Is Amsterdam being hit with any of the Syrian Refugees . My heart goes out to Europe who seems to be getting the short end of the stick with these unwanted people .

The Netherlands is one of the top four European destinations because of very generous refugee aid
(Germany, Sweeden, and Norway being the others)
They are certainly planning and preparing for a crush, but I don't think there have been more than a few thousand so far this summer. Germany has said they would accept 800,000 refugees.
They have been, by far, the most proactive country.
That number would overwhelm services, and would not be enough in light of an estimate of 3-4 million people on the move to Europe from the middle east and north Africa.
Hungary is trying to control the flow at their border, but they can't keep it up much longer.
If Hungary gives up, there may be a tidal wave. Once services become strained in Germany, it looks like the Netherlands would be the next most popular destination.
This could go very bad, very quickly.

Weasel

Well, despite your username, your not quite "fun" after all are you ;) These displaced people are the end result of the West's latest agenda in the Middle East, which is to create instability (for what purpose I have no idea... it can't still be about the oil afterall?). If we want to unleash mayhem, death and destruction on their countries then who are we to blindly look away when they reach out for help?

I say take all the genuine refugees in, but keep the economic migrants out, like we are legally obliged to.

There so called Neighbouring countries are doing nothing to help ?? Isis stated they would flood the west with refugees months ago!! So do we know what we are letting in'' NO '' they all look pritty much fit and able to me.... So if it turns out there here to do us harm''What will there targets be,, the solder with the gun,,, fuck will it !!!! It'll be the family walking down the street or in a shopping centre... Me !! I want them kept out..... Believe it or not little old England is fuckin full.

Regards

Will82

The current approved allocation for refugees to the Netherlands is 2000.
Debate to increase that to 9000 is ongoing, but is meeting significant resistance.
The actual number of refugees likely to reach the Netherlands in the next year is certain to be much higher.
Deporting refugees that arrive without approval is unlikely to happen. It is impossible to investigae claims of refugees regardng status (i.e. political refugee, religious refugee, economic refugee) because of the utter collapse of government in most of the Levant. Who do you think you are going to call to ask?
Regarding causes:
1) Sunni and Shia have been engaged in battle for over 1000 years. Not caused by anyone in the western world, and not likely to be solved by anyone in the western world.
2) Relative calm in the area during the last half of the 20th century was achieved primarily by brutal secular dictators. They would kill any opponent, regardless of religious basis, and held down (or pressurized, if you like) historical animosity between the various factions.
3) The power vacuum created by the abrupt and poorly coordinated exit of western forces in 2013-2014 took the lid off, leading to violent struggle for control among the remaining sects.
4) The largest and most violent of the remaining sects, the fundamentalist Sunnis, are attempting to rule by genocide. Opposing groups targets for death include, but are not limited to:
Shia, Druze, Christian, former Baath party members (except those with military value that are willing to fight with ISIS), anyone with western education, anyone known or accused of assisting western forces, and anyone that resists.
5) Iran is funding, training, and arming Shia resistance.
6) Kurds are continuing to fight in the north, but Turkey fears the birth of a Kurdish state that might lead to succession of part of its southern territory, including its oil fields, and is overtly and covertly harming Kurdish efforts, blunting NATO responses, and in effect, strengthening ISIS and Syrian Defense Forces of the Assad regeime (also being aided by Russia).

I'm glad I am not there any more, and don't blame anyone for fleeing. I don't think calling this a "muslim invasion" (Wilders) is fair, as those most targeted for genocide are the Christians and western educated, but the refugees will cause unimaginable problems, and will not assimilate for generations.
One last thought--don't expect any help from the Americans. The next presidential election cycle is gearing up, and no one will even discuss this topic, other than to say how awful it must be for those poor refugees, and how difficult it will be for Europe to absorb them.

