The EU Migrant Crisis

[twist3d0n3]

why you just tried to imply europe was no different but you had to go back 100s of years.

that law used to exist here so surely that justification for murder based on nationality?


how do you fix it at source?

go in fight force them to be like us cause that's worked so well?

No idea, I'm not a tactician nor a philosopher, that's supposedly what world leaders (and their advisers/think tanks) are for.

And?

Point is twist3d, it took Europe and the west 2500 years to evolve to the point it is today - bringing in these archaic ways of thinking en masse that our ancestors finally eroded will destroy all those years of tireless efforts.

It is simply naive to think these people will just assimilate in such numbers.

Fully aware of that dude.

I'm not referring to assimilation, I'm referring to change. If they can't change then I guess let's just build a big wall around the ME and forget about it.

 

[balky12]

Though it might have been if we didn't ruin it, Afghanistan and Iran were both more evolved (culturally) in the 50's than they are today, had we not destroyed them they would probably be on the same level as Brazil/India/China today.

I could be wrong but wasn't Afghanistan relatively nice until the 70's? When they descended into civil war and shortly after that the Russians had a go? Been in some sort of war ever since...

Hardly blame that on the west?

 

[estebanrey]

Though it might have been if we didn't ruin it, Afghanistan and Iran were both more evolved (culturally) in the 50's than they are today, had we not destroyed them they would probably be on the same level as Brazil/India/China today.

I know it is very fashionable and socially acceptable to pin all the world's problems on the UK but in the cases of the middle and the decline of progressive culture that can be attributed mainly to religion I'm afraid.

Nigel Degrasse Tyson does a lecture and covers how the Middle-East was once the home of science, maths and general forward thinking which all went out the window when fundamental religion started to take a stronger grip.

 

[ubersonic]

why you just tried to imply europe was no different but you had to go back 100s of years.

that law used to exist here so surely that justification for murder based on nationality?

That law was somewhat justified at the time, the full law was that no Welshman should enter the city before sunrise, they must leave their arms at the city gates (not literally! ;p), mustn't gather in groups of more than three and must not remain within the city's walls overnight under threat of execution.

The reason for all this was that the was a war going on for the English throne and Prince Henry (later Henry V) was annoyed that Chester had formed an alliance with Owain Glyndŵr.

 

[FoxEye]

The thing I find saddest about all this, is that the lefties shouting the loudest that we should be helping, doing more, etc and moaning that nobody cares about drowned children. Don't seem to realise that those drowned children are on THEM, they were the ones two years ago who were shouting the loudest that we didn't need to get involved in Syria, the was no need to prevent a humanitarian crisis, it was all lies, etc and moaning that it would just turn into another Iraq and they should be left to sort it out themselves.

We did get involved tho to some extent, providing support to the people who were destabilising Assad's regime.

We might not have put boots on the ground, but there is a lot you can do to provide support without doing that...

So if anything we made things worse, as we tend to do lately.

I honestly think the best thing that could happen to these places would be for Russia or someone to annexe them.

We have seen what happens when you interfere, invade, and don't stick around. They end up going back to their tribal conflicts; their governments are 90% corrupt to the core, and the damage to their infrastructure caused by war leaves them in a terrible state.

Either invade to annexe and rule, or leave them alone.

You guys should ask yourselves if you'd prefer Syria et al to have their own crappy governments, endless civil war, being places that terrorists operate out of... or having a western nation take them over.

Would that be so bad?

 

[dowie]

Though it might have been if we didn't ruin it, Afghanistan and Iran were both more evolved (culturally) in the 50's than they are today, had we not destroyed them they would probably be on the same level as Brazil/India/China today.

you seem to be forgetting about the Taliban... we didn't ruin Afghanistan, it was already divide up by warlords before some bright spark living in a cave over there decided it was a good idea to get some followers to fly a couple of planes into some tall buildings in NYC

the invasion itself was rather quick and didn't require much force either, a lot of it driven by local forces under the northern alliance and persuading some warlords to switch sides - the disruption after that is driven by an insurgency campaign partly helped at times by Pakistan playing its own games to maintain influence in the area

 

[Jono]

Sure, but the same can be said for Europe of old.

But that's not now. We're no longer in the past.

 

[One More Solo]

The thing I find saddest about all this, is that the lefties shouting the loudest that we should be helping, doing more, etc and moaning that nobody cares about drowned children. Don't seem to realise that those drowned children are on THEM, they were the ones two years ago who were shouting the loudest that we didn't need to get involved in Syria, the was no need to prevent a humanitarian crisis, it was all lies, etc and moaning that it would just turn into another Iraq and they should be left to sort it out themselves.

