Politics 2017 Part 3

[Elerond]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fight against it like we fought against communism. Invite people in, promise them freedom and self control. It was communists that build wall to prevent people leaving their country not western people building wall to prevent people coming in from communistic regimes. Now days we fight more like authoritarians than people from the free world.

 

Like people are saying that Muslims will take over our countries are same fear that communist had towards western people, it is wear that our way of living isn't appealing enough to people and outside philosophy will over run it if we don't protect our way philosophy even if it means to go against our own values and ideologies.

 

They are not fleeing islam as a religion. They colonising and creating their own societies.

 

 

You mean to say that most of them are fleeing war, persecution or poverty in their own countries and we don't let them to integrate to our society but instead we put them for years in centers where they have little to none daily interaction with main population. I would point out that tens of thousands of Muslim refugees are willing to convert to Christianity (although often motivated y hope that makes us to let them stay) 

 

 

Strange how middle eastern and north african muslims fail to integrate into western societies while the rest does even if you take into account the detriment policy of dumping anyone into the ghetto.

 

Previously we invited Salman Rushdies to the west to live in freedom from tyranny, but last year the door was open for any jester fooling the lady border patrol officer that he suddenly wants to be christian and if you don't open the border for him, he and his pals will storm it, throw rocks at you or any other means necessary.

 

 

It is strange how there are several (5) restaurants run by middle eastern and north african muslims just one kilometer radius from my home

 

 

So well integrated that they are exporting the best back:

 

http://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/cnn_finland_tops_list_of_countries_with_muslim_fighters_in_syria/7446816

 

The world would be better of by sending them all back, build a wall around them, wait a few hundred years, and open the door and hopefully something civilized will emerge from the other side.

 

Perpetually importing people from regions that do nothing but destabilizing a society is simply not going to cut it. Better do it now in a civilized matter before creating the balkanisation begins the inevitable war begins.

 

 

So 30 people went in Syria to be terrorists and nearly 1000 of them decided to make pizza and kebabs in Tampere. 

 

 

Those are just the most hardcore ones. But being the best ISIS-exporter should tell you something about what you're dealing with compared to other groups like those from south america or east asia. So nevermind the disproportional amount of violence committed by said groups in almost every other european country already with a continuous negative trend, as long as you get that those restaurants, anything is permitted.

 

http://i.imgur.com/EHbUiOU.jpg

 

 

I am saying that majority of them integrates in our society quite fine. But there are problems that need to be looked at, so that we know what is the causes behind those problems and how we can solve those problems. But attacking/punishing all of them, especially those that not just follow our laws fully but actively contribute in our society by creating their own businesses isn't good strategy to go forward in any sense.

 

Also grouping all people from Middle East and North Africa as same hides some of those problems and causes behind them. Like for example unemployed rate within somali population is over 55% and as largest North African Muslim population in Finland they make statistics look bad for people from other North African countries even when they do much better job in becoming productive part of our society. 

 

We have had problems with Somali population now over 20 years and still somehow we don't seem to find any actual solutions or even know why so many of them are unemployed.

 

Also we have more problems with refugees from Afghanistan than we have from Syria for example, when it comes to committing crimes and acting badly towards women. Also people from Morocco and Algeria (maybe the criminals from those countries go in France and law binding people come to Finland who knows) seem to integrate better than Russians for example when it comes to crimes. 

 

I can't say what would to be best policy to go forward but I am pretty sure that grouping millions of people that share similar religion but still come from different culture and different circumstances in same isn't probably the best solution to pick. 

[Elerond]

Some researchers say that in USA immigration don't increase crimes in USA, but it may do opposite at least with some crime types

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/immigration-increased-crime-levels-no-link-us-study-donald-trump-muslim-ban-racism-us-study-a7576971.html

 

A team of researchers led by the University at Buffalo in New York examined census data and crime reports from 200 US cities in the years between 1970 and 2010

 

They found “strong and stable evidence” that crime rates are not linked to immigration, said the study’s lead author Robert Adelman, adding: “The results are very clear.”

