Martin O'Malley Calls for U.S. to Accept 65,000 Syrian Refugees.Newsweek

[elleng]

Last edited Fri Sep 4, 2015, 05:54 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.newsweek.com/martin-omalley-65000-syrian-refugees-368833

O’Malley Urges U.S. to Welcome 65k Syrian Refugees.Bloomberg
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-09-04/o-malley-urges-u-s-to-welcome-65k-syrian-refugees

O'Malley: 'We must do more' for Syrian refugees.Hill
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/252795-omalley-we-must-do-more-for-syrian-refugees

O'Malley calls for U.S. to receive at least 65,000 Syrian refugees.BaltSun
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bs-md-omalley-refugees-20150904-story.html

O’Malley calls for U.S. to accept 65,000 Syrian refugees by next year.WaPo
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/09/04/omalley-calls-for-u-s-to-accept-65000-syrian-refugees-by-next-year/

[bigtree]

1. this is getting a lot of coverage

k&r

[Agnosticsherbet]

2. Good idea, but what is his solution to the Refugee crises.

People are fleeing their homes for a reason.

What does he suggest we do about the causes of the humanitarian crises?

[yellowcanine]

9. When a person is lying in the road bleeding you treat them and get them to a safe place.

Then you concern yourself with why they were lying in the road bleeding in the first place. The refugees are going to keep climbing into boats and drowning. That is something which can be prevented immediately with the right kind of effort. The conflict which made them refugees is not so easily solved because we cannot undo history, for one thing.

[JustAnotherGen]

13. Very well said

And if he wins - it's going to be way too late to stop the immediate bleeding.

He's asking us to help people in need now.

Let the government we have to include a US Senator running for President figure the details out later.

[Agnosticsherbet]

32. Actually we can do more than one thing at a time.

So your analogy doesn't work.

We need to address the refugees now, but if we don't turn our minds and efforts to fixing the cause, 65,000 will just not be enough.

[FormerRepublicanNow]

16. How do we know they are real refugees and not terrorists

making believe they are refugees. Welcome to the US, what you have no papers, well that is to be expected since you are a poor refugee.

[AgingAmerican]

18. Refugees are not blindly allowed into the US

There is an exhaustive process they must undergo, and if they do not past muster they do not get in.

If 'Terrorists' want to come to this country they will do so legally, on commercial jetliners, bearing passports with fat bank accounts. No need to 'sneak in'.

[arcane1]

26. How do you know the people flying into every airport aren't terrorists?

[dorkzilla]

35. Um, no offense but that remark makes your username seem like you need to delete a word nt

[passiveporcupine]

39. Maybe you are too new here

to get away with this without a sarcasm tag?

[Agnosticsherbet]

62. We take care of the humanitarian needs before we worry about that.

If we do nothing because we assume some might be terrorists then we are ISIS, also.

[JustAnotherGen]

48. That question needs to be answered by

President Obama, 100 current US Senators, and 435 Members of the HOR.

They are bunch of Washington DC insider smarty pants - let them do the job they get paid to do before we start asking Presidential candidates who aren't in any of those three positions to enter and co-sponsor bills in the House and Senate.

Let Ted Cruz, Bernie Sanders, and Lindsey Graham answer that question.

It's their job.

[Agnosticsherbet]

63. It is also important that those running for President give their own ideas.

part of the crises is cause by our wars in the Middle East, part of it is due to the revolutions that moved through African and the middle east as people tried to make their government more democratic. Part of it is about how global warming is affecting these regions.

[jberryhill]

3. There was a young man on the CBS news last night...

...who said that he worked with the Americans in Afghanistan for six years and that his family had become a target.

How many of these folks are people who took a gamble on supporting the US, and we didn't have the decency to prioritize getting them out?

[jwirr]

28. Like so many of the Veitnam refugees.

[left-of-center2012]

4. No

The USA has it's own problems, and we have our own homeless, hungry and unemployed citizens.
There are 196 countries in the world today.
Let other countries, such as wealthy Saudi Arabia, solve it.
Charity begins at home.

[elleng]

6. Sorry, we started it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century
we should play a big role in helping ameliorate the resulting distress. 'SOLVING IT' is something else entirely.

