I would like a reason why America must lead and point out that there are so many more options than fear or resolve.  I choice neither, for the record.

Simply put, no one else will do it and no one else has the resources.

And I don't like that either. I opposed our rescue efforts of the Muslims in Kosovo maintaining that the (now) EU countries should fix their problems and quit waiting for "Sugar Daddy" to show up. I called my reps, etc., etc. BUT when we went in I shut up and supported the troops.

Now, my turn.

Tell me what reason, moral, legal or otherwise that we are supposed to accept thousands of "refugees" that mostly will have a large number of people who will not assimilate into our society, demand special treatment in schools, work places and society in general. And it is very reasonable to believe that a percentage of them will be radical islamists or become radical islamist and attack us.

Why can't the Muslim countries accept them?

One key premise here seems to be that prior to the Snowden reporting, The Terrorists helpfully and stupidly used telephones and unencrypted emails to plot, so Western governments were able to track their plotting and disrupt at least large-scale attacks. That would come as a massive surprise to the victims of the attacks of 2002 in Bali, 2004 in Madrid, 2005 in London, 2008 in Mumbai, and April 2013 at the Boston Marathon. How did the multiple perpetrators of those well-coordinated attacks -- all of which were carried out prior to Snowden's June 2013 revelations -- hide their communications from detection?

This is a glaring case where propagandists can't keep their stories straight. The implicit premise of this accusation is that The Terrorists didn't know to avoid telephones or how to use effective encryption until Snowden came along and told them. Yet we've been warned for years and years before Snowden that The Terrorists are so diabolical and sophisticated that they engage in all sorts of complex techniques to evade electronic surveillance.

By itself, the glorious mythology of How the U.S. Tracked Osama bin Laden should make anyone embarrassed to make these claims. After all, the central premise of that storyline is that bin Laden only used trusted couriers to communicate because al Qaeda knew for decades to avoid electronic means of communication because the U.S. and others could spy on those communications. Remember all that? Zero Dark Thirty and the "harsh but effective" interrogation of bin Laden's "official messenger"?

Link

And I should remind you: Snowden did not disclose anything.  The disclosures all came from media outlets, outlets that made the decisions about what to reveal and when.

And here's another inconvenient little fact that is probably the real reason Snowden's name is being invoked:

At least three of the men involved in planning and carrying out the French attacks were known to European authorities. Ismaël Omar Mostefaï, who helped carry out the massacre at the Bataclan concert venue, had been flagged as a radicalization risk in 2010. French police reportedly ignored two warnings about Mostefaï before he carried out the attacks. Some of his friends claimed to have tried to alert French police about his radical views, but said they were told the authorities could do nothing. Samy Amimour, another of the men involved in the Bataclan massacre, had been previously charged with terrorist offenses "after an abortive attempt to travel to Yemen," according to Paris prosecutors. The alleged mastermind behind the attacks, Abdelhamid Abaaoud, was also well-known to European police; he featured prominently in jihadi propaganda and was named as a wanted extremist after a gun battle in Belgium in January. Others involved in the attacks are also likely to have been on the radar of police and intelligence agencies due to their travels to Syria. Bilal Hadfi, for instance, was living in Belgium after having returned from Syria, where he is believed to have fought with Islamic State militants. Hadfi apparently attended the Instituut Anneessens-Funck college in Brussels; his former history professor recalled that, following the Charlie Hebdo massacre in January 2015, Hadfi defended the attacks. The professor reported him to management due to concerns about his radical views, but management "decided not to intervene, to avoid stigmatizing the young student." In June, Hadfi reportedly posted on his Facebook page encouraging terrorist attacks: "Those dogs are attacking our civilians everywhere. Strike them in their community of pigs so they can't feel safe again in their own dreams." The family of Ibrahim Abdeslam, who detonated a suicide vest inside a cafe during the attacks, said he too had spent "a long time" in Syria before returning to Europe.

"Snowden!"  Only slightly less popular than "Benghazi!"  But, golly, pretty sure "Snowden!" will lap "Benghazi!" in short order.