The United States and European Union should collaborate with Russia, Iran and the Syrian government to temporarily transport displaced Syrian citizens to the United States and Europe, and to provide opportunities of immigration to citizens seeking a safer environment.
While this is a good idea to help benefit the terrible situation that is occurring in Syria right now,I believe that this is an unacceptable answer. Syria is a country of chemical warfare, and terror. While Syria is saying that they will end their chemical weapons and attacks, their is no way to be sure that their word is good. How would we determine whether or not an incoming immigrant was a "terrorist" or not? If we begin to immigrate Syrians into the United States, and then the United States decide to launch their cruise missile strike on Syria, as President Obama is currently leaning towards, what will these Syrians do?These immigrants could be "terrorists",and they could retaliate against America, just as the Al-Qaeda did on September 11th, 2001. No we did not bomb Iraq,but we sanctioned them, had troops watching them in Saudi Arabia, and also had support of Israel, their enemy. Al-Qaeda killed over 4,000 people from this...what would Syrians INSIDE our country do if we bombed them?
Terrorist groups get much of their political support and funding by accusing the United States and Europe of hypocrisy and cowardice - it is both inhumane and dangerous to prove them right. It is absurd to think we will make more global enemies by defending civilians than we will by ignoring them. Additionally, it is naive to think the human race can prevent terrorism by preventing people from moving into new countries - bad men exist in all cultures, and their evil is not triggered by the process of migration. It also lacks a grasp on complexity and reality to try and chracterize an entire population of Alawites, Sunnis, Christians, Armenians, Assyrians, Druze, Kurds and Turks by the actions of Al-Nusra, Al-Qaeda and Assad. My opposition would have us quarantine an entire population of unarmed civilians from aid and support because we fear political movements that exist within those borders, but political borders do not divide the world between good and evil or civilized and malicious.
Eight hundred dollars per month per person would comfortably support an individual's basic needs if housed in this country, as well as in most others. By American economic standards, allocating a $24 billion annual value to the collective needs of displaced Syrians would subsidize the efforts of nations across the globe to support Syrian civilians until the end of the conflict. This would lead by example, inspiring other nations to pitch in with their own financial and logistic contributions to the crisis. A year under this plan would cost roughly 1% of the $4 trillion required to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, and would act as early damage control against the escalating Syrian situation. It would reduce the risks of having to repeat such an invasion, concretely disprove the talking points of terrorist anti-western propaganda, and provide a political bargaining chip to negotiate with whichever Syrian faction stabilizes as the Syrian leader in the next few years.