The current refugee wave in Europe

[Raithe]

Well I'm currently sleep deprived so I probably won't hit the mark in that accurate or coherent a manner, so I'll try to make a brief point on it.

 

The EU as such has evolved out of several treaties, and amendments over time. It isn't really an elected form of government, its a bureaucracy that's grown, sprawled, and twisted itself around more and more over the years.

 

The idea of the EU has developed and changed over the decades - which I have no problem with. What I think is one of the issues with it, is that in many ways its trying to do a top down forcing  of control onto a wide group of people.

 

Just for an example, the way the legal systems work, not only from a strictly legal standpoint, but from the very cultural approach is insanely different between the separate countries in the EU. A huge chunk of European countries are inspired or based on the Napoleonic codes, but the UK uses a completely different system. The German's have another, although that still uses some elements of the Napoleonic (I think).

 

But it's not just in the technical aspects, but look at the cultural.  For example, the French have a habit of making a point over how they have higher motoring standards in their frame of law. They have tighter legal codes on whole lot of things. But.. they don't try to enforce those codes at that standard. A few years back the UK inspired the French truck drivers to go on a massive strike, because the UK insisted on giving their trucks mechanical tests according to our "lower" standards, and most of the trucks failed and were deemed "unsafe". Because, culturally the UK sets the laws at a level they can enforce. Hell, look at the Italian court system, they allow people to be tried for the same crime multiple times, and they still have a large chunk of the culture looking at "who is the defendant related to" in just how stiff prosecutions are. There's a lot of nudge nudge, wink wink to it all. But it's culturally acceptable to them.

 

You can't take groups that disparate, force a point of view on them, and expect it to actually mesh that well in real life.

 

Yet , according to the morass of treaties.. "Under the principle of supremacy, national courts are required to enforce the treaties that their member states have ratified, and thus the laws enacted under them, even if doing so requires them to ignore conflicting national law, and (within limits) even constitutional provisions.". 

 

Now point of thing, you get a lot of these amendments get slid through without public awareness. No-one I got to vote for was involved in the process. The bureaucratic level of the EU pushes things back and forth, it gets signed into being, and before you know it the things that a group of people who have completely different cultural perspectives and viewpoints, who have no experience with my country have created a situation where my laws don't matter. 

 

I mean, sure there's the whole thing with the European Parliament.. but again, that wasn't designed as a form of government. That started out as a .. common assembly of the old European Steel and Coal Community and has been morphed and warped and added to over the years. Now it has all of these legislative and executive powers that I, as a joyful member of the EU, have bugger all say in. It has bizarre levels and redundancy, its complex, there is little real transparency to it.

 

There are over 20,000 civil servants forming the administrative body of the EU commission, and, in all fairness, civil servants of all stripes have a distinct tendency to build empires in any bureaucracy, and evolve into that "this is how things work, regardless of what the politicians do". Now make this a bureaucracy where a ridiculous amount of money flows and there's no real transparency or question of how or why that money gets spent... But where EU politicians and Civil Servants seem to live incredibly well.

 

That seems to be the general perspective from around me.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

Thats interesting. Your view is obviously relevant because you are a European, I may not agree with it but end of the day I'm keen to understand where this apparent dislike of the EU comes from 

 

So I would just like you to consider two points which hopefully may change your mind

• Lets get the obvious out the way. The EU is considered for millions of people who live outside of it the perfect place to live and settle down in ...look at all the Syrians and other immigrants who risk death just to get there. Of course this doesn't mean you should change your view but there must be something good if people want to immigrate there?
• The next point is more important. An economic and political  union like the EU is actually much harder to get working and functional  than I think you guys realize. Think about the reality, you have all these countries with different governments and different economic models that suddenly had to now be aligned under common rules, a common currency  and more importantly under a common economic framework. The criteria to join and stay in the EU has to be very strict or else it will fall apart. Now you may say  " nonsense...it can't be that hard  " but trust me there is NO other union in the history of mankind that has brought so many disparate countries together to achieve economic prosperity. Look at the abject failure of AU .....one of the main reasons for its failure to transform the continent is the fact that the AU doesn't enforce its own rules and this means there isnt real consensus or political will to make the hard choices. So I know you guys feel the EU is draconian but it has to enforce rules and structures or the entire EU will fall apart. 

You will always have your own cultural  identity and that is something to be proud of but you have to realize that rules are really needed to make the EU work

 

 

Vaclav Klaus, former president and prime minister of the Czech Republic gives a better summary: http://blisty.cz/art/78797.html

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Václav_Klaus

 

No offense but Vaclav Klaus doesn't even seem to understand the history behind conflicts like Syria ...seriously how can we take what he says as relevant when he wont admit the impact of the Arab Spring?

 

Also I read on that link you posted " His appointment was terminated in September 2014, due to his views on the Ukrainian crisis, his hostility to homosexuality, and support of European far right parties" 

 

He doesn't sound very liberal or reasonable 

 

 

We have native populations going down and immigration going up, an unelected commission Brussels that tries to dictate more power to themselves and a global industry reaping the benefits. And now we have illegal settlers running around central europe trying to find which country that gives them most money. It has to be reversed, otherwise another Caesar, Napoleon or Hitler will rise, you can bet on it.

