Jewish Refugees vs Syrian Refugees

[phil19034]

America in 1938 was also still in a very isolationist mode & still recovering from the Great Depression.

America didn’t end our isolationist views until well after World War II started in 1939. Again, in 1938, we didn’t want to get involved with Europe again, after getting sucked into World War I.

The differences between these groups might not be as many as people might hope. Americans had genuine fears of Jews in much the same way they have fears of Syrian refugees today. Then, Jews were viewed as potential communists and/or spies, as people who would take jobs from Americans, the economy can’t take the stain they’ll place on it, etc. These really aren’t dissimilar to attitudes taken toward Syrian refugees today: they’re terrorists, they’ll take jobs away from Americans, we can’t afford to admit them, etc. Americans at one time, while sympathizing with the Jewish plight, still resisted accepting them.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Keep in mind this is all before the plan to exterminate all Jews of Europe was set into motion by the Nazis. We resisted accepting refugees still the same.)

Look at something like the story of the St. Louis to see how Jewish refugees were viewed: Voyage of the St. Louis | Holocaust Encyclopedia

And read something like the following to see how frightening the parallels really are: Opinion | Anne Frank Today Is a Syrian Girl - The New York Times

 

[Theo520]

So there are a lot of people who support banning all immigrants from places like Syria, Iraq, and other war-torn countries. Most of these people are in desperate need of refuge and help. Does the US have a moral obligation to help these people out? Would these same people have supported banning all Jewish immigrants from Germany and Eastern Europe during World War II and the late 30’s? Are these two issues connected or the same at all and how do you not compare the two? Just a question I was having trouble answering and thinking about.

I think you are misrepresenting the whole shebang.

Most people do want to help these war refugees, and how we go about it is fairly well laid out in the UN Agreement of Refugees signed in the 50’s.

We provide refugee camps with protection, medical care, food, and shelter within the region.
We work to stabilize the home situations, so they can return.

This is also the most doable approach, vs moving millions of people half way around the world.

There is also a clear process for identifying people that qualify as refugees and are not just economic migrants. Most western countries have opened their arms to legit refugee immigrants, but we can’t take everyone home from every conflict zone. Hence we need increased focus on stabilizing their home governance, so they can return.

With these post WW2 rules, the Jews would have qualified for Asylum in any of the agreement countries, they wouldn’t have been sent back to Germany.

What we have now isn’t perfect, but it is fairly balanced against the competing pressures with this problem.

 

[blackforest]

I’m unfamiliar with the slaves living in Texas. I tried to look it up but came up with only less-than-reputable websites. Are you able to provide a link?

The Boston marathon bombers were ayslees, not refugees.

Also, nice touch with the vague “somehow” while asking Red Betta to provide specifics.

I’m not clear on what you’re saying. Are you asking for specifics as to how our culture has survived and thrived despite/because of 200+ years of refugees and immigrants settling in the U.S.?

There’s a new Native Americans who would dispute that.

Good point. I don’t see them putting up much of a fuss over Syrian refugees, however.

 

[redbetta]

I do not know about our vetting process right now. I am just highlighting that it would be important to discern if the people claiming whether they are refugees are actually refugees and not just economic migrants. Also, check for terrorist associations. I mentioned to to another poster earlier.

Also, for the record, both my parents, my brother, and basically everyone in my extended family over thirty are immigrants. I do not have a problem with immigrants. I just have a problem with mass unfiltered immigration. Also, the country has reduced the amount of people allowed to enter into the country several times in our history, both in general and from particular places. That has allowed time for people to assimilate before the next batch came in. We don’t want ghettoization.

 

[blackforest]

Following one year in the U.S., they routinely apply for citizenship and seek greencards. I help out a team of lawyers with this process.

If the men stay in their home countries they A) won’t be alive to help rebuild it and B) won’t be able to provide for their families living in the U.S., who in turn will be demonized for—what was that word upthread? Ah yes!—“leeching” off the system.

 

[blackforest]

I can assure you that between multiple interviews over a two-year period and invasive background checks all the way down to fingerprints and retina scans, they are being well vetted. The federal government has always recognized particular countries experiencing violence from which refugees are to be accepted. Sorry - I didn’t mean to pick on you. There’s a lot of misunderstanding among the public re: how the refugee process works.

Obama himself even established a refugee ban, but my fellow liberals never squawk when their club members act up. Sigh. But I assure you that not even the most liberal among us believe in “mass unfiltered immigration.”

 

[Theo520]

Good point. I don’t see them putting up much of a fuss over Syrian refugees, however.

