Asylum Seekers; Yay or Nay?

[Embattle]

It is quite odd listening to the news when they talk about proposals to resettle an extra 120,000 refugees over two years at the same time as mentioning that 340,000 have already crossed into Europe so what is the plan for the ballooning number not planned to be resettled.

 

[Embattle]

Giggle - http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ys-immigrants-to-the-us-should-speak-american

Robert Peston - Why Germany needs migrants more than UK - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34172729

 

[Trem]

I want to bump this again.

Apparently, and yes it could be extreme and a one off etc but I want your views on it, apparently the refugees in Greece are turning it into a battle ground, fighting amongst themselves and with others and making it a complete no go area and the authorities have no...erm authority to intervene. How does that sit with people here, with the liberals?

Also another thought I had, and again it is a Trem thought so I'm cautiously throwing it out here why don't they fight for their land? There are tens of thousands of young fit men just leaving, why isn't there a backlash against what is happening in *their* country? I don't understand this, women and children out to safety and the men stay and fight. We would be expected to and so would pretty much every other country in the world, that's true though isn't it? It would be over in a jiffy if they stayed and stood up and with the financial aid of the West, surely?

 

[Gwadien]

Apparently, and yes it could be extreme and a one off etc but I want your views on it, apparently the refugees in Greece are turning it into a battle ground, fighting amongst themselves and with others and making it a complete no go area and the authorities have no...erm authority to intervene. How does that sit with people here, with the liberals?

The Greeks can't handle the islands, they can't afford it, Europe should be helping them, if you put thousands of people in the same area, then shit will happen, it doesn't matter who it is, it's down the authorities to handle it.

Also another thought I had, and again it is a Trem thought so I'm cautiously throwing it out here why don't they fight for their land? There are tens of thousands of young fit men just leaving, why isn't there a backlash against what is happening in *their* country? I don't understand this, women and children out to safety and the men stay and fight. We would be expected to and so would pretty much every other country in the world, that's true though isn't it? It would be over in a jiffy if they stayed and stood up and with the financial aid of the West, surely?

I wouldn't stay and fight if there was a civil war in the UK, I don't associate myself enough for this country to be 'patriotic' and defend it.

Also, the fight has basically turned into the dictatorship vs the Islamic Extremists - What if you don't associate yourself with either of those groups?

I'll say it again, and again, and again, and again, and again, in reality, the vast majority of people don't give a shit about patriotism and religion when push comes to shove, people just want a peaceful life and to make their way in life, regardless who's at the top - hence why the middle east has had these dictators for so long.

 

[Scouse]

why don't they fight for their land? There are tens of thousands of young fit men just leaving, why isn't there a backlash against what is happening in *their* country?

Fuck nationalism. It's retarded and outmoded. Fuck risking everything you've got for a piece of dirt you've no physical attachment to when you can leave with your family and go somewhere peaceful where you've a chance to make something for yourself and your family.

Also, if you're retarded enough to fight you're leaving your family behind to probably die. If you join "the man" you're probably fighting for a tinpot dictator and if you join "the rebels" you're probably committing horrible atrocities. You probably deserve to die if you make this choice.



Edit:

women and children out to safety and the men stay and fight. We would be expected to and so would pretty much every other country in the world, that's true though isn't it?

1) Sexist.

2) Fuck that. I wouldn't risk my life for blighty because I was "expected to". There'd have to be a fucking good reason to get me to do anything of the sort.

 

[Trem]

Fuck nationalism. It's retarded and outmoded. Fuck risking everything you've got for a piece of dirt you've no physical attachment to when you can leave with your family and go somewhere peaceful where you've a chance to make something for yourself and your family.

Also, if you're retarded enough to fight you're leaving your family behind to probably die. If you join "the man" you're probably fighting for a tinpot dictator and if you join "the rebels" you're probably committing horrible atrocities. You probably deserve to die if you make this choice.



Edit:


1) Sexist.

2) Fuck that. I wouldn't risk my life for blighty because I was "expected to". There'd have to be a fucking good reason to get me to do anything of the sort.

Fuck me mate, what a dreadful world this would be if everyone thought like that not so many years ago. Maybe that is the problem, too many thinking "bollocks to that, it's someone elses problem, I'll run away and let another country subsidise me and my family".

I bet Hitler is kicking himself he isn't alive today (if dead people can do that!) instead of when people actually had balls and pride in where they live.

Disgusting.

Edit - Theres @Gwadien (surprise!) agreeing with you but you wouldn't be having this conversation Gwadien if people didn't stand up for their rights, and country, you wouldn't be able to ask if we should allow these people in. How strange, something doesn't make sense at all.

