Author Topic: Syrian Refugees  (Read 25069 times)

astvilla

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 224
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #100 on: December 06, 2015, 12:21:52 PM »
I have to be honest, and I think you can also admit, that pulling a few graphs from a Google Search wouldn't really be considered scholarly work worthy of publication nor a good investigation or report.  Although I'm not expecting any of us to do a lot of data digging when even authorities don't have much data in the field..  And the graphs can still be debated.  I think in terms of data analysis, best to leave to authorities in this field explain than have amateurs try and analyze.

Of course not.  But that's not what I was doing.  I was countering one specific point:

It doesn't surprise me the spike in these attacks are only recent in these last few years as opposed to Bush's/Clinton's presidency.

My point on the presidencies have nothing to do w/the actual presidents.  As I've mentioned multiple times, my point was that technology and Internet make the spread of dangerous information and ideas more accessible and foster more dangerous people who want to wreck harm at moments of weakness.  I only used presidency because I can't think of a focal, pivotal point in technology advances in social media that allowed big influence from ISIS (since ISIS is not that old a group).  You couldn't send much info over AOL in the 90s now right?

I know that you know that social media and internet are potent tools of ISIS (we have been bombarded w/this info) for recruiting, brainwashing, people here.  ISIS doesn't need to send people here.  They can brainwash people and convince people who are weak to do the work for them.  Social media is what makes ISIS unique.  It turns everyone (but more likely Muslims who know the religion already) into potential terrorists.  And there's no precedent for social media in all of human history, all that is happening is new.  These tools were available or used extensively before like today's terrorists. 

NYT even did coverage on ISIS tactics and they actually did a decent explanation. 
And, I'll repeat myself:
Quote
NO.  This is WRONG.  This is exactly the type of uninformed opinion that leads to terrible policy.

There's plenty of data to show that this is wrong - there has been no spike in attacks in the last few years.  I don't know why you think this data doesn't exist or is fishy.  Here, if you really want to do research, buy this book:
http://berkshirepublishing.com/product.aspx?projid=60

Okay first off you already know the book goes up to 2005.  And a lot of has changed then.  Back then, Motorola RAZRs, Ipods, LG Chocolates were the thing.  Now we have smartphones, tablets, drones, and so on.  More ammunition, more connectivity for vulnerable people to be implanted w/dangerous ideas.  (Adam Lanza was a shut in who spent too much time on PC right?  Columbine were gamers).  The traditional 9/11 terrorists who had intent before coming to the US isn't the only problem now.  We're experiencing a new phenomena that can't be compared because of changing times.  Any researcher knows you cite recent evidence because previous evidence you already know and have but the newer the data, the better.

And second, that book is $325, I don't know if you were trying to make a joke about that.  No mustachian would buy it. Plus it's outdated.  10 years is a long time in today's terms, the pace of change is really fast now.

I think FB, Twitter, Instagram, and their counterparts play a big role in spreading the word of ISIS that reaches a few people who don't use their heads and blindly resort to violence.  (Tools, sites that weren't around in Bush's early time, or Clinton's, I used them as a timestamp, not a critique on their Presidencies) It's a new reality, that your neighbor or friend can easily commit acts of terror or mass murder (idk why V Tech isn't terrorism but Bernadhino is that's been debated elsewhere).  Now is it also a gun control issue?  Religion?  Poor economy?

I'm still wondering your rebut to
Better medicine saving lives that previously in the 80s could've been lost causes
The % of terrorists controlled for population size (and just perhaps that religion in Islam more so than Christianity has a significant difference)
FBI/law enforcement better tactics (through better surveillance b/c of advances in technology since 70s/80s) in preventing terrorism and how that perhaps lowers the number.  (this is one possible explanation for the graph)
What are the types of terrorism, how are they subdivided? Has terrorism by Muslims been increasing since the 50s? Maybe overall going down, but there are too many explanations, again you can't make a well-designed experiment for this.

There are holes one can poke through. (I've been trying to be devil's advocate)

I agree overall it's nothing to worry about.  I'm okay w/accepting refugees provided they were screened, and treated like any other refugee.  The risk they bring is negligible compared to other risks of death. But in this new environment w/the Internet, we should accept that these type of attacks Muslim or not, are just the new reality we have to live w/.  And I'm okay w/those risks.  Maybe we do more law enforcement, monitoring and prevention, that doesn't mean we close our doors to those needing our help.  I'm against internment because it only further marginalizes them like it did in Europe and exacerbate the situation.  I've personally worked with Iraqi immigrants from the war and they are very nice, hardworking people.

And any death, murder, violence, no matter the method is unacceptable.  But the media, politicians, lobby groups, and businesses aren't really interested in that.  They like sensationalism, yellow journalism, and distortion so they can make money.  So networks like ABC, NBC, and FOX have material they can cover, have "experts" and "analysts" sit in.  If the world was fine and dandy, where would they be w/out conflict? 

beltim

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2728
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #101 on: December 06, 2015, 12:43:22 PM »
I have to be honest, and I think you can also admit, that pulling a few graphs from a Google Search wouldn't really be considered scholarly work worthy of publication nor a good investigation or report.  Although I'm not expecting any of us to do a lot of data digging when even authorities don't have much data in the field..  And the graphs can still be debated.  I think in terms of data analysis, best to leave to authorities in this field explain than have amateurs try and analyze.

Of course not.  But that's not what I was doing.  I was countering one specific point:

It doesn't surprise me the spike in these attacks are only recent in these last few years as opposed to Bush's/Clinton's presidency.

And, I'll repeat myself:
Quote
NO.  This is WRONG.  This is exactly the type of uninformed opinion that leads to terrible policy.

There's plenty of data to show that this is wrong - there has been no spike in attacks in the last few years.  I don't know why you think this data doesn't exist or is fishy.  Here, if you really want to do research, buy this book:
http://berkshirepublishing.com/product.aspx?projid=60

Okay first off you already know the book goes up to 2005. 
…
And second, that book is $325, I don't know if you were trying to make a joke about that.  No mustachian would buy it. Plus it's outdated.  10 years is a long time in today's terms, the pace of change is really fast now.
…
ramble
…

You keep taking the conversation other places.  Some of those are good points for some other discussion.  They're not, however, responsive to my point.

The data exists to show that you're wrong.  There is no spike in attacks.

I suspect that you'll poke some hole in any source I give you though, so I think I'm done trying (aside: the book costs too much so the data doesn't exist – seriously?).  Next time, maybe you can provide a shred of evidence that your initial statement was right.

Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 471
  • Location: Germany
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #102 on: December 06, 2015, 01:52:05 PM »
I have zero concerns accepting refugees.  It is the right thing to do, especially for our country.  The concern I have is that after immigration, subsequent generations are still becoming radicalized.  We saw it in the Paris attacks, these weren't refugees, they were citizens born and raised in France and Belgium.

We see the same thing with born and raised Americans with backgrounds in the Middle-East and Africa becoming radicalized and leaving to join ISIS/Al Shabab etc.

We've got to figure out why this is happening and work to change it.

I read a really good piece about this and the theory was:
Refuges being accepted where moderates, so not overtly religious. But they were living in communities of other refuges/like minded people so did not really become part of the the greater community ie continued to speak their own language, kept up their customs.
Their children on the orher hand, felt like they hadn't really become part of this country, and their religion became important to them due to lacking a feeling of community, this makes them vulnerable to radicalisation.

I'll see if I can dig up the post.

This is not a theory at all but precisely what has happened regarding almost all groups of Muslim immigrants in Europe. One exeption that I am aware of are very well educated Iranians who fled Iran because of the Islamic revolution. What you described happened to Turks and Arabs in Germany, to North Africans in France, to Pakistanis and Bangladeshis in GB.

There is NO reason to believe that the current wave is going to yield better results. Especially since the sheer numbers force e.g. Germany to build new homes at high speed and in close proximity. We could really just name those places "New Banlieue".

Resettlement into the West can only work for small numbers and with a profile comparable to e.g. the Iranian refugees.

Middle Europe has not enough work for its own unskilled labourers. And even the lefty secretary of work and social affairs (Andrea Nahles) has estimated that about 90% (!) of the refugees/migrants currently entering Germany are not employable in Germany. Almost everybody who entered Germany to better his fate, build a home, make a living is going to be very disappointed in about a year or two. And then is going to become either very depressed or very angry. And a lot of those are going to seek consolation in tradition and religion. A few are going to radicalize.

And some don't need any radicalization. The chance for a Christian refugee to be harresed, threatened and bullied in German refugee camps is 100%. You've read that correctly. Each and every Christian refugee is persecuted by some of his fellow Muslim refugees. Of course this does not mean that all Muslim refugees take part in such behaviour or condone it. But they are not shutting it down either (why should they? This is what has been going on in the Middle East for quite some time and the reason why the already small numbers of Oriental Christians has plummeted during the last decades).

I consider the German "open door policy" insane. And I know almost nobody who agrees with it.

Any country should exercise a concious choice whom to welcome as an immigrant or refugee. "Whomever manages to set foot into our country" is suicidal and also downright perverse considering that it priviledges the young, healthy, male, equipped with enough money for traffickers and bribes over the ones more in need of protection. And indeed, young men is who are arriving at the moment. Entire families or women are a very minor minority. And also subjected to violence and harrassment in refugee camps.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2015, 12:22:20 AM by Lyssa »

TheOldestYoungMan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 629
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #103 on: December 07, 2015, 08:42:46 AM »
And indeed, young men is who are arriving at the moment. Entire families or women are a very minor minority.

So, I know this is often reported, but I see all these facts out there that seem to imply the opposite.  Do you have a source?


The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees — which refers refugees for resettlement in other countries — says there are more than 4 million registered Syrian refugees. Its figures on the demographic makeup of refugees is based on available data on the 2.1 million who were registered by the UNHCR in Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon. (Another 1.9 million Syrian refugees were registered by the Government of Turkey, and more than 24,000 were registered in North Africa.)
UNHCR’s data show that 50.5 percent of refugees are women. Females age 18 to 59 make up 23.9 percent of the refugees, while males in that age group make up 21.8 percent.
Even younger males — age 12 to 17 — represent 6.5 percent of refugees, while females that age are 6.1 percent. The majority of refugees — 51.1 percent — are under age 17, including 38.5 percent who are younger than 12 years old. These numbers were as of Sept. 6.

 -http://www.factcheck.org/2015/09/stretching-facts-on-syrian-refugees/

I searched "Demographic makeup of Syrian Refugees"

Maybe it's a Germany specific problem?

There are few times in life when the right course of action is crystal clear.  All other considerations aside, when your neighbor's house burns down, you offer shelter for the night.  Tomorrow there may be a better thing to do, but right now we know what to do and aren't, and there is no acceptable reason for it.

Put it another way, if 100% of the refugees were single men age 22-35, the right thing to do is take them in.  If they were all radicalized muslims, the right thing to do is take them in.

There exists no reality where it is OK to stand by and not help when you have the means to do so.  What they might do after you help has no bearing on what the right thing for you to do is.

Be not afraid.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2015, 08:46:45 AM by TheOldestYoungMan »
"Whenever you are presented with the opportunity to pee...pee." - Advice from my grandfather. 

At a fundamental level, it's all gambling.  Would you rather bet your money or your time?

20 months to go!

brainfart

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #104 on: December 07, 2015, 09:12:04 AM »
Who do you think crosses the mediterranean in open boats and then walks a few thousand kilometers through Eastern Europe to Germany? Predominantly young males.

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 24890
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #105 on: December 07, 2015, 09:23:32 AM »

Who do you think crosses the mediterranean in open boats and then walks a few thousand kilometers through Eastern Europe to Germany? Predominantly young males.

And again--statistics?  What percent are they compared to the whole?
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with a kid.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (occasionally) blog at AdventuringAlong.com.
You can also read my forum "Journal."

OkieStache

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 33
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #106 on: December 07, 2015, 09:51:17 AM »
For a pretty comprehensive (and concise) analysis of forty year (through 2009) of  terrorism incidents:
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/05/terror-trends-40-years-data-on-international-and-domestic-terrorism

Summary of International Terrorist Incidents against U.S.:  1987 - 1991 - 635 incidents        2004 - 2008 - 221 incidents

Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4292
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #107 on: December 07, 2015, 10:46:12 AM »
For a pretty comprehensive (and concise) analysis of forty year (through 2009) of  terrorism incidents:
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/05/terror-trends-40-years-data-on-international-and-domestic-terrorism

Summary of International Terrorist Incidents against U.S.:  1987 - 1991 - 635 incidents        2004 - 2008 - 221 incidents
But that does not include our domestic terrorists, of which are the majority of the USA terrorist activities. 

astvilla

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 224
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #108 on: December 07, 2015, 11:35:02 AM »

Who do you think crosses the mediterranean in open boats and then walks a few thousand kilometers through Eastern Europe to Germany? Predominantly young males.