I’m pretty confident we aren’t resettling illegals and refugees on reservation lands.

 

[phil19034]

If the men stay in their home countries they A) won’t be alive to help rebuild it

Not if they are in a safe zone. I’m suggesting that male refugees should remain the safe zone refugee camps.

Are you working with a refugee assistant program or a program meant for asylum seekers?

Until the Year 2000, the UN (UN High Commissioner for Refugees) stated that the relocation of refugees to other nations should only be the last resort, only after all other options are exhausted.

But after 2000, the Commissioner stated it should no longer be considered the least preferred method, claiming that sometimes it’s the only solution. While I agree that SOMETIMES resettlement to another nation is the only solution, we need to get back to treating it as the last option.

We should be doing everything possible to

1. keep refuges in their own nation
2. when they have to leave, set it up with a plan for them to return home after X amount of time after the danger is over.
3. countries working with refugees should COMMIT to rebuilding the nation so the refugees can return.

A refugee crisis should not been seen as an opportunity to “diversify a country” by the political left. The idea that refugees are better off in Europe and North America is no different than colonialism.

Just like the Polish camps in England after World War II, when people are migrated to other nations, they refugee camps should be established in rural areas (not the so called urban refugee camp) where refugees can work on farms and find other work; similar to the multiple migrant workers we have in rural America today from Mexico, the Caribbean & Central America.

Urban camps are disastrous, but again; unless they seek asylum because they are personally a political enemy, refugees programs should be designed with the intent to return refugees home, not to turn them into immigrants.

God Bless

 

[Theo520]

But I assure you that not even the most liberal among us believe in “mass unfiltered immigration.”

Doesn’t that describe what much of Europe is experiencing?
The vast majority seem more to be illegal economic migrants, trying to get to the best countries for their welfare. These are people who failed to meet the requirements for being a recognized refugee or asylum seeker. I don’t think Europe would be experiencing turmoil on the issue, if they were only dealing with actual refugees.

Also, since our capacities to absorb does have practical limits, we need to redouble our efforts in stabilizing their home regions, so refugee camps can be safely vacated.

BTW, I don’t think economic migrants are bad people, we just can’t absorb the demand, which hits our most vulnerable pop the worst.

 

[meltzerboy2]

The U.S. has a long and shameful history of NOT welcoming refugees, be they Jewish, Muslim, or members of other ethnic groups. We have feared immigrants and discriminated against those we have taken in, and we still do.

 

[meltzerboy2]

We never learn, do we?

 

[blackforest]

Doesn’t that describe what much of Europe is experiencing?

All European nations have laws for their borders. If families are desperate to keep themselves and their children alive, they may break them. I know that I would for my family.

Also, since our capacities to absorb does have practical limits, we need to redouble our efforts in stabilizing their home regions, so refugee camps can be safely vacated.

I would support this endeavor, although our country is doing a terrible job at it.

 

[blackforest]

Not if they are in a safe zone. I’m suggesting that male refugees should remain the safe zone refugee camps.

War simply doesn’t work that way. If a country is erupting in civil war, there are no “safe zones.”

Are you working with a refugee assistant program or a program meant for asylum seekers?

With refugees.

We should be doing everything possible to

keep refuges in their own nation
when they have to leave, set it up with a plan for them to return home after X amount of time after the danger is over.
countries working with refugees should COMMIT to rebuilding the nation so the refugees can return.

Just because there’s land, it’s not as simple to simply stick people on it. There’s no work in Syria. It’s a natural effect that bombed cities have on an economy. I would think that a nation full of young, unemployed men would be a breeding grounds for recruitment to radicalism.

A refugee crisis should not been seen as an opportunity to “diversify a country” by the political left.

This is certainly a side effect–for better, I’d argue–but it’s not the intent in refugee resettlement.

The idea that refugees are better off in Europe and North America is no different than colonialism.

This I don’t follow at all. Colonialism stripped other cultures of their self-determination. Refugee resettlement is about restoring it as best as possible under tragic circumstances.

Remember that camps are just that, a place to camp until more permanent arrangements can be found. Farm work is one option for the able-bodied, but I support attempts to find work wherever possible. Job placement for human beings isn’t akin to moving tokens around a chess board. I’m working with one trained mechanic. I’m not going to advocate sticking him on a pear farm when there’s a garage that’s hiring.

I’m tired and perhaps incoherent. Blessings!

