Topic: Unhappy Random thoughts...

[FR1DAY]

Emo-politics driven by fleeting media frenzy is never a good idea.

What does that mean? That is a dead human lying face down in the sea!
Why can't we set up large scale processing camps for all of them. Probably because the gate way is into poor southern Europe. Us northern Europeans should pay for it. What will it cost us £50 each. It's nothing. 
We can let in all those who want yo work and deport all the lazy natives we've got to balance the numbers.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

Emo-politics driven by fleeting media frenzy is never a good idea.

What does that mean? That is a dead human lying face down in the sea!

What it means should have been clear from my other posts.

Why can't we set up large scale processing camps for all of them. Probably because the gate way is into poor southern Europe. Us northern Europeans should pay for it. What will it cost us £50 each. It's nothing. 

The political situation in the Middle East (and the economic situation elsewhere) is not going to stabilise soon. Germany alone expects 800.000 asylum seekers this year. One should not be suprised to see even higher numbers in the years to come. And as I pointed out in previous posts, left unchecked, immigration is self-perpetuating. Every accepted asylum seeker must be multiplied with a factor of at least 3 in subsequent legal and illegal immigration.

We should invest not in processing camps, but in decent refugee camps in the neighbouring countries. With the cost of one asylum seeker in Europe, you can support a far greater number of refugees there and provide them with a least a basic standard of living (housing, food, water, sanitation, schools) and relieve the burden on those countries.

We can let in all those who want yo work and deport all the lazy natives we've got to balance the numbers.

There is no link between deserving asylum and wanting to work. This is one of the many fudges that cloud the whole issue.

[Syphon]

Emo-politics driven by fleeting media frenzy is never a good idea.

What does that mean? That is a dead human lying face down in the sea!
Why can't we set up large scale processing camps for all of them. Probably because the gate way is into poor southern Europe. Us northern Europeans should pay for it. What will it cost us £50 each. It's nothing. 
We can let in all those who want yo work and deport all the lazy natives we've got to balance the numbers.

See, that's exactly what Fidelis means. They want us to think politically over the back of that dead child. Who says its a Syrian child? For all we know it was a Turkish child who died because his parents were smart enough to pose as Syrians. There are a thousand caveats. It's still a dead child, and that is sad. But don't make it like it's our fault and that we have some sort of obligation to care for them. Start at the top. Go to the EU boffins in Brussels who either willfully (which is the worst scenario) or in their ignorance have been stirring in beehives they had no business in going in to.

So why should the common person pay if local countries are not doing SQUAT to help these people? Because of some ill-seated feeling of guilt for the past? Even then it was the boffins before the current boffins that did all that, and not you and me. But you know what? You and me are going to pay for that. And suffer the consequences of harboring rapists, murderers, war criminals amongst the real refugees. Not the boffins, because they managed to somehow place all the centres where refugees are put nowhere near the areas where boffins live.

Here's a map:



If your first guess was that this is a map where enemy invaders have landed...well, you probably wouldn't be wrong. Who knows how many ISIS sympathizers are hiding there? The circles are centers where asylum seekers were built. And what immediately comes to the fore? There are almost none in the west, where, who guessed it, the boffins are. Earlier this year there were plans to put 400 asylum seekers in a town of 140 people. Uproar! Protest! But those people were branded racists. The best weapon anybody has against anything related to the migrant crisis is to call someone a racist. Or a nazi, works well too. That works especially well in Germany, where the guilt and shame are still very much alive. People's fathers and sometimes grandfathers that live now have voted for the nazi party. They have worked for nazis. Might have been nazis. And that stings. It's a stain on their history. And it's their biggest weakness. The quickest way to shut somebody up in this debate in Germany is to call them Hitler. Which is what Merkel loves doing.

You know what, by the way? Orbán of Hungary is completely right. It IS Germany's problem. Why should Hungary carry the burden of it when it was Germany that said "All Syrians get free papers and permits!" Of course, what you now also see is Turks posing as Syrians to get free papers. Which brings me back to the start. How do you know it was a Syrian boy whose family fled the US/EU SPONSORED VIOLENCE? Might as easily have been a Turkish boy. Or any other nationality.

