Quote:
Originally Posted by techguyone
I'll say it again. The UK response of a measured, planned, controlled acceptance of Refugee
|
I don't think the world would agree that 20,000 refugees over 4 years is in any way a measured response from the world's 4th wealthiest nation.
Saying that, you are missing the point: the UK should be helping more, much more but not in the way the right wing are bleating about i.e. taking in people into the UK. What should be happening, and Cameron should be leading on this, is to establish:
- set-up of safe havens inside Syria and Iraq backed up by ground troops if necessary
- investment in permament refugee camps in neighbouring countries, run by the UNHR and funded by the US, UK, EU, etc
- support of neighbouring countries e.g. Lebanon, Turkey, etc in they ability to accomodate the refugees
- deployment of Nato troops to Turkey to control the flow of people, materiel and money to ISIS
- working with Russia to defeat ISIS and the Islamist rebels, constrain Assad in his killing of civilians and then later aim to remove Assad from power if possible
Doing this is in the UK's national interest and will seek to cure the cause of the problem and not the symptoms.
Cameron and the West are watching Rome burn .. they are trying to handle the fallout from a conflict they are not attempting to control. At some point, the Middle East will get to a point where it will not be containable ..
Imagine if ISIS defeats Assad and whose border will they then be knocking on? Israel ... Hamas on one side, ISIS on the other. That is not going to play out well ..