justify their contrarian position without exposing their hypocrisy, greed, and intolerance?
.

It's not irrelevant to me. Study the history of immigraton law.

I can give you a multitude of reasons why we should not accept immigrants. I would like a list from you as to why we should. I like to measure the pros and cons.

Today, we don't have to agree on which president is most responsible for the tide of humanity crashing onto Europe's shores. Maybe you blame George W. Bush for starting a war that brought chaos to Iraq, which spilled into Syria. Maybe you fault Barack Obama for pulling out of Iraq and declining to take out Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

We don't have to agree on which president broke the region. But one or both of them had a hand in the destruction. So we can't very well pretend we have no obligation to the hordes driven from their homes. This is the biggest refugee crisis since World War II, a humanitarian emergency of the highest order, and the U.S. isn't doing enough to ameliorate it.
This Is Why America Should Take More Syrian Refugees

We caused the problem, we have a responsibility to the people affected by it.

I don't care who you want to blame. I haven't done anything to any of these people, and I feel NO obligations to them whatsoever. I notice that you avoided giving me the list of pros. Until you can give me a list of pros that outweigh the cons, then I will stick to my original position on this topic.

---
"I feel NO obligations to them whatsoever."

That sounds really COLD.
:-(

Not very Christian-like, and i'm not even religious. Just have empathy.
.

This is part of our problem. Bleeding hearts. You don't make policy based on what "feels good." You make policy based on what is BEST for your country.

---
What's best for a country, and Earth collectively, is what "feels good" overall ... among ALL participants in this GLOBAL economy of ours nowadays.
.

 

[Foxfyre]

The one thing about this board that most baffles me is the incredible depth of hatred and contempt for liberals.

The amount of comments from people suggesting all liberals are stupid, anti-patriotic, dumb...you name it. One even suggested liberals don't know what paragraphs are.

I don't get it. And I don't see anything the like the contempt expressed by liberals towards conservatives.

Firstly, the term "liberal" could be used to describe about half of the planet. Like "leftist", it's a fairly cliched catch-all adjective that have little real meaning. It's just too general to be much use.

Secondly, I've met extremely intelligent people from right across the political spectrum - and as many idiots. I've talked to brilliant facists, idiotic conservatives, intelligent communists and brain-dead centrists. I don't see a pattern there at all.

And lastly, why hate liberals when many of the most successful and celebrated administrations have been liberal ones? Were the governments if Clinton, Wilson, FDR, JFK and Truman really so much worse than conservative governments of similar eras?

The constant attacks on liberals seems to me (as an outsider) just a sign of incredible arrogance and conceit - and I would consider attacks on conservatives the same way.

If there is a REAL reason, with facts, for hating liberals - let's hear about it.

From my perusals of the forums, I've never seen so much pathological hatred towards Conservatives. But then, American partisan divisions have reached an all time high. What happened to the "heal the world" mantra espoused by Barack Obama?

Where are all the old style Democrats who seem to have disappeared into the ether? Such as Kennedy, who could become a hawk when needed. Or Clinton, who was prepared to move to the centre, when expedient.

Present day liberals bear no relation to Democrats, IMHO.

---
I would say present day conservatives bear no relation to previous generation Republicans.
.

"Liberalism"
As mentioned earlier (post 2950), the USA was founded on this ideology.
Can any conservative justify their contrarian position without exposing their hypocrisy, greed, and intolerance?
.

I can give you a multitude of reasons why we should not accept immigrants. I would like a list from you as to why we should. I like to measure the pros and cons.

Today, we don't have to agree on which president is most responsible for the tide of humanity crashing onto Europe's shores. Maybe you blame George W. Bush for starting a war that brought chaos to Iraq, which spilled into Syria. Maybe you fault Barack Obama for pulling out of Iraq and declining to take out Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

We don't have to agree on which president broke the region. But one or both of them had a hand in the destruction. So we can't very well pretend we have no obligation to the hordes driven from their homes. This is the biggest refugee crisis since World War II, a humanitarian emergency of the highest order, and the U.S. isn't doing enough to ameliorate it.
This Is Why America Should Take More Syrian Refugees

We caused the problem, we have a responsibility to the people affected by it.

I don't care who you want to blame. I haven't done anything to any of these people, and I feel NO obligations to them whatsoever. I notice that you avoided giving me the list of pros. Until you can give me a list of pros that outweigh the cons, then I will stick to my original position on this topic.

---
"I feel NO obligations to them whatsoever."

That sounds really COLD.
:-(

Not very Christian-like, and i'm not even religious. Just have empathy.
.

This is part of our problem. Bleeding hearts. You don't make policy based on what "feels good." You make policy based on what is BEST for your country.

---
What's best for a country, and Earth collectively, is what "feels good" overall ... among ALL participants in this GLOBAL economy of ours nowadays.
.

Oh sure. What "feels good" has created an unhealthy generation hooked on processed foods. What "feels good" has created millions of obsessive gamblers, alcoholics, and other drug addicts. What "feels good" has eroded people's values, encouraged risky behaviors, and created a generation of people who feel no shame in not providing for themselves or their families and looking to others to do that. It is what "feels good" that has prompted people to use coercion, terrorism, and inappropriate actions to force their values and sense of morality on everybody else to their own advantage. And that certainly doesn't include everything that could be on that list.

