Why Limit Requiring All Countries' To Have An Open Door Policy For Just Syrian Refuge

Sometimes the viewpoint that is not in the spotlight that is not the solution frequently being proposed is the right thing for a country and countries to do! This situation fits perfectly for the Syrian refugee problem for the solution being pushed is all Western countries need to fully open their doors to Syrian refugees! Of course it is a good thing and if need be it should be lobbied for all Western countries to take in some of these refugees so that all these countries are behaving as good humanitarian countries. But pursuit of an "open door" policy is just plain wrong almost all these Western countries already have a problem where they cannot create enough good paying jobs for their current citizens to ask them to take in additional people into their country that will compete for jobs against their own citizens is not right and good governments have a duty to create good livable wage jobs for their own citizens that takes priority over helping foreigners fleeing their own failed country. It is really this simple the government of a country has a duty first to its own citizens over foreigners this might be abhorrent and an enigma to liberal and leftist values commonly held by peoples throughout the world but it is the truly good viewpoint.



In addition look what is going on with this Syrian refugee problem a dangerous precedent is being set here. Experts and even Syrians themselves will tell you what is going on here is Syrians are despairing they are giving up on their home country of Syria. They are saying Syria is a failed country that does not offer security, civil rights, economic opportunity, etc. to its own people and there is no real hope in the foreseeable future that it will, Syrians must find a new country. People throughout the world need to say I am sorry Syrians but this is not a justification for seeking membership in another country. Being part of a country is an awesome and precious privilege these circumstances for you Syrians don't warrant the grant of such a privilege.



The viewpoint that is the optimally good viewpoint the one that should be followed is the one often publicly spoken about as if it is a brainstorming idea, the free world needs to create secure zones inside Syria close to the border for these Syrian refugees. This is not a novel idea the free world has done this numerous times in the past especially in Africa. It is really evident as the solution when the problem is characterized correctly, this Syrian problem really involves the question what should the world do about the approximately four million Syrian refugees fleeing their home country because of a multi-party war and there is no permanent place for these four million people to go? The answer is create secure zones, the world has done it numerous times in Africa specifically in Darfur Sudan as one example!



As so often said and said appropriately, the devil is in the details on the issue! The international community is going to need a robust security force to create and secure these security zones. These security forces can't be the typical UN security force of lightly armed soldiers with jeeps and trucks these forces will need tanks and artillery units probably it should be a NATO operation. Come to think of it isn't the purpose of NATO to protect the sovereignty of NATO countries and isn't a million plus people migrating into NATO countries in violation of these countries' laws a violation of these countries' sovereignty? Maybe NATO should just be fulfilling its role here! The international communities participating should make a multiyear commitment to this force you cannot expect Syrian refugees to return to Syria when they are going to have to repeat the fleeing process in eighteen months because the zones collapsed for the lack of a strong international force protection. The international community is going to have to make a multi-year significant financial aide commitment of course there will be settlement camps in these security zones where the inhabitants will need housing, food and medical care this will at least require four to five billion dollars of aid per year.



The security zone solution to the Syrian refugee problem will also help bring about an overall solution to the Syria being a failed country problem. As put forth on numerous occasions the solution to fixing the country of Syria problem is that Syria needs a decentralized form of government where the people in the provinces essentially govern themselves so that largely you separate the major Syrian sects of Alawites, Sunnis and Kurds. If the international community sets up these security zones in Syria with millions of largely Sunni Syrians in them it will become obvious to Alawite leadership, Kurdish leadership and Sunni leadership that the only future for Syria and their respective peoples is a decentralized government where each people largely govern themselves. Furthermore, what is the demographic make-up of these Syrian refugees it is obvious from news reels that one truth is that there is a hell of a lot of young and middle aged men in this group, so if the international community essentially sticks this demographic into camps inside Syria where they have no option other than to stay in Syria unless the Alawite and Kurdish leadership is brain dead they are going to support a good negotiated peace settlement because the alternative over time is that the Syrian Sunni's population through natural demographic growth will be able to take over the country of Syria by means of force of arms!



