[dijit]

Guess your country was never invaded by a genocidal expansionist neighbour or been taken over by a militant theocracy/dictatorship.

Hope for your sake that it doesn’t happen. In the meantime, I’ll keep supporting Ukrainians.

I don’t consider it harmful.

[arolihas]

No that’s never happened to India you’re right. If you “support” relocation of a Ukrainian like Iryna Zarutska they might end up moving to Charlotte, NC where they get stabbed on a train. Road to hell paved with good intentions and all that.

[dijit]

No, but the UK did support the relocation of my great-grandfather who fought alongside the British against the Soviets and Nazi's leaving him no home to return to once the war was over.

He dedicated his life to the defence of his home, then to Britain and then spent 37 years in the coal-mines powering the country. All the while being a refugee.

I totally understand your worry about globalism, and to be clear: very human feelings about demographic shifts and change are being stoked by both sides of an ever polarising political spectrum.

But, I think it's important to remember that the reason refugee protections even exist as a concept is because there are real people who suffer, and we offer protection to those who need it not because we think ourselves superior: but because we hope that if the day were ever to come for us: that other nations would help us live our life so we could return home.

Unfortunately for my great-grandfather, even though he settled in the UK; he would have returned, but his part of Poland had become part of Ukraine, and Ukraine was the Soviet Union: the entity he went to war against.

[arolihas]

I can tell you there will never come a time when American or UK refugees will be able to look to Poland or Ukraine or Afghanistan or India for rescue. It is that level of idealism and high trust naïveté that makes first world civilizations nice places to live but also dooms them to be taken advantage of by tribal mooches if there is no careful pragmatism.