Should The United States Accept The 10, 000 Syrian Refugees?

And the United States themselves should be able to accept as much refugees as they can due to the fact that there are some Americans that would do anything to help refugees out. For example, I read a document from the Boston Globe, titled “An Outpouring of Support for Refugees” and basically talked about how Cheryl Hamilton from Lowell asked many people to help her out to support refugees arriving from Congo, Syria, Myanmar, and Iraq. Cheryl and others basically gathered a collection of kitchen supplies, winter coats, blankets, and much more, just to give them to the refugees that have arrived to a totally different place than what they were used to. And it also said: “Volunteers walked into the office and said, “I can’t stand watching the news anymore. How can I help?”” This shows that there are some Americans that have no problem with letting in refugees, and are willing to do anything for them, because it help seeing what type of conditions they were living in, as well as what is going on in their home countries. For example, there’s a photograph from Time which shows a young boy covered in blood, and says: “Footage shared online by the Aleppo Media Center is said to show a boy who was pulled from an airstrike on Aug. 17 in the Syrian city of Aleppo.” which I remember

The U.S need to also accept more refugees because of medical and mental assistance. As we can read in document #1 , a man kill his nephew because of all the traumas he has suffered. This show that this man needs mental health assistance and here we can provide with all the resources the U.S has. We can also connect this with document #2 because of the help that the little boy awaiting help. The U.S government should be like German chancellor Angela Merkel, who is admitting more refugees without worrying about the attacks that happen, and helping those who she can help and give them assistance. No everyone is the same, and we know there were attacks, but, those attacks where no most of it from refugees.

states cannot legally refuse Syrian Refugees without the approval of the federal government first. According to Stephen I. Vladeck, an American university law professor says that, “Legally, states have no authority of the question of who should be let into this country is one that the Constitution commits to the federal government.” Also, he added that, “Without the state’s participation, the federal government would have a much more arduous task.” Stephen finally added that, “… So a state can’t legally sat it is objecting, but it can refuse to cooperate, which makes things much more difficult.” Also, Kevin Appleby, the director of immigration policy for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, says that, “The federal government has the plenary power and the power of the 1980 Refugee Act to place refugees anywhere in the country.” ‘More than 250,000 people have died in the country of Syria and at least 11 million people have left the country since the Syrian Civil War has broken out,’ according to the United Nations, and ‘about 51.13636% of the Syrian population has been killed or fled their homes’ and has been discussed elsewhere (Fantz, Ashley, and Ben Brumfield. “Syrian Refugees Not Welcome in 31 States – CNN.com.”, and Yan, Holly. “Refugee Crisis: Pressure Builds for U.S. to Take in More Syrians –

Many U.S. citizens have no problem with Syrian refugees coming to America. According to both “Why America Could-and Should-Admit More Syrian Refugees.” and “Our Responsibility to Refugees”, The authors feel that The people of the United States are turning their backs on the refugees. In “Why America Could-and Should-Admit More Syrian Refugees.” the author says, “The United States has resettled over three million refugees, offering victims of persecution and conflict the opportunity to build a new life. Refugee resettlement is unequivocally safe. It would be wrong, both morally and politically, to curtail Syrian refugee resettlement, and why it is in fact both ethically imperative and politically expedient to instead expand U.S. commitment to refugee resettlement” (Long). This author sees nothing to fear from refugees. Furthermore, the writer of “Our Responsibility to Refugees” states, “The U.S. can do more and we must. Since 2011, more than 4.2 million Syrians have been displaced by war and violence, and fewer than 3,000 of them have resettled in the U.S. President Barack Obama has committed to resettling 10,000 Syrian refugees in the U.S. His administration needs to

Why should the United States not accept Syrian refugees? Not every Syrian is a terrorist, most of them really need help. Because of the civil war in Syria, a major genocide is happening. People are leaving their homes for a better life where they can be safe and economically stable. I think that the United States should accept Syrian refugees in because they have been dealing with inequality, they also have a good work ethic that at a lot of Americans do not have which can benefit the country, and the United States is a country where a lot of people migrate so why not let the Syrian refugees in since they need to.

Many people believe that the United States should not let Syrian refugees into the United States to escape war would damage the country’s safety and way of life, but the U.S. should allow them in because it provides these immigrants such as humanitarian aid, safer families, a well- rounded education, and a strengthened workforce. As the Syrian Civil War rages, ISIS bombs the Middle East, and Russia targets airstrikes, thousands of Syrian refugees flee their home and country with their lives. Children cannot go to school and parents are running out of money. They need aid, but in the war-torn cities there is little help that these people can find. Separated from their jobs, livelihood, and families, they can

Is it our moral responsibility to take in Syrian refugees? Right now the biggest refugee crisis since the Second World War is taking place. Around 6.5 million Syrian have been displaced due to a terrorists group called ISIS. While countries throughout Europe have taken in around 500,000-1,000,000, America has only taken in 1,578. Which brings up the debate as to whether or not America should take in more Syrian refugees. America should take in more Syrian refugees because it can increase our economy, repair relations with Muslims in America and it’s our moral responsibility.

