I never really felt the need to write about my view on the (European) refugee crisis (since there was a pretty big thread about it), but well.. here we go. As a European i honestly don't know how to feel about this ban on immigration. I understand this is not a ban specifically aimed at muslims (but do realize this is coming from an administration that wants to implement a register for muslims living in the country), but is related to refugees coming from countries that are torn up in conflicts and aims at lowering the chance of having this agression eventually hitting American soil - as it did in Europe (i will not deny this) and has done in America in the past as well with the 9/11 attacks.
I see my political orientation as pretty left'ish. Just like my dear friend absent i'm a socialist, except for the nationalist part that he adds to it. However i try to keep an open mind regarding every political subject because i feel that 'left' and 'right' hardly exists anymore: people vary in this on many different points. I have read the past few pages and read some pretty valid arguments for imposing a ban like this. Especially the fact that it's just way more cost efficient to help refugees in the local area, instead of taking them up in our countries. However that's not really being done as effectively either, because they still end up moving out of the Middle East partly due to the fact that the help they're getting in neighbouring countries is not sufficient - let alone the fact that except for Saudi Arabia most neighbouring countries don't have the resources for it. On top of that: a bunch of neighbouring countries did ask for help in the past (especially Turkey's charming Erdogan, who wanted the UN to aid him with creating a safe zone in eastern Turkey and a part of Syria) but weren't helped by the UN because.. you know.. money.
The one thing i do think is the same that DMAUL said a few pages ago: regarding terrorism it's pretty fucking safe over here. The chance of becoming a victim in a terrorist attack is really low so for me this feels like a classic case of fearmongering. Yes some attacks happened both in Europe and America and it's horrible, but if you compare the amount of casualties to other cases in where people die due to whatever, you see that the amount is much, but then much lower. Looking at America there's an average of two people dieing by the hands of radical muslims a year, opposing to:
Now i understand that we have to be careful about everything that can lead up to death. I agree on the fact that we should be extra careful regarding gun violence and terrorist attacks, because unlike natural disasters or deaths resulting from traffic or anything like that these come forth out of things that are not unstoppable or benefit our society in any other way.
So yes: implementing measures to try and keep the amount of casualties 'the same' or preferably lower them is something we should all be looking at. But here comes the million dollar question:
will this measure be effective? I mean seriously.. there are so many other countries to depart from to gain entrance into the USA. If a group wants to go for a 'coordinated' terrorist attack it won't be such a huge effort for them to fake ID's, get a tourist visa and to still be able to do it. Especially in a country where you can buy a fucking assault rifle at basically every streetcorner (where those bans at bro?). All it takes is one willing citizen with a clean record to help them, right? Keep in mind that the attacks in Paris - one of the deadliest terrorist attacks in European history - were done by three or four guys with a bunch of AK's. It doesn't take that much of an effort. On top of that they had Belgian and French nationalities, so were pretty much a domestic thread to begin with.
Then comes another question:
what effects will this measure have on the lifes of refugees in general? Remember these are still people. It's really easy to write them all off as savages because you read about that on Breitbart, some other shitty blog or err TribalWar, but in the end it's a minor percentage of them that are not compatible with our western values. I will not deny that a multicultural society will experience clashes between groups and their values and that i feel that this is a very solid argument to implement certain measures to stop this. However a recent study has shown that 90 % of Syrian refugees in Austria feel that western democracy is the best way to govern a country. There were many other statements in that same paper regarding 80/90 % of that group being pretty 'compatible' with western values. Yet again i will not deny that there will always be a percentage within this group that might have radical ideas, out of which an even smaller percentage will eventually act out on them. I just think that this ban isn't going to stop them from eventually coming to the country to engage in terrorist attacks if they want to, but it will make it a whole lot more difficult for people who are really, but then really in need of help. We're talking about families here, men, women and children fleeing war torn countries. They're not leaving because they want to partake in that war. They want to leave because they want to live in peace. I just feel like Trump is selling you all big bag of air with this 'solution'. It's all showtime politics.
In the end i feel that the whole Syrian refugee crisis came forth out of the war in Iraq, which majorly destabilized the region while in the end being nothing more than a dirty scheme for a bunch of American (and possibly European) corporations to make a fuckload of money. So i've always been pretty pissed off about the fact that 'the European people' (i don't believe this exists but ok) ended up paying for it's effects by taking in hundreds of thousands of refugees, while it's those organizations who especially financially should be held responsible for all of this. But i guess that that's all a little bit too real - even for The Donald.
P.S. i guess i
sPerG3d out on this one. Be gentle please i'm not a native speaker.