And again--statistics?  What percent are they compared to the whole?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/08/world/europe/migration-of-young-men-poses-risks-for-both-syria-and-europe.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/29/world/europe/in-waves-of-migrants-children-arrive-alone-and-settle-in-uneasily.html

A lot of other NYT readers commented on photographs or local witnesses to say that it's predominantly male. What does that mean, 90-10, 60-40? I don't know. There was a lot of accusation of media bias and than a later not retraction but maybe admission by NYT that maybe accepting 500,000 people w/no care in the world, from an area of the world where people are likely to look down on Western culture, hate, yada yada.

Because they didn't track or fingerprint everyone since they're all illegal, I don't think there are accurate stats, just like there aren't accurate stats on illegals in the US.  So people are relying on photos, observations, and anecdotes.  I'd like to see data but it ain't available.

brainfart

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #109 on: December 07, 2015, 11:48:00 AM »
http://www.stuttgarter-nachrichten.de/inhalt.fluechtlinge-vor-allem-junge-maenner-suchen-in-deutschland-asyl.a8f7d2d1-689a-4c32-98fd-a958c7818200.html

303443 registered refugees  between january and september, 206037 male and 97406 female.

67.9 % male.
77.35% of the refugees between 16 and 30 are male.


Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 471
  • Location: Germany
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #111 on: December 07, 2015, 11:05:28 PM »
http://www.focus.de/politik/deutschland/migration-prognose-uebertroffen-fast-965-000-fluechtlinge-registriert_id_5137616.html

Latest news: 965,000 registered, unknown number unregistered.

http://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/fluechtlinge-in-europa-warum-vor-allem-maenner-asyl-suchen-1.2584201

Worldwide there are about 50% male and 50% female refugees. Of those arriving in Europe the breakdown is 70/30%. And if I may add from my own observation: a large number of the females comes from the Balkans, not from Syria.

http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article146919471/Islamisten-bedrohen-Christen-in-Fluechtlingsheimen.html

Christian refugees being threatened and haressed (one family described in the article decided to go back to Iraq because they felt safer there...)

http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article147725757/Ausserhalb-des-Heims-fuehle-ich-mich-sicherer.html

Sexual violence against female refugees in refugee centers.

Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 471
  • Location: Germany
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #112 on: December 07, 2015, 11:14:50 PM »
And indeed, young men is who are arriving at the moment. Entire families or women are a very minor minority.

So, I know this is often reported, but I see all these facts out there that seem to imply the opposite.  Do you have a source?


The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees — which refers refugees for resettlement in other countries — says there are more than 4 million registered Syrian refugees. Its figures on the demographic makeup of refugees is based on available data on the 2.1 million who were registered by the UNHCR in Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and Lebanon. (Another 1.9 million Syrian refugees were registered by the Government of Turkey, and more than 24,000 were registered in North Africa.)
UNHCR’s data show that 50.5 percent of refugees are women. Females age 18 to 59 make up 23.9 percent of the refugees, while males in that age group make up 21.8 percent.
Even younger males — age 12 to 17 — represent 6.5 percent of refugees, while females that age are 6.1 percent. The majority of refugees — 51.1 percent — are under age 17, including 38.5 percent who are younger than 12 years old. These numbers were as of Sept. 6.

 -http://www.factcheck.org/2015/09/stretching-facts-on-syrian-refugees/

I searched "Demographic makeup of Syrian Refugees"

Maybe it's a Germany specific problem?

There are few times in life when the right course of action is crystal clear.  All other considerations aside, when your neighbor's house burns down, you offer shelter for the night.  Tomorrow there may be a better thing to do, but right now we know what to do and aren't, and there is no acceptable reason for it.

Put it another way, if 100% of the refugees were single men age 22-35, the right thing to do is take them in.  If they were all radicalized muslims, the right thing to do is take them in.

There exists no reality where it is OK to stand by and not help when you have the means to do so.  What they might do after you help has no bearing on what the right thing for you to do is.

Be not afraid.

Why the hell would it ever be the right thing to take radicals in? There are millions and millions of people suffering and without any perspective that could give them hope. Many, many more than even the most generous country could ever take in (as Sweden has already realized and Germany is in the process of realizing. All others knew that before...). I think it is not only our right but our obligation to screen whom to take in. For our own sake and for the sake of the victims of the radicals.

As evidenced by the dire situation of Christian refugees in German refugee homes.

This is all the more true because it is not at all about saving lifes (this can be and is done by UNHCR shelter) but about providing opportunities for the future. That's why people come to Europe/Germany. That's why they are walking through several safe countries.

For sources, please see my last post.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2015, 11:24:37 PM by Lyssa »

brainfart

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #113 on: December 07, 2015, 11:59:58 PM »
That's what happens when your big buddy sets the neighbor's house on fire and you help him carrying the jerrycans.
The refugee crisis didn't come as a surprise. It would have been much cheaper and effective to adequately care for the refugees in Turkey, Jordan etc.
The effectivity of this mess makes you wonder if this wasn't kind of planned in advance. Think economic warfare. But then again it's actually working too good to be planned in advance, judging by the track records of all the parties involved.

Shane

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 686
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #114 on: December 08, 2015, 02:10:33 AM »
Some of you may find Juan Cole's recent piece called, "Trump vs. the Founding Fathers on Muslims Coming to the U.S."

TheOldestYoungMan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 629
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #115 on: December 08, 2015, 01:20:08 PM »


Why the hell would it ever be the right thing to take radicals in? There are millions and millions of people suffering and without any perspective that could give them hope. Many, many more than even the most generous country could ever take in (as Sweden has already realized and Germany is in the process of realizing. All others knew that before...). I think it is not only our right but our obligation to screen whom to take in. For our own sake and for the sake of the victims of the radicals.


My point with the demographics is that it doesn't matter either way.  The majority being young men doesn't make them any more or less dangerous.  It'd be like if Donald Trump said the majority of them being women meant they were more stupid.  It's nonsense, with no basis in fact, and trotted out there to play on fears.  Regardless of the demographic makeup, the right course of action is to take them in.  Screen them for terrorists to the extent that is possible, but don't think a society that keeps them out was worth protecting.

I was using a broader definition of radical, the one that goes something like:

When asked about the practice of [sharia law, honor killing, religious persecution in general, women as full citizens] they say something that makes all of us go "wtf?".

Not, "do you plan to blow something up/shoot tons of people" they say "yes".

Just because someone has radical ideas doesn't mean they have actually or will hurt someone.

It's a spectrum like this:

Normal person -> Star Wars Enthusiast -> Star Wars Re-enacter -> Thinks he's a Jedi -> Kills people with his lightsaber.

Christian -> Missionary Christian -> Religious Protestor at a military funeral -> KKK member -> KKK member that kills Jewish people.

