Why Don't The "Gulf States" Take Syrian Refugees?

[Anglojew]

A recent thread about Al Jazeera's criticism of the West not taking more Syrian refugees begs the question of why the Gulf States (The Qatari royal family owns Al Jazeera) have done nothing to resettle Syrian refugees in their countries.

Amnesty International said last month;

Wealthy Gulf states have failed to resettle a single refugee from the Syrian conflict - a "particularly shameful" omission by countries that should be at the forefront of those offering shelter

Furthermore;

The Gulf Arab states are some of the primary funders of the armed rebellion in Syria, but in four (now five) years not one of these six ultra-wealthy Arab states has agreed to resettle even one single refugee.

Why Don't The "Gulf States" Take Syrian Refugees?

Is it a long-term plot to flood the West with Muslim refugees and bankrupt the West with wars, foreign aid and welfare?

[Tooting Carmen]

And likewise Iraqi refugees. Very good question indeed.

[Tooting Carmen]

It is, furthermore, deeply absurd how Syrians have got so desperate that lots of them have even fled into Iraq, yet the much more peaceful and wealthy Gulf Arab countries won't take them in at all.

[Anglojew]

And likewise Iraqi refugees. Very good question indeed.

They figure they can't colonise the West with violence but they can with immigrants, refugees and resulting demographic growth.

[Jana]

They should. Those refugees would be less foreign in there and would have better chance for new life in culturaly similar environment. They are rich anyway, and should help fellow muslims.

[Profileid]

Jordan and Lebanon, neither country having any oil or much in terms of natural resources whatsoever have taken in over a million refugees, yet the gulf states are our "allies" and they pull this shit.Prolonging the war in Syria by supporting the "moderate rebels" and not even having the decency to deal with the consequences.The more you learn, the more you dislike them.

[OnceLord]

Simple-- they are smart. They know what sort of problems a massive immigrant refugee population will bring. Even if it's their 'own kind'.

Since the Anglosphere and the rest of the West has already set precedence for being so lovey-dovey and smothering with the humanitarianism.. Makes sense to shirk the responsibility onto us.

Even more pathetic/funny/ironic is these govts (or at least elements in the countries) have been supporting ISIL types (such as Al Nusra) to play a stupid 'power play' in the region the same way Pakiland's ISI did with the Taliban.

We just keep paying the price, eh?

[Prisoner Of Ice]

Because they want to destroy the west by colonizing it.

[Prisoner Of Ice]

lol at randomguy. He is exactly the kind we should paradrop into saudi arabia.

[TheGoldenSon]

They should. Those refugees would be less foreign in there and would have better chance for new life in culturaly similar environment. They are rich anyway, and should help fellow muslims.

Gulf Arab are the most xenophobic people out there (beside East Asians, Jews, and Albanians), most comparable are the Ancients of Greece. Encouraging others to "follow the path of virtue", while being the most opportunistic, manipulative and cold calculating people in the region, much like their Jewish cousins to the West. I guess that is the natural state of the Semites.