In the Op-ed, “Welcoming Refugees Should Be a Settled Question” in the New York Times, David Miliband argues that decimating the United States refugee resettlement program would put thousands of victims’ lives and the American values at risk. David Miliband is a British former foreign secretary and he’s also President and CEO of the International Rescue Committee (IRC). Miliband job is to oversee the agency’s humanitarian relief operations in more than 40 war-affected countries and its refugee resettlement and assistance programs in 28 United States cities. Thousands of victims of war and persecution have been fighting for a better life in America. However, if the administration decides to decimate the resettlement program thousands of lives
…show more content…
Miliband attacks all the stereotypes that come with being a refugee. Miliband used a logical approach to shed light on them. Stereotypes like all Muslims are part of ISIS and are involved in terror acts on America soil always follow them. Based on the article, “Not one of the three million refugees to the United States since 1980 has committed a lethal act of terror on American soil.” Miliband uses logos to support the refugees and to show that not every refugee is a terrorist. According to Miliband, “The Cato Institute has calculated that a United States resident has a 1 in 3.64 chance of being killed by a refugee.” Americans are turning their back to see the crimes that are committed by their own people and blaming them on …show more content…
This is very important because it captures the reader’s attention and makes them think about what has just been said. According to Miliband, these are the “crocodile tears of diplomacy.” The diplomacy is guiding with ignorance to what refugees are going through by using false emotion to back up something that is not truthful. In the mid-16th century “crocodile tear” was named from a belief that crocodiles wept while devouring or luring their prey. These refugees are being misled by being lured in with the hope of being part of a nation with false hope. Compared to Uganda, the United States has more valuable resources, including money, land, and power to extend plenty of opportunities to refugees. However, we allow less than Uganda, making America hypocritical because America is known to be the country one goes to when every other country has turned their back. Why is the America government turning their back
Miliband attacks all the stereotypes that come with being a refugee. Miliband used a logical approach to shed light on them. Stereotypes like all Muslims are part of ISIS and are involved in terror acts on America soil always follow them. Based on the article, “Not one of the three million refugees to the United States since 1980 has committed a lethal act of terror on American soil.” Miliband uses logos to support the refugees and to show that not every refugee is a terrorist. According to Miliband, “The Cato Institute has calculated that a United States resident has a 1 in 3.64 chance of being killed by a refugee.” Americans are turning their back to see the crimes that are committed by their own people and blaming them on …show more content…
This is very important because it captures the reader’s attention and makes them think about what has just been said. According to Miliband, these are the “crocodile tears of diplomacy.” The diplomacy is guiding with ignorance to what refugees are going through by using false emotion to back up something that is not truthful. In the mid-16th century “crocodile tear” was named from a belief that crocodiles wept while devouring or luring their prey. These refugees are being misled by being lured in with the hope of being part of a nation with false hope. Compared to Uganda, the United States has more valuable resources, including money, land, and power to extend plenty of opportunities to refugees. However, we allow less than Uganda, making America hypocritical because America is known to be the country one goes to when every other country has turned their back. Why is the America government turning their back