Muslim -> Prays many times a day/won't shave/beer/pork  -> Unhappy his wife drives Muslim -> Thinks it's OK to wage religious war but personally it's not for him -> asshole who blows himself up to kill others.

Probably everyone to the right of "Enthusiast" meets my definition of radical, but everyone left of "kills people with his lightsaber" is deserving of my compassion.  As I understand it, the "radicals" by my definition account for like 70% of worldwide Muslims, but the "radicals" that will actually go blow stuff up accounts for like, way way less (still a scary high number though).

Until they do violence, they haven't done violence.  Everything else is future-crimes land and that's not someplace you want to live.  That isn't about safety, security, or crime prevention.  It's about fear and hate.

Understand, I'm not saying there is no risk here, or that none of them will be dangerous.  I'm saying you do it anyway.  I'm saying that it is what the right thing to do is.

Legally, I don't think it's wise, in a time of crisis, to overrule what those that came before set up as the rule of law when they had time to consider it in their right minds when they were not afraid.  Trust them and follow the law.

As a Christian, you let them in.  As I understand it, the Jewish faith says something similar.

I know of no creed or ethos that advocates barring your door, taking shelter from the cold, and plugging your ears until the screams and the pounding gradually subside.

And it is about saving lives.  A body saved from death is not a life without opportunity.

I think Germany for one has taken on too many, but you do what you have to when others won't do their part.  The U.S. needs to step up and agree to take in millions instead of arguing over how few thousands.

My own Senator was vowing today to try and stop the few dozen who made it to Texas, and I'm just shaking my head at the insanity of it all.  So far (to date) Texas, a state larger than Germany (1.95x baby!) with millions upon millions of people, a vast immigrant population, and loads of opportunity for someone to feed me good shish, has taken in 250 Syrians.  That's shameful just because I could have almost funded that out of my own pocket.

It's all bullshit *waves hands in the air*
"Whenever you are presented with the opportunity to pee...pee." - Advice from my grandfather. 

At a fundamental level, it's all gambling.  Would you rather bet your money or your time?

20 months to go!

TheOldestYoungMan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 629
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #116 on: December 08, 2015, 01:42:18 PM »
When you're climbing Everest, and you're almost to the top, and they guy next to you runs out of oxygen, it's OK to leave him to die.

You can't save him.

It's a survival situation, and you gotta take care of you.  It wouldn't be wrong to give your oxygen to him and choose to not make it yourself, but it wouldn't be right either.  Sharing the oxygen such that you both die would be wrong.

The "majority of them are men" and they "might be terrorists" is trying to turn this into the above situation.

But it clearly is not.

There is a right thing to do, and the U.S. is not doing it.

"Whenever you are presented with the opportunity to pee...pee." - Advice from my grandfather. 

At a fundamental level, it's all gambling.  Would you rather bet your money or your time?

20 months to go!

hoping2retire35

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 971
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #117 on: December 08, 2015, 02:51:44 PM »
OP-thanks for posting, i looked a good while and could never find anything like this. Unfortunately, there are 0 centers within 50 miles of me.

As for the rest of the conversation, I am pretty sure it would be a lot cheaper and they would be a lot happier if they could just go home. Not sure how that could happen at this point, though.

Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 471
  • Location: Germany
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #118 on: December 09, 2015, 05:10:08 AM »
@ the oldest young man:

I guess at least we can agree that there should be some kind of limit and that Germany is already above such limit... Yes, the US can and should do more.

However, I absolutely disagree with the rest of your post.

Firstly, there is no German law and no international treaty requiring us to take everybody in. None. If somebody is fleeing an already safe country (physically safe, not nice to live in) he is neither a 'refugee' according to international law nor to be recognized as an asylum seeker in Germany. It was the unilateral decision of our chancellor to forget all that and overnight turn 'no boarder - no nation' into our official policy. You mentioned Christianity as a motivating factor and so has she. What as an atheist kind of makes me question whether one can ultimately trust religious folks since in the end even apparently sane and sober people can do very unreasonable things when they are convinced that their religion asks them to...

Secondly, the ratio of young men or 'sons per family' is so far the best indicator we have for the likelihood of war. Too many young men for too few inheritances fueled both world wars. In Rwanda it has been demonstrated province by province that the youth bulge correlated perfectly with the intensity the genocide was carried out with. We already see what effect an out of balance gender ratio currently has in India and China. All those facts are not pretty but refusing to take them into account won't make it any prettier. Very much the opposite. They are showing the only real way out: empowerment of women and small families. Nothing else is going to cure any of the major problems in the Middle East.

Which brings me to your other point:

I'm not really worried about terrorists. They are a special kind of criminals and should be dealt with as such. Their attacks are probably going to strengthen European societies more than weakening them. My fear of riding the subway with Muslim refugees is zero.

What I am worried about is your perfectly harmless radicals with wacko ideas. Those have already appropriated entire quarters in European cities. They establish inofficial sharia courts, kill their daughters for having sex outside of marriage and all the other not so pretty things that we in Germany came to call 'parallel societies'.

Since we already agreed that our capacities are limited we should focus them on those we actually could live with and not 'in parallel' to. The Raif Badawis of this world. The atheist and feminist bloggers currently being slaughtered in the streets of Bangladesh and Pakistan. We should offer visas to those people right fucking now. And not wait till they arrive per life threatening means along with those who call them traitors and make their life a living hell in the middle of Europe.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2015, 09:42:23 AM by Lyssa »

TheOldestYoungMan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 629
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #119 on: December 09, 2015, 08:35:08 AM »
Religion doesn't lead me to the conclusion, logic does.  I bring it up only because there are a ton of openly christian folks out there in the U.S. advocating no admittance at all, and that's inconsistent with their faith.

Not being required by law to take people in does not make it acceptable to not take them in.  And just because there was no direct path to a country doesn't mean you aren't still a refugee by the time you make it there, even if some idiot wrote a law defining refugee that way.

Can I help?  Then you help.  Until the emergency is over.  Until everyone knows where they are sleeping tonight.  Until there is more to everyone's day then waiting for the next food hand out from an aid worker.

But Germany has taken in plenty.  No doubt that there will be consequences of doing that, societal, economic, cultural consequences.

As for the rest, correlation is not causation.  All of your arguments are, perhaps, excellent reasons to treat the incoming population seriously.  To take deliberate and decisive action to integrate and embrace, but not to bar entry.

As to the wacko idea folks breaking laws in your country, they should be arrested, tried, and punished according to the laws of your country.  No doubt about that.

