Immigration discussion

Started by mumblemumble, June 08, 2017, 05:15:23 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

mumblemumble

I'm curious why you haven't immigrated to europe, and how many of your friends have....genuinely curious.

Then again, attitudes are changing : I wonder if perhaps lack of mental health services may indeed be a glaring weakness in the system : refugees who go through nasty crap are not stable, similar to a colonist suffering from several family deaths always burning down the colony.

... This is certainly something to consider.

EDIT : for the record, this was snipped and moved from another post somewhere else, where someone spoke about being in syria and not being able to buy rimworld due to syria being at war, or something.
Why to people worry about following their heart? Its lodged in your chest, you won't accidentally leave it behind.

-----

Its bad because reasons, and if you don't know the reasons, you are horrible. You cannot ask what the reasons are or else you doubt it. But the reasons are irrefutable. Logic.

Gohihioh

#1
Quote from: mumblemumble on June 08, 2017, 05:15:23 AM
I'm curious why you haven't immigrated to europe, and how many of your friends have....genuinely curious.
There is a mass immigration nowdays towards Europe. It's overflowing and most countries are not prepared from it. Europe is in time of trying to figure out how to help those people and not heavily damage Europe in process(in various ways) So it's not like you can just come and be greeted happily. Many countries and people are extremely against accepting people from muslim countries.
On top of that since the immigrations began, terrorist attacks by ISIS has sky rocked in Europe which leads to people being more and more opposite(or afraid) to accept immigrants.
Many goverments are stugling cos parties which lean towards nationalism are starting getting much more support.
Europe is in pretty shaky political state. Immigrating from countries like Syria, leaving your home etc. must not be easy in first place, and on top of that even when you immigrate you will not receive a warm welcome. Accidents of racism and violence towards muslim people are getting higher and higher(and never were on low level to begin with).

cultist

Quote from: mumblemumble on June 08, 2017, 05:15:23 AM
I'm curious why you haven't immigrated to europe, and how many of your friends have....genuinely curious.

You don't want to be a refugee in Europe right now. General tolerance for immigration in the EU has never been lower (people's attitudes, not the rules) and right-wing populism has been on the rise all over since the turn of the century. Marie Le Pen, Geert Wilders, UKIP and my own personal bugbear, DF (Danish right wing party) are all doing their best to convince their populace that every single immigrant only comes here to get benefits and commit crimes.

And I didn't even mention the boatloads of (sometimes illegal, sometimes not) refugees that have drowned in the mediterranean sea during the war in Syria because some countries flat out refuse to deal with them.

BetaSpectre

Europe has been very welcoming before the crisis, now they've become hypocrites who stopped decrying pushing immigrants away.

Honestly there's a whole lot of issues going on, but it's better than Syria if you're under threat. Last I recall the govt liberated Aleppo not to mention if you can afford electricity and internet you've probably got it pretty good there.
░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░─╤▌██ |
░░░░░░░░─╤▂▃▃▄▄▄███████▄▃|
▂█▃▃▅▅███/█████\█[<BSS>█\███▅▅▅▃▂
◥████████████████████████████████◤
                           TO WAR WE GO

Headshotkill

Quote from: mumblemumble on June 08, 2017, 05:15:23 AM
I'm curious why you haven't immigrated to europe, and how many of your friends have....genuinely curious.

It's still your home that you're leaving, and with the migration flood coming to Europe isn't a guaranteed better life.

Bozobub

Furthermore, emigration is both extremely dangerous and expensive, moreso for every family member you bring with you.

It's directly analogous to when people ask why the poor don't move out of ghettos/slums.  What, you thought it was free, or something?!
Thanks, belgord!

mumblemumble

Immigration crisis was made worse by 1 : not trying to make immigration possible into MUSLIM countries : iran, saudi arabia, and other places are economically well, and more culturally meshing, yet they want to send them into Europe, which is extremely different. And 2 : The lack of documentation or regulation has CAUSED the outright HATRED of Muslim population by many : if they just took time to get their ducks in a row, and refuse to let in idiots without documents, much of the problems would of been prevented.

I think if 1 : iran and other places took immigrants, and 2 : we executed, deported, or otherwise dealt with people who rape, terrorize, or do other activities, it would be better on the global scheme of things.

