I realize you're making a snarky political point, but, "Refugees are bad for a country's culture but we should still let them in if they exist" is a perfectly consistent position. It's trading off prevention of something unwanted but not an evil (cultural dilution) in order to prevent an actual evil (death of the refugees).
"We should let refugees in, but we should avoid creating refugees" is also a consistent moral position, and perhaps a more obvious one.
(Also, as an American citizen, the fact that we're not absorbing a significant fraction of the refugees in Europe when we have the resources to do so is absolutely unconscionable. I now feel like every time I was taught "never again" in grade school, it was just virtue signaling and we're actually totally fine with it happening again.)
"We should let refugees in, but we should avoid creating refugees" is also a consistent moral position, and perhaps a more obvious one.
(Also, as an American citizen, the fact that we're not absorbing a significant fraction of the refugees in Europe when we have the resources to do so is absolutely unconscionable. I now feel like every time I was taught "never again" in grade school, it was just virtue signaling and we're actually totally fine with it happening again.)