Germany may very well be at capacity.  The U.S. isn't though.  Speaking with the co-ordinators here in Houston (yes it's a large city but a small fraction of the U.S.) they have the resources and infrastructure in place to take on a thousand times as many refugees as they currently have, from all over the world.  This is money-in-the-bank stuff is already built-let them come type thing.  And our leaders are just being dicks.

Literally empty classrooms with instructors lined up to teach language and cultural integration.  Sponsors and mentors standing by.  I'm betting something similar exists in almost every major city, as there is a constant influx of refugees all the time from all over the world.  If we weren't going to use it, why bother to build it at all?
"Whenever you are presented with the opportunity to pee...pee." - Advice from my grandfather. 

At a fundamental level, it's all gambling.  Would you rather bet your money or your time?

20 months to go!

hoping2retire35

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 971
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #120 on: December 09, 2015, 12:07:41 PM »
kinda relevant
https://reason.com/archives/2015/12/07/a-states-rights-approach-to-immigration#comment_5762284
allows more people in need without creating a burden and if they are working then less time for planning atrocities.

Cassie

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3555
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #121 on: December 09, 2015, 08:53:56 PM »
Lyssa: I understand your prospective because my DIL is from Poland and frequently goes back & she talks about all the problems the refugees have brought to Europe. I am usually a bleeding heart liberal but I have very mixed feelings about this issue. I really can see both sides & feel so bad for people however, as we have found out with all the wars we can not solve the world's problems. If we could it would be done by now. I am also bothered by all of the USA's homeless people that are not being taken care of yet we want to care for others. People blame the homeless for their own problems but having worked in human services for years it is estimated that about 75% are too mentally ill to work.  They do not have the basic necessities & needs met that everyone in a country as rich as ours should have. No good easy answer to this problem.

Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 471
  • Location: Germany
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #122 on: December 10, 2015, 05:42:13 AM »
Lyssa: I understand your prospective because my DIL is from Poland and frequently goes back & she talks about all the problems the refugees have brought to Europe. I am usually a bleeding heart liberal but I have very mixed feelings about this issue. I really can see both sides & feel so bad for people however, as we have found out with all the wars we can not solve the world's problems.

The Eastern European perspective is worth listening to. Usually those countries are just painted as 'the new nationalists', having not yet caught up to the humanitarian spirit of Europe (consisting of Germany and Sweden, apparently...). What's frequently overlooked is that they have taken in Ukranians and that a lot of them tell you: I've worked in Germany/England/another European country (or a relative is doing so), have lived in the cheap part of the city with many Muslim immigrants (where journalist and politicians usually do not live...) and have observed the problems many of them have integrating into a European society up close. I don't want the same things to happen here.

Yes, that's somewhat unfair to liberal Muslims. But it is well within the rights of any country to decide whom to consider as an immigrant.

As described above, I would not exclude any nationality or religion per se but would screen strictly and radically subjective. Whom can we expect to contribute in a positive manner to our society? Can I picture our kids playing together? Can I picture our kids having a family together?

Because that's the ultimate goal of immigration isn't it? The arrivals blending in and enriching the fabric of the host society by adding new and interesting features. People intermarrying until there is no 'us' and 'them' left. 

Unfortunately it's two equally radical and unreasonable positions making almost all headlines today. Either 'We need to keep those criminals out!' or 'We should take everybody in, it will work somehow... and if it doesn't it will be our fault alone!'.

Cassie

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3555
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #123 on: December 10, 2015, 11:07:59 AM »
The goal is to integrate and if people refuse to do that then it is better for all if they don't come. Also my DIL has relatives working all over Europe-especially Germany because of a lack of jobs in Poland so where will all these people find jobs?  Even if they are skilled they may not be able to practice in another country. My DIL is a high school french teacher that speaks 5 languages yet she must work unskilled jobs in the US because we don't recognize her degree. I know someone with a master's degree locally that is working as a seamstress for the very same reason.

Shane

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 686
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #124 on: December 10, 2015, 12:04:20 PM »
As described above, I would not exclude any nationality or religion per se but would screen strictly and radically subjective. Whom can we expect to contribute in a positive manner to our society? Can I picture our kids playing together? Can I picture our kids having a family together?

Because that's the ultimate goal of immigration isn't it? The arrivals blending in and enriching the fabric of the host society by adding new and interesting features. People intermarrying until there is no 'us' and 'them' left. 

Unfortunately it's two equally radical and unreasonable positions making almost all headlines today. Either 'We need to keep those criminals out!' or 'We should take everybody in, it will work somehow... and if it doesn't it will be our fault alone!'.

Obviously, making reasonable efforts to screen refugees coming into our countries is an important first step. However, no matter how thoroughly we screen potential immigrants, it will never be 100% effective. How can we possibly expect to screen a 5 year old boy coming into the country with his mother and grandmother in order to determine whether he will become radicalized 20 years in the future? It's not possible to know that ahead of time, no matter how thorough our screening procedures are. So, IMO, it's not worthwhile to spend an inordinate amount of time and resources on the screening part of the equation.

Putting most of our efforts into helping immigrants assimilate and have hope that their lives can improve in the future if they work hard, learn the language, stay out of trouble, etc., will bring a much higher ROI than any amount of screening. After the immigrants come into our countries is the most important time. If, as a society, we can make these people feel welcome and part of something greater than themselves and their little immigrant enclaves, then they will be no more likely to commit violent acts against their hosts than native born citizens.

Cassie

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3555
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #125 on: December 10, 2015, 02:13:02 PM »
We need to take care of our own people first before taking more on. I don't want to see more homeless people.  Let's figure that out as a society and then go from there. 

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 24890
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #126 on: December 10, 2015, 02:33:52 PM »

We need to take care of our own people first before taking more on. I don't want to see more homeless people.  Let's figure that out as a society and then go from there.

Many people on the street don't want help off of it (or the requirements that come with that help).

If I was a refugee, fleeing from ISIS, and whole countries said "You aren't allowed, because we have some homeless people already," I'd think them pretty heartless.
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with a kid.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (occasionally) blog at AdventuringAlong.com.
You can also read my forum "Journal."

yyc-phil

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 969
  • Location: Yellowknife NWT
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #127 on: December 10, 2015, 02:39:12 PM »
We need to take care of our own people first before taking more on. I don't want to see more homeless people.  Let's figure that out as a society and then go from there.

That's an argument we hear a lot in Canada nowadays, mostly from big C conservatives who miraculously become very concerned about the plight of the homeless and the poor, Aboriginal People on reserves who lack running water and sanitation, etc. Allelujah!
No matter where you go, there you are...

