CreateDebate


Debate Info

7
10
The hand wingers out in force. No concern for the U.S. poor.
Debate Score:17
Arguments:13
Total Votes:17
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 The hand wingers out in force. (4)
 
 No concern for the U.S. poor. (7)

Debate Creator

Ahoghill(1452) pic



Is this an opportunity for the santimonious to display feigned humanitarianism?

Still reeling from the resettlement of refugees from the politician's induced Syrian crisis we're now going to have to dole out for their political ''MASTERPIECE'' in Afghanistan.
The POLITICAL FILTH started this unwinnable, futile crusade in Bananastan and as usual we, the taxpayer will have to  pay the price for their stupidity.

The hand wingers out in force.

Side Score: 7
VS.

No concern for the U.S. poor.

Side Score: 10
2 points

Those wishing to claim the moral high-ground are clambering to be seen and heard expressing their plans, ( financed by you and I, the taxpayers) for the poor Afghan displaced people while totally ignoring the poor and homeless here in the United States.

There is less glamor in addressing the domestic humanitarian emergency here at home so the ''do-gooders'' are out in force with their fake grimacing with hand-wringing.

THE VIRTUE SIGNALERS ARE HAVING A BALL

Side: The hand wingers out in force.
Jace(5222) Disputed
1 point

i suspect that most people who support accepting political refugees also support addressing domestic poverty and homelessness. it's not obviously an either-or set of issues.

that said, most people who do lip service to these commitments do little to nothing to realize them. that's hardly unique, though; people are rarely committed in action to what they profess. welcome to the species.

Side: No concern for the U.S. poor.
1 point

Through giving our politicians carte-blanche powers we in the west, ALL OF US created humanitarian, social and economic problems in a number of failed Muslim nations then expect adulation for helping some of those we nailed to the cross to escape crucifixion.

There is a significant shortfall of social housing in most western nations yet withal the virtue-signalling politicians are blustering about giving the Afghanistan refugees (their refugees) priority when it comes to the allocation of housing.

WHAT COUNTRY WILL WE LET OUR POLITICIANS DESTROY NEXT?

COME ON, WHERE AND WHEN?

Side: The hand wingers out in force.
excon(18261) Disputed
3 points

Is this an opportunity for the santimonious to display feigned humanitarianism?

Hello A:

I dunno.. Is it humanitarian to PROMISE a bunch of people that they'll be PROTECTED, and then ABANDON them to a fate worse than death? If somebody is WRONG here, it's NOT the people who were LIED to..

Look.. I'm a Jew.. I'm not enamored with Arabs. But, I'm LESS enamored with a country who abandons their friends, no matter what color those friends happen to be..

excon

Side: No concern for the U.S. poor.
Ahoghill(1452) Clarified
1 point

I can't remember the exact circumstances which led to our political masters deciding to invade Afghanistan in the first place.

I'm no historian but I am aware that the even when the British were at their military zenith they could not quell the Afghan warlords and had to withdraw.

Then, for some reason the Russians invaded with the objective of defeating the Taliban and imposing their own puppet government.

The upshot was that the Ruskies got their ass whipped.

Then we and our allies came along and, well here we are 20 years later, with some 4000 American and allied military personnel dead with countless others suffering life shattering injuries, but no further on.

Something is screwy.

It's not the peoples of America nor those of its allies.

It's not the Afghan people.

IT IS HOWEVER, THE POLITICIANS, PAST AND PRESENT.

To those who assert that we should not have disengaged with the enemy I would ask;-

How much longer do you propose we stay?

What do you hope will be achieved during this extended period?

How much more taxpayer's dollars should we direct towards what appears to be a futile war?

Afghanistan is a money sponge and directing American's HARD-EARNED DOSH in their direction is like throwing cookies to an elephant.

Anyway, it's all over except for those wishing to make political gain from the needless slaughter of American military personnel and the plight of the Afghans.

Side: The hand wingers out in force.
Jace(5222) Disputed
1 point

this seriously exaggerates the influence of the average person on international politics.

Side: No concern for the U.S. poor.
2 points

More cultural enrichment, more stress on all our social services, police, courts, prisons and further encroachments on our civil rights as the ''politician's refugees'' stake out their turf into which the average citizen of the various host nations daren't venture.

Left-right-up or down it's the politicians and the progressive media who whittle away at our quality of life with their ineptness and fake humanitarian concern.

WHO PAYS THE PRICE?;- WE DUMMIES DO.

Side: No concern for the U.S. poor.

These do-gooders are all for bringing these people here as long as they're settled in YOUR neighborhood, not theirs.

Side: No concern for the U.S. poor.
excon(18261) Disputed
2 points

These do-gooders are all for bringing these people here as long as they're settled in YOUR neighborhood, not theirs.

Hello High:

I'm just not sure that I'd call somebody who HONORS their word, a do-gooder..

So, tell me... What do you call somebody who makes PROMISES, and then reneges??

What DO you call a person like that??

excon

Side: The hand wingers out in force.