....Course, people say if you advocate for executing rapist immigrants, that you are Islamophobic : I think saying so is an insult to Islam, as its saying Islam is all about rape.

But no, I'm for executing all rapists be them muslim, christians, jewish, athiest, or whathaveyou, long as its proven, and not within a marriage (rapes damages are proportional inverse to the level of intimacy wanted with the person entirely)

Beyond that theres the whole issue of the conflict with israel, which both sides have problems. major problems.

But I still think immigrants should stay in the muslim world : the core reasoning because of the worry is because the worry of "taqiya" : Granted, the ISIS bombing MIGHT be isolated incidents, but a LOT of people think its a ploy from the muslim world to invade Europe through non-resisted means. Kinda sucks, but its true that this isn't an uncommon thought : and considering no migrants are sent to muslim countries, typically speaking, this only intensifies this theory being accepted by people.

I really don't want to think such thing, but considering such texts and muslim laws exists, it makes people err on the side of caution : which unfortunately, means xenophobia, and being on guard against them.

Quote from: Bozobub on June 09, 2017, 03:01:28 PM
Furthermore, emigration is both extremely dangerous and expensive
its a basic risk assessment, what is worse, immigrating there, or risking mortar fire. A shitty situation yes, but thats the decision.

Lastly, I want to say, I feel bad for sihks : these people aren't muslim, but LOOK muslim, are awesome people, and get hate meant for muslims far too much.
Why to people worry about following their heart? Its lodged in your chest, you won't accidentally leave it behind.

-----

Its bad because reasons, and if you don't know the reasons, you are horrible. You cannot ask what the reasons are or else you doubt it. But the reasons are irrefutable. Logic.

pktongrimworld

#7
(pssst, they have to go though ISIS to get to Iran, ISIS might not have strongholds anymore, but crossing that lawless desert right now with all the warlords infighting? good luck)

(And SA just declared pretty much-not-war on Yemen *similar attitude as Syrians. Just cause Saudi Arabia is Islamic doesn't mean they like the Muslims that are not the right sect.)

Saudi Arabia = Wahhabism
Wahhabism = Don't treat Shia or Sunni Muslims as people (They are considered infidels/heretics by Wahhabism).


But yes, the Middle east is not as monolithic as the above poster like to believe it to be.

mumblemumble

#8
Indeed : there needs to be more distinguishing between sects, discrimination is a good thing.

I JUST got off a chat with a girl from there whom stated she was muslim : and she made no complaints of treatment there. She stated she was sunni muslim, which corroborates with stuff i see from google.

Where did you hear that saudi arabia is wahhabism???

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Saudi_Arabia

Or was that taqiya?

EDIT : after more reading, apparently other sources cite this, but wahabism is actually a form OF islam, with a literal interpretation : so pretty much assholes imo.

Still, official religion is sunni, and I suspect some self proclaimed sunni could classify as wahabists too.
Why to people worry about following their heart? Its lodged in your chest, you won't accidentally leave it behind.

-----

Its bad because reasons, and if you don't know the reasons, you are horrible. You cannot ask what the reasons are or else you doubt it. But the reasons are irrefutable. Logic.

pktongrimworld


mumblemumble

Right, but if endorsed, why is the state religion not then sunni?...I find that odd.

I do think the no muslim policy should instead be more stringent per sect : but if this cannot be done, err on the side of caution.

It seems upon researching that shia may be the ones whom are more dangerous, but frankly I'm shakey on if this is true, or even if it matters.
Why to people worry about following their heart? Its lodged in your chest, you won't accidentally leave it behind.

-----

Its bad because reasons, and if you don't know the reasons, you are horrible. You cannot ask what the reasons are or else you doubt it. But the reasons are irrefutable. Logic.

mellowautomata

Yikes, so much weirdness in this thread. I probably shouldn't post this, but I will. I'll preface this with stating that I'm not a muslim nor an academic that studies muslim culture nor do I have too much interest in these subjects necessarily, just occasionally read up on them.

