I see no place to comment on this essay.
I am surprised by the number of Republicans who echo these talking points.
The essay does not mention the low average IQ of Syrians (about 83).
By Kim Cragin and Ben Connable of Rand Corporation:
It will take some time to parse all of the events in the Paris attacks, but reporting indicates that at least one of the suicide bombers used a stolen Syrian passport and followed the refugee path to France via Turkey and Greece.
This one attacker now has politicians on both sides of the Atlantic calling for moratoria on Syrian refugee programs.
We argue that the opposite approach—taking in even more Syrian refugees—is not only humane but could bleed the Islamic State militant group (ISIS) dry and deliver the kind of “strategic messaging” victory sought by the U.S.-led coalition.
The United Nations has registered 4.3 million refugees from the conflict in Syria and an additional 370,000 from Iraq. Approximately 123,000 of these refugees have sought asylum in Europe. Together, Canada and the United States have taken in about 5,400.
The international media have documented their journeys. These refugees have risked hypothermia, starvation and death. Families have been separated, and many loved ones have been lost. Yet they keep leaving their homes in search of a safer, better life.
These people deserve compassion for what they have experienced and admiration for their bravery. Of the 123,000, just one has so far been implicated in an attack.
The humanitarian crisis, by any measure, outweighs the risk. But that was known before the attacks in Paris. The challenge is that these attacks have increased pressure on government officials to do more. The calls for action are drowning out the cries for compassion. Instead of blocking Syrian refugees, more should be done. Taking in more Syrians could help defeat ISIS.
After all, what good is an Islamic caliphate if nobody wants to live there?
