Jump to content

Immigration/Refugee Thread


Axl owns dexter

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

They(the EU, the US, UN or whoever) should set up safety zones in the countries the refugees are coming from and protect and help them there.

Having no clue how to handle situations like the one in Sweden for example in the real world and simply shrugging saying "Fuck it. I want to feel like a nice person." and letting massive swathes of immigrants and refugees pour in isn't good enough. It's an awful idea.

Totally agree. It would be the best for everyone if that were possible. It's a pity not more is being done to make that possible. It would be so much more logical to investing the money there than spending it here.

Now we have a situation where vile criminals rob war victims of all their money to get them to Europe, refugees risking their lives, ending up in countries they have no connection with whatsoever. And once they're settled, and the war is over, they'll have to go back and there will be problems with that, after they've built up a life here, and especially so for families with young kids, who have no connection with their country of origin.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/18/2017 at 10:39 AM, Silent Jay said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/17/erdogan-calls-turkish-families-have-five-children-bulwark-against/

 Turkey’s president urged “his brothers and sisters in Europe” to begin a baby boom in their new countries. “Have not just three but five children,” he told his flag-waving audience. 

Mr Erdoğan is in the midst of a closely-fought referendum campaign in which he is asking voters to grant him sweeping new powers that would potentially let him stay in office until 2029. 

These would be words of war in previous era's. 

Does anyone want to take a stab at what Mr. Erdogan meant when he was threatening Europe with more refugees? Is he implying the refugees are bad for Europe? Anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

“If Europe continues this way, no European in any part of the world can walk safely on the streets,” Mr Erdogan told journalists in Ankara. 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/turkey-erdogan-germany-netherlands-warning-europeans-not-walk-safely-a7642941.html

Erdogan at it again. What does he mean by this statement? Is it a direct threat, is he saying the refugees will start rioting?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20 March 2017 at 2:21 PM, Oldest Goat said:

They(the EU, the US, UN or whoever) should set up safety zones in the countries the refugees are coming from and protect and help them there.

Having no clue how to handle situations like the one in Sweden for example in the real world and simply shrugging saying "Fuck it. I want to feel like a nice person." and letting massive swathes of immigrants and refugees pour in isn't good enough. It's an awful idea.

Should probably stop letting war profiteers destablizing countries in the middle east then there'd be less refugees. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Oldest Goat said:

Completely agree.

I've noticed in the media and just in casual convos people don't make the connection. It's the issue of immigration. Never why it is needed or is happening. It's like a blind spot. Are we ashamed?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

Yes I think that's part of it. I know I am.

People don't want to talk about it. Not enough time really. But the media is kind of not doing it's job. Anyone brings it up on tv they divert it by pulling the race card. There's no awareness of why it's happening. We're such solid narcissists at this point we'd rather run a marathon for charity than actually just go help at the soup kitchen. I'm guilty of that. I could take refugee myself. Not that I'd wish that on anyone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Axl owns dexter said:

0eakvt3pjzmy.png

This tweet hasn't aged well.

Yeah pretty crazy.

Sadiq Khan has said he believes the threat of terror attacks are “part and parcel of living in a big city” and encouraged Londoners to be vigilant to combat dangers.

Fuck that guy.

Edited by Silent Jay
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, wasted said:

Another statist heard from. 

US governments since world war I have killed 4 million muslims. If a few are pissed off blame your government/EU/Nato. 

Welp, all the more reason for strict immigration then!

And honestly, I was never a cheerleader for Middle Eastern wars, so don't attack me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, downzy said:

First, his remarks were from six months ago, not in response to the latest attack in London.  Second, how is he wrong?  Large western cities will always be under threat from terrorists and that preparedness and vigilance is needed.  

I don't see the issue here.   

Why are London, New York, and Paris such big targets of terror but Tokyo isn't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Axl owns dexter said:

Welp, all the more reason for strict immigration then!

And honestly, I was never a cheerleader for Middle Eastern wars, so don't attack me!

I'm kind of for open borders because if all the countries are locked up the govs dont have to serve the people. If you can leave then they have to do something for the people. It can work if a balance is struck. 