Higher levels of immigration are in fact related to a drop in some types of crime, they discovered.

 

“The results show that immigration does not increase assaults and, in fact, robberies, burglaries, larceny, and murder are lower in places where immigration levels are higher,” said Dr Adelman, an Associate Professor of Sociology at the university.

 

Figures from the US Justice Department analysed by the Cato Institute think tank found immigrants were one-half to one-fifth as likely to be jailed when compared with American citizens.

 

About seven per cent of the country’s population are non-citizens, while five per cent of prisoners in state and federal prisons fall into that category.

 

“We are not claiming that immigrants are never involved in crime,” he said. “What we are explaining is that communities experiencing demographic change driven by immigration patterns do not experience significant increases in any of the kinds of crime we examined.

 

“It’s important to base our public policies on facts and evidence rather than ideologies and baseless claims that demonise particular segments of the US population without any facts to back them up.”

[Wrath of Dagon]

Legal immigrants commit less crimes because they're screened before being allowed in and often come from less violent societies and higher social strata in their societies. Illegal immigrants commit more crimes and wouldn't commit any if they weren't here like they're supposed not to be.

[Darkpriest]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Amusingly simplistic view. Well unless you believe the West isn't reaping a bit of what they've sown.

The "west"? Isn't the party line to trot out the ole "the majority of terrorism happens in ME countries". What did they do to deserve it? Oh yeah, slightly different interpretation of the scripture. I guess pretty much anything is a valid reason huh?

Well you were bleating about Crusades and others so you weren't looking at the West? Isn't all that hard to understand things don't reach a point without a lot of hands involved.

 

Ah well.

No the West must take some responsibility for the rise of Islamic extremism, it would be disingenuous to suggest the West has played no part

 

I would say the West is maybe 8-10 % responsible for Islamic extremism, the rest is other factors most Muslim countries are grappling with like implementing human rights and particularly recognizing the rights of minorities like women and other groups

...

 

 

8-10%?

Yes I realize this may sound excessive but lets accept some historical blame ?

The west has DEFINITELY messed up more than 8-10% of the Middle East. A lot more. Your view is delusional at best. I hope this is a joke I'm not getting.

 

 

Define "the West", then define "messed up" and then finally define the time frame.

 

We can start as far as persian wars, then go through Alexander the Great, to go back through disassembling greek satraps of Seleucids. Perhaps a failed Roman invasion to the middle east? Parthians raising to power? wait, later? Moors hold over Spain? Byzantine time? Crusades? or maybe Invasion of and hard grip for several centuries of Ottoman empire over Balkans and Greek peninsula? Going as far as Vienna and almost sacking it by Ottomans? or is it the Russian war with Ottomans? Is it the fatermath of the first world war? or maybe the second? Or perhaps we should not allow to create Israel in early 50s?

 

Define it bro, because to be honest that place has been a place of voilence since forever, and Islam just made them go backwards...

[Volourn]

It is not the West throwing gays off of buildings in the ME. It is not the West throwing stones at women for being raped or forcing them to marry their rapists. It is not the West  strapping bombs on their chest and walking into ME places of worship and blowing it up because the Muslims there are the 'wrong kind' of Muslims.

[Meshugger]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fight against it like we fought against communism. Invite people in, promise them freedom and self control. It was communists that build wall to prevent people leaving their country not western people building wall to prevent people coming in from communistic regimes. Now days we fight more like authoritarians than people from the free world.

 

Like people are saying that Muslims will take over our countries are same fear that communist had towards western people, it is wear that our way of living isn't appealing enough to people and outside philosophy will over run it if we don't protect our way philosophy even if it means to go against our own values and ideologies.

 

They are not fleeing islam as a religion. They colonising and creating their own societies.

