I diverge from this post only to the extent that it somewhat minimizes the difficulties in Syria today. While things have certainly quieted down from the height of the post-2011 war, the U.S. continues to punish Syria by:
• starvation sanctions
• occupying with Kurdish proxies the eastern part of the country, depriving Syria of most of its oil revenue and much agricultural land
• occupying the border crossing with Iraq at al-Tanf and a radius of some kilometers around it, obstructing commerce and reportedly giving safe haven (and possibly more) to anti-government, Islamist fighters
• being at best hands-off with (and possibly continuing clandestine support for) the Islamists still in place in Idlib governorate.
The mass-migration pump into Western countries has both push and pull. To stop it efficiently and humanely will require not only stopping the pro-migrant policies pulling these people in, but also the Western policies of immiseration pushing them out.
I agree with you on this issue and I admit to this shortcoming.
Virtually the same, however, could be said about, e.g., Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, etc., yet esp. countries in the 'Global South' continue to push out people (e.g., when Pakistan announced the imminent deportation of over a million Afghans last autumn).
Should 'we' be better than that? I think, for moral reasons, it might be said: yes, of course. Practical considerations, incl. the build-up of anti-immigrant sentiment due to mass immigration, suggest limits.
Please don't ask me what I'd do about it, because I'm unsure how to stop the US-Western juggernaut (to say nothing about what would happen if these aggressions stopped, say, tomorrow).
I diverge from this post only to the extent that it somewhat minimizes the difficulties in Syria today. While things have certainly quieted down from the height of the post-2011 war, the U.S. continues to punish Syria by:
• starvation sanctions
• occupying with Kurdish proxies the eastern part of the country, depriving Syria of most of its oil revenue and much agricultural land
• occupying the border crossing with Iraq at al-Tanf and a radius of some kilometers around it, obstructing commerce and reportedly giving safe haven (and possibly more) to anti-government, Islamist fighters
• being at best hands-off with (and possibly continuing clandestine support for) the Islamists still in place in Idlib governorate.
The mass-migration pump into Western countries has both push and pull. To stop it efficiently and humanely will require not only stopping the pro-migrant policies pulling these people in, but also the Western policies of immiseration pushing them out.
I agree with you on this issue and I admit to this shortcoming.
Virtually the same, however, could be said about, e.g., Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, etc., yet esp. countries in the 'Global South' continue to push out people (e.g., when Pakistan announced the imminent deportation of over a million Afghans last autumn).
Should 'we' be better than that? I think, for moral reasons, it might be said: yes, of course. Practical considerations, incl. the build-up of anti-immigrant sentiment due to mass immigration, suggest limits.
Please don't ask me what I'd do about it, because I'm unsure how to stop the US-Western juggernaut (to say nothing about what would happen if these aggressions stopped, say, tomorrow).
I can sum it up in two words for you: Trojan Horse.
Time bomb, if you’d ask me.