 

[tweedlealice]

Dear Run Man,
There is a Islamic wish by many, not all, to overcome the world w Islam. That’s why the Muslim side of the world didn’t object to ISIS. It fulfilled a prophecy. They did join in eventually. This exodus from the MidEast is a little curious.
They could have gone East to Saudi Arabia who had air conditioned tents waiting. I don’t know if they ever got used. They were empty in the beginning.
So, if ISIS failed to create a Caliphate. The Refugees can. What do they do when they get here. They localize together. They don’t assimilate. They want their Sharia law. UK said OK. TENN said OK. That’s cutting off hands, etc. stoning ppl who are gay and adulteres. Decapitation can be used. REALLY! Who would allow this in a civilized society. They try to kill us.
What about that Caliphate.
Now we take refugees. We have Refugees.
They have to wait a little longer to be vetted.
So, morally, we’re OK. We take them in. Think, if they don’t want to assimilate, why come West. The East is Islamic country.
Hitler and the Jews, yes, the world agreed to end his reign. Refugees were accepted and then, the UN opened up ISRAEL. OFF we go!
In Christ’s Love
Tweedlealice

The UN should have gotten in Syria earlier. It was genocide of Christians.

 

[tweedlealice]

Blessings!
I don’t think that is a fair sentence. We are from Irish stock. They were considered worse than blacks. I had an Uncle from Lebanon. By now, the Irish became policeman and were working Ellis Island. They couldn’t say Arabic names. My Uncles sister was Tubani Kalim. They named her Mary Kelly. My Uncle was named Anthony Seaman. He was a man in the Sea. Good grief. I’ll give you Ellis Island would be confusing. But once established in similar areas, we started to blend. By 1950’s most were good x the poor blacks.
We are the Melting Pot of the world.
The initial struggles evaporated over time. I grew up in Little Italy. We had Russian friends in N. Philly. My grandfather was Penn. Dutch. (German) With the war, there was an uprising of prejudice. The Japs and Germans were affected. The poor Japsnese w those concentration camps. But, still we had heroes who fought for us in spite of the treatment they received. Good men exist.
Seasons of prejudice come and go, I guess but it had smoothed out nicely. still a little while ago.
God help us bring kindness to all. Help us stop hate.
In Jesus name
Tweedlealice

 

[Theo520]

All European nations have laws for their borders. If families are desperate to keep themselves and their children alive, they may break them. I know that I would for my family.

Many don’t qualify for refugee status for very good reasons, I don’t support enabling them.
Economic migrants readily overwhelm services and the welcome mat (heart) that we should be directing to refugees.

 

[Seeksadvice]

Unknown. Considering who these “refugees” might be… Kind of interesting how many “refugees” that you see on the news are guys younger than I am. I would be seriously concerned about the possibility of terrorist plants in the masses.

 

[Lara]

Liberals seem to think that in time, you can assimilate Muslims and the truth is you can’t.

Do you agree with Sharia Law? Do you agree with Female Genital Mutilation? Do you think a family’s honor lies in the virginity of its daughters, and that these daughters can be killed to save it? Do you think a rape should only be considered punishable if four Muslim men happened to be watching and are willing to testify? Do you believe in child brides being forced to marry men much older than they? Do you think polygamy is an acceptable lifestyle? Do you think women should wear niqabs to keep a modesty that is actually a form of oppression? Do you think your own twelve year old boy should be able to tell you, his mother, whether she can marry the man of her choosing, or anything else major if your husband has died? Do you think homosexual sin should be punishable by death? Do you think a woman walking out at night alone is meat for the cats (basically she deserves whatever sinful male does to her because she was alone)?

Sure there are many nice Muslims. Maybe over 90%. But it’s the Muslim leaders who eventually lead them, and they tend to be very conservative, fundamentalist imams.

The truth is the Muslims are coming here to take us over by sheer birth numbers. And I actually agree with them having large families. But I don’t agree they bring more good than bad. The West is too much concerned with gay rights, abortion rights, and transgender rights to notice their real agenda.

On the other hand, Jews have contributed much to our society, including its laws.

 

[meltzerboy2]

But, tweedlealice, you said so yourself: the Irish were treated WORSE than Blacks, and this is true in places such as New York City. Yes, as you state, things eventually changed toward the immigrants who became established and made contributions to the welfare of society. But it was a tough road in the beginning and for a long time. And my main point is that we, as a country, are still resurrecting the same old tired arguments concerning new immigrants: they will impose their foreign culture on us, they are barbarians, they are stupid and illiterate, they will take jobs away from our citizens, and so on. That is why I assert that we never learn from the mistakes of our past.

 

[PJH_74]

The US government has decided what side it is taking:

Syrian Refugees let into the US.

If you believe this is unjust, go vote (please).