The other day I saw footage of a refugee camp in Italy. "WE ARE SUFFERING!" one well-fed man shouted as he still wore his iPhone earbuds. Of what? Certainly not suffering from hunger. Or exposure. Or were they angry because the ground under their tents was wet? These were all young adult men, not a single child or woman among them, and I saw a few people that looked nothing like middle-easterners but rather seemed very Indian. At least, like they came from that region. India, Pakistan, they had that ethnicity. Just like the man who claimed he came from Syria, but was remarkably dark-skinned and GHANESE for being from Syria.

All of this makes me think that the Coudenhove-Kalergi plan, a plan to foster the creation of an indistinct, Caucasiafrican race that has no local loyalties but rather loyalties on a larger level, might just be true. This would be the start of a greater bloc of the America combined with a single, united Europe.

TL;DR:

• Local shelter (That means you, Dubai, Qatar, Saudi-Arabia!)
• Temporary stay in the west only
• No reunion policy
• Border controls
• Stop trying to kill Assad

[Finlay]

@ Fidelis, it wasn't that clear hence my clarification.

your first reaction is cold steel politicising.


you later say of course it upset you, and you feel guilty basically betraying what Christ is telling you.

[FR1DAY]

In regard to local countries there is over a million syrians in lebanon, a country of only 6 milllion, and two million in turkey. They cant go to fucking isreal, gaza, because of the isrealis or iraq due to ISIS. Also iran is a long way across very hostile country to the east. The west, europe is realively close. If someone was dropping barrel bombs on my family id leave, as would you.
What do you suggest, annex a sovereign states land to set up a protection zone and they pay to look after the peopke till it sorts its self put. There will there will Be no jobs or infrastructure for them. We have to pay. However there is everything here for them so hey can pay thier own way. We took the hugonauts in the 17th century, they jews in the 19th century, why not the syrians in the 21st. There is plenty of useless british people we could fuck off to make room.
British culture went in the 90's with new labours multiculturalism. I live in the wealthist part of britian and even there its changed beyond the white culture i enjoyed as a child. Lets embrace it. All i ask is everyone works hard and is nice to each other, regardless of all other factors. Im lucky, due to the cost of living in surrey you dont get may dossers around but i see them where my wifes from and elsewhere on my travels. If someone from Poland, america, syria, or somarlia what to live in peace and work hard why should we care. You make a society like that. 


I hate tuping on the ipad! Sorry.

[Syphon]

Relatively close? PLEASE. So are Qatar, Dubai, Saudi Arabia. And together they shelter absolutely NOBODY. There is no reason to come here because you have culture shock, travel dangers, people that don't even want you there. But still, they come here. And somehow they manage to recreate the exact circumstances that made possible the reason for fleeing in the first place. (If you can even call them actual refugees, see before about them merely being fortune seekers, i.e. people who want to get rich with minimal investment). Again, why do they insist on going ALL the way to France, Britain, Germany, Netherlands, when they are SAFE in neighboring countries? Exactly. To live off the pity industry, who in turn make a nice little buck with their "counsellors" and "advisors" and so on. I've got exactly ZERO sympathy for anybody who risks their life for a free ride when they should be at home making something out of their own country.

[FR1DAY]

So when the Germans invaded your country you think the people should of stayed to make something of the place. Especially the Jews.  What about the Christian Syrian feeling isis?  I do take it you don't have kids Syphon.  I was very much like you in my twenties, however as I've got older, kids and wealth I've changed my stance on this.
I think you misinterpreted  me, I do belive these countries bring it on themselves. They have no idea how to run a country and would have been better off under colonial rule still.  Not every country by any means,  but the African ones particularly.  Also the Arab countries need a firm hand at the tiller. Better a local cunt in charge that kills 0.1% of the population than the situation in all the countries the west has either ousted or supported the locals in ousting the leader. What a collection of cluster fucks that has been. However we have either allowed them to have their independance or help the 'rebels' start the problem. Thus we have to help the normal people who need help. Nobody wants bombs drop on them, especially you americans who do the dropping not the ducking.
We either just invade, conscription of all those twenty something refugees with a guaranteed citizenship after three year like the french forget legion, or star ship troopers.
Positive action to sort out their countries using their own people. Or we deal with the problems we sowed using the wealth we've got. I'm happy either way.
We are all human. Bring on the aliens do we can all finally see this.
 

