2014 July 22 Tuesday
Modest Proposal On Syria, Egypt, Christians
Move the at least 7 million Coptic Christians from Egypt (where they are plenty persecuted) to a country carved out of the Middle East to be a Christian nation. Let the assorted persecuted Christians of other Arab countries move to this country.
Where to carve out the country? Perhaps northern Lebanon and northern Syria? The advantage is that they wouldn't be landlocked. Or move the Shiites of southern Lebanon to a belt around Baghdad to make Baghdad better protected by Shittes against Sunnis. Then make Lebanon a Christian country which Syrian Christians could move to while Lebanese Sunnis could move to Syria.
You might say this is cruel to the Shiites and Sunnis. Well, Shiites and Sunnis do far worse to Christians. Once the shuffling around was finished they'd face fewer threats as well. The Shiites and Sunnis could have the benefit of ethnically purer states where they wouldn't be victims of each others' animosity.
Iraq could become a Shiite state, Syria a Sunni state, and Lebanon a Christian state.
Now of course this isn't going to happen. Instead Christians will continue to flee the Middle East while getting robbed, raped, and killed. The Western governments will do close to squat to stop it because religious loyalty by Christians toward Christians has been morally delegitimized while other forms of religious loyalty are still acceptable. The West will continue its decline.
By Randall Parker at 2014 July 22 09:20 PM
Obviously any such program if one attempted to seriously carry it out would involve massive blood-shedding. Admittedly that's already occuring. Getting involved in the conflicts of the Middle East was one of the biggest mistakes the US ever made. Truman was advised by the foreign policy establishment of his time including people such as George Marshall to stay out. His political advisors told him that the Jewish vote was crucial. Given a choice between political expediency and the national interest he didn't hesitate long.
This was already tried; it was called Lebanon, pre-1970s. It was the Paris of the East; it was the most beautiful, prosperous, peaceful and democratic nation in the Middle East. And then left-liberals went to work with their usual guilt tripping and convinced the Lebanese to open their hearts to their poor, oppressed, starving Muslim Palestinian "Arab brothers," and the poor, oppressed, starving Palestinian "brothers" trashed the place.
Founding another Christian state in the midst of surrounding Third World Muslim dysfunction would just repeat the process.
Haven't you figured it out yet? No one is allowed to have "nice" countries anymore, especially not Western (or Westernized) people. "Nice" countries immediately become target number one for Third World toiletization, in the name of making everyone "equal."
Lebanon had lots of internal conflict and bloodshed in the nineteenth century long before there was a Palestinian refugee population. Lebannon, like many other countries in the Middle East, including Israel, is inherently unstable and prone to deadly conflict.
In places like Lebanon or Cyprus, outside powers, like the Ottoman Empire, the French or the British, can sometimes maintain an uneasy peace for a awhile. But eventually such places tend to blow up. Human beings are highly prone to group conflict.
"The Western governments will do close to squat to stop it because religious loyalty by Christians toward Christians has been morally delegitimized while other forms of religious loyalty are still acceptable. The West will continue its decline."
But most of them are Monophysites and Monotheletists. I only want rescued people who accept the Nicene creed.
The survival of the Western civilization depends on its ability to develop a new kind of energy source, most likely the molten salt thorium reactors as soon as possible. As long as most of the oil is located in the Middle East, freedom in the Western world will gradually be lost. Much less than half the money that the Western world had wasted in the wars in the Middle East, would be sufficient to gain energy independence.
Randall said: "The Western governments will do close to squat to stop it because religious loyalty by Christians toward Christians has been morally delegitimized while other forms of religious loyalty are still acceptable."
The thing is that the majority of the west only nominally identify themselves as Christian, so its tough arguing that someone should be given special treatment because they happen to already be a member of a club that you're not interested in joining.
No doubt Obama would prefer to bribe the Muslim Arabs to tolerate the Christian Arabs, in return for allowing an equal number of Muslim Arabs to immigrate to the USA.
Countries like Japan and China are heavily dependent on Middle Eastern oil but they are little affected by the the vicissitudes of conflicts in the Middle East. Had this country heeded statesmen like George Marshall in 1948 we would be far better off today.
"But most of them are Monophysites and Monotheletists. I only want rescued people who accept the Nicene creed."
What are you babbling about? Coptics, Catholics, the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox (i.e. Armenians), who collectively make up ~98% of Near Eastern Christians, all accept the Nicene Creed.
Wolf-Dog, I don't think the energy problem is about fixed power plants, rather its all about mobile power plants. If I were King for a day, one of my proclamations would be for a crash program into battery technology. Fast charging (equivalent to the amount of time it takes to fill a traditional tank) and large storage (enough for 500km).
Jim said, "Countries like Japan and China are heavily dependent on Middle Eastern oil but they are little affected by the the vicissitudes of conflicts in the Middle East."
That's a really interesting point. Perhaps oil is just the excuse, but really the purpose is to ensure that Israel doesn't face a unified enemy.
Japan and China have had access to Middle East oil without a need to send troops there or spend lavishly on foreign aid. They have little need to get involved in the conflicts of the Middle East. They need somebody to sell them oil. They care not at all whether that somebody is Sunni, Shia, Kurdish or whatever. Nor do they care whether those countries that sell them oil are democracies, monarchies, theocracies or anything else. Nor do they lose any sleep over whether women in the countries that sell them oil have to wear veils. They get Middle Eastern oil as cheaply as possible while the US expends huge resources in totally useless attempts at social engineering the Middle East into a replica of Iowa.
Since the US has no borders anymore, how about we import them here? I'm only half joking. If we could trade 7 million illegals for 7 million persecuted Christians, I'd say do it.
"Many who today hear me somewhere in person, or on television, or those who read something Iíve said, will think I went to school far beyond the eighth grade. This impression is due entirely to my prison studies."
Is this a treatise on how to educate blacks?
The Mexicans, Salvadorans, etc. coming here are overwhelmingly Christian, too. Why would Syrian and Lebanese and Iraqi Christians make better neighbors?