Use my orange key when you open any account with Tangerine.ca and we will both get money: 20950261S1

Jack

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4745
  • Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #128 on: December 10, 2015, 03:38:15 PM »
If all you bigots and racists think internment is okay, then how about we just put you in the camps? You assholes are demonstrably more dangerous than the Muslims!

brainfart

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #129 on: December 10, 2015, 04:17:36 PM »
Well said.

Kris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #130 on: December 10, 2015, 04:38:12 PM »
We need to take care of our own people first before taking more on. I don't want to see more homeless people.  Let's figure that out as a society and then go from there.

They are completely, 100% separate problems. If your government was really committed to homelessness, it could be taken care of.

Here is a real-world example of how it can happen.  If you want it to, then work for change at your local level.

http://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-chronic-homelessness-by-91-percent-heres-how
« Last Edit: December 10, 2015, 09:21:49 PM by Kris »
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

hoping2retire35

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 971
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #131 on: December 10, 2015, 08:33:09 PM »
 A lot of the disagreements I see on this thread and this forum and life in general for that matter goes back to the same problem. For the US government to take in thousands of refugees begins to treat the situation by the government as a humanitarian crises and humane obligation to be solved; similar to any other entitlement. So the question is very similar to "does a 5yo deserve to go to kindergarten or do people deserve health care of the right to food or whatever, and only an asshole would say no. But that really is not the problem, the problem is 'who is going to pay the teacher, doctor, farmer, or landlord(refugees) to serve those entitlements. We all want to retire early here and some of us may continue to wrk part time but at the end of the day we want to work less. In order to provide for those services people need to be productive otherwise they don't happen. I guess the point I am trying to make is we seem to all have big disconnect between something we believe people should be given and where it actually comes from.

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 24890
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Syrian Refugees
« Reply #132 on: December 11, 2015, 01:17:45 AM »
A lot of the disagreements I see on this thread and this forum and life in general for that matter goes back to the same problem. For the US government to take in thousands of refugees begins to treat the situation by the government as a humanitarian crises and humane obligation to be solved; similar to any other entitlement. So the question is very similar to "does a 5yo deserve to go to kindergarten or do people deserve health care of the right to food or whatever, and only an asshole would say no. But that really is not the problem, the problem is 'who is going to pay the teacher, doctor, farmer, or landlord(refugees) to serve those entitlements. We all want to retire early here and some of us may continue to wrk part time but at the end of the day we want to work less. In order to provide for those services people need to be productive otherwise they don't happen. I guess the point I am trying to make is we seem to all have big disconnect between something we believe people should be given and where it actually comes from.

I would pay more taxes to have more social services, and support the poor and refugees. Even if that meant going back to work for awhile.

Donation to charity is in my FIRE budget, and if the government had me do more (even through their inefficiencies), I gladly would. As long as everyone else was as well (I.e. I'm not just the only one writing a check to the government, otherwise there are better charities to write the check to--but if I'm one of everyone, great).

I think most people who support more services understand they'll be the ones paying for it, and there's no disconnect.

It's only the ones who don't want it, and say "I don't want to pay for that," who think that. So again, no disconnect.
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with a kid.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (occasionally) blog at AdventuringAlong.com.
You can also read my forum "Journal."

Cassie

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3555
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #133 on: December 12, 2015, 12:35:55 PM »
First of all I have done more then most people to help others. I have spent my entire life both professionally & personally in human services.  The homeless don't want to go to a shelter where they will be robbed, assaulted, etc but contrary to popular belief they do not want to be on the streets. They want a warm place to live, decent food, access to health care, etc.  It is great to donate $ but get in the trenches and work with these people to understand what they want & what is needed.  I walk my talk every day of my life.  Generally I am a bleeding heart liberal but I am listening to people in Europe to what is happening and we need to find a way to help these people stay in their own countries-we can't rescue the entire world.  Europe & the US do not have enough $ and resources to solve this problem.  The Arab countries are not helping at all. Maybe some pressure on them to do their part.  Look in the mirror and ask yourself who have you personally helped not by giving $ but by rolling up your sleeves & working to help.

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 24890
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #134 on: December 12, 2015, 12:56:25 PM »
I feel no need to get into a discussion of who's helped whom more, but suffice it to say, my helping people hasn't caused me to want to help any others less, especially people fleeing from a terrible situation with nowhere to go.
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with a kid.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (occasionally) blog at AdventuringAlong.com.
You can also read my forum "Journal."

Cassie

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3555
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #135 on: December 12, 2015, 01:11:13 PM »
Take the easy way out. By the way I am not against helping others I am saying it is a complicated issue with no easy solution. What makes you think we can help the refugees when we can't even help our own people? Don't say that they don't want help because I know first hand that is not true.

brainfart

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #136 on: December 12, 2015, 02:08:47 PM »
> Europe & the US do not have enough $ and resources to solve this problem.

Sure they do.
They definitely had enough resources to start a lot of that shit in the past.

Shane

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 686
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #137 on: December 12, 2015, 07:56:04 PM »
Take the easy way out. By the way I am not against helping others I am saying it is a complicated issue with no easy solution. What makes you think we can help the refugees when we can't even help our own people? Don't say that they don't want help because I know first hand that is not true.

Have you read the article Kris posted a link to above? In Utah they solved their homeless problem. We could do the same thing in our entire country if we wanted to, but instead politicians, policemen, and the public are busy trying to find ways to prosecute the homeless as criminals.

As someone mentioned above, our domestic homeless problems and the issue of how many Syrian refugees the U.S. can afford to take in, are completely unrelated. Most chronic homeless people are mentally ill. They're on the streets because 40-50 years ago the U.S. government began releasing them from our state mental hospitals where we used to keep them. Now crazy people who aren't currently in jail live on the streets in our big cities.

Syrians we let into our country won't be living on the streets. We will give them housing assistance, language and job training, assign them counselors and advisers to help them get settled into their new country and make sure they have everything they need to become successful, contributing members of our society.

You're right, we should do the same things for all of the existing homeless people as well. We should also provide healthcare for every single person living within the borders of our country, regardless of where he was born.

Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 471
  • Location: Germany
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #138 on: December 13, 2015, 04:27:34 AM »
> Europe & the US do not have enough $ and resources to solve this problem.

Sure they do.
They definitely had enough resources to start a lot of that shit in the past.

We are north of one million refugees from only a few of the world's 'hot spots' after only a few months of open door policy. It is estimated that any one of those getting a positive asylum decision under current law would have the right to be joined by four immediate family members. Anybody familiar with the common family structure in the Middle East knows that such estimate is on the low side. So we're talking five million per year. And the inflow from Afghanistan and Pakistan has just started and is going to pick up speed after winter if things don't change. How is this sustainable? We don't have enough housing, jobs, school teachers and language teachers for the people already here. It's pretty easy to say 'the first world is rich, they can take care of it.' It's a little different if you would need to build a new midsized town each month. And then school such town and integrate it in an already tight job market and a society with totally different values than most of the newcomers have learned and practiced.