Didn't the Lib Dems back action in Syria? Quality bit of revisionism there. A number of Tory MPs also voted against getting involved. This isn't a left/right issue.

 

[ubersonic]

I could be wrong but wasn't Afghanistan relatively nice until the 70's? When they descended into civil war and shortly after that the Russians had a go? Been in some sort of war ever since...

Hardly blame that on the west?

You can entirely, the Afghan government was friends with the USSR, that made them a de-facto enemy of the USA so the USA decided to fund/arms/train local Islamic extremists to enable them to rise up to overthrow the government. The USSR then sent military support to back up the Afghan government however this was hampered by the USA continuing to fund/arm/train* the extremists which meant the whole thing dragged on until the fall of the Berlin Wall and the beginning of the collapse of the USSR.

*According to 80's films they were also sent Rambo (Rambo III) and James Bond (The Living Daylights) but that may not be accurate.

 

[Tefal]

I honestly think the best thing that could happen to these places would be for Russia or someone to annexe them.

Chechnya?

 

[ubersonic]

We did get involved tho to some extent, providing support to the people who were destabilising Assad's regime.

We might not have put boots on the ground, but there is a lot you can do to provide support without doing that...

We managed to win the Libyan civil war in pretty record time without doing that...

you seem to be forgetting about the Taliban... we didn't ruin Afghanistan, it was already divide up by warlords before some bright spark living in a cave over there decided it was a good idea to get some followers to fly a couple of planes into some tall buildings in NYC

I'm not forgetting anything, just looking back in time further than you. The reason the Taliban were in power was because the west had put them there, 9/11 would never have happened if we had not orchestrated the overthrowing of the Afghan government.

 

[dowie]

I'm not forgetting anything, just looking back in time further than you.

you're looking at some backing of some afghan militants against the soviets who later made up the northern alliance and seem to be using that to blame the west

Afghanistan was an OK country prior to the coup/Soviet 'invasion' and new afghan govt requesting troops/assistance

 

[ubersonic]

you're looking at some backing of some afghan militants against the soviets who later made up the northern alliance and seem to be using that to blame the west

That's not how it happened, the Soviet invasion was in response to the western backing of "some afghan militants" against their government. The west knew that the USSR would have to back it's ally.

 

[Neil79]

Send them home.

On a boat?

 

[Danthus]

Some countries are writing numbers on the arms of migrants.

The mind boggles.

 

[Schlong&Stable]

Some countries are writing numbers on the arms of migrants.

The mind boggles.

Maybe they don't have the same culture of taking offence at everything under the sun?

 

[Danthus]

Maybe they don't have the same culture of taking offence at everything under the sun?

Yeah, nothing offensive about numbering people before you let them on the train.

 

[gettothechopper]

I think this has shown it doesnt matter either way - intervene or not, any war will cause displaced populations

People didnt want to intervene and after Iraq I dont blame them - but being suprised when lots of people flee from conflict is just daft.

Syria decended into chaos long before we provided any support to any rebel groups (before the rebel groups even existed)
Remember it started as peaceful protests - and only got violent after several increabily harsh putdowns by Assad (involving killing unarmed protesters) With a nicely unstable Iraq next door (yes we broke Iraq and left to early but I blame Nouri al maliki its current disaster) it was bound to turn into a mess once it was clear Assad wouldnt step down

The problem we have specifically in Europe is caused by a situation where the border countires (usually the poorist ones in europe) are flooded and the other more geographically lucky areas pretend its not happening. Refugees are then treated like a hot potato to be the problem of whoever they land on when the music stops

If Europe wants to carry on then they really need to get their act together with this stuff (its certainly helping fuel people wanting to leave) Proper Frontex funding - a unified policy that is fair for all members to share the burden of the people who really need help - and secruity / camps / facitilies to process and turn the other ones away

The Calais disruption is a vignette of the whole issue - French side gets swamped and we act like its nothing to do with us, only when we pull our finger out and start actually helping the French did it calm down at all - and It seems to be getting crazier again in the last few days - we will see more weeks of disruption again now before someone important thinks it might be a good idea to step up more assistance to compensate

If we come out of the EU do you really think the migrants will stop coming? I imagine France would turn more of a blind eye to the issue rather than less

 

[Tefal]

Yeah, nothing offensive about numbering people before you let them on the train.

don't have a clock number?

national insurance number?

we assign all people numbers when they're a big group of rapidly moving people wiring it on them can be easier than making cards up and dealing with them nicking them from each other losing them or discarding them.

 

[Danthus]

don't have a clock number?

national insurance number?

we assign all people numbers when they're a big group of rapidly moving people wiring it on them can be easier than making cards up and dealing with them nicking them from each other losing them or discarding them.

Not on my arm though.