 

It is you, who is fixated on Klaus' level liberalism in this situation, who is unreasonable.

 

I hear you and I'm not patronizing you. I understand your frustration, I don't agree with the way that the EU has opened its doors to all these immigrants 

 

For me I am sick and tired of the AU not taking responsibility of its own failed states....so now they become an EU problem. Why should they? So many African people think the AU is doing a great job and love to criticize the West...but the reality is the West still has to resolve Africas problems and it needs to stop if the continent will ever achieve its full potential 

 

And the Syrians should have gone into the ME to find refuge. But the reality is even the current ME countries like Turkey that are housing 2.1 million Syrians aren't really integrating them..they live in refugee camps and can't work or travel freely. And the Sunni countries like Saudi Arabia and UAE haven't taken a single Syrian

 

So now Europe is expected to just absorb all these people ...no I don't agree with it 

[BruceVC]

Well I'm currently sleep deprived so I probably won't hit the mark in that accurate or coherent a manner, so I'll try to make a brief point on it.

 

The EU as such has evolved out of several treaties, and amendments over time. It isn't really an elected form of government, its a bureaucracy that's grown, sprawled, and twisted itself around more and more over the years.

 

The idea of the EU has developed and changed over the decades - which I have no problem with. What I think is one of the issues with it, is that in many ways its trying to do a top down forcing  of control onto a wide group of people.

 

Just for an example, the way the legal systems work, not only from a strictly legal standpoint, but from the very cultural approach is insanely different between the separate countries in the EU. A huge chunk of European countries are inspired or based on the Napoleonic codes, but the UK uses a completely different system. The German's have another, although that still uses some elements of the Napoleonic (I think).

 

But it's not just in the technical aspects, but look at the cultural.  For example, the French have a habit of making a point over how they have higher motoring standards in their frame of law. They have tighter legal codes on whole lot of things. But.. they don't try to enforce those codes at that standard. A few years back the UK inspired the French truck drivers to go on a massive strike, because the UK insisted on giving their trucks mechanical tests according to our "lower" standards, and most of the trucks failed and were deemed "unsafe". Because, culturally the UK sets the laws at a level they can enforce. Hell, look at the Italian court system, they allow people to be tried for the same crime multiple times, and they still have a large chunk of the culture looking at "who is the defendant related to" in just how stiff prosecutions are. There's a lot of nudge nudge, wink wink to it all. But it's culturally acceptable to them.

 

You can't take groups that disparate, force a point of view on them, and expect it to actually mesh that well in real life.

 

Yet , according to the morass of treaties.. "Under the principle of supremacy, national courts are required to enforce the treaties that their member states have ratified, and thus the laws enacted under them, even if doing so requires them to ignore conflicting national law, and (within limits) even constitutional provisions.". 

 

Now point of thing, you get a lot of these amendments get slid through without public awareness. No-one I got to vote for was involved in the process. The bureaucratic level of the EU pushes things back and forth, it gets signed into being, and before you know it the things that a group of people who have completely different cultural perspectives and viewpoints, who have no experience with my country have created a situation where my laws don't matter. 

 

I mean, sure there's the whole thing with the European Parliament.. but again, that wasn't designed as a form of government. That started out as a .. common assembly of the old European Steel and Coal Community and has been morphed and warped and added to over the years. Now it has all of these legislative and executive powers that I, as a joyful member of the EU, have bugger all say in. It has bizarre levels and redundancy, its complex, there is little real transparency to it.

 

There are over 20,000 civil servants forming the administrative body of the EU commission, and, in all fairness, civil servants of all stripes have a distinct tendency to build empires in any bureaucracy, and evolve into that "this is how things work, regardless of what the politicians do". Now make this a bureaucracy where a ridiculous amount of money flows and there's no real transparency or question of how or why that money gets spent... But where EU politicians and Civil Servants seem to live incredibly well.

 

That seems to be the general perspective from around me.

This is a good post, thanks for sharing. You have given me some  good perspectives

 

So let me ask you a different question. What is the benefit in your view to the UK being part of the EU? As you know I am from British ancestry and I have real ties to the UK and I think its a little unfair how due to the strong social benefits the UK has how many people want to migrate there...I have no issues with immigrants but there has to be some control or balance

 

So what does the UK get from the EU...I have my view but I am interested in yours 

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

Thats interesting. Your view is obviously relevant because you are a European, I may not agree with it but end of the day I'm keen to understand where this apparent dislike of the EU comes from 

 

So I would just like you to consider two points which hopefully may change your mind

• Lets get the obvious out the way. The EU is considered for millions of people who live outside of it the perfect place to live and settle down in ...look at all the Syrians and other immigrants who risk death just to get there. Of course this doesn't mean you should change your view but there must be something good if people want to immigrate there?
• The next point is more important. An economic and political  union like the EU is actually much harder to get working and functional  than I think you guys realize. Think about the reality, you have all these countries with different governments and different economic models that suddenly had to now be aligned under common rules, a common currency  and more importantly under a common economic framework. The criteria to join and stay in the EU has to be very strict or else it will fall apart. Now you may say  " nonsense...it can't be that hard  " but trust me there is NO other union in the history of mankind that has brought so many disparate countries together to achieve economic prosperity. Look at the abject failure of AU .....one of the main reasons for its failure to transform the continent is the fact that the AU doesn't enforce its own rules and this means there isnt real consensus or political will to make the hard choices. So I know you guys feel the EU is draconian but it has to enforce rules and structures or the entire EU will fall apart. 