[jwirr]

31. We started it and now we want other countries to

fix it? Those other countries told bush II to stay out of it and they mostly refused to go in with us. The problem is that this is not going to be fixed easily. This is our problem.

We got by with poppy's war and we should have stopped there but no, TPTB made money off of poppy's war and so they wanted to fight some more.

They totally destroyed the ME and today we are still fighting the same damn wars. These refugees are the victims of our actions.

Yes, we have our own problems - caused by the same PTB who started this mess. Raise the taxes on the rich - especially the rich who made money profiteering and help the victims of the war.

One reason why we are talking about taking refugees is because many of those other countries you are talking about are already taking more than they can. They have been for a long time.

What is going to happen is that the economies of the world are going to start feeling the effects of this war and we will be lucky if any part of the world escapes the crash. And it could get a lot worse than just an economic problem.

[Faux pas]

5. We're not

feeding, clothing or housing all of OUR OWN people. Is it our responsibility to take in EVERY refugee out there? I don't get it.

Blast away.

[elleng]

7. We STARTED it,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century
we should play a big role in helping ameliorate the resulting distress.

[yellowcanine]

10. Not every refugee, just our fair share. And we did contribute to the problem in the first place.

So we do have a responsibility to contribute to the solution.

[dorkzilla]

36. 100% agreed

Europe cannot shoulder this responsibility alone. Our horrible decisions lead to this point. Plus we NEED to help our allies deal with this situation.

We don’t want another SS St Louis on our hands do we? Granted, O’Malley is suggesting we take a large number on but its a large number of people running from a situation of our making.

The picture of that little boy washed up on the beach is haunting my mind at every moment.

I agree with you 100%.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Good. We should be decent, compassionate, people.

[restorefreedom]

11. glad to see him taking a lead on this

personallly, i think they should drain the assets of cheney, bush, wolfowitz, rumsfeld, and all the other pnac scumbags to pay for the care of these people

[elleng]

14. Yes, restorefreedom,

I've been referring people to this site, those who've forgotten, that is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century

[restorefreedom]

15. glad you are reminding people of this evil

i still have to keep from wretching when i think of any of them and their master plan.

[Freddie Stubbs]

12. The Arab world (particularity) the gulf states need to pick up the slack:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/09/04/the-arab-worlds-wealthiest-nations-are-doing-next-to-nothing-for-syrias-refugees/

[jwirr]

34. Is there any country in the Arab world that is safe now?

[Freddie Stubbs]

66. Safe from what?

[jwirr]

67. Safe from the effect of war.

[AgingAmerican]

17. It ain't that easy

There is a long, long process for refugees and asylees to get into the USA. Each must undergo exhaustive FBI background checks and obtain Social Security numbers before they are allowed to even set foot in this country. I don't see that process changing for this crisis, especially given the fact they are fleeing the Middle East, which automatically makes the USA paranoid of them.

[FSogol]

19. We took in a fair number of Vietnamese refugees and it wasn't a "long, long process"

[AgingAmerican]

21. That was pre 9-11

They now must undergo exhaustive FBI background checks before they are allowed to set foot in this country.

[FSogol]

23. Remind me, which group of immigrants or refugees caused 9/11?

[AgingAmerican]

25. 9/11 terrorists came in legally on commercial jets

Bearing passports, wearing designer watches, with fat bank accounts.

I interned with the International Rescue Committee in the mid 2000s, settling refugees from Burma Bhutan, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. We had to work within the system that was in place. Just bringing in one refugee or asylee was a daunting process, and most of them languished in refugee camps for years as this process played out. I'm not saying it is impossible to bring in that many, I am saying it would take many years within the present system.

[jberryhill]

30. Well, it's a good thing these folks are trying to get away from those folks

[elleng]

22. Right, there are surely ways to address emergency situations, FSogol,

'just' takes the will.

[jwirr]

37. That long process was ONLY removed for the plane

load of babies that were already in the process of adoption in the last days of the war. Planes were loaded with boxes used as cribs and our mash nurses took care of them as they were flown to the USA.

Other evacuees were taken to areas like the Philippines to await clearance until they were allowed to come in.

