[quote]Sloth wrote:
Deportation of non-citizens who’ve overstaid.
[/quote]
LOL. Study some contemporary stats on illegal immigrants. If the US OR CANADA were to deport all their illegal immigrants, the economies of both would collapse immediately. Illegal immigrants do all the jobs in these countries that local citizens will not do. This includes almost all labor jobs, agricultural jobs and etc. There is a ton of info on this look it up.
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
Internment camps? PETA would truly be a fringe organisation after that. What violent breakdown would that prevent? I thought you was a student of history. After those measures that you suggest, you wouldn’t really be defending those values you claim that you are defending. Can’t you see that? You would be on the dark side.[/quote]
Hey, it worked for Stalin, didn’t it? (sarcasm) He shipped whole Muslim populations to their deaths in Siberia and all the fringe organizations today can do about it is bitch at how bad America and the West is. No one says squat about the USSR’s wholesale extermination of muslims (Ukranians, Buddhists, others).
The darkside? That’s putting it lightly…
[quote]ElbowStrike wrote:
This thread is on the verge of exploding into ridiculous.
ElbowStrike[/quote]
Nonsense. This is a great thread with a lot of good discussion going on.
(I guess maybe I should watch the darn movie. Maybe tomorrow. . .)
[quote]Shoebolt wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Deportation of non-citizens who’ve overstaid.
LOL. Study some contemporary stats on illegal immigrants. If the US OR CANADA were to deport all their illegal immigrants, the economies of both would collapse immediately. Illegal immigrants do all the jobs in these countries that local citizens will not do. This includes almost all labor jobs, agricultural jobs and etc. There is a ton of info on this look it up.
[/quote]
Illegal immigrants negatively impact wages of our own unskilled labor. They drain local resources such as schools, health clinics and hospitals, prisons, legal systems, etc. Not to mention the costs of motor vehicle accidents involving illegal aliens (no insurance!).
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Lixy you are as observant as ever. What I meant to say is that muslims should not be allowed to leave muslim countries and move into non-muslim countries. [/quote]
How do you plan on doing that? You’re not planning on building walls in the sea, now are you?
Cool! Doesn’t it feel much better out of that closet?
I don’t see any way for the USA to legally deport citizens. Well, short of declaring martial law, confiscating weapons and establishing a full-blown fascist state. Honestly, if the current economical trend continues, it’s not a far-fetched scenario. They’ll need a pretty big terrorist attack to pull it off though.
That’s just uneducated talk mate.
The problems in Beirut cannot possibly be attributed to Islam. They are directly related to the civil war, which erupted because of the Palestinians massively pouring into Lebanon, which was in turn due to Israel. Of course, Damascus is still bitter about the mere existence of the artificial country that is Lebanon, and are doing their best to exert as much influence on Beirut as it can, and by any means necessary.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Give your vote and try. If you have a strong federal government, in the style the putinians in russia are trying to implement, it is easy. It has very little to do with democracy. All that the measures you are promoting can achive is to bulk up the bureaucracy. To state it otherwise, it is difficut to to achieve the effect you wish. You get something else that you thought that you bought.
Not at all. We defend our borders only. That’s much cheaper and less “big government,” then trying to maintain forces around the world. And most certainly easier than fighting abstract wars in the mid-east while trying to balance this convoluted crusade for democracy (while supporting dictators.) Cut that crap out and we’d still see a big net loss in government.[/quote]
You are definitely daydreaming. It’s ok. And like I said, you are talking about something that has gone and there is no way to go back. There is no possibility of withdrawal, the only way is forward. What you are talking about is an academic exercise. There is no way that the US can withdraw to defending is borders only. Those days are gone.
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Give your vote and try. If you have a strong federal government, in the style the putinians in russia are trying to implement, it is easy. It has very little to do with democracy. All that the measures you are promoting can achive is to bulk up the bureaucracy. To state it otherwise, it is difficut to to achieve the effect you wish. You get something else that you thought that you bought.
Not at all. We defend our borders only. That’s much cheaper and less “big government,” then trying to maintain forces around the world. And most certainly easier than fighting abstract wars in the mid-east while trying to balance this convoluted crusade for democracy (while supporting dictators.) Cut that crap out and we’d still see a big net loss in government.