But if you are at war or have aggressive foreign policies then maybe you have to tighten up security. The thing is its not an overt war, its like we are in denial. But if we give in to fear then we can imprison ourselves. Being in the EU club open borders came with benefits. But after Brexit UK will become more isolated. It may be "safer" after a while. It might have been better not to make such enemies. I don't see the bemefit we got from the wars. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, downzy said:

First, his remarks were from six months ago, not in response to the latest attack in London.  Second, how is he wrong?  Large western cities will always be under threat from terrorists and that preparedness and vigilance is needed.  

I don't see the issue here.   

I'd like to point out that 2 decades ago, it wasn't the Muslims doing terrorism that Londoner's would have been worried about. 

UK has had a history over the past several decades and while they might not have claimed they were doing it in the name of Christianity, their religion(s) were what they were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, AtariLegend said:

I'd like to point out that 2 decades ago, it wasn't the Muslims doing terrorism that Londoner's would have been worried about. 

UK has had a history over the past several decades and while they might not have claimed they were doing it in the name of Christianity, their religion(s) were what they were.

And the US government supported them, that might be worth bearing in mind too.  Ol' Wild Bill did a speech at Martin McGuinesses funeral did he not? 

Edited by Len Cnut
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

And the US government supported them, that might be worth bearing in mind too.  Ol' Wild Bill did a speech at Martin McGuinesses funeral did he not? 

Yes.

Americans convinced people who blew up pubs targeting innocent people of any religion, sold drugs and kneecaped people they didn't like were freedom fighters!

Oh and republicans gave them money too at fund-raisers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AtariLegend said:

Yes.

Americans convinced people who blew up pubs targeting innocent people of any religion, sold drugs and kneecaped people they didn't like were freedom fighters!

Oh and republicans gave them money too at fund-raisers. 

Sounds like John McCain and Lindsay Graham supporting the 'rebels' in Syria!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AtariLegend said:

Yes.

Americans convinced people who blew up pubs targeting innocent people of any religion, sold drugs and kneecaped people they didn't like were freedom fighters!

Oh and republicans gave them money too at fund-raisers. 

So much for 'special relationship'.  They were a lot more organised, intelligent and effective than these random ISIS sympathising wankers too, who tend to always never get very far or cock it up somehow.  

Edited by Len Cnut
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Turkey has taken in more refugees than any other country along with Lebanon and Jordan. 

 

Also, is there a connection between crime and immigration? Of course there is. There's always going to be crime when you get a group of people who are forced to leave their lives behind into a land they know little about nor its laws. That is up to the country to take them in to intergrate them. The US does a better job at this, though our screening process takes a long time. Sweden has done a great job with taking in huge numbers while dealing with the crime at the same time. For a country of 10 million where immigration is on the rise but they manage to keep the murder rate so low, it is remarkable. 

 

Taking in refugees is the decent thing to do. Are their risks? Sure, but it is worth the risks. Its about helping people. If we are going to blow up their countries trying to kill terrorists, the least we can do is give them a home. If we actually follow up with wars and rebuild their nations, maybe they can go back? Millions of people are still trapped in war. Not just in Syria and Iraq, but also Yemen, Ukraine, Sudan, Somalia. If people want to flee just for another chance at life, why not let them have it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Georgy Zhukov said:

Turkey has taken in more refugees than any other country along with Lebanon and Jordan. 

 

Also, is there a connection between crime and immigration? Of course there is. There's always going to be crime when you get a group of people who are forced to leave their lives behind into a land they know little about nor its laws. That is up to the country to take them in to intergrate them. The US does a better job at this, though our screening process takes a long time. Sweden has done a great job with taking in huge numbers while dealing with the crime at the same time. For a country of 10 million where immigration is on the rise but they manage to keep the murder rate so low, it is remarkable. 

 

Taking in refugees is the decent thing to do. Are their risks? Sure, but it is worth the risks. Its about helping people. If we are going to blow up their countries trying to kill terrorists, the least we can do is give them a home. If we actually follow up with wars and rebuild their nations, maybe they can go back? Millions of people are still trapped in war. Not just in Syria and Iraq, but also Yemen, Ukraine, Sudan, Somalia. If people want to flee just for another chance at life, why not let them have it?

Tell the women who have been raped by Islamic refugees/immigrants about how decent this all is. I guess to make an omelette you have to crack a few eggs, right comrade?

Also, I didn't cheerlead for these dumb wars (and I'm guessing neither have those women who have been raped) so I shouldn't be punished with these refugees. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...