[bordercases]

They do! Germany, the UK and the Scandinavian nations are the only European countries (that I was aware of circa within the week) to be actively accepting Syrian refugees - every other country in between them AND the Mediterranean have had negative responses to incoming refugees and I would expect deportation.

If refugees were just coming in for safety's sake, there are plenty of other Islamic countries that would be more culturally compatible (that argument would fail in the case of Syrian Christians; I don't know the full proportion of real religious denomination to refugee count). There are plenty of European countries that want no business with refugees, like Hungary, who have just declared martial law in the last few days or so wrt refugees.

It's a choice. It's a hard choice, one which tangles several levels of liberal beliefs of tolerance in a democratic state and respecting a country's historical/ethnic heritage, which is why I think there is so much controversy. I personally don't see how any country in Europe is obliged to accept refugees.

[iaskwhy]

> "Germany, the UK and the Scandinavian nations are the only European countries (that I was aware of circa within the week) to be actively accepting Syrian refugees"

You might need to inform yourself a bit better as most European countries have been accepting Syrian refugees[0]. Germany is now leading the effort to give documents to the new arrivals but in the upcoming weeks a part of them will be sent to different locations around Europe. Pretty much all countries' newspapers have been reporting this (in regards to its numbers and locations).

[0] http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/...

[varjag]

All obligations people have to each other boil down to moral obligations. Barbarism and conquest age societies were much more rational than modernity, with little formalities or attachment of value to human life. So it comes with a territory of living in a civil society.

Europe espouses a particular set of humanitarian values and has to act correspondingly. It is in European law (being UNCHR members for a start), tradition and customs of education. It is what constitutes modern Europe.

Now I personally would rather seen Assad dealt with in timely manner, years ago, instead of drawing stupid red lines in the water. This would have prevented the humanitarian disaster propelling the refugee crisis today, and would have hindered the raise of ISIS to boot. Since we can not change the past though, I'm OK with helping people survive with my tax money.

[levosmetalo]

> Now I personally would rather seen Assad dealt with in timely manner, years ago, instead of drawing stupid red lines in the water. This would have prevented the humanitarian disaster propelling the refugee crisis today, and would have hindered the raise of ISIS to boot. Since we can change the past though, I'm OK with helping people survive with my tax money.

Please don't mess with Syria anymore, and don't try to help with "your tax money". Syria was fine, at least compared to current situation, before West started meddling with the middle east and forcing democracy there.

ISIS started as a response of destroyed country (Iraq) without actual rule, that was brought in such state because of western occupation. Then, it was even armed and supported by the "west" as a "moderate islamistic democratic opposition" to Assad regime. The rest is history, and we didn't learn anything from it.

Just leave the middle east alone, as well as the rest of the world. Don't try to bring your values and way of life to them. Don't try to "help" them. Let them do it themselves on their own pace when they are ready for it. It's obvious right now they lived much better under any dictator that now, with all the "western" support.

[varjag]

> Please don't mess with Syria anymore, and don't try to help with "your tax money".

By helping with tax money I meant supporting the refugees, so. No.

> Syria was fine, at least compared to current situation, before West started meddling with the middle east and forcing democracy there.

It wasn't the West who massacred an unarmed protest with an airstrike back in the day.

> ISIS started as a response of destroyed country (Iraq) without actual rule, that was brought in such state because of western occupation.

Newsflash: the occupation of Iraq was opposed by most of the "West".

> Just leave the middle east alone, as well as the rest of the world.

Rwanda was left alone, oh look how wonderfully that worked.

No, my dear friend, there's no one recipe that fits the world, neither tree-hugging nor warmongering.

[levosmetalo]

> By helping with tax money I meant supporting the refugees, so. No.

And that's fine for me too, as long as your and mine tax money doesn't go into fueling the war instead, like weapon, military training, sanctions, ...

> It wasn't the West who massacred an unarmed protest with an airstrike back in the day.

It was the "west" that financed the opposition in Syria, and wanted Assad taken over for a long time. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that it was also the "west" or ISIS (it was called democratic opposition back in the time) that organized this. Wouldn't be the first time. Example: shooting on Maydan square.

> Newsflash: the occupation of Iraq was opposed by most of the "West".

Opposed verbally, as in "I don't want to participate, but I'm fine if you do it, I'll even give you some minor support". And I said "west".

> Rwanda was left alone, oh look how wonderfully that worked.

Rwanda is a place where it went to hell, but I'm pretty sure it would be much worse if "west" intervened. Examples of interventions of "west", and in some cases "east" where local population would be much better if left alone: Afghanistan, Syria, Egypt, Tunis, Lybia, Iraq, Iran, Georgia, Yugoslavia, Vietnam, China, Korea, Hungary, Poland, Chechoslovakia, Bosnia, Serbia, Kosovo, Croatia, Australia, Chile, Panama, Honduras, plus many African and Asian states. In all those places foreign intervention brought much more problems than it solved, and is a direct or indirect cause of millions of dead people.

[yummyfajitas]

Similarly, just leave the old-timey American south alone. Don't try to bring your desegregationist or abolitionist values and way of life to the American south, or your anti-apartheid values to South Africa, or your anti-genocide values to Nazi Germany.

[blfr]

Germany declared war on pretty much all of the neighbouring countries and some non-neighbouring ones. But the argument probably holds for the South. Over a million people died gruesome deaths in the war. It is unlikely that they prevented an even larger evil.

We will see about South Africa. It is on a fast track to a failed state status currently. They went from surplus energy production to blackouts. Same with food while the farmers are being systematically pushed out or murdered.

[atmosx]

Germany is closing it's borders: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/14/refugees-confou...

They do! (close the borders).

[netrus]

Pssst, don't tell any Syrian friend, but we only pretend to close the borders. We only control the Autobahn-routes, not the smaller streets, and we control miles behind the border, meaning that refugees are already in Germany and can stay.

Germany tries to create pictures to discourage people from coming, while behaving the same to those who come. It is an interesting approach, and I am not sure yet how I feel about it.