No Visa Free Visits to Sandro

[Trenchcoat]

No, they are not.  But Parliament must pass a law if Brexit is to occur, and MP's can vote as they wish.  Not all Conservative MP's supported Brexit, and most Labour MP's did not.

No, they are not.  But Parliament must pass a law if Brexit is to occur, and MP's can vote as they wish.  Not all Conservative MP's supported Brexit, and most Labour MP's did not.

Boethius is correct GQ the idea of 2nd vote referendums and the like are now all dead and buried. All attempts and arguments in the end came to nothing and no politician that values their credibility would now raise such an issue. In any case the Brexit Bill to invoke Article 50 is well on its way through Parliament now so matters have moved on. The Brexit Bill has cleared the House of commons without amendment and now its just the House of Lords to finish ramming it through there. Its pretty much said and done a full gone conclusion. As Boethius correctly states most Mp's were in favour of Remain however crucially The Labour Party Leader quickly came over to Leave post referendum (not that he was an avid supporter of Remain during the referendum) and most of his party have followed. Most of the Tory Party have now come over as well. All being well Brexit (Article 50) will be announced in the next few weeks. Officially we don't leave till negotiations are complete or after 2 year period is up but I think in reality Britain will be freed up to at least hold its own representations with foreign countries on what is now normally EU domain topics during this time even if agreements aren't fully signed till after we officially leave the EU.

[Gator]

Gator, there are more refugees in Lebanon and Jordan than there are in the EU.

So what!  You were complaining about refugees in Europe and blaming the US. 

These refugees staying in the region are the best ones.  They will be able to rebuild it given the opportunity.   Those allowed to start a life in Europe will not return.  So I blame Europe again. 

Had the US not interfered in Syria with sanctions, freezing Syrian assets, and covert operations by the CIA before the conflict escalated, we don't know if it would have.  So yes, I do blame the US, though France, Germany and the UK also played roles.

Token efforts as part of Obama's Arab Spring initiative.  Obama was misguided in thinking democracy would seize the day.  The rebels were never given enough support by EU nor the US to win.  I understand Saudi Arabia gave more support than we did, so you should blame them as well as blame the Syrians who had the cojones to fight a ruthless dictator. 

[GQBlues]

Boethius is correct GQ the idea of 2nd vote referendums and the like are now all dead and buried. All attempts and arguments in the end came to nothing and no politician that values their credibility would now raise such an issue. In any case the Brexit Bill to invoke Article 50 is well on its way through Parliament now so matters have moved on. The Brexit Bill has cleared the House of commons without amendment and now its just the House of Lords to finish ramming it through there. Its pretty much said and done a full gone conclusion. As Boethius correctly states most Mp's were in favour of Remain however crucially The Labour Party Leader quickly came over to Leave post referendum (not that he was an avid supporter of Remain during the referendum) and most of his party have followed. Most of the Tory Party have now come over as well. All being well Brexit (Article 50) will be announced in the next few weeks. Officially we don't leave till negotiations are complete or after 2 year period is up but I think in reality Britain will be freed up to at least hold its own representations with foreign countries on what is now normally EU domain topics during this time even if agreements aren't fully signed till after we officially leave the EU.

Noted. Thanks Trenchcoat.

[Gator]

It is not an "either/or".  The US has geostrategic interests in the Middle East, which include Israel, stopping terrorism from reaching the US (last two decades), and oil.  You have focused on the small picture, i.e., access to Arab oil.  But oil is a single market.  A supply disruption and ensuring America's enemies don't control that Arab oil is important so long as most of the world relies on hydrocarbons.

So given all this importance, why did Obama essentially withdraw from the Middle East and allow Russia to take our place as the superpower in the region, with Iran the largest regional power???   Our long-term allies ( gulf states and Israel)  fear Iran.   Iran can support interventions around the region, contest the Persian Gulf shipping lanes, and eventually employ nukes.   