You will always have your own cultural  identity and that is something to be proud of but you have to realize that rules are really needed to make the EU work

 

 

Vaclav Klaus, former president and prime minister of the Czech Republic gives a better summary: http://blisty.cz/art/78797.html

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Václav_Klaus

 

I love that man, never heard him say anything other than the unvarnished truth.

 

I don't know why every single party that's skeptical towards immigration has no chance to win elections (apart from unending and united media hostility toward them), I can't believe European citizens are so brainwashed.

 

Logic:

 

Syria is religiously and politically moderate (one of the few ME countries where Christians used to live without fear), reasonably independent. > therefore, US, SA, Turkey with tacit support from Israel arm Al Quaida and Syrian traitors in a bid to wreck the country >

country falls apart becoming a warzone hosting a bunch of a savages that cut off people's heads that inspire an entire generation of muslims, local and western born to terrorism - making Bashar look like a saint >

these savages are supposedly unbeatable, have an endless supply of everything, and no one knows where its coming from or who is supporting them and apparently can take air strikes from the worlds largest militaries in stride - thank god for pocket plane armies, teleporting supply shipments and cloning vats! and Twitter! >

migrants from all over the muslim world materialize in Europe demanding asylum and welfare checks (feeling unsafe in Pakistan bro? mhm) >

Europe is guilty for US sponsored wars therefore taking them in is the right thing to do >

what you don't want to do the right thing? well **** you, you'll take them in anyway >

half a million, or a million or whatever jobless, culturally incompatible, mostly uneducated angry young men dumped in the streets of Europe's capitals... what could possibly go wrong? >

Syria still a dump without resolution, West forced to swallow their own **** and admit Bashar wasn't so bad after all, will eventually have to help him get the rest of his country back

 

Summary: things come full circle except US meddling comes back to bite the servile Europlebs in the ass and yet another reasonably moderate muslim state has become a breeding ground for terrorism.

 

FLAWLESS VICTORY!

 

With leadership like that Europe doesn't deserve to exist.

Edited September 9, 2015 by Drowsy Emperor

[BruceVC]

 

 

Thats interesting. Your view is obviously relevant because you are a European, I may not agree with it but end of the day I'm keen to understand where this apparent dislike of the EU comes from 

 

So I would just like you to consider two points which hopefully may change your mind

• Lets get the obvious out the way. The EU is considered for millions of people who live outside of it the perfect place to live and settle down in ...look at all the Syrians and other immigrants who risk death just to get there. Of course this doesn't mean you should change your view but there must be something good if people want to immigrate there?
• The next point is more important. An economic and political  union like the EU is actually much harder to get working and functional  than I think you guys realize. Think about the reality, you have all these countries with different governments and different economic models that suddenly had to now be aligned under common rules, a common currency  and more importantly under a common economic framework. The criteria to join and stay in the EU has to be very strict or else it will fall apart. Now you may say  " nonsense...it can't be that hard  " but trust me there is NO other union in the history of mankind that has brought so many disparate countries together to achieve economic prosperity. Look at the abject failure of AU .....one of the main reasons for its failure to transform the continent is the fact that the AU doesn't enforce its own rules and this means there isnt real consensus or political will to make the hard choices. So I know you guys feel the EU is draconian but it has to enforce rules and structures or the entire EU will fall apart. 

You will always have your own cultural  identity and that is something to be proud of but you have to realize that rules are really needed to make the EU work

 

 

Vaclav Klaus, former president and prime minister of the Czech Republic gives a better summary: http://blisty.cz/art/78797.html

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Václav_Klaus

 

I love that man, never heard him say anything other than the unvarnished truth.

 

 

You like a  homophobic right winger who thinks Russia is awesome ...come on Drowsy surly you can find other people to admire or at least respect?

 

Make me your role model 

[Drowsy Emperor]

I don't know about role models but I could make you into a liberal piñata and hang you somewhere in Raqqa to see what happens

[BruceVC]

I don't know about role models but I could make you into a liberal piñata and hang you somewhere in Raqqa to see what happens

Can you imagine ...I would be beheaded for sure, they savages and iconoclasts. They must be the most abhorrent ideology since the Nazis? 

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

I want as much constitutional freedom at a local level, but at the same time i recognize the right of families, ethnic groups and to extent nations to be allow to exist and determine their future themselves. 

 

 

 

...As long as they know their place and don't stink up your country with their filth, right?

 

Or am I wrong to think the stance "your freedom to determine your future for yourself extends just as far as I'm comfortable with your presence" sounds somewhat... less lofty than your original statement?

 

 

 

Removal of borders will destroy everything and will only leave a mono-culture

 

 

That's a pretty big assumption.

 

I mean, you seem to simultaneously hold the opinion that the existence of national and ethnic groups is a factor that reinforces communities, but holds no inherent power and has to be held up artificially by the existence of borders. That strikes me as a really weird position. (And not just because the whole idea of nations as distinct entities is a comparatively modern one, yet people managed to have functioning societies without them for millennia.) As far as I can see, national identity is either a strong enough meme to self-perpetuate even without borders, or it's meaningless in a global society and there's no point in mourning its passing.