American politicians so far have conducted themselves shamefully on this Syrian refugee problem because America is a far distance from the Middle East the American government has not had to deal with this actual human migration problem so American politicians have taken the easy path by just calling for European governments to help these desperate refugees on European Union soil. American politicians have to stop their double standard they expect European Union countries to step up when America's security and other interests are at stake America has to do the same now when the European Union countries interests are being really harmed. The American government needs to step-up and support the only solution here which is the international community needs to create safe zones in Syria for these millions of Syrian people. Further, the German government needs to fully consider the interests of the other countries of the European Union these other countries don't have the jobs and resources to accept these refugees en masse the German government needs to recognize this truth and support the only viable alternative solution the creation of "security zones" in Syria for these refugees, if Germany and the U.S. team up and fully support this security zone solution happening one can bet the house it will happen!

 

President Obama and EU leaders are so committed to not putting in any troops to do the obvious an create security zones, the only alternative is mass scale immigration to EU Countries. It makes NO sense. Rather than using small military forces that would allow safety to the most at risk refugees - women, children and the elderly - the EU and USA is going to expend vastly greater sums of money that will required years of expenditures and massive police work to instead have mass waves of primarily only young males.

Why do you only mention Germany and the USA? Why not also France, the UK and other EU countries too? THAT is what the EU should require - not quotas for each country of taking in young male immigrants. Rather, that it is countries that will not participate in creating and defending a Security Zone in Syria and Northern Iraq must accept refugees.

 

It is an interesting subject but your post is too long to be able to respond to everything you write about. So, for the sake of other readers I will limit myself to your first paragraph only and to the last sentence of that paragraph: "It is really this simple the government of a country has a duty first to its own citizens over foreigners this might be abhorrent and an enigma to liberal and leftist values commonly held by peoples throughout the world but it is the truly good viewpoint." This is a false forced choice. Not only is it unnecessary to choose between citizens of a country and refugees but helping refugees is a mutual benefit to both the asylum seekers and the citizens. Immigrants help build an economy, work, pay taxes, and provide labor and services for existing citizens. Economies always benefit from immigration in various respects.

 

Anybody give the U.S. anything for the 11 million refugees we've taken in?...

The Latest: US to give $419 million in aid to Syria refugees
Sep 21,`15-- The latest developments as European governments rush to cope with the huge number of people moving across Europe. All times local:

See also:

Bickering in the Balkans: Officials clash over migrants
Sep 21,`15 -- The war of words over Europe's migrant crisis is turning vicious, with officials in the bickering Balkans trading blame and accusations of lying, while also disparaging each other's actions as "pathetic" and a "disgrace."

 

Please provide evidence non-White immigrants to White majority nations are always beneficial.

 

I blame homosexual men.

 

Some do, but most don't - especially since we have a serious unemployment problem here in the UK.

 

It is well known that the English are xenophobic. They complain about immigrants taking all the jobs they will not do themselves and also complain about them not working and on benefits.

 

It has nothing to do with race.

 

To a greater or lesser degree, everyone is xenophobic - including you.

 

Speak for yourself, cerberus.

 

Proof? How does that answer my question?

 

I'm kind of a fundamentalist here, but shouldn't a country that drives its own citizens out (for whatever reason) be considered enemy of the entire world?

 

An enemy state would be one that means us harm. It does not follow that a country which fails to look after its own will want to do harm to other countries. At the same time, they need not be our allies.
We see it in nature, some animals will reject their own young and abandon them or even kill them. Humans too are known to do this. Many children have to flee from neglectful or abusive parents. When this happens, those with consideration and love to spare will take them in. So it is with countries; we can take in refugees.

Rescue Pit Bull, Lacey, Becomes Foster Mom To 16 Abandoned Puppies

 

It's not a matter of intent to do us harm. Fact is, they ARE doing us harm. And I'm not just picking on ISIS here. Vietnam did it. Rwanda did it. Mexico is doing it. Israel has been doing it for 70 years. None of those people want to be pushed out of their homes and none of the accepting countries want to be forced into becoming humanitarians.

Btw, I'm a huge fan of pit bulls.

 

Any take on the murderous Muslim xenophobes with genocidal tendencies who murder Christians in Syria and Iraq? How about the Sunnis and Shi'ites in Iraq? Germany has this thing for Muslims since they and Turkey were allies in WW1. Should the rest of Europe give a damn about the German complexes? The policy of broken in doors and windows must be scrapped and the power-crazy Eurocrats must join the asylum rather than handing out asylums.

 

Sorry but your post is incoherent.