Do Syrian refugees deserve a cool $1 Billion from US taxpayers?

2015-10-15T09:49:10-04:00

Democrats are backing a push to give the Obama administration $1b in emergency funds to help Syrian refugees.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/256970-dems-back-emergency-syrian-refugee-funds
For some context of what 1 $Billion is, the entire US Coast Guard surface assets plus air assets 2016 budget is $740M (less than what we're proposing to give to the Syrian refugees). https://www.uscg.mil/budget/

Dems back emergency funds for Syrian refugee crisis

Lawmakers want to give the administration $1 billion in emergency funding.

Response by MSgt Curtis Ellis made Oct 15 at 2015 9:50 AM

2015-10-15T09:50:56-04:00

No. Period. And I do believe it is an "emotional/society dictates" response.

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Oct 15 at 2015 10:10 AM

2015-10-15T10:10:39-04:00

Syrian refugees do not merit any funding from the USA Col Joseph Lenertz. Earlier this year President Obama was threatening to veto the National Defense Authorization Act stating the bill wastes federal funds and shortchanges key administration priorities. For the Democrats to back a push to give the Obama administration $1b in emergency funds to help Syrian refugees seems foolish. We poured too much money into Syria all ready. The administration has been so focused on ousting Assad until now while refugees have been fleeing from Syria for over a year after they had been fleeing to Syria from Iraq for so many years. Syrian refugees need to be addressed by regional powers first and then perhaps European powers.

Response by 1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 15 at 2015 10:44 AM

2015-10-15T10:44:11-04:00

We need to take care of us first and foremost.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 15 at 2015 10:48 AM

2015-10-15T10:48:09-04:00

I feel sorry for them, but we need to take care of matters at home before we can attempt to help someone else!

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 15 at 2015 10:53 AM

2015-10-15T10:53:52-04:00

Why.....Oh why......can we not use this money to help our own?

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 15 at 2015 12:13 PM

2015-10-15T12:13:15-04:00

which part of them don't realize that We are already in debt .... $18 going 19 trillions now!!

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 15 at 2015 1:56 PM

2015-10-15T13:56:42-04:00

All of our money in regards to Syria has been so well spent so far... why not throw more good money after bad?
I propose a public offering of "Syrian Refugee War Bonds". Members of Congress that are so eager to spend taxpayer money could be the first to put their money where their mouth is and bring attention to this serious issue.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Oct 15 at 2015 2:55 PM

2015-10-15T14:55:25-04:00

While we are at it, give a few billion to Homeland Security. They are going to need it after this travesty on the American public is finished. The wealthy Muslim nations must be rolling over and laughing their collective butts off at our ignorance.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Oct 15 at 2015 5:20 PM

2015-10-15T17:20:24-04:00

I have pity for the legitimate refugees. We have bombs dropping on pro-Assad forces and now another major power dropping bombs on anti-Assad forces. I would want to bail too. BUT, if their very own Muslim nations refuse to allow them to enter their own countries where they share a common belief, why does it become the responsibility of western nations? We are not in debt up to our eyeballs. We are in the middle of the deep blue sea clinging to a branch. We have to sever the ties and reliance on these countries who own the fate of the world because they are swimming in oil and pumping billions into the very groups that we spend trillions tying to eradicate. We concentrate on making cell phones so advanced that we could land a man on Mars yet we still have to pay an arm and a leg for a hybrid car that will cut our nation's needs in half. I know I'm ranting but we need to attack this problem from another approach. Can you imagine if we had not gone to Iraq and taken that money and spent it on our own infrastructure?

Response by SGT John Rauch made Oct 15 at 2015 5:56 PM

2015-10-15T17:56:40-04:00

what is wrong with this govt. we cant even take care of our own vets but now we want to give people money who quite possibly hate america and everything it stands for? Obama will have his legacy. his legacy will be how terrible of a president he was. maybe not this generation, but the next one for sure will realize this when they realize our debt is unpayable forever. and we are hopelessly dependent on other nations for our well being.

Response by SGT Jerrold Pesz made Oct 20 at 2015 4:51 PM

2015-10-20T16:51:22-04:00

If dems are so concerned about the Syrian invaders they should spend some of their own money to help them.

