| thranx said: should also our have our military on the ground there to solve the reason or refugees. |
How exactly can that be done cheaply and without huge costs? Isn't one of the major reasons not to take in refugees cost? How is having troops in multiple countries fighting many different enemies, disrupting the middle-east more than it is already disrupted, creating more ideological boundaries, positioning alliances in much the same way that the World Wars started and the Cold War developed, and wasting tons of manpower, dollars, and resources going to resolve this issue? It is obvious after the decades of intervention in the Middle-East that the "war on terrorism" has been as effective as the "war on drugs" and the "war on poverty", in other words, it has exacerbated the problem through blowback.
It is simple in my opinion. Accept anybody who comes here through private dollars. That is no cost to the taxpayer, and almost half of the resources that bring refugees here are raised through private charity as it is. Leave the middle east to self-destruct or become tamed by Russian taxpayers. Focus on cost reforms here by cutting huge money-draining domestic resources. Don't take out any more massive amounts of debt which will bite Americans in the future. Defense spending should be spent on defense, and not the destructive preventative warfare. The progressive ideology of transplanting democracy to the rest of the world is a failure in this case. Wilsonian internationalism does not work.
