People are fleeing, yes. And I would argue to your next point about ISIS gaining territory that refusing displaced refugees leads to higher levels of human-trafficking and abductions. Many of these will also be at a greater risk of being indoctrinated, because what do they have to lose? These people are likely to be psychologically traumatised and damaged, the perfect breeding ground for extremist indoctrination. Interesting that you accept the surface info supplied to you about the air strikes being "controlled".
" The sheer pace of the strikes adds to the risk to civilians.....pre-planned missions made up approximately 10% of strikes. The vast majority are on “emerging targets”. In these strikes the targeting process takes “anywhere from minutes to hours depending on collateral damage concerns" (SOURCE: The Guardian) Most of these emerging targets are in cities, which is where civilians are - obviously. Poorly and quickly planned, leading to countless deaths and more bloodbaths - from the wrong side.
You say "destroying one base where they recruit and train fighters is worth killing 100 civilians in an air strike". Really? If you put a blowing up a single camp in perspective, against the international network of increasing indoctrination and underground ties.. That's barely a drop in the ocean. And for what? You really do put a low price on civilian deaths - the statistics have blinded you. How many more dead babies have to wash up on the shore before we take off our rose-tinted glasses? These are human beings - children, women, men. They have just as much of a right to life as you. And they have a right to run - God knows I would!
"If ISIS members were let in the chances of a terrorist attacks goes higher" - well yes. But out of the thousands and thousands of refugees that have rightly fled, how many have been part of a terrorist attack? One? Zero? Like I mentioned, they're home grown. They don't need to waste time and money and effort smuggling everyone across when there are plenty of vulnerable youths that are happy to join up.You're right in that we can't deport homegrown terrorists. So what do we do? We need to attack the heart of the issue, and that's the ideology and minds of the (mainly) young males in our countries. We need to provide centres where they can come off the streets and be given a shot at life. There are places like this in Brussels and they have been proven effective at battling the problem - if I recall correctly there were actually people in this youth centre who had considered extremism but were pulled out of the ideology thanks to the centre. We need to protect people, not bomb senselessly and actually aggravate the problem.
Just some info:
"The majority of asylum seekers do not have the right to work in the United Kingdom and so must rely on state support.Housing is provided, but asylum seekers cannot choose where it is, and it is often ‘hard to let’ properties which Council tenants do not want to live in.Cash support is available, and is currently set at £36.95 per person, per week, which makes it £5.28 a day for food, sanitation and clothing." (SOURCE: Home Office)
They do not 'jump housing queues' as they do not get to choose where they live, which are often 'hard to let' properties. They are not paid for by the local council.
Additional facts:
• It is estimated that it costs around £25,000 to support a refugee doctor to practise in the UK. Training a new doctor is estimated to cost between £200,000 and £250,000 (source:
http://www.nhsemployers.org/Aboutus/Publications/Pages/ReapingTheRewards.aspx - October 2009 NHS employers)
• The UK is home to less than 1% of the world’s refugees – out of more than 59.5 million forcibly displaced people worldwide. (Source: UNHCR Mid-Year Trends 2015)
• Immigrants, including refugees, pay more into the public purse compared to their UK born counterparts. (Source: Institute for Public Policy Research, Paying their way: the fiscal contribution of immigrants in the UK, 2005)
Hope this informed you a little bit!