Response by LCDR Thomas Doherty (USNR-R Ret) made Oct 22 at 2015 5:17 PM

2015-10-22T17:17:03-04:00

We spent a lot more than one billion f..ing up their country, Syria, by shipping weapons into it and training Al Qaeda-affiliated rebels, making it unliveable, so why not? Who was complaining about that spending? General Austin just testified that they spent $500 million on training and only got about 5 rebels trained. What about that waste?

One question that will not be asked and answered at the Benghazi hearings - what was the CIA doing with the weapons it was collecting in Libya? Answer: shipping them to Syria for the rebels there. Why were we arming the rebels in Syria? Beats me, I don't see a good reason in the interest of the American people.

America causes chaos and death in other countries, and this question and the responses tell me few Americans have any idea what their county is doing in Syria or lots of other places, like Ukraine.

The chaos caused by "regime change" operations in Iraq, Syria and Libya is now spreading to Europe and destabilizing the postwar order there. We really are fools led by fools. You reap what you sow.

Response by Maj Christopher Armour made Oct 22 at 2015 8:35 PM

2015-10-22T20:35:21-04:00

I believe the way you phrase your question is less than impartial, and more importantly, misstates the issue. No one, not even the crackpot liberal dem establishment, is suggesting that we drive over truckloads of cash and start tossing $1B around like Halloween candy. The money is intended to support humanitarian actions with all the good and bad history tells us that implies. Moreover, your use of the term "deserve" misses the point. Did Rwandan minority Hutus deserve any help when Tutsis slaughtered 800,000+ men, women and children, mostly with machetes? The question doesn't really even make any sense in context because people, human beings, don't need to do anything special to warrant help when their lives are threatened, especially on this scale. We now look back on those 100 days in the spring and summer of 1994 and recognize that the US decision to let the Rwandan genocide continue was a monumental failure in leadership and abdication of our moral authority as the (still) one remaining world superpower. No, the Syrian refugee situation is not a genocide yet, but it is an acute humanitarian crisis that needs attention, leadership, and action. The question is not what the refugees deserve, but rather what needs to be done and who should do it. To deny any US role in that process is to turn our backs on generations of inherited wisdom. I suspect that those military professionals commenting here who blithely respond with the equivalent of "F()c# 'em" have either seen too few, or too many of the horrors of war.
For the record, I voted with the majority on this poll because there is no rational basis for the $1B figure proposed. It is an act of contrition on the part of congress in lieu of actually displaying any leadership or taking meaningful action. In reality, it is a failure of leadership in the executive branch and of the chief executive in particular, but that is nothing new. The US should certainly not be shouldering the majority of the financial burden. The EU has to stop pretending there is not a problem on their doorstep and recognize this situation a primarily their responsibility. However, like it or not, the US IS a world leader and DOES have obligations beyond our own borders. We are the wealthiest and most powerful nation in the history of mankind by virtually any measure. Throw money at the problem and hope it will go away? No. Close the blinds and go about our business pretending we shouldn't have to do anything? Absolutely not. We've already given half a billion in aid. That's enough. Now we need to use our considerable influence to get the rest of the world to follow our lead and do what needs to be done to fix this problem.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 22 at 2015 9:13 PM

2015-10-22T21:13:12-04:00

Want YES, deserve....NO! Why do we always bail out everyone else, when we can't take care of our own.

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Oct 24 at 2015 11:52 PM

2015-10-24T23:52:05-04:00

That money could be better spent taking care of American citizens especially are displaced homeless or mentally ill veterans or our disabled vets

Response by CWO2 Darryl Craft made Nov 5 at 2015 5:36 PM

2015-11-05T17:36:58-05:00

No way! Give more money to a regime that hates America should not be getting anything ffrom us. When will politicians realize you can't buy love.

Response by 1LT Aaron Barr made Nov 12 at 2015 2:22 PM

2015-11-12T14:22:16-05:00

Depends; is that money in the form of military assistance to European nations trying to stop this invasion?

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 12 at 2015 7:06 PM

2015-11-12T19:06:53-05:00

I voted No, this is an emotional response. $1B is a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things, but we are not responsible for these refugees. IMHO, the countries that should be ponying up a LOT of money in this matter are the wealthy Middle Eastern countries who have a large stake in the outcome.