(November 17, 2015 at 3:02 am)RaphielDrake Wrote: In all honesty I can't decide which is the right call.It's doubtful if there is a right call. The West instigated the chaos and now has to deal with it. As a result of every war we suck people out of the countries that we have fought and now it's the turn of the people in the Middle East.
On one hand banning the refugees will alienate that nation and may well drive other members of that country into the arms of fanaticism while allowing some of its more rational occupants to be destroyed thanks to turning them away.
On the other hand if we accept them when theres a clear tone of fanaticism in that countries national identity right now then it could actually begin to seep into the US over the next 30-40 years and make homegrown terrorism more likely just like in the UK. Not only that if we are accepting the rational Syrians then who is left to counter the irrational ones?
It doesn't seem like either one is a solution. The opposition to the fanaticism needs to be empowered, not hidden away.
The people on the road are in dire straits. The weather will soon start turning really cold and countless kids and older people will freeze to death. There will be bodies everywhere. Germany is trying to house them, even at the point of kicking Germans out of their homes. Each refugee that makes it to England costs the country about $38,000. Sooner or later even the bleeding hearts will get tired of the expense.
At some point the average citizen will kick the politicians to the curb and the countries will fall into repressive dictatorships. Tens of millions of people will be killed. We are witnessing a major historical event.