First of all, although it's true that during these times racism and far-right populism in general has been on the rise (in particular, Le Pen was really worrysome), that doesn't really represent all of Europe. Sweden, Finland, Germany etc aren't that terrible. Bigger problem is that lot of these refugees are promised a paradise on earth (by the smugglers in social media who want them (refugees) to be come their clients) and it's probably terrible feeling when they find out that it's not quite what they were promised, after all the resources they spent (currency, mental stress, physical stress) to get there. And of course they seem ungrateful when they don't want to settle for, say, one room in an apartment that is shared by other refugees completely unknown to them. Then they seem ungrateful to others, yet the crucial detail is that they have all the right to be upset when they were promised much, much more than that. But it is obviously not the fault of a country that smugglers promised a paradise to them.

Secondly, as it was stated, Muslim people are not a monolith and they have diverse views on the world. Iran and Saudi Arabia, for example, are opponents of each other in general.

Thirdly, it is not quite wise to think that there is better/worse in Shia/Sunni debacle, especially when you're not part of that culture. It is true that "extremism" in relative terms is more prevalent among Shia, but to say that this is because of Shia faith in itself (instead of say, because Shia countries happen to be constantly under stress due to actions of foreign governments), you would assume that ideas create conditions, which is a big assumption. I'll just say that in general, stay away from that debate as a (presumably) western person. You simply don't know much about it and you probably won't unless you study their culture (googling for couple of hours ≠ studying).

Fourth thing: wahhabism doesn't say that Shia or Sunni cannot be treated like human. In fact, wahhabism has ties with some Sunni (for example, government of Saudi Arabia draws from wahhabism directly). Wahhabism is mostly considered controversial because it's based on Ibn Taymiyyah theology and there is one fatwa that is considered to be the most controversial, related to whenever other people of muslim faith can be killed. This particular fatwa likely came to be because he observed and wondered how the Mongols caused so much stress in his life (their family, when he was very young, already had to become refugees due to Mongol invasions). As mongols called themselves muslims, he could not comprehend how people who shared the same faith could do this to him (and people close to him).

Last thing: terrorists aren't stupid people, they're actually often very smart people (ISIS is an exception to this as they will allow anyone in their ranks). Limiting immigration isn't likely going to have a big impact on terrorism and domestic security (any other than ISIS terror anyway) because they already come into countries in ways that raise least amount of suspicion. Ziad Jarrah is probably one of the greatest examples of this. He was no fool and he took a lot of precaution to not raise suspicion.


mumblemumble

#12
Your post seems to only make refugees seem WORSE. If you are complaining about being given FREE housing when coming from a situation which REQUIRES you to become a refugee, then you are an ingrateful, bitter person : I've been homeless in the past, and it honestly seems like the refugee situation has them treated as better than most homeless in the united states. And most homeless aren't assholes (though many are mentally ill or drug addicted). But I suppose maybe this is another case for mental health.

It really doesn't matter, and frankly, I don't give a fuck is shia is the true cause of terrorism : really, I don't. But I do care that its a detectable, measurable factor which RELATES to terrorism directly or indirectly (ie, less shia, less terrorism). Besides, what else would be the cause? maybe its Europeans leniency against immigrants, I don't really know, but the cause itself doesn't matter when mitigating risk factors. Its also very insulting you insinuate that I cannot know about being shia without BEING shia : I can talk about something without ever being in the thick of it, or being on the side. If you truly believe I can't tell me why I should CARE for immigrants in the first place? After all, I'm not one, so I cant empathize with them, so screw them, right? (sarcasm)

I honestly think more countries should treat immigrants like mexico : you come illegally, you get treated like the criminal you are and deported, you come legally, you better be a benefit for the country, and you dont have a right to protest being first generation : but I guess trying to be like mexico is racist against others, unless you are mexico.

Also, your last comment is stupid, indicating we should just give up because trying something wont be important

Imagine if you say to a woman "rapists aren't dumb, your better off just going limp and spreading your legs, because it won't help fighting". That would get you lynched saying that, but somehow saying what you said is ok? Yes, obviously people might get through. Home invasions, political assassinations, child rape, and other attrocities still happen, but does this mean we leave our doors unlocked, leave political leaders without security, and let our kids talk to strangers? NO! Immigration needs to be limited to stop terrorism, at LEAST get them documented, or the risk is astronomical.

Its all about risk mitigation, and currently NO risks are being mitigated.

Its also worrying that ex muslims seem to get lynched if found out, under sharia law, meaning its very closed off, and hostile to outside opinions in some contexts. That and the belief in jihad being a way to forgive all sin inherently promotes terrorism
Why to people worry about following their heart? Its lodged in your chest, you won't accidentally leave it behind.