[Gneisenau]

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21662547-bigger-welcome-mat-would-be-europes-own-interest-let-them-and-let-them-earn?fsrc=scn/fb/te/pe/ed/lettheminandletthemearn
Make them useful members of society. It definitely isn't a new concept.

From the article:

Europe can and should do better. And not just for moral reasons but for selfish ones, too. Europe’s labour force is ageing and will soon begin to shrink. Its governments have racked up vast debts which they plan to dump on future generations. This will be harder if those future generations are smaller. Immigrants, including asylum-seekers, are typically young and eager to work. So they can help ease this problem: caring for the elderly and shouldering a share of debts they had no role in running up. Africans and Arabs are young. Europe can borrow some of their vitality, but only if European governments handle all types of migration more sensibly, which will be politically hard and require reform in labour markets, too.

This argument is trotted out repeatedly and is utter rubbish.

An ageing population is not a problem in itself. The only problem associated with it is the strain on the welfare state. You do not need young people per se to fix that, you need taxpayers.

The average refugee, even from Syria, will be less skilled than the average native. There is also the language barrier that must be overcome. It's absolutely delusional to think that refugees will solve the lack of skilled labor that we are currently facing.

Of course, this does not mean that we should not help genuine refugees. We absolutely should, for moral reasons. But let's not pretend that there is any sort of utilitarian justification for doing so.



Edit: This is not meant as a personal attack on you, Quickbeam, and I hope you don't take it as such. The situation in the USA is very different, I think.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

What Gneisenau says. There is a tendency within liberal/progressive circles to use the asylum issue to force more immigration on an unwilling electorate. 

And here is a map to put the geography in perspective:



The Gulf states, Egypt and Iran are closer to Syria than Germany, the preferred destination (most even far closer). Note that there are clear safe routes over Turkey or Jordan to reach these countries. Note also that the transit countries Macedonia and Serbia are European countries, and that Cyprus, Greece, Bulgaria, Rumania and Hungary are all part of the EU.  All of these European/EU countries are safe and closest to the Middle East, but, funnily enough, no one wants to seek refuge there.

[Gankom]

Frankly I think space colonization would help a great many of these problems, or at least help in the population/immigration area.

[Gneisenau]

There's enough space here. There's just too many places where people are asshats to other people.

[patsy02]

There's enough space here.

Nope, there really isn't. The population density in Europe is insane, and particularly in the UK/Benelux/Northern France/Western Germany area. The number of birds in Europe has been reduced by 20% since 1980, fish stocks in European oceans are being killed off, and there are barely any forests left south of Scandinavia.

Further population growth is A: going to be unsustainable, and is B: Going to come from non-european immigrants -- the results of which can be seen in Sweden right now.

[Quickbeam]

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21662547-bigger-welcome-mat-would-be-europes-own-interest-let-them-and-let-them-earn?fsrc=scn/fb/te/pe/ed/lettheminandletthemearn
Make them useful members of society. It definitely isn't a new concept.

From the article:

Europe can and should do better. And not just for moral reasons but for selfish ones, too. Europe’s labour force is ageing and will soon begin to shrink. Its governments have racked up vast debts which they plan to dump on future generations. This will be harder if those future generations are smaller. Immigrants, including asylum-seekers, are typically young and eager to work. So they can help ease this problem: caring for the elderly and shouldering a share of debts they had no role in running up. Africans and Arabs are young. Europe can borrow some of their vitality, but only if European governments handle all types of migration more sensibly, which will be politically hard and require reform in labour markets, too.

This argument is trotted out repeatedly and is utter rubbish.

An ageing population is not a problem in itself. The only problem associated with it is the strain on the welfare state. You do not need young people per se to fix that, you need taxpayers.