 

 

 

Removal of borders will (...) only leave (...) aimless consumerists that serve no higher purpose than what materialism can buy. 

 

 

 

Again with the assumptions. What do you base this on?

 

 

 

 

The quote is relevant because one of the most influencal people in the european elite dreamed about a world without frenchmen and germans, and in extent, a world without France and Germany. 

 

 

 

I fail to see how that would be a terrible loss.

 

 

 

Mass-emigration in times when the native population is dwindling is simply genocide built into the system.

 

 

 

You may want to brush up on your definition of "genocide".

Edited September 9, 2015 by aluminiumtrioxid

[BruceVC]

 

 

Thats interesting. Your view is obviously relevant because you are a European, I may not agree with it but end of the day I'm keen to understand where this apparent dislike of the EU comes from 

 

So I would just like you to consider two points which hopefully may change your mind

• Lets get the obvious out the way. The EU is considered for millions of people who live outside of it the perfect place to live and settle down in ...look at all the Syrians and other immigrants who risk death just to get there. Of course this doesn't mean you should change your view but there must be something good if people want to immigrate there?
• The next point is more important. An economic and political  union like the EU is actually much harder to get working and functional  than I think you guys realize. Think about the reality, you have all these countries with different governments and different economic models that suddenly had to now be aligned under common rules, a common currency  and more importantly under a common economic framework. The criteria to join and stay in the EU has to be very strict or else it will fall apart. Now you may say  " nonsense...it can't be that hard  " but trust me there is NO other union in the history of mankind that has brought so many disparate countries together to achieve economic prosperity. Look at the abject failure of AU .....one of the main reasons for its failure to transform the continent is the fact that the AU doesn't enforce its own rules and this means there isnt real consensus or political will to make the hard choices. So I know you guys feel the EU is draconian but it has to enforce rules and structures or the entire EU will fall apart. 

You will always have your own cultural  identity and that is something to be proud of but you have to realize that rules are really needed to make the EU work

 

 

Vaclav Klaus, former president and prime minister of the Czech Republic gives a better summary: http://blisty.cz/art/78797.html

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Václav_Klaus

 

I love that man, never heard him say anything other than the unvarnished truth.

 

I don't know why every single party that's skeptical towards immigration has no chance to win elections (apart from unending and united media hostility toward them), I can't believe European citizens are so brainwashed.

 

Logic:

 

Syria is religiously and politically moderate (one of the few ME countries where Christians used to live without fear), reasonably independent. > therefore, US, SA, Turkey with tacit support from Israel arm Al Quaida and Syrian traitors in a bid to wreck the country >

country falls apart becoming a warzone hosting a bunch of a savages that cut off people's heads that inspire an entire generation of muslims, local and western born to terrorism - making Bashar look like a saint >

these savages are supposedly unbeatable, have an endless supply of everything, and no one knows where its coming from or who is supporting them and apparently can take air strikes from the worlds largest militaries in stride - thank god for pocket plane armies, teleporting supply shipments and cloning vats! and Twitter! >

migrants from all over the muslim world materialize in Europe demanding asylum and welfare checks (feeling unsafe in Pakistan bro? mhm) >

Europe is guilty for US sponsored wars therefore taking them in is the right thing to do >

what you don't want to do the right thing? well **** you, you'll take them in anyway >

half a million, or a million or whatever jobless, culturally incompatible, mostly uneducated angry young men dumped in the streets of Europe's capitals... what could possibly go wrong? >

Syria still a dump without resolution, West forced to swallow their own **** and admit Bashar wasn't so bad after all, will eventually have to help him get the rest of his country back

 

Summary: things come full circle except US meddling comes back to bite the servile Europlebs in the ass and yet another reasonably moderate muslim state has become a breeding ground for terrorism.

 

FLAWLESS VICTORY!

 

With leadership like that Europe doesn't deserve to exist.

 

Drowsy I want to ask you a serious question and I'm sorry if it feels personal, its not meant to be or meant to  catch you out but I am genuinely interested in how you would rationalize this

 

I know you don't like the West, I may not agree but at least I know where you stand . But Serbia has been trying to join the EU for years. Don't you feel conflicted, I know you are a patriot but surly if your country can like the West and see its benefits why can't you ? 

Edited September 9, 2015 by BruceVC

[Zoraptor]

Yes the EU, which Germany has a good deal of influence on, is clearly not pursuing a neoliberal agenda that has done severe damage to the economies of PIGS while benefiting Germany. And past experience has shown that these refugees will not be used as a source of cheap labor and will get along splendidly with the locals. It's got to be crazy talk that neoliberals would bend over backwards to accommodate corporations.

