An "amazing" thing about the British tabloids/press in general is their ability to switch perspectives essentially overnight while still keeping their readership. The "migrants" were bad, until they were good. Or something.
I don't claim to know how to solve the world's problems, but I suspect that we could spend a bit less on "humanitarian bombs" and a bit more on "taking in refugees" and probably at least help a few more people than we do. I understand the urge (sometimes somewhat noble, sometimes not) to go after the bastards in charge, but ultimately the point is, supposedly, to help the people. The US is a giant country. We can take in way more refugees than we do, and the moral case for doing so doesn't even depend on the fact that we've helped to nudge them out of their homes.
