So why don't they just spend the money on taking the refugees in in the first place?
Better to spread Islam abroad presumably. Scatter the seed far and wide.
Nothing wrong with supporting people of your own religion to maintain that religion.
However in parallel I do feel that there are people attempting to take advantage of the situation.
Someone is funding ISIS, to destabilise the region and perhaps push opposing groups of people away from the region. One of the tactics of war is to wound rather than kill - this puts more pressure on the opposition in terms of logistics and morale.
Therefore it stands that effectively someone is attempting to force the action of the west against by causing a refugee crisis where the only options are:
a) engage in the region - allowing refugees to return, however this normal hindered by the fact that everything is usually destroyed - including infrastructure and economy. This gives ISIS the martyrdom they want and causes weak-minded people to rally to the cause - based on non-islam attacking islamic individuals.
b) take the refugees - providing the option for refugees to settle and become native. Large numbers of refugees can destabilise the country culture and infrastructure however for the UK this is not the case - the number of refugees compared to the GDP is low.
Total Syrian Asylum Applications in Europe
348,540 between Apr 2011 and Jul 2015
138,016 in 2014 only
Note - Data for 37 European countries which provided monthly data to UNHCR.
- data from the long below.. 500K refugees in the EU that has 503 million people. That's 0.09940% of the EU population.
Now given that the arabic states aren't engaging in the region, I would like to see numbers of refugees being taken in by the arabic states. I do think that some states are taking a large number but at the same time I don't think it's been an equal response - much like the EU.
If the refugees are temporary - then the mosques will also be temporary. I think that the statement about SA supporting with mosques is actually to fan the fire of the situation - perhaps putting a full account of aid being provided should also be listed?
This is a good site for data:
http://data.unhcr.org/syrianrefugees/regional.php
Why is there no data on Saudi Arabia and other countries? I don't know and that concerns me that we have a very
****-sided view of the situation.
It is certain that going to war is a win-win scenario for their goal (ISIS) of spreading Islam, given the result if martyrdom or refugees, listed above. Turning ISIS against themselves is one option, causing a collapse as fractions via for control/power. However if all members have a roughly similar goal this makes for a very parallel problem i.e. there's no dependences to knock out - except one and that is the relationship between those funding and those fighting. Fighting costs money, either by stealing assets of those 'conquered' or taking from individuals, organisations or states.
Military forces for this parallel problem requires considerable resources. Usually it's more cost effective to assassinate/sour the relationship for those funding, or even target the funding vehicle itself (i.e. if the funding is created by trade, then reducing the reliance on the traded commodity).
This is the reason why I have a very dim view of organised religion. It is often used as a mechanism to attempt to control the minds of the weak, cause suffering and kills children by those who have an alternative agenda that is nothing todo with normal people.
It would be interesting to see that all global states declare publicly that they renounce the violence and the acts of terror. However I have a sneaking suspicion that this will not occur...
