European refugee crisis: tensions mounting, nations reacting

[GodIsSalvation]

This is actually a common form of Jihad called Hijra. I've argued again and again that Muslims can't take over the West until I read about how Hijra works. Now I firmly believe that Europe will fall to Islam within the next 50-75 years.

Remember when the US had such a strong opposing nature against Socialism/Communism/Marxism?

I'm never nervous about stuff like this, but this one has got me concerned haha.

I am familiar with the concept of hijra, and I do indeed understand that some may have that goal. I understand there will be Islamic attacks. However, I really don't think islam can take a foothold in the America. There's a big Syrian and Lebanese expat community in my area. A lot of them that are the direct immigrants they are the ones that stick with islam, but their own children do not. The American culture is too immersive for them.

The biggest problem with the Middle Eastern immigrant community both Christians and muslims is when they move to America their children largely become secularized. Secularism is a much bigger problem in America than islam.

For Europe, it's a bit harder to say. Their governments and cultures have gone so far to the left that they almost have no culture at all anymore, but instead surrender their unique culture to try to accommodate the foreign cultures. It seems to me they do this to try to seem more "open-minded" and liberal than America lol. Guess that is being put to the test this century. It does indeed seem plausible that Europe will fall, but don't sleep on them Europeans. They have an uncanny knack for going from downtrodden to empire-striding in a short space of time. We shall see.

 

[tanach]

concerning migrants from non european countries

the uk takes refugee's from camps in the middle east, they go through a strict selection process, we dont have the same problem of thousands getting through our border, esp now as belgium and hungary have closed their borders. we also have our own port controls established in countries that surround the uk as well as border controls in our own country. yes a small amount will no doubt get in but nothing compared to the problems other european countries are having. personally i dont have a problem of helping people fleeing from war, but i do wonder if there is any reason most dont return when the war is over.. i dont think fear-mongering is helpful, one European country has said they will only take christian refugee's. yes there are many christians fleeing the war too, they are not all moslem but i agree the majority seem to be. if you have a pre-disposed hate for moslems then this will be a great article for you to further vent that hate, if you have a heart to evangelise to other faiths, you may find this is a great opportunity to do so. I spose it depends on wether you believe god is in control or not.

John 19

​

10So Pilate said to Him, "You do not speak to me? Do You not know that I have authority to release You, and I have authority to crucify You?" 11Jesus answered, "You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above; for this reason he who delivered Me to you has the greater sin."

If our port controls are anything like those in place in Calais God help us. To refresh your memory that is where up to a few weeks ago migrants were attacking our lorry drivers and climbing on Euro trains to get to our soft country. how many countries I wonder had they passed through before getting to France. Also how many asked for asylum or whatever in France itself. My guess is zero because France is not so stupid. If you want to evangelise Moslems there are plenty already here to
approach already. They are in the majority in East London and in many other UK cities. I wouldn't bother with the Middle east because you will probably end up dead there for trying unless martyrdom appeals to you.

 

[Agricola]

This "Help the refugee" movement is getting out of hand, problem is people are taking knee jerk reaction due to an image of a dead child on a beach and as a result all common sense has gone out the window.

In Portsmouth, we had some people deciding to help these poor refugees by having collections and taking a convey over to give help and aid to these poor refugees, did they head for Turkey or Lebanon? NO.

THEY WENT TO CALAIS,

I kid you not, they went to the Jungle in Calais and the media was going on how good they were, even found a Syrian... really? These people will say anything to gain something.

Another point is that the aid may not really be needed or go to right people. Conveys turning up at random can spark riots, French police are not allowing conveys in now.

Instead people are urged to use the existing charity CalAid who organise collections and distribuition to the Calais migrant camp.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

This "Help the refugee" movement is getting out of hand, problem is people are taking knee jerk reaction due to an image of a dead child on a beach and as a result all common sense has gone out the window.

In Portsmouth, we had some people deciding to help these poor refugees by having collections and taking a convey over to give help and aid to these poor refugees, did they head for Turkey or Lebanon? NO.