You are definitely daydreaming. It’s ok. And like I said, you are talking about something that has gone and there is no way to go back. There is no possibility of withdrawal, the only way is forward. What you are talking about is an academic exercise. There is no way that the US can withdraw to defending is borders only. Those days are gone. [/quote]
You do realize we’re already borrowing money, watching our dollar drop, while carrying a nasty debt, to finance our foreign policy? That can’t last much longer. Oh, we will withdraw sooner or later. Unfortunately, putting if off means we’re going to be hurting alot more. It’ll happen. The only people daydreaming are the one’s who think we can continue this.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
kaaleppi wrote:
Internment camps? PETA would truly be a fringe organisation after that. What violent breakdown would that prevent? I thought you was a student of history. After those measures that you suggest, you wouldn’t really be defending those values you claim that you are defending. Can’t you see that? You would be on the dark side.
Hey, it worked for Stalin, didn’t it? (sarcasm) He shipped whole Muslim populations to their deaths in Siberia and all the fringe organizations today can do about it is bitch at how bad America and the West is. No one says squat about the USSR’s wholesale extermination of muslims (Ukranians, Buddhists, others).
The darkside? That’s putting it lightly…[/quote]
You are absolutely right, no internment camps on my soil, thank you.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
kaaleppi wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Give your vote and try. If you have a strong federal government, in the style the putinians in russia are trying to implement, it is easy. It has very little to do with democracy. All that the measures you are promoting can achive is to bulk up the bureaucracy. To state it otherwise, it is difficut to to achieve the effect you wish. You get something else that you thought that you bought.
Not at all. We defend our borders only. That’s much cheaper and less “big government,” then trying to maintain forces around the world. And most certainly easier than fighting abstract wars in the mid-east while trying to balance this convoluted crusade for democracy (while supporting dictators.) Cut that crap out and we’d still see a big net loss in government.
You are definitely daydreaming. It’s ok. And like I said, you are talking about something that has gone and there is no way to go back. There is no possibility of withdrawal, the only way is forward. What you are talking about is an academic exercise. There is no way that the US can withdraw to defending is borders only. Those days are gone.
You do realize we’re already borrowing money, watching our dollar drop, while carrying a nasty debt, to finance our foreign policy? That can’t last much longer. Oh, we will withdraw sooner or later. Unfortunately, putting if off means we’re going to be hurting alot more. It’ll happen. The only people daydreaming are the one’s who think we can continue this.[/quote]
Ok, thanks, now I know where you stand. I’m already pissed of enough about the EU and its regulations and ambitions, it’s a fucking ripoff, but what can you do, it’s the word we live in. I still think the best bet is to push forwards, not backwards.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Shoebolt wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Deportation of non-citizens who’ve overstaid.
LOL. Study some contemporary stats on illegal immigrants. If the US OR CANADA were to deport all their illegal immigrants, the economies of both would collapse immediately. Illegal immigrants do all the jobs in these countries that local citizens will not do. This includes almost all labor jobs, agricultural jobs and etc. There is a ton of info on this look it up.
Illegal immigrants negatively impact wages of our own unskilled labor. They drain local resources such as schools, health clinics and hospitals, prisons, legal systems, etc. Not to mention the costs of motor vehicle accidents involving illegal aliens (no insurance!).
Unequivocally agreed with. But what I said is also true. This is why there is no consensus on what do with this issue in any government or any body of political science discussion.
I did not say that people would not be free to leave and go somewhere else. Perhaps the land of their forefathers. Internment would only be neccessary for those who it would not be easy to deport.
As for as the dark side remark. I would have to say that my proposal is a much nicer deal than what the muslims have given the Iraqs Caldeans. The deal the Caldeans have been given by the muslims is leave the land they have lived on for over five thousand years or die.
We don’t need to build a wall in the sea we just need to have effective border controls. Also the EU needs to become democratic so the people can have a say on their rulers plans to start bringing muslim countries into Europe.
That film does paint a pretty negative picture of Islam.
