Travel ban

admin: In the case of the UK, the main immigrants taken in were before the war, and the ones taken during the war were via the kinder transport and were only kids (and some pregnant women).

In the case of the US, most were taken in whilst they were neutral and those taken in during the war were thoroughly examined. Many were stopped and a large number of them were deported only a few years later.

Famousdebater: I would definitely consider doing it if I had power at that time.

Famousdebater: I would at least do refugee camps and consider vetting them to let some in.

Bi0Hazard: Looking at those statistics, I agree that the ban is not a good idea. I was just reiterating the administration's justification. Also, the rise and decline of ISIS increases the odds of an attack like the Paris attacks, so statisics from 1975-present are somewhat less relavent.

Bi0Hazard: It's completely impractical. Why on Earth would you take in people from the enemy. Hitler was desperate for intelligence and would almost certainly have attempted to sneak people in if the opportunity was available.

Bi0Hazard: You've got your priorities mixed up. It's dangerous, not worth the money and it would increase the chances of Nazi victory.

Famousdebater: The Nazis planned to expel many people anyways for what we may call ethnic cleansing. These people were fleeing from danger, they were not looking for country to attack.
Also, the Germany wasn't even a threat to the U.S. until they started joining the war as well. If the U.S. didn't join in, I predict that Hitler would battle Stalin to the death and Nazi Germany would die off.

If you are that worried about Hitler sending spies into the country, we could compromise on a plan, but I wouldn't prefer denying fleeing refugees.

Famousdebater: Basically you're trying to downplay it now. The fact is that the US did not have a travel ban going on during world war 2 that was anything remotely like Trump's.

admin: Let me help. By doing a statistical analysis of what countries are most likely to send extremists to do suicide attacks in your country, you can determine what countries would be best to place a travel ban on, and statistically reduce your countries chances of being on the receiving end of suicide attacks.

Why accept refugees at all. Can somebody do a cost benefit analysis to show it is a good ideal, or is the whole concept based on feels

admin: You did let Germans into your country. Millions of them in fact, as they fled Nazi Germany. And then you used their knowledge to build an atomic bomb and win the war. Also they made spaceships and revolutionized your manufac

Hey let in skilled people, but these are not skilled people. They are uneducated poor.

admin: These weren't religious fanatics either, so they did not pose the same threat.

admin: You did let Germans into your country. Millions of them in fact, as they fled Nazi Germany. And then you used their knowledge to build an atomic bomb and win the war. Also they made spaceships and revolutionized your manufac

Hey let in skilled people, but these are not skilled people. They are uneducated poor.

Wylted: To me it comes down to autonomy - whether you believe these people are naturally entitled to a good chance at life, given the inhospitable, inhumane and life-threatening conditions where they came from. Respecting human dignity on the grounds that others are human and empathy is a virtue is a moral, political, ethical and social imperative.

Wylted: Syria's civil war isn't really about religion nor is Syria particularly uneducated. The only reason they're poor at the moment is because the place is in a civil war that is primarily political in nature.

The only complication is that in the midst of that civil war, religious groups fighting from Iraq (notably ISIS) have also entered the conflict. However the main battle is between the Free Syrian Army and Assad's government forces. The refugees are primarily fleeing a political conflict, and do not pose the same threat. Many are very highly educated by regional standards. There is a component of "spot the ISIS fighter" but the overwhelming majority are regular people who'd rather not get shot.

admin: On that note, it's worth reminding the planet that the whole Syrian civil war LITERALLY started because a young teenager graffitied anti-Assad slogans on a wall. The teenager was beaten by police, people protested the teen's treatment, and things escalated from there. The kid is still alive today yet many thousands have been slain because of him. Pretty weird when you think about it XD

admin: I wonder if he would do it again.