Those long ago words were written by Emma Lazarus and they referred to the immigrants coming to America. But today the millions of people fleeing the war torn Middle East, in particular Syria and Iraq, are heading to Europe. Their journey is long and arduous, and their hopes are just like those long ago immigrants to America. Leaving their homes, their loved ones, and their homeland they are looking for a safe harbor, a place to raise their children, a place to live out their lives in peace.
Some of those migrants are taking a path through Greece, on their way to other countries in Europe.
For many of the travelers Greece is just a stepping stone, but it is probably the country with the least resources to act as a transit point.
Germany is a popular destination point.
But tensions are rising.
While Europe is the primary destination the United States has accepted limited numbers of Syrian refugees.
This is a crisis of massive proportions. It will take a large scale response.
Given the Muslim tradition of preaching a single Ummah, I'm looking forward to the soon-to-be-unleashed, massive, ‘large scale’, charitable response of the ‘ummat al-Islamiyah’. No doubt that'll take care of the problem and serve as an inspiration to us all in the years to come.
Given the Muslim tradition of preaching a single Ummah, I'm looking forward to the soon-to-be-unleashed, massive, ‘large scale’, charitable response of the ‘ummat al-Islamiyah’.
Hmmm...while many share a common religion, they don't necessarily share common beliefs. So I'm thinking that the single Ummah that is preached is only an illusion.
No doubt that'll take care of the problem and serve as an inspiration to us all in the years to come.
One of the things that will happen is that the American voter will be more amenable to turning out the current dominant political party. If the Republicans take the White House in 2016 the likelihood they'll demand an ideological response to an economic problem (i.e. an austerity budget) goes way up.
If the Republicans take the White House in 2016 the likelihood they'll demand an ideological response to an economic problem (i.e. an austerity budget) goes way up.
Depends how angry the American voters are. If they split the branches of government, giving control of the White House to the Republicans and the Congress to the Democrats, it will be more gridlock.
It looks like China is down again. But some markets, like Japan, are up.
"I'm wondering how the gunman on that French train got the Ak on the train?"
Anyone can walk onto most trains in Europe with a bag sufficiently large to hide an AK, or worse, with minimal risk of discovery. Basically, unless you're under surveillence or is acting extremely strange no one will challenge you.
Lynnette: "And what was the purpose of taking off his shirt?"
I didn't hear about that before. Does seem strange.
Lynnette: "He claims he was just going to rob the train. I don't think having that much weaponry and ammo was just to rob a train! He's setting up his defense."
And he claims to have found the weapons cache in a park in Brussels.
I'm thinking he went to Turkey, trying to get to Syria, to join Jihad. But the Jihadists seeing he was a f-ckup and of little use to them told him to go back and attack at home in stead. He did, and f-cked up. Just a theory.
Other stock markets are steadying down around the world, as the Chinese market keeps falling. Quaere then: Does the Chinese market stop falling soon, or do the rest of them start falling again?
Probably Chinese continues to fall for a few more days, then plateaus off.
Lee: "Other stock markets are steadying down around the world, as the Chinese market keeps falling. Quaere then: Does the Chinese market stop falling soon, or do the rest of them start falling again?"
If one knew that for sure there would be easy money to be made.
"Probably Chinese continues to fall for a few more days, then plateaus off."
Seems like a reasonable middleground in between the optimistic and the pessimistic scenarios.
I would say though that I think (or feel) that there's a larger downside than upside. That is, if panic sets in the drop could be significant even from todays numbers.
And he claims to have found the weapons cache in a park in Brussels.
Yes, that seemed a little strange too. If it had been Syria or Iraq I wouldn't have thought anything of that, but Brussels?
I'm thinking he went to Turkey, trying to get to Syria, to join Jihad. But the Jihadists seeing he was a f-ckup and of little use to them told him to go back and attack at home in stead. He did, and f-cked up. Just a theory.
On the topic of economics I'm expecting something drammatic in Sweden, the only question is: when?
As I have mentioned before we never had a housing bubble crisis here, back when so many did.
I know I argued agaist Pete in the past giving reasons for why Sweden was different from Ireland, and those reasons were valid. (The two main ones were we have basically no market for secondary homes for investment reasons - we do have a housing shortage. And we have a better export economy and our own currency so in the case of a financial crisis we have a better opportunity to devalue the currency and at least keep the private sector humming)
But I also acknowledged that we did in fact have a housing bubble and that a drop in prices was likely to come, I just argued it wouldn't be as bad here a it was in Ireland.
Well, from then (a few years ago) until now our housing prices have continued a steady rise to what I consider insane levels. I believe now that the potential drop could easily be in the 30-40% range. And that would be absolutely catastrophic to our economy.
I see no real way around it either. Any "soft landing" is IMO unlikely given the magnitude of the bubble at hand here.
It sounds like US stock futures are signaling an uptick in the market. I also think Europe has recovered a little.
[Marcus] "That is, if panic sets in the drop could be significant even from todays numbers."
[Lee] "I'm expecting that, but I'm expecting it to be more or less restricted to the Chinese stock market."