-----

Its bad because reasons, and if you don't know the reasons, you are horrible. You cannot ask what the reasons are or else you doubt it. But the reasons are irrefutable. Logic.

mellowautomata

#13
Quote from: mumblemumble on June 10, 2017, 03:52:31 AM
Your post seems to only make refugees seem WORSE. [...]

Worse? Look, if I'll promise you that, at a great price and after a dangerous journey, there is a heaven out there for you and your family, and you believe me and go through hell to get there only to find that there is no paradise and it's all just shambles and what you get is "illegal immigrant" status with temporary housing... would you not be pissed off? Because I sure as hell would and I would complain. Dead bodies wash down the shores of Spain and Turkey for example. You really think people make those trips for nothing?

It's well known that the smugglers are the problem and their promises (to get them clients) are the most problematic aspect of it. And dealing with them is pretty hard. What you gonna do? Shoot the boats down on shores of Greece and Spain? Tell them to turn around with a boat that isn't supposed to make even half of that trip? And once refugees step afoot of a country, you can't anymore simply "send them back" if the government(s) of the country/countries they came from do not accept them (this would be a violation of international rights, something the West seems to admire so much culturally speaking).

What often happens is that they get into the lottery machine (at least in Finland) and they are going to live through a period of uncertainty whenever they can even legally stay in here. If they can't legally stay here, they aren't forcibly removed but basically they do not have the right to even legally work here or legally live here. Again, something that they weren't told when they were promised a heaven on earth.

If you were homeless because you went into a deal which you thought would end up with you living in a mansion and then you realized that everyone lied and you lost the little you had and had to work so much for the benefit of others only to end up homeless, then your situation was comparable. Were these the circumstances?

Quote from: mumblemumble on June 10, 2017, 03:52:31 AM

It really doesn't matter, and frankly, I don't give a fuck is shia is the true cause of terrorism : really, I don't. But I do care that its a detectable, measurable factor which RELATES to terrorism directly or indirectly (ie, less shia, less terrorism). Besides, what else would be the cause? maybe its Europeans leniency against immigrants, I don't really know, but the cause itself doesn't matter when mitigating risk factors. [...]


"Less shia, less terrorism" logic isn't quite as simple as you think. You might as well say that, to get rid of poverty, you have to get rid of people who have bad spending habits, are unemployed etc. I mean surely bad spending habits and unemployment has a relation with poverty, so isn't it reasonable to get rid of such people? Or maybe it sounds ridiculous after all? It should at least, because it is ridiculous.

As for other causes? Well I dunno, have you ever read what Saudi Arabia is doing in Yemen (majority of Yemen is Shia)? Or do you generally know that many western societies are often supporting Sunni governments while either ignoring or downright invading Shia countries (Iraq was a shia country, invaded by US despite G.W. Bush knowing very well, that Al Qaeda was not Iraq). Have you considered, that many of these people had families and relatives who are now gone thanks to these tragic events? That's the breeding ground for terrorism according to studies regarding terrorism profiling.

Quote from: mumblemumble on June 10, 2017, 03:52:31 AM
Its also very insulting you insinuate that I cannot know about being shia without BEING shia

That is not what I said. I said that nobody (wasn't directed only at you by the way, but it's ok) shouldn't take a stance on which one of them is the "more evil one" or whatever if you aren't a Muslim who lives in that culture and/or you haven't studied the topic at all (and by studying I do not mean academic studying, I mean actually taking an effort to learn these subjects by reading related literature, not just a "let me google up and decide quickly" type of thing). I got the impression that you aren't spending much time in studying these topics if Saudi Arabia wahhabism is news to you. I'm also not saying that is basic knowledge, but if you understand disagreements between Shia and Sunni, you should know about Saudi Arabia because Saudi Arabia currently plays a _huge_ role in that thing.

See, here's the thing. That's not a thing you lived in and probably not a thing you understand much about. How on earth can you think that you can pass a judgement like that as a complete outsider? It's equivalent to a scenario where a person who inherited all of his wealth from parents thinks that he knows something about the conditions that lead to homelessness and he goes on saying that homeless people are just lazy and deserve what they get. So would you feel that wealthy person would have the right to feel insulted when people point out to him, that he doesn't have any clue about homelessness?