The U.S. should let Syrian refugees in the United States to settle, but only a select few. According to Elizabeth McBride, a writer for NBC.com, Razan is a mom of a family of four from Damascus. Her family left after their youngest son, Ibrahim, witnessed his father getting killed in a protest against the Syrian government. Looking at this example, it becomes clear that some Syrians

The welcoming of numerous Syrian refugees into America is contentious, likely to cause or is causing an argument. It 's no secret that our President, Barack Obama, made a promise, a year ago, to bring in at least 10,000 Syrian refugees in the next fiscal year. Those who are all for it believe showing our morals, using non-government help, bettering our economy, adding to our diversity, and strengthening our alliance is what will come out of allowing them through. The opposers feel that the likelyhood of them being terrorists is to great, they will be too expensive, have to use our taxpaying dollars, could over populate, and push us away from potential job oppurtunities, that is why they shouldn 't be allowed here. Are you for it, or are you against it?

With the recent events around the world involving a terror group named ISIS, many have been affected. In Paris, many were killed during a concert which struck terror around the world. A total of 129 people perished and hundreds were wounded. Millions of Syrian refugees have been trying to escape and come to the United States for their own personal safety. Over the past 4 years, over 2000 refugees have been allowed into the country. In an attempt to increase the safety of the refugees, the U.S. has pledged to allow 10,000 more Syrians over the next year. It has become a controversial topic because citizens of the United States believe letting in the refugees is a mistake. Some incredulous citizens believe letting in refugees will cause more

According to Fox news,Obama administration officials plan to bring in about 10,000 refugees over the next year. This will give them a safe place to stay, a chance to get back on their feet, a chance to get a job, will allow them to get healthcare, an education, and any other other commodities the refugees could possibly need. But, every person has another side. In France, in November of 2015, the ISIS bombers were identified as refugees that had fled to escape the war. As they had started to live in France,they joined ISIS, and were undercover. Letting people into your country without thinking about it gives them a chance to be a threat. Some countries are letting refugees’ records slide so they can start a now life. CNN news says that 31 U.S. governors are not accepting Syrian refugees.Overall, it is the wrong choice to let refugees into your

Taking in refugees from countries in a crisis is a basic humanitarian act. I have witnessed this first hand with my dad mentoring a refugee from South Sudan and helping him get on his feet, and now he is extremely successful. The difference from twenty years ago when the Sudanese were refugees today is that there is the risk of safety. In the Middle East, especially Syria, there is no way to be able to verify that the refugees are just civilians and have no hatred for the U.S. Until there is a way to totally be able to verify that the refugees are totally risk free it is not worth the risk of taking them. We has a country has to learn from what is happening in Europe because of the sheer number of refugees that were allowed into their countries. It would be silly to make the same mistakes and risk having the similar outcome of repeated terror attacks, and whole groups of people choosing not to assimilate to Western culture. While Syria is in a humanitarian crisis and they need help, the safety of the United States and its people is the most important thing and cannot be risked. The only evidence needed is that in Europe where there are terrorist attacks almost every single

Should we do nothing for the people who are facing life or death situation for reasons they are not part of? Isn’t it the responsibility of the world to help civilians of a country who are suffering so much due to terrorism? Should not the USA, being world’s leading economy and power, accept Syrian refugees who are suffering, dying and separating from their dearest ones for reasons futile to themselves? Yes indeed, the whole world, its people, and the USA should help, support, and accept Syrian refugees. The United States should admit Syrian refuges because doing so will further solidify its image as an anti-terrorist country, not all Syrian refugees are terrorists, and most of all it will help cut out the human resources that terrorist are exploiting.

In the past, we’ve accepted more than 800,000 Southeastern Asians as refugees after the Vietnam War, around 100,000 from the Iraq War, and thousands more from different countries and of different ethnicity. What’s so different about these Syrian refugees? They are leaving their homes seeking for a resettlement and a new life which is practically the same as the other refugees. The only variation is in their religious beliefs. The US is known for democratic, liberal, and egalitarian society. Denying the entry of the refugees will adulterate that

The United States federal government should accept the Syrian refugees. The refugee crisis is an international issue, and as an active leader in the international community, the United States should be doing its part in helping those in need. There are people who are in need of a safe place and enough food. With over 18 thousand refugees resettled in America, we are on the right track, but there is more we can provide. For example, Germany has accepted over one million refugees and, according to a foreign policy article in 2016, Sweden has taken 190,000 refugees in, which is two percent of its population. In this country, the federal government has helped relocate 12.5 thousand Syrian refugees, and while that is 12.5 thousand people helped, there are thousands more that need the aid as well. If the moral argument is not enough to push this country to provide relief in this crisis, perhaps the economic benefit would. Many Americans and citizens of other countries are worried about the impact of refugees on the economy. However, a Washington Post article soothes all doubts by citing several examples in various places around the world, from Cleveland, Ohio to Uganda, to say that refugees do not limit the economy of the country they are taking asylum in. It is true that there is an initial cost for helping refugees settle, paying for housing and food, but as time passes, there is a net profit for the federal government. Bringing in new possible-workers and