Everything I have researched on the current vetting process just keeps exposing the holes in the refugee system.
Please tell us what holes you found in the roughly two year process a refugee goes through before they are even allowed on US territory.
That is unless you are Cuban.
Statistically, if we are to experience another attack by Islamic terrorists, there is about 99% chance that it will be carried out by someone who is already in the US (citizen, legal resident or illegal alien) or by the millions upon millions of citizens of these countries who can travel to the US with only a passport:
http://www.esta.us/visa_waiver_countries.html
You'll notice that France and Belgium are on the list.
Here are a couple of the more obvious ones
1) References are required. Exactly how does one verify references in a warn torn country? Not only is communicating with a reference an issues but so is vetting that reference
2) No way to keep track of them once they enter this country (same problem as with the Visa system)
We have flaws in our Visa system as well. No doubt about that. Those need to be addressed. Just because one part of our system needs fixing doesn't mitigate the problems with another.
Did you notice the countries that are glaringly missing from that visa wavier list? I did.
You quote statistics. We will pretend that your 99% is a statistical accuracy. These questions need to be addressed
* Do you feel comfortable with the 1%? It all comes down to what price a US citizen's life vs. a non-citizen's life.
* What risk is considered "acceptable" when dealing with human lives?
* What will happen if that 1% participates/perpetuates an attack in the US?
* What will be the consequences of the act? I am not just speaking of the lost lives, but of the backlash against those decent human beings who are legally here?
* What actions should/could/will the US govt take if this happens? What is appropriate?
What amazes me is how few people take the terrorists at their word. The terrorists said they would attack Western cities, and they did. Why would they not then attempt to enter the US via the refugee crisis? They said they would. Seems to me they are looking to keep their word. This isn't just bluffing or bragging on their part. They mean the US harm.
The fact that we have home grown terrorists does not lesson the possibility of a non-citizen gaining entry and attacking the US.
I am not against refugees. I want a secure system which ensures that the motives of those entering the US are for the right reasons. Right now we have a flawed system which terrorists have stated they intend to exploit. Looking at their track record and valuing US citizen lives, the US should be taking this threat seriously and addressing it with more than "platitudes" of "trust the system."