4 ms·

I'm not sure what you mean. Don't a lot of nations already receive refugees and those seeking asylum? How could anyone make a guarantee of being able to "go i

I'm not sure what you mean. Don't a lot of nations already receive refugees and those seeking asylum? How could anyone make a guarantee of being able to "go in" and get someone out without infringing upon other nations' sovereignty?

conanbatt 11y ago
You can't, but sovereignty isn't holy. Today war is waged for oil, might as well be fought for actual freedom. I'd say that providing safe exit from ISIS might be infinitely more effective than bombing them. An exit from extreme poverty and abuse would render vast criminal organizations without victims or workers. The consensus to provide "right of exit" or "passage" should overpower any single country's decision, though in this world only what the US wants is military relevant for the moment. Replacing one of the military planes might be enough financial relief for thousands of refugees.
- alphapapa 11y ago
  I still don't understand what you mean. You seem to assume that all the evil acts in the world are motivated by poverty and injustice; that if ISIS only had enough money, they'd stop kidnapping and torturing and killing and destroying. But ISIS is actually well-funded--that's part of the reason they are able to do the things they are doing. They don't need money; they have plenty. They are motivated by evil, not by poverty. Also, are you comparing ISIS to mere criminal organizations, like organized crime? If you are, I think that's ridiculous. These are two different kinds of problems. ISIS is not committing identity theft and credit card fraud. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but you seem to think that erasing borders would result in peace and prosperity. Again, not sure that's what you mean, but I think that doing so would have the opposite effect. Borders and separation help prevent tyranny from spreading. They do also permit evil to take root here and there--but evil is never going to go away for good. Just like it's never going to stop raining on this planet, so putting us all in one giant bathtub would only ensure that we all drown when it floods. What do you mean by "replacing one of the military planes"? If you mean taking the money it costs to build one and giving it to refugees: well, sure, money helps, but many charities are already doing that. And the U.S. military itself spends a lot of time and money helping people. In fact, American soldiers have died recently on pure aid missions in remote places. You don't see the Chinese or Russian military (or ISIS) flying food to starving people free of charge and giving their lives in the process. So please be careful not to simply vilify the U.S. and its military. There are serious problems in the U.S. government right now, but don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. That's trying to take the easy way out, and it's based on half-truths at best.

conanbatt 11y ago

You can't, but sovereignty isn't holy. Today war is waged for oil, might as well be fought for actual freedom. I'd say that providing safe exit from ISIS might be infinitely more effective than bombing them. An exit from extreme poverty and abuse would render vast criminal organizations without victims or workers. The consensus to provide "right of exit" or "passage" should overpower any single country's decision, though in this world only what the US wants is military relevant for the moment. Replacing one of the military planes might be enough financial relief for thousands of refugees.

alphapapa 11y ago
I still don't understand what you mean. You seem to assume that all the evil acts in the world are motivated by poverty and injustice; that if ISIS only had enough money, they'd stop kidnapping and torturing and killing and destroying. But ISIS is actually well-funded--that's part of the reason they are able to do the things they are doing. They don't need money; they have plenty. They are motivated by evil, not by poverty. Also, are you comparing ISIS to mere criminal organizations, like organized crime? If you are, I think that's ridiculous. These are two different kinds of problems. ISIS is not committing identity theft and credit card fraud. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but you seem to think that erasing borders would result in peace and prosperity. Again, not sure that's what you mean, but I think that doing so would have the opposite effect. Borders and separation help prevent tyranny from spreading. They do also permit evil to take root here and there--but evil is never going to go away for good. Just like it's never going to stop raining on this planet, so putting us all in one giant bathtub would only ensure that we all drown when it floods. What do you mean by "replacing one of the military planes"? If you mean taking the money it costs to build one and giving it to refugees: well, sure, money helps, but many charities are already doing that. And the U.S. military itself spends a lot of time and money helping people. In fact, American soldiers have died recently on pure aid missions in remote places. You don't see the Chinese or Russian military (or ISIS) flying food to starving people free of charge and giving their lives in the process. So please be careful not to simply vilify the U.S. and its military. There are serious problems in the U.S. government right now, but don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. That's trying to take the easy way out, and it's based on half-truths at best.