The city where I live has a lot of Congolese, Somali, and Burmese refugees. They’re brought here to work at the Tyson factory, because Americans won’t do it (and English-speaking refugees aren’t welcome there, either, because they tend to be educated and ask questions.)
When they move on, and they always do, then they’ll bring Syrians to this area. That’s what happened with the Bosnians in the 1990s.
And how many are in Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Libya?
Libya has a little under 30,000. Of course, they have 360,000 of their own IDPs.
Iran doesn’t have any Syrian refugees, but they host about a million from Afghanistan and Iraq.
Saudi Arabia only hosts 70,000 refugees, I can’t tell how many are from Syria.
Your point is ridiculous and embarrassingly ignorant. You asked “Why doesn’t the Muslim world help out?” Those are your words. The reality is that nearby Muslim countries are hosting almost all of the refugees from Syria. Literally almost all of them.
This situation should be shouldered fairly, and yes the United States should take in refugees.
Among Europe, each EU nation should take several hundred thousands, larger, wealthier nations naturally can take more Syrian and Afghan refugees.
The U.S and Canada have to take a good portion of these people, not some measly 1000 people. In Syria’s own region, Saudi Arabia and Gulf States should also take refugees. One country missing in this equation that should also take in refugees is Iran, they support Bashar al-Assad and his bombing entire cities, allowing ISIS to attack rebels and hence take territory(hence making Iran-Assad-ISIS distant allies). Iran happily funds Assad and blasts regional nations like Turkey, which has taken hundreds of thousands of Syrians. Time for the Islamic Republic regime to put it’s money where it’s mouth is.
Russia included, if Vladimir Putin claims Syrians are fleeing ISIS not the “secular, moderate Assad”, then take in those people fleeing ISIS.
So it is not just one country or region that has to take care of these Syrians escaping war, this is a collective responsibility of many nations.
For the past four and a half years, Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey, as well as Egypt have taken way too many Syrians, as Europe just sat on it’s butt and did nothing and fecklessly called on Assad to go and gave only words of support to the rebels.
Well the chickens have come to roost. And yes we the United States are part of the problem also, we have not taken a decent amount of refugees.
It is embarrassing, like I mentioned Iran has to take in more Syrian refugees, they by supporting and funding Assad and his crimes, have a big hand in causing this problem. Saudi Arabia should take in more, as well as the wealthy smaller Gulf States.
And yes the poster’s assertion that the Muslim world has not taken in any Syrian refugees is nonsense, Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon have been strained for more than four years while we in the West have not zilch or very little. Take Lebanon, some 1.2 million Syrians live there, in a nation of less than five million. Compare that to Germany’s generous figure of 800,000. But Germany has a population of 82 million, compared to tiny Lebanon and Jordan.
Heck even war torn Iraq has taken in many Syrian refugees.
So while some Muslim nations have fallen short, it’s not fair to say that all of Syria
s neighbors have done nothing and only the innocent, European nations are shouldering the burden.
I don’t think it will make any difference, the numbers until now are low. Also, Russia may need to put in much more boots on the ground in Syria. And if things go wrong and Russians start coming home in body bags, Putin will be to blame.
Assad has always had the military upper hand, he has the planes, the funds and weapons from Iran and Russia, still he now controls less of Syria than years before. So I don’t think Putin can do anything, bomb more cities? Well Syria’s government has been doing just that, using chemicals weapons, check.
Really Bashar Assad and his allies have been throwing every God damn thing at the rebels and other groups, and it has achieved diddly squat.
My hunch is ISIS is a good distraction for Assad, so he would not allow Russia or anyone to destroy it. He allows ISIS to encroach onto rebel areas, heck he gave the jihadists an opening to Palmyra.
Plus we have been bombing ISIS, but they are still around, why is Russia better at it? I respect you giving another perspective, but Putin is not as strong and smart as he has led many to believe.
So basically Syrians who escape are cowards, they should all fight and die, or those who remain in Syria must be ISIS supporters? Is that what I think you mean? So you bash those who escape for a better life, and paint those who remain in Syria as ISIS supporters?
Great logic there.:smack::smack::smack::smack::smack:
You are pissed that Syrians don’t want to live in war?
Stay pissed my friend.
If already in Europe, I’m afraid my answer is no, because this will encourage more to come on leaky boats, and more of the tragedies we are reading about.
