Current Events > Honestly, why don't we just exclude teenage male refugees and older?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Women, elderly and young children are never a problem demographic amongst the refugees, or are so miniscule in number they are virtually irrelevant. Even the middle East, where terrorism and crime is rampant, it is only the young and teenage men perpetuating this violence. Why don't we just exclude them? We would largely solve the refugee problem honestly.

Men dont like being told no
---

Two_Dee posted...

Men dont like being told no

Bullets are a thing. They can be brought to heel.

That's essentially what Canada did. The refugees taken in were largely families and women and children. That's not to say no unaccompanied men were taken in, but families were prioritised.
---

SGT_Conti posted...

That's essentially what Canada did. The refugees taken in were largely families and women and children. That's not to say no unaccompanied men were taken in, but families were prioritised.

Good. I would go a step further and say they need heavy background checking before they are allowed in.

this is good. the men need to stay and fight anyway. it's kinda messed up when they leave their family to die and flee to europe instead of standing and fighting

Teddytalks posted...

SGT_Conti posted...

That's essentially what Canada did. The refugees taken in were largely families and women and children. That's not to say no unaccompanied men were taken in, but families were prioritised.

Good. I would go a step further and say they need heavy background checking before they are allowed in.

We already have heavy background checks

Zikten posted...

this is good. the men need to stay and fight anyway. it's kinda messed up when they leave their family to die and flee to europe instead of standing and fighting

Why do people say this without knowing anything that actually goes on over there besides what you see in the news? For all you know, their families could be dead, or captured.

Also it's hard for a single man to fight a militant group that doesn't care about dying on the battlefield. Syrians aren't Rambo
---

What about trans refugees
---

Lol.
---

Christ this board is a shithole
---

Right? I wish I could say what I think about people like TC.
---

Zikten posted...

this is good. the men need to stay and fight anyway. it's kinda messed up when they leave their family to die and flee to europe instead of standing and fighting

If by fighting you mean dying.
---

Zikten posted...

this is good. the men need to stay and fight anyway. it's kinda messed up when they leave their family to die and flee to europe instead of standing and fighting

Given a choice between you and everyone you love dying/being tortured and uh...not dying, I guess, I think most people would choose the option that involves them not dying. You really cannot expect everyone to just take up arms. When you can't trust your neighbours, how exactly would you gather up any meaningful resistance? You can't just go guns blazing into the middle of some ISIS stronghold.
---

Samurontai posted...

Teddytalks posted...

SGT_Conti posted...

That's essentially what Canada did. The refugees taken in were largely families and women and children. That's not to say no unaccompanied men were taken in, but families were prioritised.

Good. I would go a step further and say they need heavy background checking before they are allowed in.

We already have heavy background checks

Zikten posted...

this is good. the men need to stay and fight anyway. it's kinda messed up when they leave their family to die and flee to europe instead of standing and fighting

Why do people say this without knowing anything that actually goes on over there besides what you see in the news? For all you know, their families could be dead, or captured.

Also it's hard for a single man to fight a militant group that doesn't care about dying on the battlefield. Syrians aren't Rambo

More heavier