If we had put only a fraction of the money we need to and are throwing on the domestic refugees now into the UNHCR we would have helped a hundredfold more people. But no, we cut the UNHCR funding and then opened the borders. Insanity. Plain and simple.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2015, 06:24:59 AM by Lyssa »

Jack

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4745
  • Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #139 on: December 13, 2015, 08:11:29 AM »
It's a little different if you would need to build a new midsized town each month. And then school such town and integrate it in an already tight job market and a society with totally different values than most of the newcomers have learned and practiced.

You know some of those refugees are builders and teachers too, right? And that others are entrepreneurs who would employ the rest if they had the means? All they really need is some empty land and some money.

Besides, "integration" comes mostly with the second generation, unless there are too few immigrants from any one place to support an ethnic community. The same concerns you have now about Arab integration into German society are the ones we Americans had about German integration into our society a couple of generations ago!

brainfart

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #140 on: December 13, 2015, 09:26:41 AM »
Quote
If we had put only a fraction of the money we need to and are throwing on the domestic refugees now into the UNHCR we would have helped a hundredfold more people. But no, we cut the UNHCR funding and then opened the borders. Insanity. Plain and simple.

I absolutely agree. It's not like this was totally unforseeable, btw.

But then again as long as we donate, umm no, I meant "export" submarines to a certain country in the middle east worth 9 or 10 figure sums which they will never ever pay for (you know, the ones with the huge oversized "torpedo tubes" that no existing torpedo on this planet will ever fit inside) we can afford to spend a little money on humanitarian projects. We even export tanks to Saudi Arabia, which is currently engaged in some little neighbor bashing and minor human rights abuses if I remember correctly. A few years ago all the leftover NVA crap was being given to Turkey for free, which used it to Kill some Kurds, and then suddenly everyone was surprised that they had enough of it and turned refugees and showed up on our doorsteps. Now everyone is deep up in Erdogan's ass so he will stop the refugees while he continues to deliver weapons into Syria and imprisons journalists who dare to publish evidence.
We let a certain superpower use Ramstein for their drone business, which is illegal in so many ways I forgot the exact number. In the past we have supported pretty much every harebrained scheme of our big ally that resulted in this mess. Unfortunately all these effects are pretty long term, so it's about fucking time to change "something" so we might see some positive results in a few decades. Blowback is a bitch.

Regarding the 4 family members comment, I seem to remember that this was already cancelled, and the five million per year is the typical right wing AfD crowd fearmongering bullshit.

Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 471
  • Location: Germany
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #141 on: December 13, 2015, 11:38:59 AM »
Quote
If we had put only a fraction of the money we need to and are throwing on the domestic refugees now into the UNHCR we would have helped a hundredfold more people. But no, we cut the UNHCR funding and then opened the borders. Insanity. Plain and simple.

I absolutely agree. It's not like this was totally unforseeable, btw.

But then again as long as we donate, umm no, I meant "export" submarines to a certain country in the middle east worth 9 or 10 figure sums which they will never ever pay for (you know, the ones with the huge oversized "torpedo tubes" that no existing torpedo on this planet will ever fit inside) we can afford to spend a little money on humanitarian projects. We even export tanks to Saudi Arabia, which is currently engaged in some little neighbor bashing and minor human rights abuses if I remember correctly. A few years ago all the leftover NVA crap was being given to Turkey for free, which used it to Kill some Kurds, and then suddenly everyone was surprised that they had enough of it and turned refugees and showed up on our doorsteps. Now everyon
e is deep up in Erdogan's ass so he will stop the refugees while he continues to deliver weapons into Syria and imprisons journalists who dare to publish evidence.
We let a certain superpower use Ramstein for their drone business, which is illegal in so many ways I forgot the exact number. In the past we have supported pretty much every harebrained scheme of our big ally that resulted in this mess. Unfortunately all these effects are pretty long term, so it's
about fucking time to change "something" so we might see some positive results in a few decades. Blowback is a bitch.

Regarding the 4 family members comment, I seem to remember that this was already cancelled, and the five million per year is the typical right wing AfD crowd fearmongering bullshit.

No, it has not been changed. De Maiziere talked about intending to change it. High ranking officials dared to reassure us by saying 'don't worry about the Familiennachzug. The time slots for applying for it are booked two years in advance, so it won't matter until then.'

So because we don't want to say 'this is to much. We need to reverse a few decisions and take a totally different approach' we're basing vital decisions on the availability of timeslots!

That's like somebody taking out loan after loan and saying to all 'fearmongers': don't wory, it's just interest payments. Downpayment of principal is y-e-a-r-s from now.

Here's a really radical thought: how about adopting a system by which a sustainable number of the right kind of people, along with their families is taken in and getting final decisions in a reasonable short time?

And btw: the AfD would be below 5 per cent (maybe except Saxony...) after Lucke and Co left without Merkel behaving like she did.

Cassie

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3555
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #142 on: December 13, 2015, 01:34:40 PM »
To the person that said some of these people will be educated etc-that is correct but they won't be allowed to practice once they leave their country.  MY DIL has a BA from Poland but can't teach HS french here -we don't recognize the degree. I also know someone with a MA from europe-same story.  Many other countries such as parts of Africa etc people are being slain in ethic cleansing, young school girls kidnapped etc so they are also refugees.  Should we take them to and where does it stop?  When I was young I thought we could solve the worlds problems but at 61 I know we can't. Just like when I first got into dog rescue I kept taking dogs. Finally I reached a limit of resources so then I had to realize I couldn't save them all.  The answer is change in their own countries-not coming to other countries.  Europe is struggling with jobs right now. Many Poles live in Germany because their is no work in their own country.

PKFFW

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 293
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #143 on: December 13, 2015, 01:48:47 PM »
We are north of one million refugees from only a few of the world's 'hot spots' after only a few months of open door policy. It is estimated that any one of those getting a positive asylum decision under current law would have the right to be joined by four immediate family members. Anybody familiar with the common family structure in the Middle East knows that such estimate is on the low side. So we're talking five million per year. And the inflow from Afghanistan and Pakistan has just started and is going to pick up speed after winter if things don't change. How is this sustainable? We don't have enough housing, jobs, school teachers and language teachers for the people already here. It's pretty easy to say 'the first world is rich, they can take care of it.' It's a little different if you would need to build a new midsized town each month. And then school such town and integrate it in an already tight job market and a society with totally different values than most of the newcomers have learned and practiced.