 

[Gwadien]

If Islamists were on my doorstep, and they said look, these guys are pretty fucked up, let's push them back, I'd agree.

If we went to war with France tomorrow because some trade deal fell through, I'd tell them to get fucked.

If we had a dictator like Assad fighting extreme Islam, I'd run too, I wouldn't pick a side.

 

[Scouse]

Fuck me mate, what a dreadful world this would be if everyone thought like that not so many years ago.

I'd argue that the reason Hitler was able to storm across Europe the way he did was because human beings are so fucking stupid that they're easily mobilied into a fighting force for any whack-job going.

If people were less nationalistic (National Socialism, right?) and more averse to violence for no good means then perhaps there wouldn't be the wars and atrocities that have dogged our mongoloid race throughout history.

We're punch drunk power tripping pink chimpanzees. We're retards. We need to learn NOT to fight.




Edit: Ask yourself this - is the army chock-full of top-level intellectuals or can you get in with a CSE in woodwork.

 

[Bodhi]

Fucking hell Trem, you've only given our resident "liberals " (even though they're anything but) a chance to argue just how much better they are than everyone else.

Again.

Of course they don't realise that the rest of us read their posts and shake our heads slowly, thinking to ourselves "You sanctimonious tit."

 

[Gwadien]

Fucking hell Trem, you've only given our resident "liberals " (even though they're anything but) a chance to argue just how much better they are than everyone else.

Again.

Of course they don't realise that the rest of us read their posts and shake our heads slowly, thinking to ourselves "You sanctimonious tit."

Hang on, @Trem clearly asked for our opinion.

We both gave our opinion, and because it doesn't align with yours, you're upset about it?

I'd happily wager if a civil war happened in this country, a vast majority of the talkers on this forum would avoid it.

 

[Gwadien]

Tell me @Bodhi

Would you go and fight for;

Assad

The Islamic Rebels

Or a 3rd group with no real power, but they perfectly align your politics, meaning you'd martyr yourself for absolutely nothing.

Or would you leave?

I'm quite sure that the Rebels AND the Government forces are going around forcing people to fight for them too, - Hence the large male populations.

 

[Bodhi]

Hang on, @Trem clearly asked for our opinion.

We both gave our opinion, and because it doesn't align with yours, you're upset about it?

I'd happily wager if a civil war happened in this country, a vast majority of the talkers on this forum would avoid it.

Not so much the opinions being voiced, but the manner in which they're being voiced.

 

[Gwadien]

Not so much the opinions being voiced, but the manner in which they're being voiced.

I really don't get it.

I gave up a straight up answer.

Trem responded with sarcasm.

And you're upset with the way that in the 'manner in which they're being voiced.'? haha

 

[Bodhi]

I really don't get it.

I gave up a straight up answer.

Trem responded with sarcasm.

And you're upset with the way that in the 'manner in which they're being voiced.'? haha

It's not all about you you know...

 

[Gwadien]

Fucking hell Trem, you've only given our resident "liberals " (even though they're anything but) a chance to argue just how much better they are than everyone else.

Again.

Of course they don't realise that the rest of us read their posts and shake our heads slowly, thinking to ourselves "You sanctimonious tit."

It's not all about you you know...

 

[DaGaffer]

I want to bump this again.

Apparently, and yes it could be extreme and a one off etc but I want your views on it, apparently the refugees in Greece are turning it into a battle ground, fighting amongst themselves and with others and making it a complete no go area and the authorities have no...erm authority to intervene. How does that sit with people here, with the liberals?

Also another thought I had, and again it is a Trem thought so I'm cautiously throwing it out here why don't they fight for their land? There are tens of thousands of young fit men just leaving, why isn't there a backlash against what is happening in *their* country? I don't understand this, women and children out to safety and the men stay and fight. We would be expected to and so would pretty much every other country in the world, that's true though isn't it? It would be over in a jiffy if they stayed and stood up and with the financial aid of the West, surely?

Fight for or with who? I think at the start of all this five years ago you'd have had a point, and indeed the FSA was the obvious non-horrible bastard candidate to fight for, and many did (along with the Kurds who have effectively a whole separate war going on), but the FSA has effectively broken into smaller factions and largely been taken over by Islamists. So you've got Ba'athist nationalists under Assad, Shia Islamists, a small rump FSA, and ISIS. Who would you fight for? I think anyone who's not certifiable would say "none of the above". And unfortunately, setting up one's own army is a pretty difficult trick to pull off. Literally the only people left for whom fighting for their country makes any sense at all at this stage are the Kurds (which is ironic as they don't actually have a country).