I spent that last day of the war working from the congressman's office I was working in to get the immigrations department to allow us to bring the babies in. And it was only babies. There are photos of the planes before they took off.

If the rules were later dropped for others I do not remember it.

[FSogol]

40. The Lutheran Church sponsered many refugees at the end of the war

From their website:

1975 The defeat of South Vietnam by North Vietnam triggers a flood of refugees from Southeast Asia. Within weeks LIRS goes from a four-staffer operation to one with more than 100 staff members. LIRS oversees the resettlement of 15,900 refugees by the end of the year—an all-time annual high.
Passage and subsequent extensions of the Indochina Migration and Refugee Assistance Act authorize a large federal role in funding resettlement.

My parents' church sponsored 2 refugee families via this program.

Actually, their timeline is really good reading, they've been helping displaced people since 1939.
http://lirs.org/our-work/about-us/historyfaith/

and a sneaky plug for my candidate: from 2012: "LIRS helps uphold the Maryland DREAM Act."

[jwirr]

43. That is great. I belong to that church also and I hope

that they become involved here. I suspect a lot of those babies on those planes were being adopted through the church as well. I know the families in my small community were sponsored like your family did.

This has been going on for a long time. I remember after WWII some of our families helped sponsor German families. We were probably one of a few as we were a American German community.

We will work this out but I only hope we can find some way to calm things down in the ME so that the people can stop running in fear and life can start over for everyone over there.

What a hornets nest we have created all because of greed.

[FSogol]

20. K&R. Proud of O'Malley. He'd make an awesome President. n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

24. Particularly after seeing the picture of the toddler on the beach, im inclined to agree with Martin.

Leaving aside the fact that we share a measure of culpability for the current chaos in the region, there is a humanitarian imperative.

No, we cant take everyone. But 65K is doable and really a drop in the immigration bucket.

I concur with O'Malley.

[tularetom]

27. If Iceland can take 11,000, its the least we can do

http://www.cbc.ca/news/trending/facebook-syria-refugees-group-iceland-1.3213296

Especially since we had a lot to do with creating the conditions that made them refugees in the first place.

[dorkzilla]

38. THIS!

If ICELAND can take 11k we can certainly take 65k!

I can’t believe what I’m reading on this thread.

[glinda]

41. Here is a US FB page for this cause.

https://www.facebook.com/openheartsus?ref=profile

[glinda]

44. WH Petition here:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/authorize-and-resettle-syrian-refugees-us

[dorkzilla]

45. Thank you! nt

[dorkzilla]

46. Glinda, would you happen to know..

I know google is my friend but company is about to arrive and I was wondering if you knew if there was a list for people who are willing to sponsor/host some of these families. I have 2 unused bedrooms I would happily share.

Thanks in advance, and if you don’t have the info don’t worry - I will look it up later. I’m not about making people do stuff for me that I could do

[glinda]

65. All I know of is this FB link I gave. Seems the

US appears to be not really stepping forward much????? Don't know. Good luck!

[Truprogressive85]

29. Much respect to Gov. O'Malley

I'm shocked by some of responses

1. Someone said what if they are terrorists- besides the blatant racism , maybe you should join the republican party you bigot

2. To those who are opposed - do you feel the same when Hispanics come to our border ?

3. When my fellow human being is need we should do what we can to help them out.

[JustAnotherGen]

47. This is our country on O'Malley

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/07/15/after-criticizing-white-house-over-unaccompanied-minors-martin-omalley-said-dont-send-them-to-maryland-site/

A senior O'Malley administration official acknowledged the governor's comments last Friday irritated senior White House officials, prompting the call from Munoz to O'Malley.

But the governor's press secretary emphasized O'Malley has offered Obama administration officials his state's assistance in dealing with the crisis.

“Governor O’Malley has been discussing this issue for weeks with the White House, he has helped identify ways Maryland can assist with this humanitarian crisis, and he has directed the Maryland Department of Human Resources to take the steps necessary to find licensed providers who might be able to care for these children in Maryland," Smith said.

Notice - he didn't want the children from Central America last summer at a former Army Reserve center - in detention. He wanted them safe and snug as a bug in homes - being cared for as children should be.

Your points:
1. ITA and shame on the person who wrote it.
2. Would be interested in their thoughts on our own issue last summer.
3. That's what America needs to be.