I hate neoliberal stupidities as much as the next guy, but this is mostly just plain liberal stupidity leavened, er, liberally with a dose of incoming demographic reality. Yes, companies do like to have an unemployment pool which provides plenty of cheap labour when managed properly but a homegrown pool is less troublesome labour than someone who likely doesn't speak the language and isn't familiar with your country. Western economies are founded on constantly increasing resource utilisation and constantly increasing population. Falling birth rates mean a faltering economy and more reliance on fewer workers when it comes to superannuation and the like for an ageing, sickening population and you then have to make politically difficult decisions that are far more difficult to spin such as raising retirement ages and reducing entitlements- the stuff that should only be forced upon vassal nations like Greece, not on the ruling nations; why else do you rule other than to make your vassals subsidise you, after all. Taking large numbers of young workers allows the demographic can to be kicked down the road for a few more years. It is partly about growing the labour pool, but for the government the main factor there is that having something like 2 workers to 1 superannuitant cannot happen economically whether you're neoliberal, progressive, communist or anything short of all caps laissez-faire and willing to let old poor people die on the street; yet without action that is what will happen.

 

It does rather assume that those you are accepting will broadly speaking assimilate and not be too expensive in the short term, and it is of course mutually incompatible with a lot of the environmental talk about reducing footprints, but political reality trumps all and reality is that old people vote, they don't like their entitlements being reduced and someone has to pay for that in the long to medium term. If you don't have enough natives to do it, you import exotics, and hope for the best. Or deal with a reality that will happen at some point, but better to leave that to some poor bastard down the road...

[Raithe]

Part of the trouble is when you have large waves of refugees or immigrants in this manner, is that when they do get to the country they want to settle in they naturally localise together. It forms what I hate to call ghettos or little suburbs of that group. So in a short space of time, everyone in that area is from a different culture, they continue to use the language of their previous home as the primary language, and again, naturally, they close ranks against people from outside that group as a means of protection.

 

You then get the calls of multi-culturalism that the surrounding groups then bend to help this group out, that potentially local laws flow to them because they are now a minority group.

 

All of this gets in the way of practical assimilation between this new cultural group and the native cultural group. Then ten or twenty years down the line you'll find that there's now cultural/racial tension on both sides because rather than merging together they've stayed apart and both view the "other" group as having benefits for one reason or another that "they" don't.

[Volourn]

My biggest beef  is when refugees flee a country to another because that country was horrible and treated them poorly... but they proceed to do their absolute best to turn their new country into a copycat of what they just fled.

 

The. illogic. is. luaghably. sad.

 

Even at its worse, Westerners didn't flee to the ME. They worked their butts off to make the tough changes to their countries - this includes bloody civil wars, civil disobedience,  etc., etc.

 

Can you imagine if Europeans fled there to the ME during WW2 then proceeded to try to make those countries like the Europe they just fled.

[BruceVC]

My biggest beef  is when refugees flee a country to another because that country was horrible and treated them poorly... but they proceed to do their absolute best to turn their new country into a copycat of what they just fled.

 

The. illogic. is. luaghably. sad.

 

Even at its worse, Westerners didn't flee to the ME. They worked their butts off to make the tough changes to their countries - this includes bloody civil wars, civil disobedience,  etc., etc.

 

Can you imagine if Europeans fled there to the ME during WW2 then proceeded to try to make those countries like the Europe they just fled.

This post made me laugh  " but they proceed to do their absolute best to turn their new country into a copycat of what they just fled "  

 

Its not that bad but I do agree that the laws of the land must be obeyed...and if you can't deal with that then rather leave. When I travel to the ME for work I have no rights ...seriously. They treat you well as a white person because you are doing a skilled job but you have no real protection from the law

Edited September 9, 2015 by BruceVC

[Elerond]

My biggest beef  is when refugees flee a country to another because that country was horrible and treated them poorly... but they proceed to do their absolute best to turn their new country into a copycat of what they just fled.

 

The. illogic. is. luaghably. sad.

 

Even at its worse, Westerners didn't flee to the ME. They worked their butts off to make the tough changes to their countries - this includes bloody civil wars, civil disobedience,  etc., etc.

 

Can you imagine if Europeans fled there to the ME during WW2 then proceeded to try to make those countries like the Europe they just fled.

 

Europeans fled in other European countries and USA during WW2.

 

Nearly 100k Finns (although they were mostly children) fled to Sweden and thousands fled in USA (before they become enemy state) to get safe from Russians and after WW2 tens of thousands migrated to Sweden and USA to get better life.

 

When people decide to flee their homes they usually flee, if they are able, towards something that they see better than what they had instead of something that they feel to be worse.

[ktchong]

Karma. I guess IYO the poor boy who died deserved it because, you know, karma exists and targets those who deserve it. You better hope karma doesn't exist ktchong b/c for such an evil thoguht like that your karma  boomerang is gonna be simply nasty b/c that poor boy didn't deserve to die like that but your precious karma got him.

 

I actually think the West, especally the United States, should accept refugees from the Middle East - beacuse it is the West, especially the United States, that has created the refugees crisis in the first place.  The United States are especially responsible for the whole mess in Syria, Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan.  Honestly, it is the US that is mostly responsible, but EU/NATO are also at fault for the destruction of the Middle East that's been going on in the past decade (if not longer.)

 

On the other hand, there is little doubt in my mind that these Arab and Muslim refugees are the beginning fo the end of the European civilzations.  By now we should know that Muslim immigrants in Europe are NOT going to assimilate.  What they will do is they will overtake.  It is not a secret Muslims desire to change Europe into Islamic.   The hundreds of thousands - and likely millions - of Arab and Muslim refugees, who will most certainly have a much higher birthrate than the native European poplation, pretty much guarantees that the Islamization of Europe is inevitable, and it speeds up the process.  If the Islamization of Europe was a myth, now it has certainly  become not.