THEY WENT TO CALAIS,

I kid you not, they went to the Jungle in Calais and the media was going on how good they were, even found a Syrian... really? These people will say anything to gain something.

Another point is that the aid may not really be needed or go to right people. Conveys turning up at random can spark riots, French police are not allowing conveys in now.

Instead people are urged to use the existing charity CalAid who organise collections and distribuition to the Calais migrant camp.

I understand this and agree with bits of it, but I have some understanding for that side. The other side is just as fierce in their anti-immigration stance. So there is no alternative for the pro-immigration side but to go big or go home (yes pun intended).

The biggest point I think you allude to is the hastiness. Decisions made too hasty are indeed not good. There is some haste needed though. Can't have people suffering waiting out in the heat and weather or a camp for too long. Problem is indeed in haste to do good comes along problems of security and crime issues and also simple cultural differences. This is a common historical problem with all immigration in any country or culture or society. Then you have the additional layer of European styled complexity so characteristic of all Europe. Is this mass immigration to one Europe/European Union or to a collective of different and unique European nations with unique and distinct cultures and approaches to immigration?

In my view Europe is divided into many unique nations and cultures. This is what makes immigration in Europe far different and more challenging than immigration over here in America in my opinion.

 

[Mitspa]

Simple...

We will take this girl but let all the thugs go back to rape and pillage their own nation.

 

[Billyd]

Who's side would you pick? Assad or Islamic State?

I'd flee, and I pray for Jesus to help those fleeing. So there is no fault in them for fleeing. There is nothing for anyone except death and enslavement in Syria for now.

Indeed though them bringing islam with them is not desired as it is the very problem that is the spark of their problems for the past thousand some years. After all the Syria war is about the war over who is really Islamic in their cultures, and they do not spare even each other.

I think if even a handful of Christians are spared the chaos in Syria it is worth it. I do not think islam could gain a significant foothold in the West, at least not for the current time with western culture being so opposite of Islamic culture.

I'd take on Islamic State first, then Assad. I wouldn't give my country up to the dregs of society.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

I'd take on Islamic State first, then Assad. I wouldn't give my country up to the dregs of society.

That's pretty much Obama's policy and America's stance indeed. There's a flaw in it, the expectation for America to betray her word after destroying the Islamic State, which so far has not happened. So there is no trust to begin with among the factions combatting the Islamic State where as the Islamic State is solidly unified. Assad will not fall by our hands, and it will not be a good day when he falls off his throne, even if he survives into exile. That's the day Syria is lost.

 

[Omni]

Brits ...

The UK takes in about 16,000 asylum seekers per year. They're talking about taking 30,000 of these Syrians. That's nothing in a country whose population is 60 million. Germany take in 800,000 and their economy survives, and thrives even; it's stronger than the UK's in every conceivable way -- gross and net GDP's, less annual debt obligations, more annual income per capita -- and that's with 37 times as many asylum seekers as the UK, proportional to population.

Stop being bigoted freaks and grow some heart. As for you Americans, you're already too far gone. You'd rather your government buy bombs to kill children than find space to house and feed 'em. You people disgust me.

 

[crossnote]

Stan should take them in, he's Muslim...Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

Our streets are already full of homeless, those should get the first aid.

 

[Agricola]

So Omni, I assume you will be preparing a room or two in your home for some Syrians to live.

It is not as clear as you make it to be, certainly take some Syrian families into the UK, however a lot of people fail to make the distinction between economic migrant and refugee. Many people claiming to be from Syria turn out to be from Africa, it is a mess a total mess, we have no idea where people are from.

The threat of Islamic Sate operatives coming in under the guise of refugee is very real and this also needs to be addressed. This is not being bigoted, it is common sense.

 

[Omni]

So Omni, I assume you will be preparing a room or two in your home for some Syrians to live.

It is not as clear as you make it to be, certainly take some Syrian families into the UK, however a lot of people fail to make the distinction between economic migrant and refugee. Many people claiming to be from Syria turn out to be from Africa, it is a mess a total mess, we have no idea where people are from.