I say we should not have withdrawn.  Now that we have withdrawn, I do not propose we return.   Instead, the EU should take the lead (something new in the past 70 years).   The US does not need ME oil as we are essentially energy independent with backup  from Canada.  However, if Russia and Iran were to control ME oil, the world economy could suffer.  This would hurt the US too.  Thus, the US and EU should develop friendlier relations with Russia to insure regional stability in the ME.   This is the reason for Obama's bet on Iran.   

If that were not true, there would be no American military advisors/troops in the Middle East, and no naval port in Bahrain.

We have bases all over the Middle East, some encircling Iran.  They are small outposts with few containing more than a small  number of troops and none containing a large number. It does not matter because history has shown military force does not guarantee stability, and in fact creates radical militancy within the region, e. g.,   OBL.

I look forward to what Tillerson plans to do as he knows Russia and the ME well. 

[fathertime]

It is so easy to blame the US IF one ignores facts and reality. 

Fact check, fact check, fact check.....

Syria - The US under Obama and Hillary did nothing when they had the opportunity to stop civil war hostilities.  I am speaking of drawing a redline and then being outsmarted by Putin into doing nothing, allowing Assad to bomb his own people.  EU should have done something in place of the US.  DON"T BLAME IT ON THE US INTERVENTION other than token arming of a few rebel groups with equipment captured in  Libya.

Libya - The US was part of the  NATO intervention authorized under United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973.  The world intervened so DON"T BLAME IT ON THE US INTERVENTION.

Iraq - Yes the US invaded Iraq in 2003, quickly defeated Saddam, then stayed.  The failure came in nation building.  Some form of stability was obtained but was lost when Obama withdrew too soon.  The post-withdrawal period created the most refugees due to sectarian strife.  YOU CAN BLAME IT ON THE US. 

Afghanistan- When the covert US military aid to the Mujahedeen resulted in the defeat of the Soviets in 1989, the US did nothing to help with nation building.  The Taliban soon took over most of Afghanistan.   In 2001 the US pushed the Taliban out and instead of doing nothing undertook nation building, with NATO joining in 2003.   The conflict with the Taliban continues as does nation building.  YOU CAN BLAME IT ON THE US AND NATO.

We have discussed this before, and I have corrected you before with hard facts, yet you persist in singing the same song.  Why do you not acccept facts?

Your version of 'facts' are just you creating a phony narrative with omissions aplenty.


Fathertime!   

[Boethius]

So what!  You were complaining about refugees in Europe and blaming the US. 

I wasn't complaining about refugees.  I merely stated US policies in the Middle East created a problem which European countries bear the brunt of.

These refugees staying in the region are the best ones.  They will be able to rebuild it given the opportunity.   Those allowed to start a life in Europe will not return.  So I blame Europe again. 

So you think living in a tent or a tin shack in squalid conditions for years, with no schooling for your children, no medical aid, no jobs, is preferable to Abu Mohammed's life as described here?


http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/03/07/syrian-doctors-are-saving-german-lives-problem-refugee-crisis/

Token efforts as part of Obama's Arab Spring initiative.  Obama was misguided in thinking democracy would seize the day.  The rebels were never given enough support by EU nor the US to win.  I understand Saudi Arabia gave more support than we did, so you should blame them as well as blame the Syrians who had the cojones to fight a ruthless dictator.

The policy of revolutions springing up across the Middle East was developed by the neoconservatives, not Obama.  It was part of the rationalization for invading Iraq, which, of course, would be paid for with Iraqi oil.  I've provided the PNAC link in the past.


If you have met any Syrian refugees, or read their stories, or listened to their interviews, what is striking is that almost all of them say that Syria was a wonderful place to live.  They could worship freely or even be atheist.  No one I have met or listened to has said Assad was a ruthless dictator. Most have said you couldn't speak politics or criticize him, that was dangerous.  Democratic?  Absolutely not.  But not exactly North Korea. 

[msmob]

TC

Why am I not surprised you voted for 'Brexit'? )

Whilst the damage is done and the UK must leave the article 50 bill is anything BUT done and dusted ...

How we live is now important and the rights of EU folk in the UK and UK folk in the EU  must be sorted.