 

Basically, we are witnessing a historical turning point: the beginning of the end of the Western civilization in Europe.  The end will likely happen later in our lifetime.  And, it's the West that sowed the seeds of their own downfall - by interfering in the Middle East.  Now the West is facing the consequences. 

 

Karma rarely comes so swifly, but we are witnessing the full cycle of karma in our lifetime.

Edited September 9, 2015 by ktchong

[Raithe]

[BruceVC]

 

Karma. I guess IYO the poor boy who died deserved it because, you know, karma exists and targets those who deserve it. You better hope karma doesn't exist ktchong b/c for such an evil thoguht like that your karma  boomerang is gonna be simply nasty b/c that poor boy didn't deserve to die like that but your precious karma got him.

 

I actually think the West, especally the United States, should accept refugees from the Middle East - beacuse it is the West, especially the United States, that has created the refugees crisis in the first place.  The United States are especially responsible for the whole mess in Syria, Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan.  Honestly, it is the US that is mostly responsible, but EU/NATO are also at fault for the destruction of the Middle East that's been going on in the past decade (if not longer.)

 

On the other hand, there is little doubt in my mind that these Arab and Muslim refugees are the beginning fo the end of the European civilzations.  By now we should know that Muslim immigrants in Europe are NOT going to assimilate.  What they will do is they will overtake.  It is not a secret Muslims desire to change Europe into Islamic.   The hundreds of thousands - and likely millions - of Arab and Muslim refugees, who will most certainly have a much higher birthrate than the native European poplation, pretty much guarantees that the Islamization of Europe is inevitable, and it speeds up the process.  If the Islamization of Europe was a myth, now it has certainly  become not.

 

Basically, we are witnessing a historical turning point: the beginning of the end of the Western civilization in Europe.  The end will likely happen later in our lifetime.  And, it's the West that sowed the seeds of their own downfall - by interfering in the Middle East.  Now the West is facing the consequences. 

 

Karma rarely comes so swifly, but we are witnessing the full cycle of karma in our lifetime.

 

Nah the USA  owes those countries nothing, it has already scarified enough trying to implement a Democracy in Iraq. Yes I also believed it could happen back in 2004....I was supportive of the initial Iraq invasion and naively thought a Democracy would work in the ME

 

It sounds like you want the West to fail? Dont you live in the USA ?

 

And there is no way Muslim immigrants will ever take over the EU or dominate the West.....you mistake the kindness of example Germany taking in Syrian immigrants as a sign of weakness. Remember the West is many things but not weak and we won't compromise on certain things 

[Volourn]

"Karma rarely comes so swifly, but we are witnessing the full cycle of karma in our lifetime."

 

Again, you show how much you hate that poor little boy. What he do that was so horrible that karma killed him in such a horrible manner? What he did he do to deserve such horrible treament? Why are you so evil to believe that a little innocent boy did something to deserve something so horrible? Only satanists think that little boy deserved that sort of treatment.

 

L0L karma L0L

[Namutree]

 

Bruce. If it's the west's place to remove them then it's the west's place to do whatever we want to them. Screwing with another nation isn't something you do in moderation. It's either you respect another nation's sovereignty or you don't.

 

 

 

 

So are you suggesting if the West is involved in a military campaign, like Libya, it is now the Wests responsibility to now manage the country?

 

The only issue with that is that the Libyans didn't want the West to be involved in governing Libya after Gaddafi was removed....so what would you suggest? 

 

I would have suggested back then to not get involved. I'd suggest now to cut our loses. All can possibly do is make things worse.

 

 

So you don't believe in the principle of intervention in the case of lets say genocide?

 

 

I don't believe in disrespecting the sovereignty of other nation states. If that means that we cannot forcefully stop a genocide; oh well. We can still:

 

A) Condemn the action.

B) Cease all trade with said nation state.

C) Offer the people being exterminated refugee status and take them in if they are able to get here, or go collect them if the genocidal nation state is willing to allow it.

D) Cease all trade with any nation states that still trade with said nation state.

 

 

 

What about an example like putting pressure on  the old South African Apartheid government ....should the world have just left the alone ?

 

South Africa is a case where it's sovereignty wasn't compromised. Try to use an example of when we did disregard a nation's sovereignty to make your point.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

Ah yes, because clearly this continued austerity is doing wonders for PIGS. Look at Greece, unemployment there should be down to a low 20% if they just take a little more from citizens and give a little more to the private sector to boost confidence! And this TTIP being championed will do even more wonders, with giving corporations the right to sue states if they feel profit was negatively impacted and more privatization. The EU only has everyone's best interests in mind and isn't a shady attempt to assert corporate dominance over memeber states and you're a filthy commie if you think otherwise.

 

 

Neoliberalism is a filthy thing, and I find the idea of corporations trying to destabilize entire regions in the name of profit entirely plausible, but do we have actual proof of this going on here?

 

No, we do not have absolute proof that a cabal of shadowy corporations are destabilizing Europe so they can have more cheap labor and obtain more capital with the intent of reaping profits.

