Argument: Openness to foreign students generally benefits national security

Supporting quotes from the Economist Debate Series

  • milci, commenter. Economist Online Debate Series. December 19, 2007 14:03 – “The US should be aware of the fact that terrorists will enter it quite independent of the visa authorities efforts. 500.000 illegal imigrants enter the USA every year. They already have 12 milllion of them. The visa restrictions introduced by them since 2001 only make the image of the USA as the Land of the Free deteriorate.”
  • milci, commenter. Economist Online Debate Series. December 19, 2007 14:03 – “The best way to fight terrorism �€“ globally �€“ is with the attitudes and arguments that foreign students can readily learn by studying abroad.”
  • milci, commenter. Online Debate Series, Education 2. December 14th, 2007 – …”This is One World (Wendell Wilkie 1944)now the more we know of each others the better the chance to have peace and less of a chance for dangerous demeagogues and troublemakers to be successfull. The terrorist danger is minimal and anyway terrorists will get where they want to get anyway. With false papers and illegally if it has to be. The Americans believe there were no more terrorist attacks in the USA since they created their homeleand security department and their ridiculous system of denying visas to perfectly normal and serious people. There were no more terrorist attacksd because Osama bin-Laden got whwt he wanted. Provoque panic, cause damage and huge expenses and make the USA`s image worse and worse in the world. What a pity! America used to be the hiope for all the poor, miserable people i9n the world. They created that fantastic country which was a leader in the world rdespecting and protecting Human Rights. This is not anymore the image even if basically it still is, together with the EU and a few other countries the home of free people. Nothing better then to make Democracy American style popular then to have students from foreign countries.”…
  • bluesphere, commenter. Economist Online Debate Series. December 11, 2007 13:35 – “Jessica Vaughan’s suggestion that counter-terrorism is one plausible argument against this proposition is farcical and flawed. Surely the same ‘ideal cover for terrorists, criminals, and other young, unattached people who would not otherwise qualify for entry’ could also be a counter-intelligence recruitment opportunity? In a truly free market global economy, the free movement of students, and all people, is something that smart economies embrace and benefit from. The United States, the EU and, more recently, China, have benefited from freedom of labor movement. Yes, there are issues, but the state is paid to mitigate those threats.”
  • Etcher, commenter. Economist Online Debate Series. December 12, 2007 09:11 – “Barricades around every government building, reinforced garbage cans in subway stations, constant announcements to report anyone or anything suspicious and every foreigner is a potential terrorist. With some notable exceptions, I don’t believe most in government seek to create this overarching paranoia with a sense of malice, but rather through an unchecked desire to protect themselves and the people, building, power plant, fill in the blank. No one wants to be responsible for bad things happening and it is in our nature to blame �€“ and no one wants to be blamed. So we build taller walls, we buy more guns, we spy on our neighbors and we fear those not like us. And so stagnates creativity, innovation, new ideas. Therefore, I support the proposition and am willing to live with some uncertainty as to other’s motivations.”