If we had put only a fraction of the money we need to and are throwing on the domestic refugees now into the UNHCR we would have helped a hundredfold more people. But no, we cut the UNHCR funding and then opened the borders. Insanity. Plain and simple.
It's interesting that Europe and the USA found the means to take a huge chunk of land from other people, build enough houses, schools etc and settle millions of refugees once before in the past but can't seem to do so now.

If it could be done after WW2 why can't it be done now?

Shane

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 686
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #144 on: December 13, 2015, 02:31:38 PM »
It's interesting that Europe and the USA found the means to take a huge chunk of land from other people, build enough houses, schools etc and settle millions of refugees once before in the past but can't seem to do so now.

If it could be done after WW2 why can't it be done now?

Instead of taking land from other people to settle those millions of refugees after WWII, if the U.S. and Great Britain had given them some of our own land, for example somewhere in the southwestern U.S. where there were lots of empty spaces, there probably would be far fewer problems in the M.E. today.

That we made a mistake 67 years ago when we stole other people's land to resettle refugees after WWII isn't as bad as the fact that we continue, to this very day, to allow our country to be controlled and bullied into unconditional support for Israel, when it is in neither of our best interests to do so.

PKFFW

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 293
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #145 on: December 13, 2015, 08:30:42 PM »
It's interesting that Europe and the USA found the means to take a huge chunk of land from other people, build enough houses, schools etc and settle millions of refugees once before in the past but can't seem to do so now.

If it could be done after WW2 why can't it be done now?

Instead of taking land from other people to settle those millions of refugees after WWII, if the U.S. and Great Britain had given them some of our own land, for example somewhere in the southwestern U.S. where there were lots of empty spaces, there probably would be far fewer problems in the M.E. today.

That we made a mistake 67 years ago when we stole other people's land to resettle refugees after WWII isn't as bad as the fact that we continue, to this very day, to allow our country to be controlled and bullied into unconditional support for Israel, when it is in neither of our best interests to do so.
I totally agree.

I see how my comment could be read as a suggestion to steal some other countries land once again to solve this problem just as the problem of Jewish refugees was solved after WW2.

I really meant that if all the money and effort to steal land from the Arabs to give to the Jewish people was doable after WW2 then perhaps the money and effort to help Arab refugees now to settle in Europe and the USA could be found.

Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 471
  • Location: Germany
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #146 on: December 13, 2015, 10:38:53 PM »
It's interesting that Europe and the USA found the means to take a huge chunk of land from other people, build enough houses, schools etc and settle millions of refugees once before in the past but can't seem to do so now.

If it could be done after WW2 why can't it be done now?

Instead of taking land from other people to settle those millions of refugees after WWII, if the U.S. and Great Britain had given them some of our own land, for example somewhere in the southwestern U.S. where there were lots of empty spaces, there probably would be far fewer problems in the M.E. today.

That we made a mistake 67 years ago when we stole other people's land to resettle refugees after WWII isn't as bad as the fact that we continue, to this very day, to allow our country to be controlled and bullied into unconditional support for Israel, when it is in neither of our best interests to do so.
I totally agree.

I see how my comment could be read as a suggestion to steal some other countries land once again to solve this problem just as the problem of Jewish refugees was solved after WW2.

I really meant that if all the money and effort to steal land from the Arabs to give to the Jewish people was doable after WW2 then perhaps the money and effort to help Arab refugees now to settle in Europe and the USA could be found.

I'm not even going to answer to "stole thier land for Jewish" people in order to not completely derail the thread...

Answering the original idea/point in a seperate post.

Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 471
  • Location: Germany
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #147 on: December 13, 2015, 10:57:56 PM »
It's a little different if you would need to build a new midsized town each month. And then school such town and integrate it in an already tight job market and a society with totally different values than most of the newcomers have learned and practiced.

You know some of those refugees are builders and teachers too, right? And that others are entrepreneurs who would employ the rest if they had the means? All they really need is some empty land and some money.

Besides, "integration" comes mostly with the second generation, unless there are too few immigrants from any one place to support an ethnic community. The same concerns you have now about Arab integration into German society are the ones we Americans had about German integration into our society a couple of generations ago!

Even according to our 'we're all wearing rose tinted glasses because we are the very best humanitarians of the whole world' government 9 out of 10 refugees are unemployable in Germany. Pet projects of major corporations with refugees as interns or apprentices have up to now not gone to well. About 20 per cent are illiterate even in their own language.

Our experiece with the previous waves of immigration from Muslim countries (maybe the better comparison than Germans in the US...) can be summarized as follows: - Turkish manual laborers (too often unemployed after further automatisation): very mixed; - Arabian refugees: rather bad.; - Well educated, not very religious Iranians fleeing the Ajatollah's revolution: very good.

This matches the experience of other European countries.

And when it goes bad, it goes worse in the second and third generation. That's why thousands of European Muslims have joined the IS. And hundreds have already returned to Europe, forming our biggest risk factor for terrorism right now.

Jews are emigrating France at a rate of tens of thousands per year because the violent antisemitism of Muslim immigrants. This does not seem to bother anybody. Least of all the European left.

Last but not least: In comparison to the US, Germany and even the UK are strong welfare states. While the US can give and has given its immigrants the 'sink or swim' lesson, we can't and won't do that. As Milton Friedman (?) said: You can have a welfare state or open borders. You can't have both.

Kris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #148 on: December 14, 2015, 11:47:17 AM »
To the person that said some of these people will be educated etc-that is correct but they won't be allowed to practice once they leave their country.  MY DIL has a BA from Poland but can't teach HS french here -we don't recognize the degree. I also know someone with a MA from europe-same story.  Many other countries such as parts of Africa etc people are being slain in ethic cleansing, young school girls kidnapped etc so they are also refugees.  Should we take them to and where does it stop?  When I was young I thought we could solve the worlds problems but at 61 I know we can't. Just like when I first got into dog rescue I kept taking dogs. Finally I reached a limit of resources so then I had to realize I couldn't save them all.  The answer is change in their own countries-not coming to other countries.  Europe is struggling with jobs right now. Many Poles live in Germany because their is no work in their own country.

Considering that we spend far, far more in the U.S. on corporate subsidies than we do on social welfare programs, I don't think it's very honest to say that we "can't" help more people.  I do not have the answer of how many we should take in, but I think we have far, far more capacity than we are currently taking.
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

brainfart

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Syrian Refugees
« Reply #149 on: December 14, 2015, 12:39:47 PM »
Steve Jobs father was a Syrian from Homs, and Steve was "made" in Syria.