 

 

You mean to say that most of them are fleeing war, persecution or poverty in their own countries and we don't let them to integrate to our society but instead we put them for years in centers where they have little to none daily interaction with main population. I would point out that tens of thousands of Muslim refugees are willing to convert to Christianity (although often motivated y hope that makes us to let them stay) 

 

 

Strange how middle eastern and north african muslims fail to integrate into western societies while the rest does even if you take into account the detriment policy of dumping anyone into the ghetto.

 

Previously we invited Salman Rushdies to the west to live in freedom from tyranny, but last year the door was open for any jester fooling the lady border patrol officer that he suddenly wants to be christian and if you don't open the border for him, he and his pals will storm it, throw rocks at you or any other means necessary.

 

 

It is strange how there are several (5) restaurants run by middle eastern and north african muslims just one kilometer radius from my home

 

 

So well integrated that they are exporting the best back:

 

http://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/cnn_finland_tops_list_of_countries_with_muslim_fighters_in_syria/7446816

 

The world would be better of by sending them all back, build a wall around them, wait a few hundred years, and open the door and hopefully something civilized will emerge from the other side.

 

Perpetually importing people from regions that do nothing but destabilizing a society is simply not going to cut it. Better do it now in a civilized matter before creating the balkanisation begins the inevitable war begins.

 

 

So 30 people went in Syria to be terrorists and nearly 1000 of them decided to make pizza and kebabs in Tampere. 

 

 

Those are just the most hardcore ones. But being the best ISIS-exporter should tell you something about what you're dealing with compared to other groups like those from south america or east asia. So nevermind the disproportional amount of violence committed by said groups in almost every other european country already with a continuous negative trend, as long as you get that those restaurants, anything is permitted.

 

http://i.imgur.com/EHbUiOU.jpg

 

 

I am saying that majority of them integrates in our society quite fine. But there are problems that need to be looked at, so that we know what is the causes behind those problems and how we can solve those problems. But attacking/punishing all of them, especially those that not just follow our laws fully but actively contribute in our society by creating their own businesses isn't good strategy to go forward in any sense.

 

Also grouping all people from Middle East and North Africa as same hides some of those problems and causes behind them. Like for example unemployed rate within somali population is over 55% and as largest North African Muslim population in Finland they make statistics look bad for people from other North African countries even when they do much better job in becoming productive part of our society. 

 

We have had problems with Somali population now over 20 years and still somehow we don't seem to find any actual solutions or even know why so many of them are unemployed.

 

Also we have more problems with refugees from Afghanistan than we have from Syria for example, when it comes to committing crimes and acting badly towards women. Also people from Morocco and Algeria (maybe the criminals from those countries go in France and law binding people come to Finland who knows) seem to integrate better than Russians for example when it comes to crimes. 

 

I can't say what would to be best policy to go forward but I am pretty sure that grouping millions of people that share similar religion but still come from different culture and different circumstances in same isn't probably the best solution to pick. 

 

 

As you are most likely aware is that Finland is on its way to commit the same errors with the very same immigrant-groups/refugees as other countries in Europe, as in second generation muslims from these regions are either self-segregating or are behaving in anti-social behaviour of which are not acceptable by any western standards. For them to achieve order and peace in themselves in their communities, they turn to their customs and religion, which is the antithetical to the very values that we hold dear. So either we will have to betray our own values and force them the values of the enlightment upon them, which will never happen as they are too many already to simply be absorbed by the local culture, or incentive is offered to return to their homelands combined with a policy of and sensible vetting on who is let in. Otherwise we are having a ticking timebomb waiting to explode within the borders of several countries as these very groups are the fastest growing ones.

 

This is without counting on the refugees who arrived last year.

[Ben No.3]

It is not the West throwing gays off of buildings in the ME. It is not the West throwing stones at women for being raped or forcing them to marry their rapists. It is not the West strapping bombs on their chest and walking into ME places of worship and blowing it up because the Muslims there are the 'wrong kind' of Muslims.

That's true. But te question has to be WHY such things can happen and are accepted. Which brings us pretty quickly to failed interventions.

