Looking to feel out /pol/s opinion on this. Primarily directed at Americans, but Europeans, your input is appreciated. Just throwing my opinion against the wall and seeing what you think. How would you feel about letting Syrian refugees in on 3 conditions.
>1. Absolutely no military-aged males under any circumstance (using the U.S. military ages 17-35)
>2. Families with children, especially young ones, get precedence
>3. They are interned in refugee camps, and not allowed to leave. Children may attend school on the camp, which will employ American citizen new college-graduates with teaching degrees to offer them experience. Adults are allowed to leave to work in the area, but most return within a reasonable time after. Absence from work, while reporting to the camp you've been at work, will result in immediate deportation.
Thoughts?
>>56570452
bumping for opinions, I would really like /pol/s thoughts before i get ripped apart on this for things I didn't realize at Thanksgiving
How long will they stay in the camp and where will they go after?
>>56570452
>3. They are interned in refugee camps
Fuck no, just build and secure a safe zone in Syria and keep them all there.
>>56571284
That's sexist towards males
>>56571443
They will stay in the camp, supposing their are no infractions (involvement with crime or salafist activity) until the war in syria/iraq (depending where they come from) is over or greatly stabilized. They will then be returned to their homelands. Complete with better english experience, a greater respect for the United States (i'm thinking maybe organized field trips to local landmarks, and pushes for celebration of thanksgiving/4th of july within the camp), and in the case of children some American education. This'll lead them to being more productive in their homelands, perhaps better career qualifications, and ultimately, a better opinion of the United States.
What an absolute shitpost OP.
How about at thanks giving you eat your turkey leg and shut the fuck up?
>>56571591
Military-aged males pose the greatest threat. The united states targeted them specifically during the War in Iraq. I know you're being a troll, but I don't want to even entertain the thought of my country looking like Brussels does right now.
>>56571443
So send them all to land Assad firmly controls? That'd be great, but my countries leadership has a hard on for hating the Assad regime
>>56570452
>How would you feel about letting
>Syrian refugees
>Syrian
>refugees
There's the problem. They are neither.
>>56571635
>what an absolute shitpost
>the aussie said
>>56571746
also, didn't bother reading the rest of OP's text.
>>56571746
Well I understand that a buncha 35 year old niggers are posing as 16 year old syrians and I'd hope this program would scrutinize to make sure thats not the case. The U.S. isn't connected to Syria by land, we get the freedom to discriminate who shows up and who doesn't.
>>56571721
I'm really not being a troll. I don't think its fair to punish males for being male.
>>56570452
Agreed but would add the following:
The camps should be run by the NATO, and only by the NATO. The purpose of having it under control by the NATO is that it would be an international effort. Everyone is involved, and everyone pays for it. Also there is more control on what the NATO does politically. Trusting only a couple of sovereign states with the job only leads to more conflict.
The land on which the camps exist could be temporarily annexed by the NATO, preferably in or as close to the home countries of the refugees as possible.
>>56571721
The Brussels situation is being sensationalized by the media. And no offence, but especially American media have a way of exaggerating what happens in other countries.
I drive through Brussels to work every day and it's not even close to the "besieged city" media make it out to be. I was still stuck in traffic for half an hour to drive 5 miles into the city, to give you an idea of how busy it still is.
And no, it was not due to roadblocks or anything like that. Just your average rush hour traffic. Be it less than usual maybe.
>>56571622
How do you expect a family of refugees to appreciate a country that detains them in camps? How would this not breed dissidence and anger, e.g. christmas island
>>56572527
Are people blowing themselves up on christmas island senpai?
>>56572527
>Being guaranteed safety,education ,food and shelter as long as they obey some rules
>not being appreciative
If they don't like it, we send them back where they came from. simple.
>>56572168
Interesting concept not rejecting it off the bat. I'm just concerned with setting the precedent for NATO operating within the United States. If anything i'd like to give the States with camps in them the most authority over the matter.
>>56572396
I know it's the same as above but interesting perspective. I've heard the streets are generally empty and a lot of private businesses closed. Past the siege too, I don't want to live on a country on high-alert for 4 days expecting a shitstorm of allah akbar
>>56572527
We owe the Syrians literally nothing. If anything their government brought this upon themselves by allowing AQI to use their border because Assad -does- in fact hate America. However frankly, I feel as though my country is somewhat responsible, especially b/c IMO we left Iraq too early so our nigger could get re-elected. Also, our camps would encourage American culture via propaganda in the camps
>>56572682
What's the goal of these refugee camps? Assimilation or just temporary refugee camps?
