Islamic State’s message to migrants…interesting.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]DBADNB1 wrote:
…You can criticise the U.S and Europe without supporting Russia, or China etc.
[/quote]
I think it’s fairly obvious you can only criticize the US and Europe. Period.[/quote]
I don’t believe you actually know that do you. You are just being extremely defensive.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Islamic State’s message to migrants…interesting.[/quote]
This was my point earlier in the thread, the refugees are people who already escape IS and are in neighbouring states. ISIS don’t allow people to leave, they hate it, they are desperate to stop it. The people leaving don’t like IS. The idea the people coming over are sympathetic to IS is ludicrous.
Jihadists are flocking to go to where these people are fleeing. The locals who support them don’t want to come to the west, they want to live under the caliphate, under sharia.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]DBADNB1 wrote:
…The idea the people coming over are sympathetic to IS is ludicrous…
[/quote]
Let’s think this through,* shall we?
-
They may not be sympathetic to IS but they are likely sympathetic to an Islam that is much more stringent and harsh than what Europeans are likely to welcome,* you suppose?
-
It’s entirely reasonable to assume IS fighters would infiltrate with the refugees,* don’t you think?[/quote]
- We accept tonnes of religious people whose religious beliefs are antithetical to western society, we have a large orthodox Jewish community in the south of the city. They refuse to assimilate, they often speak no English, they hold views about women and social relations we in the west find offensive.
We don’t and didn’t stop jews coming here, nor the refugee jews who came here from places like Lebanon in the 90’s. Singling out Muslims in this regard is crude and not a good reason to refuse large groups of refugees. My country played a main role in causing the vacuum that created ISIS. My country has a moral obligation to house people our war helped displace.
- Yes that is a possibility. However IS is on the whole against immigration to the west, bans it in its territory when possible and for the most part, is more concerned with keeping hold of all of it’s men to keep the ground they are losing, as opposed to sending them to the west. However yes, there is a possibility IS are sending a couple men over with goals of striking Europe.
But you are a patriotic American, what is that saying about trading liberty for security? The IRA sent men into England as IRA cell members, immigrants set up the logistical and operational networks. Our response was not to ban all Irish people because they had views deemed “stringent and harsh”, we instead let Irish in and targeted the IRA through good police and security work.
Could we of stopped more IRA attacks by stopping Irish immigration? Sure. But would the policies and moral implications of them, upon our society cause more harm and problems than worth the trade for security? I think it would.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]DBADNB1 wrote:
- We accept tonnes of religious people whose religious beliefs are antithetical to western society, we have a large orthodox Jewish community in the south of the city. They refuse to assimilate, they often speak no English, they hold views about women and social relations we in the west find offensive.
We don’t and didn’t stop jews coming here, nor the refugee jews who came here from places like Lebanon in the 90’s. Singling out Muslims in this regard is crude and not a good reason to refuse large groups of refugees. My country played a main role in causing the vacuum that created ISIS. My country has a moral obligation to house people our war helped displace.
[/quote]
If you think harsh and stringent Judaism is comparable to harsh and stringent Islam then you have surely ventured into the land foolishness and ignorance. They simply aren’t and a prudent man understands this.
LOL, I think I’ll just let this statement stand there in all its naked splendor.
BTW, I believe you’re British or Canadian so let’s make a deal. Have YOUR country take all they want and set a good example for us backward Americans,* ok? Show us how it’s done.
[/quote]
So your country, the one who instigated the war that destabilised the region, should have no responsibility for cleaning up it’s mess? OK, if you want that to be what America is about in the eyes of the world go ahead.
Very Christian of you.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]DBADNB1 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]DBADNB1 wrote:
- We accept tonnes of religious people whose religious beliefs are antithetical to western society, we have a large orthodox Jewish community in the south of the city. They refuse to assimilate, they often speak no English, they hold views about women and social relations we in the west find offensive.
We don’t and didn’t stop jews coming here, nor the refugee jews who came here from places like Lebanon in the 90’s. Singling out Muslims in this regard is crude and not a good reason to refuse large groups of refugees. My country played a main role in causing the vacuum that created ISIS. My country has a moral obligation to house people our war helped displace.
[/quote]
If you think harsh and stringent Judaism is comparable to harsh and stringent Islam then you have surely ventured into the land foolishness and ignorance. They simply aren’t and a prudent man understands this.
LOL, I think I’ll just let this statement stand there in all its naked splendor.
BTW, I believe you’re British or Canadian so let’s make a deal. Have YOUR country take all they want and set a good example for us backward Americans,* ok? Show us how it’s done.
[/quote]
So your country, the one who instigated the war that destabilised the region…
[/quote]
That’s certainly the progressive/America is Purt Near the Great Satan perspective.
An objective realist would counter that evil men in those countries were and are responsible for destabilization.