Weasel

I realize that this is far, far off topic for an Amsterdam discussion board,
but the best book that I was forced to read during my time in the region was
Faith, Power, and Fantasy: The History of the United States in the Middle East 1776 to Present
by Michael Oren, Professor of History at Columbia, and former Israeli Ambassador to the US
Occasionally boring, but in parts fascinating, especially in the early chapters regarding the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the retreat of European powers from the area following huge banking losses, the American missionary and military influence after the Civil War, and the SaudiAmerican petrodollar explosion of the last century.
Understand history, or be forced to repeat it.

Weasel

Found it really bothersome that their closest and wealthier neighbours (Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kuwait among others) are not taking in Syrian refugees. Always thought that neighbours were there to help......

However, I read an interview with an Saudi official today who says their inaction is "deliberate" as they want the refugees to go to the west and spread Islam.

Then, in another article, Saudi offers to build up to 200 mosques (committing up to $800 million) in northern Europe at their expense so that newly arrived refugees will have places of worship. So that basically confirms now why Saudi isn't doing anything.

The whole thing has become head shaking for me.

Regards, Roland

The Saudis are an odd lot.
The royal family is Wahabi, a very conservative subset of the Sunni's.
They aren't very adherent to the religion, but they try to look good to the rest of the muslim world by donating huge amuonts of money, expanding the worldwide reach of islam, and trying to save thier own butts.
They will not fight other Sunni's. Unless their kingdom is threatened, and even then, there are questions about how effective their military would be engaging other devout muslims. Odds are that the Saudi Military would either refuse to fight, turn and run, or get routed due to incompetence.
They will not take refugees, because they fear the rise of radicalism in their own land ( a very real possibility).
The best line I ever heard on the topic was from a Kuwaiti diplomat:
"All muslims are our brothers, but some brothers are more welcome than others."
The wealthier arab nations see the flow of refugees as, at best, an economic headache, and at worst, violent radicals that may overthrow lazy, wealthy and happy monarchies.
They won't help, and most of those fleeing wouldn't want to live in Saudi Arabia anyway.
The only place that might be as dangerous and repressive for Christians, the non-religious, and non-Sunni muslims would be Saudi Arabia. Even the Kuwaitis and Emerati hate the place.
Look at this as the King of Saudi Arabia. Non-Sunnis are either being killed, or forced to leave. Win-win.
Thousand-year-old prophecies are coming true, and the middle east may soon be home to only the purest of Sunni believers.

It gets interesting if:
1) Those pure believers turn on the Saudi monarchy, and try to take the holy centers of Mecca and Medina.
2) The Shia, led by Iran, fight back. That would be Iran-Iraq War, part 2, and would also fulfill Shia prophecies of holy war to install the Shia as the dominant form of Islam.
3) The Russians re-arm Syria, and move east into the oil fields.
All opitons would involve even more refugees trying to get the hell out of the middle east, and into Europe.

The opportunities to defeat ISIS quickly and easily have passed. They are using oil money to expand their control, and are already functioning as the de-facto goverment in a large part of the Levant. Maybe they burn out, or fracture due to internal strugles for control, but I think that is a pipe dream.
Do nothing, and they will become a state that is most similar to North Korea, only better organized, with a more effective military, and oil money to keep things rolling. (just without nuclear weapons...so far)
Engaging them in war will take years, trillions of dollars, and a will to fight that no one seems to have.

Once again, glad that I'm not there anymore,
Weasel

I am not too smart, but,when I look at the news.
70% of them have the latest phones and wearing decent clothes .

If they are running for their lives, surely they should be content to be in any country where they are safe?

Perhaps we should support Hungary, and use their red lights?

]I,m gonna be slated or kicked off for this.

Under Hitler this would not be happening.
I am NOT a nazi, or racist, but come on, enough's enough.

A lot of things wouldn't be happening if Hitler was in charge. A bizarre comment that is very disrespectful to certain groups of people. But I get what you mean. The problem is soft governments with soft politicians that are scared of saying no and hurting peoples feelings. I just wish people stood up for what they believed in.