Thank GOD we have the Lord's to slow down May's headlong rush to jump off a cliff.

Now concerning this thread's theme.. The vote in the EU Parliament is non binding.

This dropping of visa free status is not going to happen unless the European Commission make it law.

This is a long running dispute predating the election of 'Tramp' and the EU is quite correct to insist all 28 member states citizens must be treated the same.

An analogy..Imagine the EU refused those US citizens from Kentucky, Alabama, Texas, New Mexico and Maine?

If Canada, Japan, Australia can agree all EU states citizens are visa free and reciprocate...What IS the issue with the US?

[Gator]

I wasn't complaining about refugees. 

My mistake because your words imply your feelings for refugees parallel  Krimster's feelings for illegal immigrants.     

I merely stated US policies in the Middle East created a problem which European countries bear the brunt of.

So refugees are a "problem."  You differ from Krimster because he asserts illegal immigrants are not a problem.   

Why do you persist is singling out the US? I have repeatedly shown that Europe is just as culpable as the US because Europe did not take proactive measures in Syria and participated via NATO in Afghanistan and Libya.  More important, Europe opened its doors to refugees for economic reasons to augment a decline in the worker population.       

So you think living in a tent or a tin shack in squalid conditions for years, with no schooling for your children, no medical aid, no jobs, is preferable to Abu Mohammed's life as described here?

Abu was needed in Syria.  More people were being injured and killed in Aleppo and many of Abu's medical colleagues stayed there to help.  Plus many international doctors voluntarily helped too.   

Refugee camps are not a walk on the beach; however, many are not as bad as you describe.  The money spent in helping refugees in Europe would improve the lives of more people if it were spent on refugees in the Middle East. 

The policy of revolutions springing up across the Middle East was developed by the neoconservatives, not Obama. 

Neither President Obama nor Bill Kristol  originated the concept of democratic revolutions.  Obama certainly endorsed the concept,  all the Arab Springs happened on his watch, and Obama gave varying levels of support to all of them.  The PNAC did not send arms to rebels. 
 

If you have met any Syrian refugees, or read their stories, or listened to their interviews, what is striking is that almost all of them say that Syria was a wonderful place to live.  They could worship freely or even be atheist.  No one I have met or listened to has said Assad was a ruthless dictator.

So you think Assad is a "prince of a man?"

Syria, as with any nation,  had many delightful areas, and a certain class of people could enjoy them.    People who move to a new land will miss what was good about their prior home.  If Syria were so wonderful, why did mass Arab Spring protests occur?  If Assad were such a "prince of a man,"   why did he crack down hard on protesters, killing some, and prompting the protest to grow into a civil war?  What rating would you give to Assad for his rules of engagement in attacking his own people in the ongoing civil war. 

[Boethius]

My mistake because your words imply your feelings for refugees parallel  Krimster's feelings for illegal immigrants.   

I can understand why people wish to escape poverty and start life in prosperous countries.  In a perfect world, were we more advanced as a species, there would be no borders and people would be free not only to move where they wish, but opportunity would be equal across the globe.  But, we're not there, nor will be for centuries, if ever. 

So refugees are a "problem."  You differ from Krimster because he asserts illegal immigrants are not a problem.   

Of course it is a problem.  Unlike illegal immigrants, most refugees, and the majority of Syrians in particular, had no desire to leave their countries and start life anew elsewhere.

Why do you persist is singling out the US? I have repeatedly shown that Europe is just as culpable as the US because Europe did not take proactive measures in Syria and participated via NATO in Afghanistan and Libya.  More important, Europe opened its doors to refugees for economic reasons to augment a decline in the worker population.

Most of this is the end result of the invasion of Iraq.  There would have been no ISIS, no Syrian civil war, nor the downfall of Gaddafi without the invasion of Iraq.

Abu was needed in Syria.  More people were being injured and killed in Aleppo and many of Abu's medical colleagues stayed there to help.  Plus many international doctors voluntarily helped too.   

Would it be better if he'd died in a bombing campaign?


