more options to make heads shake in disbelief

Submitted by myth (Germany), Sep 26, 2013 at 05:30

A return to the trational colonialist model would open another option. If only the West had one colony left in Arabia. That colony could accomodate refugees from the very same "culture zone". Western military would then recruit suffienct men from those refuguees in order to intervene in the next conflict within the same zone.

Why did Obama not leave a single soldier in Iraq? Iraq could have easily accomadeted the Syrian refugees. I am curious. Would the civil war in Syria have escalated the way it did with the full American military in Iraq? Calling the territory a colony certainly would disgust the American public. Perhaps there's another word in the liberal vocabulary that boasts more emotional legitimacy. Perhaps calling a territory a "Multinational Refugee Protectorate". Add a UN department to the construct and critics remain siltent.

Then theres the land for peace option. Why not have all Arabs in Europe. We Europeans all resettle in Arabia, defeat the dictators and the islamists, and leave the old continent to the peaceful Arabs. Oil would be cheap from that point on. The compromise variant of this solution would declare Rotterdam and Marseille independent Islamic city states.

Dr Pipes is right to focus on Saudi Arabia for innovative and effective solutions. While the green movement is Europe is struggling to reduce CO2 emissions from cars the Saudis got it right. They effectively reduced the emissions by 50% with the simple measure of prohibiting half the population from driving cars.

A last option would reduce the count of Syrian refugees significantly. Why not marry as many Syrians as possible to people with a Palestinian refugee status. The UN consequently would accept them as Palestinian refugees.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".