Refugees would rather not go anywhere.
Ideally, they would prefer to stay home, but just under safer conditions.
They have decided that there is no chance that Syria/Iraq/Afghanastan/Liybia are going to be safe, and they have also decided that no one is going to come to their aid.
Moving is painful, and they don't want to move twice. They will go where they think they have the best odds of survival. Unlike other nations in the middle east, those in western europe will not let them starve, and will not allow them to be beaten. IN additon to being kind, some nations in europe have a history of giving money to refugees, and one (Germany) went so far as to publically state that refugees were expected and welcome.
Turkey would seem a much easier destination, with more similar culture. The problem is that in addition to getting zero aid from the Turks, refugees are just as likely to get clubs across the back.
Today, Germany reversed course, halted trains entering form the south, and started passport checks at the Austrian border.
It was obvious that Germany would not be able to take in 800,000 people without major problems. I never imagined that those problems would surface this soon.

How long will it be before ordinary travel in southeastern europe becomes impossible?
How long until we see major disruptions in travel in Europe as a whole?
What if things get so bad that tourists avoid?
Who will be the first politician to lose an election for being refugee friendly?
And the big question:
When will the EU decide that they will have to engage in military action in Syria (and beyond)?

Weasel

well,

Congrats on the first (to me) Godwin in the Fine Forum (so far).

Answers and opinions from the Old Continent:

How long will it be before ordinary travel in southeastern europe becomes impossible?
- That will start very soon. Already train travel between Hungary and Austria is frustrated, and between Germany and Denmark. Next is between Austria and Germany. All temporarily - yet - but expect more of this.

How long until we see major disruptions in travel in Europe as a whole?
- Good question. There are enough minor ones in Germany already.

What if things get so bad that tourists avoid?
- I would personally already avoid Budapest now. And very likely Vienna. Munich will be next ...
And the Aegean and Dodekanesos Isles (Greece facing Turkey) do not sound that attractive anymore. O wait, add Athens to that ... See a pattern emerge ?

Who will be the first politician to lose an election for being refugee friendly?
- Anyone who is so stupid to anounce so in any next election.

And the big question:
When will the EU decide that they will have to engage in military action in Syria (and beyond)?
- I hope tomorrow. Against all better judgment btw.


a sad

Gaston.

Gaston,

I had to look up Godwin's Law.
You are a never-ending fountain of knowledge!

As you predicted, travel advisories regarding Budapest and Vienna are now coming out of the State Department,
and private companies are refusing to sell travel insurance to many areas in southern Europe, including Oktoberfest in Munich!?!

I was surprised that you see refugee support as a political kiss of death. Our current administration takes pride in a record of unregulated crossing of the southern border. They forsee millions of future loyal Deomcratic voters, and make no apologies. I wonder what effect the crisis in Europe will have on immigration policy here.
One thing has been striking--the silence from the White House.

I was supposed to go to Dresden this October, but one of my partners snuck in and stole the trip from me. Now he is having second thoughts. If he backs out, I will take the chance. It already looks like Austria and Hungary are getting very serious about closing the borders. Germany would be better off, but Serbia could get absolutely screwed if that comes to pass.

In the news today, Turkey was accused of cracking down on journalists for reporting on sufferng of refugees in the country. There were no reports of attempts to crack down on suffering.

Weasel

Weasel-leinchen,

I reckon Dresden will be safe enough later this year. I would not bet on anything German next year - bad enough - without additional intel. But Dresden is not too much known for FKK-ing, right ? A day trip to the 'Sachsische Schweiz' and tasting some local wines may do you good, however (I cannot imagine local food being anything, er, uplifting).

I honestly think that - at least in Denmark and Sweden - any tolerant stance towards refugees will be severely punished in next elections. In Germany, Merkel may survive, but there are mayoral elections in Germany - oh hold on, thats was last weekend - and that may give a first sign of the sentiments there (but one should recognize that both major national parties are more-or-less pro-refugee - for now) ...
Austria ? Stating you're pro- refugees is political suicide, methinks.


best regards,

Gaston.

So, if Hungary invades Germany from behind, will Greece/Grease Help? LOL

Thanks Weasel,

Your posts were really interesting reading.

It is a mess and only to get worse...far worse....in my opinion.

