Mike Zapchek (Your Views, Gazette, Dec. 9) feels the refugee program is not "the best bang for the buck," although that didn't seem to be the objective. The program seemed to be the responsibility of the West because of the West's perception that laws concerning the sovereignty of countries could be breached with impunity, once again on the basis of false rumours and allegations.
Certainly, we didn't get the best buck-bang for our $5 million-effort against ISIS, which came mainly in the form of F18s responsible for three per cent of all sorties. Only Russia has made headway against these terrorists: apparently, the 10,000 oil-truck convoy of oil stolen by ISIS and transported to northern Syrian, Kurdish, Turkish territory and elsewhere seems to have been invisible to everyone else and their surveillance systems. Russia, the only country with the right to be in Syria – according to international law and UN Charter provisions, is vilified for doing what the West has pronounced should be done: eliminate ISIL.
Ironically, Assad's efforts to that end have also been vilified and lied about, as concerning for instance, the alleged use of poison gas on his own people, an act which has as little basis in common sense and the cui bono principle as it does in fact, and has been totally refuted by Seymour Hersh, among others.
But as it appears that truth, ethics and laws have become irrelevant these days, perhaps Mr. Zapchek's refugee camp suggestion has merit – but only if privatized according to the neo-liberal model for the biggest cash return on investment, or buck-bang.
Doris Wrench Eisler, St. Albert
