Our invasion of Iraq caused a massive humanitarian crisis that included millions of refugees forced to flee their homes, often due to the sectarian violence that invasion unleashed. Rand Paul has a morally horrible reason why we should just ignore their plight:
“We won the war in Iraq, why would we be giving political asylum to people to come from a country where we won the war?” Paul asked. “It’s one thing if you’re trying to escape Castro or trying to escape communism in Russia or Vietnam or somewhere else or China, I can understand asylum, but when you win the war, why would you give people asylum? And if the 60,000 coming here are friends of the West, wouldn’t you want that 60,000 to be in Iraq helping to form a better country over there?”
He continued: “If you let the better people, the people who like the United States leave and come here, then aren’t you diminishing the numbers of folks that would make that country a better place to live? So I think the whole idea of resettling 60,000 people from Iraq over here was a mistake. But I also think that the refugee program as well as the student visa program are some of the highest risks for us to be attacked.”
Okay Rand, which is it? Are those refugees so wonderful and pro-American that we should leave them in Iraq to lead that country to glory? Or are they so violent and anti-American that they pose a huge risk if we bring them here? Reminds me of the arguments against immigration — they’re coming here to take all of our jobs AND they’re coming here to sponge off our welfare system. They can’t both be true.