5 wealthiest Gulf Nations have refused to take a single Syrian refugee

Wait a minute.

Why does Iran get a pass here. There as responsible as anybody for what's happening and they have 150 billion dollars coming to them soon.

I'm hearing that a good many of these "Syrian" refugees are actually refugees who've been living in Syria.

That makes a big difference.

Yes, in fact didn't ISIS take over a big chunk of Yarmouk? They call it a Palestinian refugee camp, but that's probably a misnomer. I hear it's more like a suburb of Damascus.

But even so, maybe it's about time the oil states took responsibility for some of those.

There are even Sunni refugees. Those are people like cops and politicians; people who had power under the old regime in Iraq and Assad in Syria. I know the Kurds are looking after some Sunni refugees like that. You'd think the Arab States would at least take those.

Some would be Shia. You would think Iran could at least take those in.

My guess is that unlike Europe most, if not all of them don't want the problems ISIS and other terrorists organizations that are using this tragedy as a springboard to expand their cells would bring.

Besides it's alot cheaper and safer to let the UN belittle, browbeat and embarrass white countries into taking them rather than spend their own hard earned cash on refugees especially since that money could be better used for furthering their own sect's religious ambitions in the region.

Hammer, meeting the nail.
Some days it's amazing how stupid the white countries are.

I'm starting to think that evil Ann Coulter was right when she said we should conquer them, kill off all the adult males, and forcibly convert the survivors to Christianity. For every one hundred of these "refugees" that are let in at least one of them is probably an ISIS or Al Qaeda infiltrator. All Europe is doing is giving shelter to the most venomous snakes on the planet.

4000.

Meanwhile, True Dope is yapping off about how he'll bring in 25,000 more immediately after being elected.

Just an example of why True Dope and Mulcair truly are f***ing stunned.

And he's not talking about the harmless and true victims, like Yazidis or Christians.

Curly, hangs out at the Mosques the real baddies run. This makes him tolerant and Progressive, you see.

It's become almost like a competition though. Harper had already offered space for 10,000.

Then Trudeau says "Oh yeah, well we'll take 25 grand."

Now Mulcair's guy says "We can top that, we can do 46."



http://globalnews.ca/news/2205321/ndp-f ... ee-crisis/

And the thing is this new push for more "refugees" started, because some guy who most likely wasn't even a real refugee wanted to get to Germany so they'd fix his teeth. He got his kid killed. Actually he got his whole family killed, but the media got a good pic of the youngest and that seems to be all that matters.

How many is the US taking in and the reason I ask is because, their foreign policies have turned Iraq into giant sectarian war, Syria into a giant civil war, Libya into a religious quagmire, Egypt into a military dictatorship and Iran into a nuclear power.

So, if anyone should be taking refugees from those shitholes it should be our neighbours to the south but, I'm pretty sure not even the current administration is stupid enough to start bringing them in wholesale given that alot of these refugees oddly enough seem to be of military service age.

I never thought I'd say this but, I hope Russia puts Assad back in power and ends the Obama experiment in bringing democracy to the 12th century.

The Americans didn't break Syria. Assad and ISIS did that together. Same with Afghanistan. The Soviets destroyed the place then the Taliban & Al Qaeda ruined what little was left. The Americans tried to rebuild the place but failed not from lack of trying but because the Taliban tried to reverse everything the US and UN tried to fix. No one's running from Egypt and the bulk of the population seems to prefer the army in charge instead of a "democracy" run by the Muslim Brotherhood. Iraq? The Americans got rid of Saddam which was a huge mistake because but it has to be kept in mind that it was the Potemkin village of the Maliki government that wanted the US out of there altogether by 2011. The US left as the Iraqi wanted and it's entirely the fault of the Baghdad government that their paper tiger armed forces ran away as fast as they could from ISIS.

And it wasn't Obama who pushed the "Muslim democracies" nonsense. It was 100% Bush/Cheney that cooked up that perverse lie to justify invading Iraq after the WMD excuse fell completely apart.

So bombing Libya, Syria and supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt were Bush and Cheney?

I'm sorry but the US has had failed diplomacy since Vietnam and Obama's Administration has proven to be just as bad as Bush's for keeping the Middle East completely unstable.

It's almost like successive regimes are trying to turn the whole place into a blazing inferno of sectarian and geopolitical strife.