Instead we should take more people from refugee camps near the countries from which they were displaced.
A large number of refugees are in camps in Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, and Chad, after having been displaced from homes in neighboring countries. US consular officials should interview people who want to immigrate to the US and let in those who show reasonable signs of being ambitious hard workers.
As others have pointed out, there are nations within the Muslim world taking refugees.
But it is besides the point. Showing leadership, being the beacon of humanity we like to claim we are, means doing the right thing for the suffering, huddled masses. There is a need, and decrying those who don’t help isn’t actually helpful.
The fact is that the suffering here is at really horrific levels, and we have the resources to help. I find it interesting that so many Americans think that showing leadership really just means blowing shit up.
Plus, I happen to be one of those who thinks that the best indicator of future success is past success, and I think that the previous waves of immigrants were a huge gain for this country, and I don’t see why we wouldn’t gain from future waves.
Indeed. Interesting that many of those who opposed the Iraqi invasion - and were decried for it - are doing a pretty decent humanitarian job right now.
ISIS, and therefore much of what is happening now, came from that.
Fwiw, this is how most of the world sees the USA.
Absolutely yes. They have even created some of these refugees (invasion of Iraq)
Over 200 000 have come to Europa the last 3 months (most of them from Syria and Iraq).
I have the impression that USA don’t take any refugee at all. Why is that?
[QUOTE=Scandic]
Over 200 000 have come to Europa the last 3 months (most of them from Syria and Iraq).
[/QUOTE]
Damn…all the way to Europa?? That’s a hell of a long way to go…and they must be freaking cold! :eek:
Well, I don’t know why you have that impression. Probably because you never heard of that Cuba place would be my guess. In addition, the US has given the most money in absolute terms to helping the refugees. The thing is, logistically it would be kind of difficult for the US to take in a substantial number of refugees since, you know, the US isn’t in the Middle East nor connected to it via land, nor as close as Europe is wrt the Mediterranean verse that Atlantic Ocean thingy. I wouldn’t personally have any issue with the US taking some of the refugees, and in fact we have…usually those with enough money to actually get here and who have relatives here in the States. I believe Canada has done something similar and for similar reasons. You know who hasn’t taken in many refugees though? A lot of the ME nations, especially the richer ones, though to be fair they have ponied up quite a bit of cash…I think Kuwait is the second largest donator in absolute monetary terms, but that’s from memory.
As far as I know Kuwait is the third largest donor of the UNHCR (after the US and Japan). Other than that I agree that the rich Arabian gulf states could and should do more in therms of taking in refugees.
When it comes to the US and Canada I don’t think the primary reason why they are not taking in more Syrian refugees is logistics. Syrians coming to Europe these days often pay tremendous sums to traffickers. That money would be more than enough to pay for an airline ticket from Turkey to the US - if the US were willing to issue them a visa.
You take immigrants, but hardly any refugees.
USA have actually created the refugee-crisis in Iraq
I think it would be a huge mistake. Every time Germany announces that it will take more, three times more try to enter. The best solution? Get Assad and ISIS to stop fighting, and send them home.
We take between 70k+ refugees in each year in the US (as you will note it dropped…we used to take in more). This is beside the number of immigrants we take in each year (which is in the millions).
As to Iraq, yeah…we probably did have a major impact on creating the problem in Iraq. And, yeah, I think we should offer Iraqis the option of immigrating to the US. But Syria and the situation there is also having a major effect on Iraq (I don’t remember the exact numbers, but it’s in the 100’s of thousands of Syrians who have fled into Iraq)…and I think most of the refugees pounding on Europe’s door are Syrian at this point, though I don’t know what the percentage is.
Well, Assad et al aren’t really fighting ISIS that much, or vice versa, so I don’t see how your plan would really do much. But good luck with that! I’m sure it will work like magic.
ralph’s grasp of foreign policy is a little tenuous.
Yay: King Ralph’s nailed it.
The Naughty Step beckons for ISIS fighters.
Yeah, I’m sure all we need are Russian special forces types in Syria and they will clean up the whole mess post haste. I mean, why doesn’t the US send all our special forces in there (light troops will be SO effective against ISIS after all!), unsupported with air or logistics, to clean house in Syria? Why? Because you never see Obama riding a horse bare chested with a rifle in his hand, that’s why!