Creating a Refugee Country (Iraq, middle east, legal, border)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was discussing this idea with a gentleman a few months back and he thought it was a bad idea. I, on the other hand, was open to the idea of taking unused land and helping refugees to create a nation of their own. Obviously there would be a lot of problems, but what other alternatives do we have? If the new nation can be administered for a period time, it might be better than keeping them in camps in countries that don't want them.
Refugees come in 57 varieties. It is extremely unlikely that they will play nice together.
So True but in the case of Mexico I think it would work.
In a comment I made in a Donald Trump thread I thought the wall he wants to build at the border was a good idea. If people still came to the wall and couldn't get past they would start a camp which would eventually turn in to a town and President Trump could sell them the supplies they needed and Mexico could pay for them.
When you think about the American West back in the late 1800's many towns sprung from nothing due to the RR coming through the area. The RR in this case would be the never ending flow of potential immigrants.
We could have towns and cities right at the border fence and it would be a good place for refugees.
How would this even work? Who runs this country? Anyone? What's stopping another country from just exploiting it? And where would it go? There isn't much free space available.
I think it's a good idea. But there would have to be two or three or even four of them: one each in North Africa, sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and Far East. Except for the Far East most countries in these regions are Western creations with little or no other rational for existence. Syria, Iraq, Libya, all are polyglot countries with no single culture. Same for most of sub-Saharan Africa.
It's the only way to protect people in these regions from ISIS, bokoharam, Somali warlords, etc. These are little more than well financed criminal gangs like the Bloods and Cripts. Refugees could be disarmed, put into them and taken care of. It would be better for them and for everyone else except their would-be tormentors.
The East India Company did something like this when it annexed Oudh. It replaced it's tyrannical ruler with a benign administration that protected people from legalized criminality.
How would this discourage refugees? Seems like it would encourage it: "Leave your country and we will give you some free land." Where do I sign up?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