[Darkpriest]

 

It is not the West throwing gays off of buildings in the ME. It is not the West throwing stones at women for being raped or forcing them to marry their rapists. It is not the West strapping bombs on their chest and walking into ME places of worship and blowing it up because the Muslims there are the 'wrong kind' of Muslims.

That's true. But te question has to be WHY such things can happen and are accepted. Which brings us pretty quickly to failed interventions.

 

 

Unless you are willing to make an intervention in 3rd reich style, then no intervention ever is going to work there. They need to grow up themselves...

[Azdeus]

Unless you are willing to make an intervention in 3rd reich style, then no intervention ever is going to work there. They need to grow up themselves...

Education. This and some activism did have an impact on things like female genital mutilation in some parts of Africa. And it'd help if politicians wasn't so pussyfooted around such things, but then again, it could hurt their corporate overlords purses, and that'd be bad.

But it's a slower process, and you can't listen to 'Die MF die' in your tank. And previously mentioned corporate overlords would'nt be able to make money sellings said tanks and fired shells.

 

[213374U]

 

It is not the West throwing gays off of buildings in the ME. It is not the West throwing stones at women for being raped or forcing them to marry their rapists. It is not the West strapping bombs on their chest and walking into ME places of worship and blowing it up because the Muslims there are the 'wrong kind' of Muslims.

That's true. But te question has to be WHY such things can happen and are accepted. Which brings us pretty quickly to failed interventions.

 

Err... not across the board. Saddam was gassing Kurds even before Kuwait. Shia and Sunni Muslims have been murdering each other over religious dogma since Muhammad kicked the bucket. It's just that brutality pre-war was confined internally and we didn't have to clean up.

 

That being said, Western interventions didn't exactly help the case of progressive Islamic scholars arguing for "separation of mosque and state" and liberalization, that's for sure. I guess if John Locke had had a JDAM dropped on his head, we might not enjoy some of the freedoms we do today.

[Valsuelm]

Err... not across the board. Saddam was gassing Kurds even before Kuwait.

Not one bit of evidence has ever emerged this is the case, and when people attempted to fact check those making this accusation once upon a time, they met a brick wall.

 

'tis more than likely a myth good sir.

 

much like:

 

'Weapons of mass destruction!'

 

and

 

 

[213374U]

 

Err... not across the board. Saddam was gassing Kurds even before Kuwait.

Not one bit of evidence has ever emerged this is the case, and when people attempted to fact check those making this accusation once upon a time, they met a brick wall.

 

'tis more than likely a myth good sir.

 

Even leaving the evidence thing aside, why would they make up something like this? In 1988, the US was still supporting Iraq against revolutionary Iran.

[Valsuelm]

 

 

Err... not across the board. Saddam was gassing Kurds even before Kuwait.

Not one bit of evidence has ever emerged this is the case, and when people attempted to fact check those making this accusation once upon a time, they met a brick wall.

 

'tis more than likely a myth good sir.

 

Even leaving the evidence thing aside, why would they make up something like this? In 1988, the US was still supporting Iraq against revolutionary Iran.

 

For the same exact reason they made up 'weapons of mass destruction' and propped up Nayirah al-Ṣabaḥ to spout the lies she did.

 

Gotta have a good casus belli to sell to the masses when you wanna invade and conquer. Making them up happens at least as often as it doesn't.

 

History is replete with them, modern times seemingly even more so.

 

It also helps to blame atrocities committed by one's own armies or that of one's allies upon the designated enemy. Which is very probably the case with the 'Halabja chemical attack'. Whoever was responsible (Iraq, Iran, or someone else), the allegations that Saddam did this didn't even occur until the late 90s in the western world, when the talking heads in the U.S./U.K. et al were constantly trying to drum up public support for a re-invasion of Iraq (even more than they try to drum up public support against Russia or Iran today).