 

But we do have

1. An EU that aggressively pushes Neoliberalism, particularly harsh austerity in response to debt, that has done huge damage to the standard of living in PIGS

2. Conditions(both austerity and EU mandates that discourage state-owned capital) that have allowed private businesses to scoop up previously state-owned capital(search for Greece's situation with airports for a good example) and a trade agreement(TTIP) which cedes state power to corporations

3. A wave of refugees consisting largely of men, who if following the behavior of most other immigrants of poor states will work for less than locals and as such cause tensions with existing citizens

 

Combined, this is a recipe for disaster that will likely result in a drop in standard of living for the average citizen while increasing profits and control for corporations. Whether this is an intentional attempt to destabilize Europe for profit or a bunch of idiots blinded by ideology on a collision course matters little to me if the result is the same.

[BruceVC]

 

 

Bruce. If it's the west's place to remove them then it's the west's place to do whatever we want to them. Screwing with another nation isn't something you do in moderation. It's either you respect another nation's sovereignty or you don't.

 

 

 

 

So are you suggesting if the West is involved in a military campaign, like Libya, it is now the Wests responsibility to now manage the country?

 

The only issue with that is that the Libyans didn't want the West to be involved in governing Libya after Gaddafi was removed....so what would you suggest? 

 

I would have suggested back then to not get involved. I'd suggest now to cut our loses. All can possibly do is make things worse.

 

 

So you don't believe in the principle of intervention in the case of lets say genocide?

 

 

I don't believe in disrespecting the sovereignty of other nation states. If that means that we cannot forcefully stop a genocide; oh well. We can still:

 

A) Condemn the action.

B) Cease all trade with said nation state.

C) Offer the people being exterminated refugee status and take them in if they are able to get here, or go collect them if the genocidal nation state is willing to allow it.

D) Cease all trade with any nation states that still trade with said nation state.

 

 

 

What about an example like putting pressure on  the old South African Apartheid government ....should the world have just left the alone ?

 

South Africa is a case where it's sovereignty wasn't compromised. Try to use an example of when we did disregard a nation's sovereignty to make your point.

 

You know I like you and I'm not just saying that, you are one of the few people who has decided to not ignore me and not   talk to me for a period of days and thats impressive 

 

But  you don't seem to understand the importance of relevant intervention from the West....there really are valid cases. Sometimes in life direct intervention is required and expected.

 

See the logic behind the Clinton Doctrine 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Doctrine

 

I support this 100 % and I find it hard to believe that you would be fine with the genocide of hundreds of thousands of people. We are an enlightened and progressive society, this is the greatest era of mankind. We don't allow genocides or mass rapes of civilians

 

This is a good thing and yes it means the West will intervene in certain global events ....this should be celebrated  

[213374U]

No, we do not have absolute proof that a cabal of shadowy corporations are destabilizing Europe so they can have more cheap labor and obtain more capital with the intent of reaping profits.

 

But we do have

1. An EU that aggressively pushes Neoliberalism, particularly harsh austerity in response to debt, that has done huge damage to the standard of living in PIGS

2. Conditions(both austerity and EU mandates that discourage state-owned capital) that have allowed private businesses to scoop up previously state-owned capital(search for Greece's situation with airports for a good example) and a trade agreement(TTIP) which cedes state power to corporations

3. A wave of refugees consisting largely of men, who if following the behavior of most other immigrants of poor states will work for less than locals and as such cause tensions with existing citizens

 

Combined, this is a recipe for disaster that will likely result in a drop in standard of living for the average citizen while increasing profits and control for corporations. Whether this is an intentional attempt to destabilize Europe for profit or a bunch of idiots blinded by ideology on a collision course matters little to me if the result is the same.

 

Indeed, conspiracy or idiocy (or shortsighted greed, or blind adherence to market fundamentalism, pick your poison), the end result is the same. The only difference is the level of mustache twirling one suspects to be involved.

 

Personally, and considering the abysmal average level of competence that people in positions of power have demonstrated throughout the ages, and the fact that there is no reliable method to predict and manipulate the economy and social dynamics -only now we are starting to see rigorous analysis of these fields- I'm more inclined to believe that it's the result of a myriad different factors than a classic conspiracy. Hell, there probably is a conspiracy, perhaps even several, each with its own particular petty goals, involved. But one cabal of Wise Men masterfully pulling the strings of it all? Yeah... if only.

 

The one thing I'm missing in all this is the people. Yes, yes, the political elites and 1%ers are huge jerks, but where is everyone else? Why no "Occupy Brussels" to protest TTIP? Why no rioting on the streets to protest the fire sale of critical infrastructure to international investors? Why no mass demonstrations against imperial adventurism in Libya? Heh.

 

 

edit: whoops, you already mentioned the thing with Greek airports. Clearly past my bedtime.

Edited September 10, 2015 by 213374U

[Namutree]

You know I like you and I'm not just saying that, you are one of the few people who has decided to not ignore me and not   talk to me for a period of days and thats impressive 

 

 

 

I'm the best thing since sliced bread.

 

 

 

See the logic behind the Clinton Doctrine 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Doctrine

 

The Clinton doctrine lead to the Iraq war. How'd that turn out? 

