As they flee from war and violence, Syrian refugees are trying to find better lives in other countries, whether it is temporary or permanent. Only recently has the refugee crisis been brought to people’s attention around the world, but it has been in existence since the Arab Spring in 2011. The Arab Spring brought about rebellion against Syria’s President al-Assad’s regime and Al-Assad fought back, creating a devastating civil war. Now, 4.6 million Syrians are seeking safe havens. Syria’s neighboring countries and some European have been the more accessible asylums. The neighboring countries of Syria, such as Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan, have taken in overwhelming amounts of refugees. Turkey currently has nearly half of the Syrian refugees.
…show more content…
Concerns of economic consequences and security threats are the most common defenses for those who fear the benign refugees. Although admitting refugees into the United States would come at great monetary costs, the expenses of military intervention is even greater. ISIL related operations costed $6.5 billion since 2014. With the same amount of money, the U.S. could offer protection for a fair share of refugees for over 3 years. Paying for refugees would not only be less expensive, but more successful than increased military intervention in the Middle East. Losing jobs and freeloading is another economic concern that a country built on values of hard work has. The potential that Americans will lose jobs has caused uproar more than once, but especially when arguing against refugee entrance. The reality of stolen jobs is understandable, but refugees would not be a large impact on the United State’s economy. Refugees would likely take unwanted jobs and some may even set up their own businesses. When Vietnamese refugees came to the States after the Vietnam War, there was a similar angry uproar towards them. But although they did face opposition, the Vietnamese were able to integrate themselves into the American culture. They were able to find jobs and benefit the economy by doing so. Syrian refugees could replicate what the Vietnamese refugees did before them. Refugees …show more content…
America cannot continue to say “us” and “them” because we are all one species sharing a planet. We must help the Syrian refugees out of the human compassion that everyone has. The opposing views of this issue must be able to agree that we must at least aid the refugees still overseas. The United States has already taken in 1,500 refugees and gradual increase in the amount of refugees resettled to the States would please both sides of the conflict. Gradual resettlement would begin with the states willing to take in refugees and then eventually, the rest of the states, as the states do not have actual control over a foreign affairs issue. Gradual resettlement would mean that the vetting process is not being rushed and ensures security. It is more beneficial for both sides if refugees are offered asylum because the concern for those against is how much it would be costing the country to pay for refugees. When compared to the costs of military intervention, the costs of refugees is less expensive– just as those who were against resettlement because of cost wanted. The silent blasts of guns have failed in their endeavours. The dogmatic fears of Muslims must be mended. Now, more than ever, we must listen to the voices of the
Concerns of economic consequences and security threats are the most common defenses for those who fear the benign refugees. Although admitting refugees into the United States would come at great monetary costs, the expenses of military intervention is even greater. ISIL related operations costed $6.5 billion since 2014. With the same amount of money, the U.S. could offer protection for a fair share of refugees for over 3 years. Paying for refugees would not only be less expensive, but more successful than increased military intervention in the Middle East. Losing jobs and freeloading is another economic concern that a country built on values of hard work has. The potential that Americans will lose jobs has caused uproar more than once, but especially when arguing against refugee entrance. The reality of stolen jobs is understandable, but refugees would not be a large impact on the United State’s economy. Refugees would likely take unwanted jobs and some may even set up their own businesses. When Vietnamese refugees came to the States after the Vietnam War, there was a similar angry uproar towards them. But although they did face opposition, the Vietnamese were able to integrate themselves into the American culture. They were able to find jobs and benefit the economy by doing so. Syrian refugees could replicate what the Vietnamese refugees did before them. Refugees …show more content…
America cannot continue to say “us” and “them” because we are all one species sharing a planet. We must help the Syrian refugees out of the human compassion that everyone has. The opposing views of this issue must be able to agree that we must at least aid the refugees still overseas. The United States has already taken in 1,500 refugees and gradual increase in the amount of refugees resettled to the States would please both sides of the conflict. Gradual resettlement would begin with the states willing to take in refugees and then eventually, the rest of the states, as the states do not have actual control over a foreign affairs issue. Gradual resettlement would mean that the vetting process is not being rushed and ensures security. It is more beneficial for both sides if refugees are offered asylum because the concern for those against is how much it would be costing the country to pay for refugees. When compared to the costs of military intervention, the costs of refugees is less expensive– just as those who were against resettlement because of cost wanted. The silent blasts of guns have failed in their endeavours. The dogmatic fears of Muslims must be mended. Now, more than ever, we must listen to the voices of the