MikeRox said:
man-bear-pig said: What they should have done is created guarded safe zones within Syria and/or made neighbouring Muslim countries accept more refugees where they could've assimilated into society better. Anyone can just throw their passport into the Mediterranean and claim they're a refugee and be accepted into Europe. It's fucked up |
This is why I preferred the "heartless" Tory approach of aid funding being provided for aid camps nearer to where the conflict is happening. The solution isn't to just let everybody migrate across the globe to safer countries. It needs a concerted effort to stabilise refugees' homelands. Which yes, can't happen overnight, but is a damn site more preferable to letting the evil selfish pricks take advantage and turn global opinion against refugees.
|
The Tory aid approach may have had good intentions, after all they sent £600million. What they don't say openly or avoid is what happened to that £600million.
They didn't take any advice from the Muslim charities and other NGOs on the ground and most the aid went into the hands of ISIS.
You can't simply throw money at a problem and hope it goes away. Then you have the second problem with sage zones. When the allies and other countries help, they blow up anything. Within the last month Russia and USA have managed to bomb safe civilian zones and kill over 2-300 innocent civilians.
The easiest thing to do would have been to remove Assad from power (as that would have stopped one of the causes of war there), and then slowly unite Syrians and wipe out ISIS.