Feel bad for those in the EU and those fleeing. No winners from the looks of it.

Find it ironic, though, that those fleeing want to be safe.....they get to a safe area...then seem to riot because they expect free access to Europe. Thought the German school principal's letter certainly highlights problems and adjustments that will be required.

Don't know what the men don't stay and fight. Also looks like 70% of the refugees are young (under 35) males.

I just shake my head.

Regards, Roland

This is the result of the European attitude that the way to deal with ISIS is to ignore it. Rather than trying to absorb millions of refugees, send over 100,000 or so troops, create a no fly zone, and kill ISIS where it lives.

(Those fleeing the region are doing so more out of fear of ISIS than Assad. Get rid of ISIS and the locals will be happy to stay and take care of Assad.)

I wouldn't count on an uprising from local citizens to overthrow anyone.
The only country that has been involved in more military conflict than the US over the last generation is Iraq.
The US is war weary, but the Iraqis are beaten down. Syrians and Afghans, too.
In 1992, the US attempted to organize and train the New Iraqi Army, to overthrow Hussein.
They failed miserably, and they were all killed, along with family, friends, financiers, collaborators and sympathisers. Anyone with an interest in armed resistance that didn't die in that misadventure had another opportunity to do so in the second Iraq war, and the sectarian fights in Falluja and Sadr City to follow.
Western governments like to encourage locals to "rise up and fight for your home", but the end result is that they usually are poorly organized and armed, they expose themselves to a more lethal opponent, they get into trouble and expect western forces to bail them out...and the bailout does not happen.
Half a million young, able-bodied men fleeing the middle east make a good looking army on paper.
Not so intimidating in real life. They have not survived this long by being able to fight. They are alive today because they were able to hide and run. Put them in uniform, and train them up for a few months, and they will do EXACTLY the same thing
Look up the Bay of Pigs fiasco in Cuba in 1961 for the original blueprint of this failed doctrine.
American war colleges have been trying out the Teach Them to Fight for Themselves theory for a century.
The conclusion:
Well intentioned civilians cannot be molded into a force capable of defeating small, entrenched mercenary forces. And the longer it has been since a nation has had an effective military, the less likely they will be able to organize a new one out of poor, tired, angry young men.
I would love to see the Syrians and Iraqis fight for their homes (and I am sure they would like to as well), but it is a fantasy. Isis is made up of a bunch of professional soldiers with small unit experience going all the way back the Afghan/Russian war in the late '70s. Well traind and experienced small units would find them formidable. Well intentioned novices would be cannon fodder.
Defeating ISIS will involve:
Ground troops with armor support to force ISIS to take up grouped defensive positions.
Coordinated bombing of those positions.
Forcing retreating troops out of those bombing fields and into open ground. Capture or kill before they have the chance to blend into the civilian population in the next town.
Then the hard part.
GIve the surviving population reason to believe that they are better off staying home and rebuilding than fleeing.

A parting thought:
Big wars usually leave scorched earth, unable to support the remaining population. The population in the middle east is not supported because they grow plentiful crops, or build electronics or cars. No. Agriculture and Industry are not necessary. They pump oil, and use the money to get everything else. The oil will survive any conflict, and be available to the victors to pay for reconstruction. I was at a conference years ago where a paper supported the idea of mercinaries fighting in the middle east, and being rewarded with oil rights of any territory that they were able to control. It is exactly the model currently used by ISIS to attempt to control occupied territory. I predict that the refugee crisis will force nations in western europe to send military forces to the middle east. There will be all sorts of crying about the costs, some nations will do nothing, others will do little. I predict that the nations that actually do the dirty work to secure territory will pump the holy hell out of the oil fields. We will see how much of that loot goes to reconstruction, and how much is kept as reparation, but the American model of fighting like mad, then dropping everything to evacuate is over. Worst military strategy EVER.
Military school is wierd and creepy. But if you plan to be commander in chief of the largest force in the free world, you should probably go to one. Or at least learn to take a little advice from people that went to one.
Or expect to be the subject of future classes on inept, failed strategy.

Weasel