The very first refugee off the plane in Canada is an Armenian ob-gyn.  He owned two clinics in Syria, and had a very prosperous life there.  One morning, his wife told him she had a bad feeling, and that he should call all his staff, tell them not to go to work that day, and he should stay home.  He listened to her.  That afternoon, his clinic was hit by a bomb (airplane), and was completely destroyed.  They fled Syria shortly thereafter.

Refugee camps are not a walk on the beach; however, many are not as bad as you describe.  The money spent in helping refugees in Europe would improve the lives of more people if it were spent on refugees in the Middle East. 

www.ctvnews.ca/canada/utterly-inhumane-canadian-nurse-describes-conditions-in-syrian-refugee-camp-1.2680412


http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=52893#.WLx9U9QrJkg

Neither President Obama nor Bill Kristol  originated the concept of democratic revolutions.  Obama certainly endorsed the concept,  all the Arab Springs happened on his watch, and Obama gave varying levels of support to all of them.  The PNAC did not send arms to rebels. 

No, but PNAC was the blueprint for the invasion of Iraq.  I think Obama was wrong to have fomented war in Syria, and Libya.

So you think Assad is a "prince of a man?"

No.  But according to Syrians who lived there, they had good lives.  I think the more pertinent question is, would there have been a popular uprising without outside arms? 

[Gator]

I can understand why people wish to escape poverty and start life in prosperous countries.    In a perfect world, were we more advanced as a species, there would be no borders and people would be free not only to move where they wish, but opportunity would be equal across the globe.  But, we're not there, nor will be for centuries, if ever.

 

Commodities, goods and services can cross the border now.  Prosperity for Chinese citizens has improved dramatically without their having to move as refugees.  In 2013  the wealth per adult in China was twice the rate in Russia and is better distributed.   

Charity begins at home (in 2013 31% of the US adults were in the 0-$10,000 net asset category).  We have much work to do here to advance US citizens who have not been helped by government welfare.

Of course it is a problem.  Unlike illegal immigrants, most refugees, and the majority of Syrians in particular, had no desire to leave their countries and start life anew elsewhere.

TV news showed  a large number of healthy male Syrians with money rushing to move to Europe, men needed to fight for their country and rebuild it when the fighting ends.  The Germans and Japanese stayed after WW II ended.
     

There would have been no ISIS....

Or if Bill Clinton  had killed OBL when he had the opportunity.

...no Syrian civil war...

Syrian soldiers defected and Civil war broke out in Syria when Assad cracked down hard on the Arab Spring protesters.  Iraq invasion was not a factor. 

....nor the downfall of Gaddafi without the invasion of Iraq.

He was loved by some and hated by others.  From Wiki,  Gaddafi's  "social and economic reforms were strongly opposed by Islamic fundamentalists and he was internationally condemned as a dictator whose authoritarian administration violated the human rights of Libyan citizens and financed global terrorism."  For a dictator, he stayed in power for a long time. 

Would it be better if he'd died in a bombing campaign?

Most Syrians who stayed have lived.  It would have been better if he stayed and helped  his country.  Such is what patriots do.

.... his wife told him she had a bad feeling.... He listened to her.  That afternoon, his clinic was hit by a bomb (airplane).....They fled Syria shortly thereafter.

A Syrian Nostradamus.  I don't know what this has to do with the discussion of refugees. 

www.ctvnews.ca/canada/utterly-inhumane-canadian-nurse-describes-conditions-in-syrian-refugee-camp-1.2680412

Around the world there are an estimated 40 million people on the run due to conflict in their own countries.  Most of those live worse than Syrian refugees, e. g., Sudan.  How about them?

... I think the more pertinent question is, would there have been a popular uprising without outside arms?

Good question.  Yes and no.  The Arab Spring wave of protests occurred in about 20 countries.  Most were non-violent and were resolved in a productive manner with some government concessions.  The Tunisian government was overthrown with a total death toll of only a few hundred.  The deaths in Egypt were not much greater.   Libya, Yemen and Syria were exceptions (and arms were everywhere).