The threat of Islamic Sate operatives coming in under the guise of refugee is very real and this also needs to be addressed. This is not being bigoted, it is common sense.

If Germany (which isn't surrounded by water on every side, I might add) can take in 800,000 asylum seekers (economic migrants or not is irrelevant -- one asylum seeker gets the same from the government as the next, the financial outcome for the UK is the same for 30,000 economic migrants as for 30,000 Syrian refugees) I'm sure the rest of our countries can do better than taking in a paltry few thousand. You're finding lame reasons to be cold-hearted.

When the entire EU and the Americans decided to give the Ashkenazis an entire country smack bang in the middle of Arab countries, displacing millions of the people who were already settled there, there were far more worrisome potential outcomes, but that didn't stop anybody. I know you're an advocate for Israel, and you deny the very existence of the Palestinians or of a place called Palestine. You openly argue with anybody who asserts (rightly) that Israel, under international law, illegally occupy thousands of square kilometres of land that was not given to them in the partition, yet you'll find issue with a few thousand Syrian refugees (and perhaps a few "economic migrants") coming to the UK to escape an all out war where their children and families are being slaughtered on the streets.

Seems Jewish children are worth far more to you than Muslim ones.

 

[jb]

Americans must passively submit to taking in their "fair share."

Actually, I think the US should take twice as many as every other country, then you'll be able to boast twice as much! lol

 

[Agricola]

If Germany (which isn't surrounded by water on every side, I might add) can take in 800,000 asylum seekers (economic migrants or not is irrelevant -- one asylum seeker gets the same from the government as the next, the financial outcome for the UK is the same for 30,000 economic migrants as for 30,000 Syrian refugees) I'm sure the rest of our countries can do better than taking in a paltry few thousand. You're finding lame reasons to be cold-hearted.

When the entire EU and the Americans decided to give the Ashkenazis an entire country smack bang in the middle of Arab countries, displacing millions of the people who were already settled there, there were far more worrisome potential outcomes, but that didn't stop anybody. I know you're an advocate for Israel, and you deny the very existence of the Palestinians or of a place called Palestine. You openly argue with anybody who asserts (rightly) that Israel, under international law, illegally occupy thousands of square kilometres of land that was not given to them in the partition, yet you'll find issue with a few thousand Syrian refugees (and perhaps a few "economic migrants") coming to the UK to escape an all out war where their children and families are being slaughtered on the streets.

Seems Jewish children are worth far more to you than Muslim ones.

OH DEAR, you just could not resist the urge to bring up some more hate against Israel could you?

FIrst of all, Palestinians can have thier own nation tommorow for all I care, problem is they will not get one as they do not want to make peace with Israel and they will never recognise the right for Israel to exist. How many countries have land which were not legally given to them?

Israel gave back the whole of the Sinai penisular comeplete with oilfields back to Egypt in a peace agreement which has lasted to today. Same applies for the Palestinians, they can rule over 95% of the West Bank and Gaza if they wanted to, but no, the hatred of Jews and Israel is stronger than that for the want of a nation.

Back on topic now, WHy assume all Syrian refugees are Muslims? They are not. I point out again I have no problem taking in genuine refugees, but the way it has panned out, only a tiny percentage of people fleeing Syria are headed to Europe.

European nationals who want to move as economic migrants can live where they like, we have to put up with this and we are seeing a lot of Eastern Europeans moving to the UK.

What is a problem are the illegal immigrants, such as those camped at Calais hoping for a chance to cross illegally into the UK. Why else are they there if not for that? I can see many non-Syrians pretending to be Syrian in a chance they can enter the country illegally. We must need strict checks in place for this.

 

[jb]

Brits ...

The UK takes in about 16,000 asylum seekers per year. They're talking about taking 30,000 of these Syrians. That's nothing in a country whose population is 60 million. Germany take in 800,000 and their economy survives, and thrives even; it's stronger than the UK's in every conceivable way -- gross and net GDP's, less annual debt obligations, more annual income per capita -- and that's with 37 times as many asylum seekers as the UK, proportional to population.

