you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Site_rly_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Oh ok so housing the trafficked refugees in a national guard barracks was the CORRECT outcome?

Instead of government forcing property owners to open up their apartments?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Housing political refugees is the job of a government, not a citizen. So yes, a barracks is probably a sensible option. Besides, it's suitable residence for a soldier, why not a refugee?

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sure, makes sense to me, but the dipshit OP disagrees, he seems to think that if the residents didn't open their specific home at that time, then the trafficked refugees should have been left sleeping on the street. He actually thinks it's pretty damning that the refugees were placed in a barracks but he didn't explain why he thought that so 🤷