This is also the problem the West has with Syria; if you don't want to occupy the whole country (and make it your problem entirely), what do you do? You don't really want any of them to win and you can't impose an alternative from outside. Assad is probably the least-worst solution from a western POV, but the West can't publicly back a guy who uses chemical weapons, and is also bosom buddies with Putin because it would be political suicide. What really needs to happen is a regional response, but no-one in the region except Iran has the ability, and the Saudis and Gulf states (and probably the US and Israel) wouldn't let Iran go into Syria, even if they wanted to.

So if you're Abdul from Damascus and you've fought for the FSA or just been stuck in a Turkish camp for a couple of years, what would you do? Wait for someone to fix what looks like a pretty unfixable problem, or fuck off and get a life?

 

[Scouse]

Don't bother with @Bodhi, @Gwadien - he's not actually offering any argument.

 

[Gwadien]

Don't bother with @Bodhi, @Gwadien - he's not actually offering any argument.

Okay

Now stop stroking my penis.

 

[Tom]

I bet Hitler is kicking himself he isn't alive today (if dead people can do that!) instead of when people actually had balls and pride in where they live.

The days of conscription are long since gone. Today, we have professional armies. If Hitler were around today, we (UK) would have a government and military to defend us. That isn't the case in Syria, because in Syria the government and rebels are attacking you.

To use your Hitler analogy, imagine if Hitler invaded the UK and in the process of stopping him, the government decided to lob a load of barrel bombs on top of your street and kill everyone you knew. And not just your street, but anyone else who the government thought wasn't anti-Hitler enough. Thankfully, we're slightly more enlightened than the dictatorship that exists in Syria.

 

[Bodhi]

Don't bother with @Bodhi, @Gwadien - he's not actually offering any argument.

I'm sorry I didn't really see much of an argument - I just saw someone attempting to take the moral high ground whilst also using such lovely words as "retard" "monogloid" and such lovely sentiments as "they all deserve to die", then finishing it off by effectively calling anyone who works in the Armed Forces a bit thick. If you're struggling to see why that's a bit of a strange (and entirely contradictory) position to take then I think that says a bit more about you than it does about anyone else.

 

[Scouse]

I just saw someone attempting to take the moral high ground

You're really averse to that aren't you. Is it because none of your arguments ever do?

Hitler could only do what he did because of nationalist sentiment and the human animal's willingness to fight so easily.


And we need more of that?

 

[Bodhi]

You're really averse to that aren't you. Is it because none of your arguments ever do?

Hitler could only do what he did because of nationalist sentiment and the human animals willingness to fight so easily.


And we need more of that?

I don;t tend to get too involved in moral crusades about things no, as one of the key things in that is that everyone's morals are different, and the latest craze for picking an arbitrary moral crusade to get behind - especially when the reporting of such in the media is so disgustingly one sided, seems utterly bizarre, and more than a little sheep like to me.

However, I would argue that the only thing that allowed us to stop Hitler was national sentiment, and eventually, a willingness to fight. Whilst appeasing him as you are suggesting would be a noble idea, in reality, it would just result in us all speaking German.

 

[Scouse]

Once again, if humans weren't so willing to fight for nationalistic ideals then hitler would have been a damp squib. There would have been no need to fight him in the first place as he wouldn't have been able to do what he did.

Nationalism + fightyness is the recipe for unnecessary war. A recipe you overtly support.

Accusing people of being "appeasers" not only doesn't confront or change that fact - it's also bullshit as it's not relevant to the argument. I happen to agree with the point raised above - if Islamists were at my doorstep then I'd be prepared to fight (so I can't be an appeaser). But to go to war for a country out of pride or nationalistic sentiment is the action of a poorly educated man.

 

[mooSe_]

If I was a Syrian I'd be straight out of there and on a boat to Europe too so I can't really get on with any argument proposing that they should stay and fight. Like DaGaffer and Gwadien said; who the hell would they be fighting for? All the options are awful.

I can understand people's objections to the ways that Europe is handling the situation, or complaints about the situation in general, but blaming the refugees is pretty dumb.

 

[Gwadien]

If I was a Syrian I'd be straight out of there and on a boat to Europe too so I can't really get on with any argument proposing that they should stay and fight. Like DaGaffer and Gwadien said; who the hell would they be fighting for? All the options are awful.

I can understand people's objections to the ways that Europe is handling the situation, or complaints about the situation in general, but blaming the refugees is pretty dumb.