Your subject line - respect for O'Malley's CORE and consistent beliefs is why I'm voting for him.

This isn't political points for him - win, lose, draw - he believes what he believes and stands on his beliefs.

[fbc]

33. The US caused the problem - they should help solve it.

Good for O'Malley

[bigtree]

49. kick

[HereSince1628]

50. Why 67K? How was that number chosen?

The multiple conflicts have displaced millions. How does anyone settle on a number of refugees that should be accepted?

[JustAnotherGen]

52. Read his statement

Watch some of the news cycle out there -


His statement -
“I support the call from humanitarian and refugee organizations for the United States to accept at least 65,000 Syrian refugees next year,” he said in a statement Friday. “If Germany — a country with one-fourth our population — can accept 800,000 refugees this year, certainly we — the nation of immigrants and refugees — can do more.”


We look less than exceptional when we've taken in 1500 Syrian refugees with an average vetting time of 18 months.

[HereSince1628]

53. If Germany does it we can do it really doesn't address the question of the number

Rather, it suggests that with our pride on the line, the US with an economy bigger than Germany's ought to be able to do this. That merely seems to suggest, in a manner that is somewhat shaming, that we have the capacity to do much more.

But how does one pick 67K as the size of the more we should do?

I would think it would in some way involve consideration of the size of the Syrian disaster relative to the US capacity and need to take in refugees from all manner of refugee generating catastrophes across the planet.

If the US GDP is still larger than that of Germany, then one might think the over-all US effort for all refugees would be something bigger than what Germany is doing. OUr total refugee acceptance -ought- to be bigger than Germany's but, none of that is provided, so the 67K number seems without reference.

[JustAnotherGen]

54. Might be a good question for Senator Sanders

IE Could his Senate aides define a number and could he co-sponsor a bill that explores the issue in depth?

[HereSince1628]

55. Maybe, I'm not opposed to such, but on issue, O'Malley came up with the number.

I would think he or his staff did give some sort of consideration to arrive at it. They might just explain what they did.

What's presented is a bit apples and oranges sort of reasoning: Germany's overall effort for refugees of all kinds (apples) was 800k the US should do 67k for Syrian refugees (oranges)

Finding an unknown in the comparison of two ratios requires 3 pieces of information. Typically something like A/B = ?/D In this case for Germans we know Germanys denominator, we don't know it's numerator. For Americans we know one suggested numerator and are not provided a denominator.

What we have looks like ?/B = ~C/? From that it's not possible to make the comparison between German and American effort.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

51. Match Germany.

I just read elsewhere that they're talking about taking 800k. Surely the US could do the same.

[HereSince1628]

56. The 800k number I saw seemed to be for Germany's acceptance of refugees from all disasters

Are you sure you saw the 800K number as Germany's acceptance of only Syrian refugees?

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

57. No, but I'd bet we don't accept 800k from all disasters a year either. nt

[HereSince1628]

58. Maybe, I suppose we dont count undocumented immigrants from Latin America as refugees

which many of them claim to be.

In 2013 there were 600K apprehensions of people trying to enter the US.

If we included undocumented refugees, our numbers may be similar.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

59. I don't think you can count them as 'refugees' when if we catch them, we deport them.

If we had a policy of leaving undocumented folks alone, you might have a point there.

[HereSince1628]

60. I think we are faced with, and on the verge of accepting they -are- refugees

In calculating what number of Syrian refugees we should be taking, we have to consider how dealing with the crisis on our border is part of that consideration.

I suspect that Germany has very few refugees from central and South America, for the same reason we don't have Syrian refugees trying to walk in from Windsor Canada.

[Bluenorthwest]

68. In 2013, the US had about 70,000 persons enter as refugees, in addition to about a million immigrant

persons who were not of refugee status. Germany is predicting 800,000 for this year, they are not saying 'we want to take in 800,000' they are saying that's how many are coming, best prepare for what is a huge effort to come. That's 4X last year's number and also greater than projections earlier in the year. They have had nearly 300,000 asylum applications already, which is what they projected for the entire year at year's start.

[Puglover]

61. He keeps getting points from me.

[elleng]

64. GOOD, Pugl!