 

 

 

I support this 100 % and I find it hard to believe that you would be fine with the genocide of hundreds of thousands of people. We are an enlightened and progressive society, this is the greatest era of mankind. We don't allow genocides or mass rapes of civilians

 

Ever heard that pride is the worst sin? Well it isn't but it is bad. We don't have the right to impose our views on other nations at the point of a gun. BTW I'm not "fine with genocide". I'm just not willing to trample on other nations' sovereignty just because they don't adhere to my values. You know Bruce, America once had a civil war of it's own, and I'm happy the world let us resolve it on our own.

 

 

 

This is a good thing and yes it means the West will intervene in certain global events ....this should be celebrated  

 

Not really.

Edited September 10, 2015 by Namutree

[BruceVC]

 

No, we do not have absolute proof that a cabal of shadowy corporations are destabilizing Europe so they can have more cheap labor and obtain more capital with the intent of reaping profits.

 

But we do have

1. An EU that aggressively pushes Neoliberalism, particularly harsh austerity in response to debt, that has done huge damage to the standard of living in PIGS

2. Conditions(both austerity and EU mandates that discourage state-owned capital) that have allowed private businesses to scoop up previously state-owned capital(search for Greece's situation with airports for a good example) and a trade agreement(TTIP) which cedes state power to corporations

3. A wave of refugees consisting largely of men, who if following the behavior of most other immigrants of poor states will work for less than locals and as such cause tensions with existing citizens

 

Combined, this is a recipe for disaster that will likely result in a drop in standard of living for the average citizen while increasing profits and control for corporations. Whether this is an intentional attempt to destabilize Europe for profit or a bunch of idiots blinded by ideology on a collision course matters little to me if the result is the same.

 

Indeed, conspiracy or idiocy (or shortsighted greed, or blind adherence to market fundamentalism, pick your poison), the end result is the same. The only difference is the level of mustache twirling one suspects to be involved.

 

Personally, and considering the abysmal average level of competence that people in positions of power have demonstrated throughout the ages, and the fact that there is no reliable method to predict and manipulate the economy and social dynamics -only now we are starting to see rigorous analysis of these fields- I'm more inclined to believe that it's the result of a myriad different factors than a classic conspiracy. Hell, there probably is a conspiracy, perhaps even several, each with its own particular petty goals, involved. But one cabal of Wise Men masterfully pulling the strings of it all? Yeah... if only.

 

The one thing I'm missing in all this is the people. Yes, yes, the political elites and 1%ers are huge jerks, but where is everyone else? Why no "Occupy Brussels" to protest TTIP? Why no rioting on the streets to protest the fire sale of critical infrastructure to international investors? Why no mass demonstrations against imperial adventurism in Libya? Heh.

 

 

edit: whoops, you already mentioned the thing with Greek airports. Clearly past my bedtime.

 

 2133 I'm sorry but I wish you wouldn't support KP misinterpretation of the facts ..he is still young, lets not drag him down the pointless " big corporate's and nebulous Western governments manipulate and control the global economy and live to enrich themselves  "  path..its so 2008 . He lives in Texas ..think of his future 

 

Some good news ...your country mustn't make the egregious mistake of voting in some anti-austerity party...that's the last thing you need but I see the disastrous Greek outcome has weakened there support

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/11370812/Hopes-of-Spains-anti-austerity-party-Podemos-fired-by-Greek-result.html

 

 http://www.ibtimes.com/european-anti-austerity-2015-podemos-spains-protest-party-looks-uncertain-future-2079500

 

Trust me I predict you will be out of austerity in 2 years ...you don't want a distraction to the overall austerity program 

 

Also whats wrong with the Germans managing parts of Greece? That was the agreement . You are one union and there doesnt need to be this resentment 

Edited September 10, 2015 by BruceVC

[BruceVC]

 

You know I like you and I'm not just saying that, you are one of the few people who has decided to not ignore me and not   talk to me for a period of days and thats impressive 

 

 

 

I'm the best thing since sliced bread.

 

 

 

See the logic behind the Clinton Doctrine 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Doctrine

 

The Clinton doctrine lead to the Iraq war. How'd that turn out? 

 

 

 

I support this 100 % and I find it hard to believe that you would be fine with the genocide of hundreds of thousands of people. We are an enlightened and progressive society, this is the greatest era of mankind. We don't allow genocides or mass rapes of civilians

 

Ever heard that pride is the worst sin? Well it isn't but it is bad. We don't have the right to impose our views on other nations at the point of a gun. BTW I'm not "fine with genocide". I'm just not willing to trample on other nations' sovereignty just because they don't adhere to my values. You know Bruce, America once had a civil war of it's own, and I'm happy the world let us resolve it on our own.

 

 

 

This is a good thing and yes it means the West will intervene in certain global events ....this should be celebrated  

 

Not really.

 

 I think you may be confusing the Bush Doctrine with the Clinton Doctrine...but lets not blame any doctrines. There were people in the Bush government, primarily the neo-cons, who wanted to invade Iraq and believed the end would justify the means....I also believed that but I was young and uninformed..and hubris dominated my views

 

Anyway this may sound arrogant but you asked  a good question " we shouldn't trample on other countries sovereignty " and this may sound reasonable but its not. The West has every right to intervene to prevent gross human rights abuses and war crimes. Any leader of a country that is prepared to inflict this on his own country doesn't deserve to be a leader ...of course the West won't always invade but pressure is sometimes used through sanctions and punitive economic measures