I'm also not saying that you can't talk about Shia or Sunni. Heck, I'm talking about them ain't I? I'm saying that you shouldn't pass on a judgement like you did.


Quote from: mumblemumble on June 10, 2017, 03:52:31 AMIf you truly believe I can't tell me why I should CARE for immigrants in the first place? After all, I'm not one, so I cant empathize with them, so screw them, right? (sarcasm)

Important detail here is that there is difference between showing empathy and imposing your own worldview on others. This is a very, very important thing that hopefully some day everyone would understand. Lot of attempts to help and encourage people become rather hollow because people who present this advice don't actually show any empathy and instead they impose their worldview.

Quote from: mumblemumble on June 10, 2017, 03:52:31 AMI honestly think more countries should treat immigrants like mexico : you come illegally, you get treated like the criminal you are and deported, you come legally, you better be a benefit for the country

Works if you have a deal with the country you are deporting to. European countries aren't exactly in good terms with Syrian government (for example), so rather unsurprisingly, there is no deal like this for Syria. So if you successfully deport illegal immigrants back to Syria from Europe, you're violating international laws there unless Syria agrees (on case-by-case basis) to receive the deported person. Again, something that EU as a supposed role model of international peace, would not do. There was even a case of a person from Thailand waving a handgun in nightclub in Finland who was deported. The police offer went with him to the plane. They went to Thailand soil. At the airport, Thailand said no and the officer came back with the deported person. That's how these deportations work when you don't have an agreement.

Quote from: mumblemumble on June 10, 2017, 03:52:31 AM
Also, your last comment is stupid, indicating we should just give up because trying something wont be important

I'm saying if you want to stop terrorism, you need a better strategy to deal with it. There are many people already doing great work against radicalization. For example, Gilles Kepel has been successfully pacifying extremist groups among prisons by simply holding lectures about how Adb-al-Wahhab and Ibd Taymiyyah theology is not sound theology. Changing foreign policy also probably helps: it's not surprise that a lot of these attacks (not all, but majority) are targeted against countries that provide military aid into foreign countries (France in particular). ISIS-type terrorism however isn't meliorated by such policies, but their recruits generally are people who have low socioeconomic status and want to "ditch their past" and find meaning in life from radical organization (many of them actually regret once they join in).

Closing borders, however, is not a solid plan against terrorism. If saying that is stupid, well, sure, I'll be the stupid guy then. But I still wish that you take proper action against terrorism if you want to do something about it. Or, alternatively if you want to deny the access to a country from refugees that come from a wartorn country, then at least be honest about it. Not saying you necessarily want that, but such vibes I often encounter when I talk to people about these subjects. If you convince them that closing borders won't help significantly if at all, they'll still just want it out of principle.

Quote from: mumblemumble on June 10, 2017, 03:52:31 AM
Imagine if you say to a woman [...]

Okay, let's just for a moment assume that you didn't misunderstand me and this is a proper analogy of what I said (it isn't though), do you really think that was necessary comparison? It costs 0,00$ to not use that analogy. Don't use it. Ever. In fact I honestly think you should just edit it out. And if you refer back to that analogy, I'll just ignore that part completely.

Quote from: mumblemumble on June 10, 2017, 03:52:31 AMbut does this mean we leave our doors unlocked, leave political leaders without security, and let our kids talk to strangers? NO! Immigration needs to be limited to stop terrorism, at LEAST get them documented, or the risk is astronomical.

See, immigration is not like an intruder and borders are not like your door, you're using very weird analogies here. But more importantly, risk of terrorism is far from "astronomical". We haven't had single incident in Finland that involves Islamic terrorism. Sweden so far has had only one or two (I think one but might be a second one I didn't take into account). The one I know claimed five lives and wounded at least over 10. For a long time  before that, the worst extremist incident in all of nordic countries was in fact the Breivik incident, which claimed 77 lives. 

Quote from: mumblemumble on June 10, 2017, 03:52:31 AM
Its all about risk mitigation, and currently NO risks are being mitigated.

You're wrong on this. Risks are being mitigated. Countries have domestic security services which often seek out possible terrorist threats before they even come about (and successfully so) with cooperation across countries. Social policies in different countries seek to combat radicalism (in particular the ISIS type). Some countries try to remain in neutral relations with risky countries (such as Syria) to not get too much of their attention. Works of people like Gilles Kepel who seek to actively deradicalize. Integration policies for immigrants which seek to integrate them into societies (by the way, there are different paradigms on this... for example France seeks to assimilate and it hasn't gone too well, whereas Finland and Sweden aim more towards integration policies with different results mostly due to housing policies).