It's just a mechanism which is being used by people to justify doing fuck all

- Homeless people?
Homelessness has been on the increase for ages, why does it take this for us to notice and do something about it?
- Army personal mis-treated?
See above
- Syrians with designer clothing & phones
Yeah, Syria was relatively wealthy, they come with their stuff, their best stuff, why are you surprised?
- Muslims?!!??!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!
Firstly, not ALL are Muslims, secondly, there's a great deal of extremists groups that they can join out there if they were extremists.
- Why aren't they fighting for their country?
No group that represents them in the conflict.
- Why don't they stop in places like Turkey?
Conflict, and persecution, and there's still millions there.
- We're full!?!?!
2% of Britain is built upon - and how do you think Germany/Austria is dealing with it? - They're erecting tents left right and centre, and after speaking to some Germans, all this shit about 'they need them' is bullshit, only a handful of towns 'need' them.

 

[Bodhi]

I think to reduce it to the terms of Assad vs The Extremists is just a little simplistic, as one of the things that is making the situation so interesting is that there are 3 - 4 different factions in the country currently - Assad, ISIS, the Kurds (who seem to be having the most success against ISIS) and what's left of the Free Syrian Army (most have joined ISIS now but not all) - so to turn it into such binary terms shows a slight lack of understanding of the situation.

Pretty sure Jordan are getting involved also in Southern Syria, and they've also had a great deal of success against ISIS.

 

[DaGaffer]

I think to reduce it to the terms of Assad vs The Extremists is just a little simplistic, as one of the things that is making the situation so interesting is that there are 3 - 4 different factions in the country currently - Assad, ISIS, the Kurds (who seem to be having the most success against ISIS) and what's left of the Free Syrian Army (most have joined ISIS now but not all) - so to turn it into such binary terms shows a slight lack of understanding of the situation.

Pretty sure Jordan are getting involved also in Southern Syria, and they've also had a great deal of success against ISIS.

I think I pointed out all that in the post above. And it still doesn't answer the question of who you would fight for, because they're all mostly awful unless you're a Kurd.

As for Jordan, they can carry out airstrikes and a few bits around the edges, but they haven't got the bodies to take and hold territory from ISIS. Iran could do it, Turkey could do it. Neither will.

 

[Trem]

I really don't get it.

I gave up a straight up answer.

Trem responded with sarcasm.

And you're upset with the way that in the 'manner in which they're being voiced.'? haha

I did no such thing, where is my sarcasm (is it because I said surprise!)? That isn't sarcasm it's proving me right before I clicked the list of who agreed If it isn't too personal and if you don't terribly mind could you tell me how old you are @Gwadien? Not so I can take the piss I just want to know the age of people with such strong liberal feelings, I know Scouse is an old fucker. Edit - (an old Scouse, Labour fucker )

Your right to be how you are now is because people didn't think how you are thinking before you.....

The point I'm trying to make here is that you bleeding heart liberals can be just that because people fought for your right to be that. Does that make any sense? Do you understand? @Scouse people were smart enough to realise that if they didn't fight then they were fucked, clearly a lot smarter than most nowadays who seem to think that running is better. Running can't continue surely? Run forever in every country there is a war or problem?

Japan is a pacifist nation, you think if China attacked they would run? Would they fuck, how about all of the wars there have ever been, the majority of those countries people have fought, all bar one deciding factor which I will not say or point out because I aren't what everyone will scream if I do.

I......just.......don't.......get.....it.

Another edit - Does anyone have any idea roughly on how strong the ISIS force is? It obviously isn't a small group.

 

[DaGaffer]

I did no such thing, where is my sarcasm (is it because I said surprise!)? That isn't sarcasm it's proving me right before I clicked the list of who agreed If it isn't too personal and if you don't terribly mind could you tell me how old you are @Gwadien? Not so I can take the piss I just want to know the age of people with such strong liberal feelings, I know Scouse is an old fucker.

Your right to be how you are now is because people didn't think how you are thinking before you.....

The point I'm trying to make here is that you bleeding heart liberals can be just that because people fought for your right to be that. Does that make any sense? Do you understand? @Scouse people were smart enough to realise that if they didn't fight then they were fucked, clearly a lot smarter than most nowadays who seem to think that running is better. Running can't continue surely? Run forever in every country there is a war or problem?

Japan is a pacifist nation, you think if China attacked they would run? Would they fuck, how about all of the wars there have ever been, the majority of those countries people have fought, all bar one deciding factor which I will not say or point out because I aren't what everyone will scream if I do.

I......just.......don't.......get.....it.

Fighting an external aggressor is completely different from fighting a civil war.

 

[Job]

Cork has just facepalmed me on a 2013 post.
He must have simmered on it for a good bit