I'm not afraid of terrorism, are you?

[henryp]

They don;t have those things...because they are refugees.  You're literally saying that the reason we cant/shouldn't help them is because they need help.  Do you know how many refugees we took in from south east asia?  Do you know how many south east asian terror attacks we've had on our soil because of that?  I wasn;t any easier to vet them (I'd say a hell of alot harder due to the time and the sheer numbers - most weren't actually vetted).  

Do you know how many refugees we -already- take in, yearly?

I'm not literally saying that.  I'm saying maybe we can't/shouldn't help them because of circumstances related to why they need help.  

And I'm not aware of any ill will Burma has with the US.  The US, as far as I know, isn't constantly blowing up their cities, and 'oopsing' their children with drone strikes.  But we've taken Iraqi refugees, and that's seemed to have gone fine.  

This may all be moot.  Perhaps, they are perfectly capable of handling the vetting process.  In the end, I think that's all people really want.  A pretty high degree of certainty on who's coming in.  (I still prefer not involving the US, but that's for selfish reasons not safety reasons).

But the refugees in Europe aren't exactly doing the group proud.