There's lots of work being done, you're just not seeing the forest from the trees. 

Quote from: mumblemumble on June 10, 2017, 03:52:31 AM
Its also worrying that ex muslims seem to get lynched if found out, under sharia law, meaning its very closed off, and hostile to outside opinions in some contexts. That and the belief in jihad being a way to forgive all sin inherently promotes terrorism

Sharia law has nothing to do with this topic to be honest, immigrants don't exactly go on about installing suddenly a sharia law into a foreign country. And it wouldn't work really, since nobody would allow it. However, certain elements (such as debt legislation) can be made compatible with sharia law in some countries. And that's not really a bad thing, it doesn't hurt anyone to allow muslims to structure their finances according to their faith. It benefits them in many ways actually with integration. UK has done this so far with mortgages.

mumblemumble

If I got promised heaven, I'd be skeptical : ever heard the expression too good to be true? The fact they get housing, and public funding at all should be too good to be true, ESPECIALLY when they break the law. Anyone who believes such fantasies of europe being heaven, and then flips when its not up to expectations deserves no sympathy : hard knox, lesson learned, be critical of amazing sounding ideas

You are trying to make me sypmathize with criminals : no. They broke a law, and they CHOSE to embark over seas with a shitty raft. Even if they get shelled out the water, that was their choice to do so. Though I admit if this is done, it would be more humane to blow the head off the smuggler, then take the refugees back with directions to LEGALLY immigrate. And if what you say about not being able to send them back is true, then yes, sink the boats : this is essentially saying "you will take immigrants and like it". And it takes a crack down. a bloody crack down, to get the point across.

I was under the impression immigrants get welfare : why work when you get welfare? Beyond that they immigrated illegally and would prospectively take jobs from others : it essentially boils down to being greedy and demanding without compensation. Its like if I attacked you after you got groceries saying "I'm hungry" and stole some of your food : I didn't buy it, nor work for it, and you SHOULD have the right to shoot me for it, if I dont back off and continue being aggressive.

If I was homeless and thought someone would put me in a mansion, id ask at what point someone drugged my drink to make me into a fucking retard : thats kinda 101 when homeless, when it sounds to good, it most certainly is.

Quoteyou have to get rid of people who have bad spending habits, are unemployed etc
Funny part is this is true : teaching good spending habits and getting people to work DOES improve the economy, and lowers poverty for the people you help.

I'm not entirely aware, no : but this has changed, with the death of a few leaders over there due to US involvement, which I'm unhappy about. I hold the policy of staying out of global stuff unless there is a VERY, VERY good reason, like isis genociding christians, muslims, athiests, and everybody. I lost no sleep over the MOAB, because isis can die in a fire, just like they burn christians in cages. 0 pity. But my point was, stay out of other crap, and dont deal with immigrants : do this and the US will be fine.

I can understand that I very will might be incorrect : perhaps sunni are indeed the ones at fault, I don't know, but looking at the ideology at least, where terrorism is endorsed, its hard to view it as good. I would have to say "well yes, they like blowing non muslims up, but they are such swell guys!"

How on earth? By examining all information I can get my hands on : I'd love to see something which invalidated the jihad usage by isis, and shia. Besides that, ISIS is ALSO genociding sunni for not being shia. So screw them : and ISIS stands for the Islamic state of iraq and SYRIA : Syria being the country most immigrants come from, who are dis proportionally LIKELY to be in isis, by that logic.

This is why many people think immigrants are just ISIS insurgents in europe : and I suspect this may turn into ww3. I only hope if it IS, that sunnis are not killed in the process when purging violent shia.

We ALL impose our world view on others, when it comes to certain things : I'm sure you wouldn't want me say, vandalizing your house, and by stopping me, you are imposing your world view : this isn't bad though.

Likewise, for america I am against syrians coming over since they are likely to be from isis : I think trump saved our bacon with his stance on immigration, and I think "immigration sanctuaries" will be hotbed bases for cartels and terrorism.