Stop being bigoted freaks and grow some heart. As for you Americans, you're already too far gone. You'd rather your government buy bombs to kill children than find space to house and feed 'em. You people disgust me.

Here endeth the lesson! lol

Mr Pontificato!

 

[Omni]

Here endeth the lesson! lol

Mr Pontificato!

Either you're giving me the old "I don't care about sectarianism because I'm jokingly addressing you using the Italian word for Pope" gig, or you're calling me a pompous dogmatist. Well here's what I think about both: McGuinness, Adams, and Paisley are three idiots, and anybody who takes a side is worse for ever listening to them. I'm not Catholic, nor are most of Ireland anymore, and if sticking up for orphaned kids and desperate men and women with a bit of passion makes me pompous, well I'm okay with that.

 

[jb]

Either you're giving me the old "I don't care about sectarianism because I'm jokingly addressing you using the Italian word for Pope" gig, or you're calling me a pompous dogmatist. Well here's what I think about both: McGuinness, Adams, and Paisley are three idiots, and anybody who takes a side is worse for ever listening to them. I'm not Catholic, nor are most of Ireland anymore, and if sticking up for orphaned kids and desperate men and women with a bit of passion makes me pompous, well I'm okay with that.

Chill out, no need to get heated...

 

[GodIsSalvation]

Brits ...

The UK takes in about 16,000 asylum seekers per year. They're talking about taking 30,000 of these Syrians. That's nothing in a country whose population is 60 million. Germany take in 800,000 and their economy survives, and thrives even; it's stronger than the UK's in every conceivable way -- gross and net GDP's, less annual debt obligations, more annual income per capita -- and that's with 37 times as many asylum seekers as the UK, proportional to population.

Stop being bigoted freaks and grow some heart. As for you Americans, you're already too far gone. You'd rather your government buy bombs to kill children than find space to house and feed 'em. You people disgust me.

As it stands America has agreed to take up to 10,000 refugees for certain this year, with the possibility of more being discussed now. America is also putting up big money to help Europe with this immigration crises. By contrast Europe does little for America with its much bigger immigration crises.
U.S. to take at least 10,000 more Syrian refugees - CNNPolitics.com

Refugee crisis: Pressure builds for U.S. to take in more Syrians - CNNPolitics.com

Ireland has agree to take in 4,000 refugees. Ireland is part of Europe and the EU. Should Ireland take a more active role in allowing in refugees? Should Ireland take in a lot more refugees like Germany? Or should they be more conservative in their handling of this issue like Britain?

Migrant crisis: Ireland to take in 4,000 refugees - BBC News

I find no fault in Ireland. As I said in another thread on this issue, it is big, so it has to be tackled bit by bit. Every little bit helps. Ireland's help is appreciated and it seems there is some discussion in Ireland on helping more.

No ‘upper limit’ on number of refugees Ireland will take

 

[Omni]

As it stands America has agreed to take up to 10,000 refugees for certain this year, with the possibility of more being discussed now. America is also putting up big money to help Europe with this immigration crises. By contrast Europe does little for America with its much bigger immigration crises.
U.S. to take at least 10,000 more Syrian refugees - CNNPolitics.com

Refugee crisis: Pressure builds for U.S. to take in more Syrians - CNNPolitics.com

Ireland has agree to take in 4,000 refugees. Ireland is part of Europe and the EU. Should Ireland take a more active role in allowing in refugees? Should Ireland take in a lot more refugees like Germany? Or should they be more conservative in their handling of this issue like Britain?

Migrant crisis: Ireland to take in 4,000 refugees - BBC News

I find no fault in Ireland. As I said in another thread on this issue, it is big, so it has to be tackled bit by bit. Every little bit helps. Ireland's help is appreciated and it seems there is some discussion in Ireland on helping more.

