Gov. David Ige, chief executive of the Aloha State, surely felt it would be the wrong message to send, telegraphing that Hawaii would depart from its own tradition and decline accommodations for refugees.

And so he didn’t. On Monday, while more than half of the nation’s governors were saying “no” to accepting settlement of refugees from war-torn Syria, Ige announced that Hawaii would welcome any who came here. “Slamming the door in their face would be a betrayal of our values,” he said.

From a moral standpoint, that was the right thing to do. Hawaii leaders should take a philosophical stand in alignment with the islands’ melting-pot history, as well as American ideals of safe harbor for those seeking life-saving asylum.

But as a practical matter, it’s hard to see how Hawaii would fit well within any resettlement program the federal government devises.

There are general public security concerns that have become heightened since the weekend terrorist attack in Paris that horrified the world. These are rational concerns, given that the terrorists struck soft targets, innocents who were simply engaged in ordinary pursuits. Hawaii would not be immune from such an attack.

One of those implicated in the horrific violence, for which the jihadist organization Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, has taken credit, may have used a faked Syrian passport to slip into Europe disguised as a refugee. Global fears were ratcheted up further this week when German officials uncovered an apparent plan to bomb a soccer match.

Ige has expressed confidence that the federal and state governments would work together on the vetting process. But even if the challenges there could be surmounted — many of these refugees are said to be documented, with family registries that could be researched for criminal linkages — there is an even higher hurdle for Hawaii.

That is the issue of capacity. This state has been struggling with accommodations of its homeless population. Many of these are people who are refugees of a sort: The Micronesian migrants come to Hawaii seeking better employment prospects and treatment for medical illnesses under a compact with the federal government.

The economic and social woes facing Hawaii’s low-income residents have pushed many into life on the streets and in shelters, as well. State and city governments are only beginning to develop solutions for some of them.

Without a large infusion of federal funds and resources, it’s unrealistic to expect that Hawaii could take in more.

Finally, compounding the high cost of living in Hawaii is the fact that this state lacks a Syrian community that could help with acculturation.

In a news conference Tuesday, Ige cited federal sources saying that Hawaii has not been the point of settlement for any Syrian refugees in a decade. This compares with California and other states that have taken hundreds and have well-established Syrian communities.

The question of how the U.S. should counter the ISIS threat uncovers myriad complications and suboptimal strategic options, none of which leads to quick resolution.

ISIS has leveraged technology to export its perverse and inhumane ideology around the world: Military operations alone can’t extinguish an idea.

But the perception that ISIS is succeeding must be diminished, if the recruiting strength of the Islamic State is to be dismantled. That will require a cohesive counteroffensive by the U.S. and its allies. They should be joined by powers that have been adversaries — Russia and Iran are the leading examples — but could find common cause in combatting ISIS, through combined intelligence forces and military assets.

Much of the help for the besieged Syrian people should come, both in troop support and in the provision of safe zones for those in flight from battle, from the neighboring Mideast countries that to date have eluded their own responsibility in the crisis.

Even Hawaii should find some way to provide humanitarian support in the U.S. outreach to refugees fleeing war. That is what we should want to do. The realistic options on the ground here, however — as they are in Syria itself — are not so clear-cut.