On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 10:45 AM, kirby urner <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
<< SNIP >>
> However, I do think stepping up field operations in refugee camps and > involving more health care personnel in global programs will have a > positive effect on the USA scene as well. Accepting larger numbers of > refugees for resettlement and having more such refugee camps within the > USA's borders might also be a consequence. When the Albanians were getting > attacked by the Yugoslavians, I advocated getting more ships involved and > facilitating an exodus. The same might be offered to the people in Gaza > who want to start over in another setting (not everyone would want to -- > these programs should be voluntary). > > Albania: http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=42932 http://amarillo.com/stories/050699/usn_LA0718.002.shtml
(the idea of flotillas for evacuation is not new -- Syria is talked about more often in this connection as it's foreign nationals that get evacuated in the typical scenario, not natives under attack, although that happens too).
> As you may know, when Hitler was trying to drive all the Jews out of > Germany, nations such as England and the USA mostly closed their borders. > In England, recently arrived refugees were forced into prison camps whereas > the USA simply refused to raise its quota, condemning many to death. Of > course the food blockade (which the Quakers tried to work around) was also > death dealing. I mention this because of how modern warfare has targeted > civilians and involved them. In the new world order I advocate, there's a > lot more concerted effort to move people around and get them out of the > battles, even if only temporarily. Somalia is a current focus, as is the > Sudan. > > Source: http://www.amazon.com/Human-Smoke-Beginnings-World-Civilization/dp/1416572465/