[Zoraptor]

There were plenty of accusations about Halabja implicating Iraq at the time- but Saddam was a friend then. And nobody wanted too strong an examination of where he was getting his chemical weapons infrastructure and supplies from, (most of western Europe and especially Germany) nor where he was getting his intelligence on where to use them (the US). There was a conspiracy to sweep it under the carpet, but it was a standard conspiracy you can see to this day in various places to hide complicity in atrocities and protect someone fighting an enemy; and it certainly wasn't a watertight conspiracy since two UN reports in 1984 and 1986 acknowledged extensive CW usage by Iraq. I'm a suspicious chap by nature, but I doubt that those reports were fabricated to be used 5/7 years later as a casus belli.

 

Saudi Arabia and the cancer of salafi/ wahhabism is the main problem in the ME. Other places aren't as much of a mess despite having similar inherent problems and without the supposed massive benefit of hydrocarbon wealth, and the series of moronic western interventions all have the common Saudi factor.

[BruceVC]

 

It is not the West throwing gays off of buildings in the ME. It is not the West throwing stones at women for being raped or forcing them to marry their rapists. It is not the West strapping bombs on their chest and walking into ME places of worship and blowing it up because the Muslims there are the 'wrong kind' of Muslims.

That's true. But te question has to be WHY such things can happen and are accepted. Which brings us pretty quickly to failed interventions.

 

Bennie I want to you ask you  a simple  but relevant question, all that is required is an answer ...no real debate 

 

Do you agree that Russia and Putin are responsible both directly and indirectly  for real human rights abuses and more than likely war crimes in Syria and places like Aleppo?

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/25/russia-accused-war-crimes-syria-un-security-council-aleppo

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/07/syria-russia-war-crimes-inquiry-john-kerry

 

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/middle-east/syria-un-pressures-russia-over-war-crime-of-aleppo-attacks-1.2805158

[Malcador]

Well, adios Flynn. Talk radio here he comes?

[Valsuelm]

Well, adios Flynn. Talk radio here he comes?

Meh.. .Good riddance (maybe (because we don't know who we're getting next)).

 

Here's a much more interesting Flynn:

[Agiel]

I believe Petraeus was on his way to the White House this week for... something.

 

Idle thought, but it'd be something if through the rest of Trump's cabinet being embroiled in scandals that lead to further "resignations" Mattis gets Gerald Forded into Oval Office.

Edited February 14, 2017 by Agiel

[BruceVC]

Well, adios Flynn. Talk radio here he comes?

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-flynn-idUSKBN15S0BR

 

 

This is potentially a very big development and raises the whole issue of  election promises,  " post-truth " comments, hyperbole and general controversial views that some of the Trump staff have made

 

Flynn misled Pence and  I'm glad he resigned, this is good news. Russia is not the friend of the USA  despite what Putin was hoping would be the outcome of the Trump victory. Sanctions wont be changed unless Putin changes Russia's strategy on issues like interference in Ukraine and the illegal annexation of Crimea 

 

The path to Russian economic recovery lies firmly in the hands of Putin becoming a more reasonable player and contributor  in the arena of global politics, its incredulous to think Putin believes you can behave in such a belligerent way and not find yourself the target of Western sanctions

 

Trump needs to navigate a difficult political reality, he has some  populist views  in his staff who played an important role in ensuring his victory but now he needs prudence and reasonable outcomes and comments  to deliver on some of the campaign promises. And he does have a some good people working for him like Mattis and Rex Tillerson who understand the  importance of the  role the US plays in the global world 

Edited February 14, 2017 by BruceVC

[Ben No.3]

 

 

It is not the West throwing gays off of buildings in the ME. It is not the West throwing stones at women for being raped or forcing them to marry their rapists. It is not the West strapping bombs on their chest and walking into ME places of worship and blowing it up because the Muslims there are the 'wrong kind' of Muslims.

That's true. But te question has to be WHY such things can happen and are accepted. Which brings us pretty quickly to failed interventions.