No ‘upper limit’ on number of refugees Ireland will take

Yea, we should take more refugees, certainly. As for Mexicans, I'm sure they're just as welcome as anybody else who wants to come here. The US, put rather simply, is vastly underpopulated, as is Ireland. The UK has about 650 people per square mile. By contrast, the USA has 84. 650/84 is 7.74, which means that the UK has nearly 8 times as many people packed into the same space as one person in the US. Ireland has 153 people per square mile, which is nearly twice as much as the US, and Germany, since we're on that note, has 609, which is only marginally less than the UK, at about 7 times as many people per square mile as the US.

(The West Bank [which is mostly occupied by Israelis], since I broached it earlier in the thread, has 1,130, and the Gaza Strip has 9,713. To put that into perspective, the Gaza strip is 115 times more densely populated than the US).

There's plenty of space if people are willing to make it in places, but for some reason or other some war or other that happened however many years ago meant we drew these little lines across the planet we were born on so some people could be stuffed into tiny spaces with poor lives while other people, by virtue of total chance, were born into plenty. And what do we do with it? We hoard it like we earned it.

It's stupid. And the argument is usually always economic, which is even more daft. The most densely populated country on the planet also has the highest GDP per person of any country on the planet. More population doesn't have to be a bad thing.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

Yea, we should take more refugees, certainly. As for Mexicans, I'm sure they're just as welcome as anybody else who wants to come here. The US, put rather simply, is vastly underpopulated, as is Ireland. The UK has about 650 people per square mile. By contrast, the USA has 84. 650/84 is 7.74, which means that the UK has nearly 8 times as many people packed into the same space as one person in the US. Ireland has 153 people per square mile, which is nearly twice as much as the US, and Germany, since we're on that note, has 609, which is only marginally less than the UK, at about 7 times as many people per square mile as the US.

(The West Bank [which is mostly occupied by Israelis], since I broached it earlier in the thread, has 1,130, and the Gaza Strip has 9,713. To put that into perspective, the Gaza strip is 115 times more densely populated than the US).

There's plenty of space if people are willing to make it in places, but for some reason or other some war or other that happened however many years ago meant we drew these little lines across the planet we were born on so some people could be stuffed into tiny spaces with poor lives while other people, by virtue of total chance, were born into plenty. And what do we do with it? We hoard it like we earned it.

It's stupid. And the argument is usually always economic, which is even more daft. The most densely populated country on the planet also has the highest GDP per person of any country on the planet. More population doesn't have to be a bad thing.

I agree with you a lot on this issue. I'd note though in regards to land sizes and populations and density there's also other factors too like culture, language, the economic situation, resource management, the local climate, even just location and travel for the immigrants coming from point X to get to point Y. There is much task indeed in trying to maintain populations and administer a territory. It is much of the point of government, but alas, it is never fully in government's control whether it tries real hard to make it so or is more lax. Which is why there should be some leniency towards the various governments that are actually partaking in helping alleviate the situation

I just implore you don't throw us Yankees out when we are taking 10,000 and your country, homeland of my ancestors, be taking 4,000. Pressure Ireland into matching our 10k. That would give good support to the pro-immigration side in America to take some more refugees.

 

[Omni]

I agree with you a lot on this issue. I'd note though in regards to land sizes and populations and density there's also other factors too like culture, language, the economic situation, resource management, the local climate, even just location and travel for the immigrants coming from point X to get to point Y. There is much task indeed in trying to maintain populations and administer a territory. It is much of the point of government, but alas, it is never fully in government's control whether it tries real hard to make it so or is more lax. Which is why there should be some leniency towards the various governments that are actually partaking in helping alleviate the situation

I just implore you don't throw us Yankees out when we are taking 10,000 and your country, homeland of my ancestors, be taking 4,000. Pressure Ireland into matching our 10k. That would give good support to the pro-immigration side in America to take some more refugees.

I'd like to think if something happened in Ireland tomorrow, that I'd be welcome somewhere else. And the Syrians, I'm sure, are desperately hoping the same thing. It's simple empathy. If people can have that, just simple empathy, then most of the tensions will be solved from it. I mean, why would the refugees feel unwelcome when people welcome them with understanding? And why would the Americans feel threatened when they want to welcome the refugees?