As for europe, I CAN'T force my world view over there, but I can advocate my opinion. I'm not in europe, I'm not a hacker, and I don't have drones that could bomb europe : I have no means of forcing ANYTHING there, so as for europe, NO, I am not forcing my world view : even with a gun to someones head, I could not force it.

Interesting you talk about violating international laws : the immigrants already did that. Some could argue that in itself is grounds for execution. But the point is, europe wasn't the bad guy, they didn't do anything bad, they are REACTING to a problem. You cannot expect them to be perfect when you throw a problem AT them from outside, and if that means illegally sending an illegal back, or just tossing them into the sea as an example, it basically comes down to what keeps the law most effectively. And technically speaking tossing them back to the sea would not be execution : perhaps they could become a sea faring family or some crap. Their fate is their own, and if they die from drowning or exposure, thats a risk they accepted from the start, thus the death is upon them and nobody else. And international peace only works with ENFORCEMENT. Want to know why say, russia and china are at peace? they keep each other mostly in check. And so Europe should keep syria in check, and turn the immigrants around to drown on the seas, as that was their choice : make it clear you WILL NOT accept them, and trying to get there is signing up for a death at sea. Then when its clear, you have no reason to pity.

QuoteI'm saying if you want to stop terrorism, you need a better strategy to deal with it.
I doubt this because the taqiya : whats to say these muslims are not just taught to lie better, while actually planning terrorism? Actions matter more, as in what lowers the bombings. Closed borders and removing refugees WOULD work, and europeans care more about being bombed than some foreigner refugees. So, a good decision would be to throw em all out, close the border, patrol the borders with men with guns (and shoot on sight) and then call it a day.

QuoteDon't use it. Ever. In fact I honestly think you should just edit it out.
No : you just don't like it. Its very true in comparison - elements of violation, danger, and telling to not do more extreme things because "it wont work", not to mention actual rape IS a thing : its a poetic comparison IMO. And you are telling me to stop exercising free speech. You don't HAVE to respond to it, granted, but then it only makes you look like someone hiding something, or refusing to address something.

QuoteSee, immigration is not like an intruder and borders are not like your door
They are. ILLEGAL immigrants are those who enter without permission : This is intruding (put oneself deliberately into a place or situation where one is unwelcome or uninvited.) which makes them an intruder. The border is an entrance to a country, as is a door. The intruder is going through the entrance. How in gods name does this not fit? I can understand if this is a language barrier issue, but it is literally speaking quite apt : the only difference is the border is not a literal door, but an entrance, but refugees are LITERALLY intruders. I understand terrorism is not high in many places (yet) but wasn't finland very aggressive about immigrants? This might be why..

Thats not mitigating the risk enough : mitigating enough would be executing any immigrant who rapes, or kills anyone, and asking for papers on people. I think it should be 100% legal to kill an immigrant if they murder, rape, or child molest : kill them on the spot, and as long as you are right, you walk free.  Also I do not trust an immam to solve anything, because taqiya is a thing : what if hes radicalizing them more, but vocalizing the radicalization less? Perhaps its not true, but this is a terrible problem with islam, particularly shia : its hard to REALLY trust, because of laws in place in the "faith".

Sharia law is EXTREMELY relivant, as its effectively a way to hijack culture and law : if ever its allowed over the country its in, then muslims are effectively taking control : and this should not be allowed, as it is a EUROPEAN country, and not islamic. Even the financial part can hurt it : it can give them an unfair advantage in law, and tell everyone they can be treated DIFFERENT from others : and this IS racist. It should not be allowed, and if they want that, find an Islamic country, or screw off : its like black people asking for different standards than whites : its racist

Besides this , one final, IMPORTANT note, is ISIS is involved with syria pretty heavily isn't it? its hard to tell, since its such a mess, but ISIS does have syria in the name : And they take credit for bombings in Europe. This should be enough proof for a declairation of war, and removal of ALL immigrants, wars have been started under FAR less : but I figure ww3 isn't far off.

At VERY least, you need to remove immigrants till you are SURE you can filter out terrorists. If you cant, err on the side of caution and have NONE.
Why to people worry about following their heart? Its lodged in your chest, you won't accidentally leave it behind.

-----

Its bad because reasons, and if you don't know the reasons, you are horrible. You cannot ask what the reasons are or else you doubt it. But the reasons are irrefutable. Logic.