Bennie I want to you ask you a simple but relevant question, all that is required is an answer ...no real debate

 

Do you agree that Russia and Putin are responsible both directly and indirectly for real human rights abuses and more than likely war crimes in Syria and places like Aleppo?

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/25/russia-accused-war-crimes-syria-un-security-council-aleppo

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/07/syria-russia-war-crimes-inquiry-john-kerry

 

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/middle-east/syria-un-pressures-russia-over-war-crime-of-aleppo-attacks-1.2805158

Yes of course.

 

My turn: do. you agree that failed western interventions is one of the big causes that lead to the rise of fundamentalism and religious extremism?

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

It is not the West throwing gays off of buildings in the ME. It is not the West throwing stones at women for being raped or forcing them to marry their rapists. It is not the West strapping bombs on their chest and walking into ME places of worship and blowing it up because the Muslims there are the 'wrong kind' of Muslims.

That's true. But te question has to be WHY such things can happen and are accepted. Which brings us pretty quickly to failed interventions.

Bennie I want to you ask you a simple but relevant question, all that is required is an answer ...no real debate

 

Do you agree that Russia and Putin are responsible both directly and indirectly for real human rights abuses and more than likely war crimes in Syria and places like Aleppo?

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/25/russia-accused-war-crimes-syria-un-security-council-aleppo

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/07/syria-russia-war-crimes-inquiry-john-kerry

 

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/middle-east/syria-un-pressures-russia-over-war-crime-of-aleppo-attacks-1.2805158

Yes of course.

 

My turn: do. you agree that failed western interventions is one of the big causes that lead to the rise of fundamentalism and religious extremism?

 

If you want to have a meaningful debate around the rise of Islamic extremism and how much blame the West has and how this has destabilized the ME, and many parts in the world,  then we need to go back to when Islamic extremism was first seen and this can become fairly subjective but for me the rise of Al-Qaeda is the most reasonable and accurate benchmark for this 

 

ISIS came after AQ but in the  last 30 years or so we need to look the reasons for the creation and growth of groups like AQ. Based on this and  next few points I dont believe the West is largely responsible. So ask yourself these questions because the real question needs to be " how did AQ come into existence " ...so the main  points  are 

 

• Is the West responsible for the USSR  invasion of Afghanistan : At the end of this war Bin Laden believed in a world where his interpretation of Islam was the most effective, he believed in what later was known as Islamic extremism
• Is the West responsible for the First Gulf War :  This was the invasion of Kuwait from Iraq and the failure of the ME countries to follow Bin Laden's flawed advice to not invite Western countries to help the ME. Bin Laden felt his ideological objective was being undermined when the West intervened 
• 9/11 and the war on terror : Who do you think committed 9/11 
• The reasons for the Arab Spring:  Do you think the West was behind this ?

[Pidesco]

Miller appears to be a totally nice guy.

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/king-stephen-miller-latest-liar-bigot-team-trump-article-1.2971639

[BruceVC]

Miller appears to be a totally nice guy.

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/king-stephen-miller-latest-liar-bigot-team-trump-article-1.2971639

I was watching an interview around him, he was very arrogant and repeatedly made comments like  " of course there is wide spread voting fraud that impacts the election results ....everyone knows this in states like New Hampshire. The Democrats bring busloads of people into NH to skew the voting results ".  This is despite the fact no evidence has been produced about these apparent " busloads of illegal voters " 

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/12/politics/stephen-miller-trump-voter-fraud/index.html

[Namutree]

 Rex Tillerson 

 

Such an epic name. I'm still not over it.

[Zoraptor]

 

My turn: do. you agree that failed western interventions is one of the big causes that lead to the rise of fundamentalism and religious extremism?

 

 

Nah, it's still Saudi Arabia.

 

Plenty of incompetent/ malign/ ignorant western interventions outside the ME which haven't resulted in religious extremism. Rwanda, Vietnam, Guatemala etc may have been negatively effected by interventions, but they haven't ended up with the blight of a wahhabi extremism equivalent.