>>56572857
I personally would be all for them being temporary. But there could be an option where you take a very difficult test that includes united states history, constitutional ideas, basic human rights, the differences between popular religions etc, that along with the disavowing of your ties with Syria and declared allegiance to the united states could grant you residency. They would have to be vetted and make a 85% or above on the test. This at least forces them to consider western values so theirs not much culture shock if they do wish to reside here. Along with the western values hopefully reduces the chance of being radicalized.
>>56572794
To be honest I haven't worked out the details.
It's just an idea I've been thinking about when stuck in traffic.
I'm not saying the NATO should be able to annex whatever it wants. Of course at the time there would have to be negotiations. But once the territory for the camps has been decided, the camps should be run and controlled by the NATO alone.
On Brussels, it's definitely calmer than usual, I'm not denying that. For instance the subway remains closed and so are a lot of businesses. But people still go to work in the office districts and whatnot.
>>56573134
Not a bad idea, the only problem is how long will they have to be interned before they can leave? It's not too far fetched to say that the mothers are always going to fail that, should it be akin to year 10 certificate or something?
What do these people have to offer if they're under 18 or women? I would've thought economically you'd attempt to bring in labourers?
>>56572794
Traffic in and around Brussels at the moment.
>>56570452
1.No
2.No
3.No
Because none of them will be enforced
>>56570452
>>56571622
>Indoctrinating refugees
I like it. But is it even possible? Especially with their men?
>>56570452
There are female terrorists as well, dawg.
>>56571857
This sort of plan would be great for countries with borders or very close to Syria, but it's pretty safe to say that there is no fucking way any illegal immigrants going to the states won't be economic migrants. They'll also be pretty god damn rich for that, honestly I don't see a whole lot of benefit to the US even if they implemented a plan like this
>>56573601
Read rule 1 bruv, no men allowed. First Generation adult immigrants will never integrate or be fully indoctrinated, you could get the kiddies though.
no, waste of money, keep them in the refugee camps near to Syria literally no point in pissing away money by importing them here
>>56573851
Brother, it said no military-aged males, not no males. I assume that means the oldfags can get in too. Considering Islamic families are patriarchal, I can imagine instances of their old men doing their own bit of counter-indoctrination.
>>56570452
Bravo, you've somehow managed to oppress refugees beyond what they were fleeing from while giving unchecked power to administration personnel overseeing them. I bet it won't be five till noon before the camp warden runs a fucking brothel out of the camp for his dumbass prison guards.
It takes a special kind of stupid for you to do this, you know that?
Either they come in and they're treated as any other refugees, or they get turned away. No levying of power towards the state unto residents. Certainly not by government procedures.
>>56570452
1.
Only if they go the official way and don't use traffickers. They are members of the dildo group and with giving them money you support terrorism.
2.
Use absolutely acknowledge the way we live, no snackbaring.
3.
No religious fanatics, you see one on the boarder. Shoot.
You discover him later, shoot.
4.
You join a crime clan or do crime your out of my country even if it means your head gets chop off your family gets raped. You and your children are gone.
>>56573993
This would be fantastic if you could indoctrinate oldfags, they're too old to be fooled by thanksgiving and Christmas. I could imagine them becoming even more resentful of the States for not helping their country and instead belittling a 40 y/o man with petty indoctrination attempts
>>56574137
#4 is great
#3 and #2 would go against your constitution? (Freedom of Religion)
#3, What does fanatic mean? Terrorist?
#1 All refugees or just men, is there still no 18 - 35 y/o?
>>56570452
I agree, and I really am pretty moderate.
but the hyper liberals say
1: thats fucking sexist
2. KEEDS DESERVE FATHERS SENPAI
3. THATS LIKE WHAT THEY DID TO THE POOR JAPANESE FOLK DURING WW2.
obviously we should all agree that if america IS GOING TO (and it is) take in refugees, that your options are the least dangerous to the american people. liberals need to realize we are not giving these people a new shot at life, we are letting them stay here until their fucking country gets less fucked (which is excellent for refugees because that shithole will never be safe)
>>56573134
Sorry OP here, open to this idea, but the process needs to be rigorous if they're going to stay.
>>56573170
Appreciate the input Belgium-bro, stay safe
>>56576016
Thats my thought on the liberal opinion on this totally. They wanna go all in on this, and then its not doing what it was meant to do, give refuge to people until their homes are safe again. These people deserve a chance to not die at the hands of ISIS or Jaish Al-Fatah. Syria was a perfectly acceptable place 10 years back, if they come here for REFUGE they should go back when its safe so they can make their home a better place.