I’ve a feeling you wouldn’t know what “Christian” is if a cross fell on you today on your way home from work and sent you straight to a tomb sealed with a stone.
[/quote]
No I am sure you are right, jesus would stop refugees coming to the land in which he lived. After all Jesus was an isolationist, nationalist and favoured hard line economics over charity and love. Carry on Christian soldier.
[quote]DBADNB1 wrote:
After all Jesus was an isolationist, nationalist and favoured hard line economics over charity and love. [/quote]
Please explain the last point.
[quote]DBADNB1 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]DBADNB1 wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]DBADNB1 wrote:
- We accept tonnes of religious people whose religious beliefs are antithetical to western society, we have a large orthodox Jewish community in the south of the city. They refuse to assimilate, they often speak no English, they hold views about women and social relations we in the west find offensive.
We don’t and didn’t stop jews coming here, nor the refugee jews who came here from places like Lebanon in the 90’s. Singling out Muslims in this regard is crude and not a good reason to refuse large groups of refugees. My country played a main role in causing the vacuum that created ISIS. My country has a moral obligation to house people our war helped displace.
[/quote]
If you think harsh and stringent Judaism is comparable to harsh and stringent Islam then you have surely ventured into the land foolishness and ignorance. They simply aren’t and a prudent man understands this.
LOL, I think I’ll just let this statement stand there in all its naked splendor.
BTW, I believe you’re British or Canadian so let’s make a deal. Have YOUR country take all they want and set a good example for us backward Americans,* ok? Show us how it’s done.
[/quote]
So your country, the one who instigated the war that destabilised the region…
[/quote]
That’s certainly the progressive/America is Purt Near the Great Satan perspective.
An objective realist would counter that evil men in those countries were and are responsible for destabilization.
I’ve a feeling you wouldn’t know what “Christian” is if a cross fell on you today on your way home from work and sent you straight to a tomb sealed with a stone.
[/quote]
No I am sure you are right, jesus would stop refugees coming to the land in which he lived. After all Jesus was an isolationist, nationalist and favoured hard line economics over charity and love. Carry on Christian soldier.[/quote]
In politics, consequentialism is the ultimate litmus test of right or wrong. The plight of the refugees, while tragic, is secondary. The question is whether or not accepting refugees increases (or at least maintains) the power of the state or dampens it.
It makes logistical and ideological sense to send these people thousands of miles away …
because there is nothing nefarious about this whole situation
[quote]Aggv wrote:
It makes logistical and ideological sense to send these people thousands of miles away …
because there is nothing nefarious about this whole situation [/quote]
So because a corrupt, backwards, racist, monarchial dictatorship refuses to help the innocent western republics should follow suit? How about we don’t take our moral compass from such people as the Saudi state? Sound good?
Also, believe it or not, Saudi Arabia might be a bit worried about a bunch of comparatively secular people from Syria and Iraq turning and potentially down the line demanding reform to the system and in general being a problem for the theocratic Saudi state.
[quote]DBADNB1 wrote:
[quote]Aggv wrote:
It makes logistical and ideological sense to send these people thousands of miles away …
because there is nothing nefarious about this whole situation [/quote]
So because a corrupt, backwards, racist, monarchial dictatorship refuses to help the innocent western republics should follow suit? How about we don’t take our moral compass from such people as the Saudi state? Sound good?
Also, believe it or not, Saudi Arabia might be a bit worried about a bunch of comparatively secular people from Syria and Iraq turning and potentially down the line demanding reform to the system and in general being a problem for the theocratic Saudi state.[/quote]
So it’s logical to travel thousands of miles, to countries with opposite sets of ideology (respect for women,gays,free speach). It makes zero sense. Saudi Arabia and the gulf states have all the money in the world, the space, and they’re turning their back on fellow muslims.
[quote]Aggv wrote:
[quote]DBADNB1 wrote:
[quote]Aggv wrote:
It makes logistical and ideological sense to send these people thousands of miles away …
because there is nothing nefarious about this whole situation [/quote]
So because a corrupt, backwards, racist, monarchial dictatorship refuses to help the innocent western republics should follow suit? How about we don’t take our moral compass from such people as the Saudi state? Sound good?
Also, believe it or not, Saudi Arabia might be a bit worried about a bunch of comparatively secular people from Syria and Iraq turning and potentially down the line demanding reform to the system and in general being a problem for the theocratic Saudi state.[/quote]
So it’s logical to travel thousands of miles, to countries with opposite sets of ideology (respect for women,gays,free speach). It makes zero sense. Saudi Arabia and the gulf states have all the money in the world, the space, and they’re turning their back on fellow muslims.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/08/world/gulf-states-syrian-refugee-crisis/[/quote]
No one escaping islamists wants to move to Saudi Arabia, ran by theocratic nutters who behead people for doing card tricks.
Ever more evidence the refugees are not jihadists or radicals, they don’t want to go to a place that has Sharia law, they want to come to a secular democracy.