The average refugee, even from Syria, will be less skilled than the average native. There is also the language barrier that must be overcome. It's absolutely delusional to think that refugees will solve the lack of skilled labor that we are currently facing.

Of course, this does not mean that we should not help genuine refugees. We absolutely should, for moral reasons. But let's not pretend that there is any sort of utilitarian justification for doing so.

I don't think it's a utilitarian justification really. It's more like a missed opportunity to reform the Labor markets like the US did in the early 20th century with the mass of European and Chinese Immigrants that flowed in. Of course that would require a major policy shift and probably will never happen but that is just my Two Cents on the matter.

Edit: This is not meant as a personal attack on you, Quickbeam, and I hope you don't take it as such. The situation in the USA is very different, I think.

I don't take it as such  Also I don't live in the US anymore. I'm staying in Korea after I get out of the Army.

[Sig]

Find a woman?

[Syphon]

There's enough space here.

Nope, there really isn't. The population density in Europe is insane, and particularly in the UK/Benelux/Northern France/Western Germany area. The number of birds in Europe has been reduced by 20% since 1980, fish stocks in European oceans are being killed off, and there are barely any forests left south of Scandinavia.

Further population growth is A: going to be unsustainable, and is B: Going to come from non-european immigrants -- the results of which can be seen in Sweden right now.

If I consider the Netherlands, Germany, France, and the UK lost then I have no name for how far along Sweden is.
Here's a happy(!) little article about the state of Sweden, rape capital of the west and runner-up to the title of most rapey country in the world.
Seriously, even a country that I thought was pretty good at rape, South Africa, has Sweden above it in the rankings. Only Lesotho has more rapes.

[Quickbeam]

Find a woman?

I've got a job here making 6 figures if I want it.

[patsy02]

Here's a happy(!) little article about the state of Sweden, rape capital of the west and runner-up to the title of most rapey country in the world.

Keep in mind that it depends on how you define rape. Feminism is extremely pervasive in Sweden, and its proponents are well known to advertise fabricated or fudged data on the issue.

I've got a job here making 6 figures if I want it.

Nice. Doing what?

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

Regarding Aylan Al-Kurdi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZUuoaq1MLM

[Syphon]

Here's a happy(!) little article about the state of Sweden, rape capital of the west and runner-up to the title of most rapey country in the world.

Keep in mind that it depends on how you define rape. Feminism is extremely pervasive in Sweden, and its proponents are well known to advertise fabricated or fudged data on the issue.

Even so, if it almost comes in number one, don't you think something's up? You can skew the numbers any way you want, fudge them by naming rape anything else, but the facts are there. Rape happens there. A lot. And it's not  by western migrants. But we can't say that, can we? That's not politically correct. Nor is it politically correct to mention that all those people who rape are by and large adherents of the most cancerous ideology in the world.

@Fidelis:
Yep. Puts the EU propaganda machine right in its place, doesn't it?

[Finlay]

they fled Kobani, which was under siege for 6 months by Isis, and has been 70% destroyed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Koban%C3%AE

this is what Kobani looks like


In June Isis executed 154 civilians and kidnapped 100 more. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/26/kurdish-forces-have-besieged-isis-fighters-in-kobani-say-activists


His brother had been refused asylum in canada.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

@Fidelis:
Yep. Puts the EU propaganda machine right in its place, doesn't it?

It is not the EU propaganda machine. The EU establishment is being driven, not the driver.

[Syphon]

they fled Kobani, which was under siege for 6 months by Isis, and has been 70% destroyed.
His brother had been refused asylum in canada.

They fled Kobani 3 years ago.

[Finlay]

so what?

they fled a horrible civil war.
His brother had been rejected asylum in canada.
Europe is closer than canada.

but sure, it's all about the teeth.

[Syphon]

so what?

they fled a horrible civil war.
His brother had been rejected asylum in canada.
Europe is closer than canada.

but sure, it's all about the teeth.

Saudi Arabia is closer than Europe. So are Qatar, Dubai. You want to talk shelter, talk to them first.

[patsy02]

I doubt you'd ever get anyone in the peninsula or Persian gulf to help out, half of them were funding Syrian and Iraqi Salafists to begin with.