I wouldn’t worry though — religious extremism prevents a society from becoming scientific. Once the oil is gone, the ME will fade back into the pesthole it was.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
That film does paint a pretty negative picture of Islam.
I wouldn’t worry though — religious extremism prevents a society from becoming scientific. Once the oil is gone, the ME will fade back into the pesthole it was.
[/quote]
Or not. Just look at Dubai and other Gulf States that have diversified out of the petroleum business.
[quote]lixy wrote:
ElbowStrike wrote:
I didn’t make the movie, I watched it.
Well, swallowed would be a more appropriate term here.
I’ll reiterate my question: Assuming everything you said is founded and true, what do you propose we do about it?[/quote]
Lixy,
One thing you do is to insist on those that come to your country assimilate. Stop accomodating the nosense, whether it’s flying imams causing trouble on plans, “religious” women who insist on having covering their face (wearing veil) for driver’s licenses, or medical students that have a problem washing their hands because of “modesty”. Foot baths, prayer meetings at airports, Stop bringing the stone age with you wherever you go.
Face it, you’re damn lucky they let you in. Stop waging the jihad once you get there.
Now it seems your religion has problems hygiene.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Nikiforos if you study the history of early Christianity you will find that the religion spread very well through noviolent means.
Large numbers of people who were attracted to Jesus and his message followed him into the temple where he was very popular. This is why the religious authorities felt threatened by him and put a hit out on him.
By the third century large numbers of Romans were closet Christians. When the Emporer Constantine figured this out he usurped the religion and made it the official religion of Rome.
Up until that point all the violence associated with Christianity was one way. [/quote]
A good point. I don’t mean to come off as anti-Christian. In my country, Christianity has a very positive image as part of our heritage, and I don’t imagine we ever had to convert violently.(As you’re aware, Constantine also moved his capital from Rome to Byzantium, and the rest was history)
I still cannot deny what my eyes and mind tell me when I look at the history of Christianity (as well as Islam) in the Middle Ages. That’s why I believe the secular values held dear in modern day Europe are a step forward for European politics.
[quote]ElbowStrike wrote:
I just finished watching this film…My hands are shaking…It fits perfectly…it fits with my preconception that the Crusades were a Just Cause and should have gone on for another 1,000 years… It just fits.[/quote]
I will watch the movie but mate, you’ve made it sound very daft…
O RLY?
We were washing 5 times a day and bathing once a week 1400 years ago. Before anyone in Europe even thought that perhaps taking a bath at least once a year was a good idea.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
But still these Muslims refuse to wash for the sake of preventing disease in their patients? How do you defend that?
[/quote]
Why do you assume he is defending that? How about you ask him his opinion instead of rolling out yet another strawman?
The idea that the Islamic “religion has problems hygiene” (sic) is quite laughable, and that is what Shoebolt’s post was about.
So what? I suggest you take it up on the “Fatties not Welcome” thread.
Don’t be an imbecile! You are wrongly assuming that every last person involved in such activities is an immigrant.
I agree with the part where you say that nobody forces anyone to become cab drivers or surgeons, but I don’t see what all the rompus is about. Aren’t there safeguards to reprimand doctors who don’t scrub up? The behavior described in the article would never be tolerated by universities and hospitals in my country. You seem to have trouble telling non-issues blown out of proportion by the media to make a buck from real problems.
And if you think American cab drivers don’t have the right to refuse serving people, then I suggest you go vote for Hillary.
[quote]Shoebolt wrote:
Now it seems your religion has problems hygiene.
O RLY?
We were washing 5 times a day and bathing once a week 1400 years ago. Before anyone in Europe even thought that perhaps taking a bath at least once a year was a good idea.
[/quote]
To take a bath was considered ‘Roman’. To shave or cut your hair was ‘Roman’ — and the Romans were despised for the brutal and debauched conquerers they were.
Additionally, clothing in northern climes was expensive. They thought that washing it wore it out sooner. If a coat cost you 6 months wages, you’d think hard before doing anything to that coat. The advent of machines and mass production finally got rid of these notions.
Its a lot easier to wash a lot in places where minimal clothing is an option.