It depends on WHAT feels good that determines what is best for a country and Earth collectively. And here the modern American conservative is worlds apart from the modern American liberal.

 

[Samson]

Tell me what do windows taste like?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

You're going to hurt yourself: if possible, try not to think so hard before posting.

 

[ChrisL]

The one thing about this board that most baffles me is the incredible depth of hatred and contempt for liberals.

The amount of comments from people suggesting all liberals are stupid, anti-patriotic, dumb...you name it. One even suggested liberals don't know what paragraphs are.

I don't get it. And I don't see anything the like the contempt expressed by liberals towards conservatives.

Firstly, the term "liberal" could be used to describe about half of the planet. Like "leftist", it's a fairly cliched catch-all adjective that have little real meaning. It's just too general to be much use.

Secondly, I've met extremely intelligent people from right across the political spectrum - and as many idiots. I've talked to brilliant facists, idiotic conservatives, intelligent communists and brain-dead centrists. I don't see a pattern there at all.

And lastly, why hate liberals when many of the most successful and celebrated administrations have been liberal ones? Were the governments if Clinton, Wilson, FDR, JFK and Truman really so much worse than conservative governments of similar eras?

The constant attacks on liberals seems to me (as an outsider) just a sign of incredible arrogance and conceit - and I would consider attacks on conservatives the same way.

If there is a REAL reason, with facts, for hating liberals - let's hear about it.

From my perusals of the forums, I've never seen so much pathological hatred towards Conservatives. But then, American partisan divisions have reached an all time high. What happened to the "heal the world" mantra espoused by Barack Obama?

Where are all the old style Democrats who seem to have disappeared into the ether? Such as Kennedy, who could become a hawk when needed. Or Clinton, who was prepared to move to the centre, when expedient.

Present day liberals bear no relation to Democrats, IMHO.

---
I would say present day conservatives bear no relation to previous generation Republicans.
.

"Liberalism"
As mentioned earlier (post 2950), the USA was founded on this ideology.
Can any conservative justify their contrarian position without exposing their hypocrisy, greed, and intolerance?
.

I can give you a multitude of reasons why we should not accept immigrants. I would like a list from you as to why we should. I like to measure the pros and cons.

Today, we don't have to agree on which president is most responsible for the tide of humanity crashing onto Europe's shores. Maybe you blame George W. Bush for starting a war that brought chaos to Iraq, which spilled into Syria. Maybe you fault Barack Obama for pulling out of Iraq and declining to take out Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

We don't have to agree on which president broke the region. But one or both of them had a hand in the destruction. So we can't very well pretend we have no obligation to the hordes driven from their homes. This is the biggest refugee crisis since World War II, a humanitarian emergency of the highest order, and the U.S. isn't doing enough to ameliorate it.
This Is Why America Should Take More Syrian Refugees

We caused the problem, we have a responsibility to the people affected by it.

I don't care who you want to blame. I haven't done anything to any of these people, and I feel NO obligations to them whatsoever. I notice that you avoided giving me the list of pros. Until you can give me a list of pros that outweigh the cons, then I will stick to my original position on this topic.

---
"I feel NO obligations to them whatsoever."

That sounds really COLD.
:-(

Not very Christian-like, and i'm not even religious. Just have empathy.
.

This is part of our problem. Bleeding hearts. You don't make policy based on what "feels good." You make policy based on what is BEST for your country.

---
What's best for a country, and Earth collectively, is what "feels good" overall ... among ALL participants in this GLOBAL economy of ours nowadays.
.

That is incorrect. We have limited resources, as I explained earlier in the thread.

 

[ChrisL]

We used to take immigrants because it was of benefit to the country. That is not the case any longer. We need to look over why we still do things and how they benefit and how they hurt us, our economy, etc.

 

[Dhara]

Is it ok with you if we disagree? It's ok with me. I cannot adopt your way of looking at this situation of the Syrian refugees. It just doesn't fit for me, and I don't think your position benefits our country or our position on the world stage.

IMO, conservatives like Trump are dangerous for America and are terrorists best recruiting tool.

Conservative during the Vietnam War acknowledged that we owed something to the Vietnamese people having ravaged their country. We had a role in Syria's demise, we owe them. Just my opinion, of course.
I acknowledge that you worry about America's security, but if you truly want to combat extremism you don't allow ordinary Syrian citizens to languish in bleak camps abroad.

America needs to do her part. We helped break Syria, now we need to help fix it. And to do so, in order to combat extremism.

Trump and trumpeters don't understand how they play into the terrorists hands. Families cramming into rubber boats to escape extremism have more to think about than militancy.

I don't expect you to change your position. I only seek to have my voice in the conversation and to respectfully disagree whole heartedly with your position, and to help you understand why I think the way I do.

 

[Wake]

A person can believe in every thing you believe in and be a nasty person. A person can disagree with every thing you believe in and be a good person.

Always separate the person from his or her set of beliefs.