I think of all those ghost cities in China and am thinking they have some serious underlying problems to deal with. Their government's actions in trying to stabilize the stock market probably won't help because their economy has been overblown. It's all a house of cards.
Our economy has been looking up. Whether or not it is because of the effects of QE I don't know. But at least people have been paying down debt, which bodes well for future economic activity. At least if there is turbulence ahead we are a little better positioned to weather it.
"I'm expecting that, but I'm expecting it to be more or less restricted to the Chinese stock market."
It depends on what you call significant I guess, but a 20% drop to year end I would call pretty significant, and that's still a possibility even in western markets.
I saw some TA-guy (technical analysis) who claimed that if the markets break the "floor" they are at right now the next "floor" is 20% down. Sounds like mumbo-jumbo to me but the more who base their models on that sort of analysis the likelier it's to become a "truth" that the collective market agrees on and responds to.
I believe now that the potential drop could easily be in the 30-40% range. And that would be absolutely catastrophic to our economy.
Hmm...sounds a bit like the run up to the Great Recession that we went through. We have rebounded, yes, but to what extent we won't know until they start raising interest rates. It's like taking a band aid off of an open wound. Is it healed, or will it start bleeding again?
But they may be looking at delaying that interest rate rise until they see the direction China is heading and the effect it will have on the global economy.
"The Germans should be able to help you with an austerity budget, a kind of ‘Greece of the North’."
We're the opposite of Greece. The greeks had fairly low private debt but insanely high public debt. Our state finances are really well managed but it's our private debt that's spun completely out of control.
Now, of course the scenario that may play out is that private lenders go under water, our Bank's balance sheets turn red, foreign lenders raise rates or cut off funding and the state has to move in to save our banks. So the private debts (or the responsibility for them) turn public and suddenly we're talkning about the need for austerity measures here too.
I believe you're right about that, but I don't think we'll have to be prodded and poked by the Germans to reach that conclusion. We'll come to that conclusion on our own.
"I think of all those ghost cities in China and am thinking they have some serious underlying problems to deal with."
I'm thinking and I have been thinking: I wonder how big that problem actually is and how much is just hype.
If the Chinese build a city intended for 50K people and no one moves in you can do all those "dramatic" videos we've seen about "ghost cities". Even a 10K housing complex would look dramatic if shown empty on video.
But, given the 1.3 Billion population and the continuing urbanisation maybe a couple of 10K+ housing complexes that were built in vain is not that big a deal?
Say the live 4 to a unit. That'd mean 3250000000 housing untits needed in China. Say they build 1% too many. That'd be 3.250.000 units. So a complec of 10K unused units might look alaming but it's not THAT big a deal.
I'm not saying I know, I'm not saying I have a good guess even, I'm just saying alarmist news with serious loooking footage should be put into perspective.
"I suspect the Muslim immigrants will have to be shielded from those consequences. After all, one can hardly blame them for Swedish banking practices."
What on earth did you mean by that comment?
Did you mean to say I blame all problems in Sweden on (muslim) immigration?
I am aware we're in a thread debating immigration but due to recent events we moved onto the stock market and from there to economics in general.
"I am aware we're in a thread debating immigration but due to recent events we moved onto the stock market and from there to economics in general."
I'm guessing your Muslims haven't studied much on economics in general and are expecting continued support in the manner to which they've become accustomed.
Lee: "I don't want 8,000 Syrians. Maybe we can upgrade Guantànamo into a reputable location, like a new Puerto Rico or something."
Lynnette: "Well, that is an increase, but a drop in the bucket compared to the numbers that need a home."
We'll take 40K this year.
Given your population versus our that'd equate to: 40K/10*400=1.6M
So go the swedish route and ya'll can resolve the entire syrian refugee crisis in a year or two. 1.6 million syrians a year, no problems at all. Then add 2 million more from somalia, eritrea and iraq, yearly. No fuss. Easy peasy.
"I'm guessing your Muslims haven't studied much on economics in general and are expecting continued support in the manner to which they've become accustomed."
That's obviously a whole other challenge to our society. But it's completely separate from the housing bubble (well, unless you factor the white flight in our cities which is a real factor but hard to measure).
But yeah, that too is a "bubble" that will pop, if I might use a very careful description as to the real problems that will soon hit us.
Probably they are also interlinked. Housing bubble pop --> economic downturn --> less social wellfare --> riots among the "new swedes" a "rights" are stripped away --> even increased anomosity towards them from "old swedes", and so on.
Lee: "What's with this ‘new Swedes’ and ‘old Swedes’ stuff?"
You're right. Sorry about that. I capitulate completely and agree it's insane language.
But, you see, it's the sort of coded language we have to use here to not be either demonised or have the comment removed.
A Gypsy is an "EU-migrant". An 18 year old Syrian man is an "alone coming refugee child", etc. It's just like a page out of Orwell - first they change the language.
Sorry I infested this blog by that cowardly commie-speak. I'll be more careful in the future.
Lee: assimilation is a BAD word here, and certainly not PC. A BAD, BAD word it is. You mention it and you'll be compared to Hitler for sure. You can't advocate assimilation and be in good grace with either Public Service or private MSM media here.
It's "integration" which is the answer to all problems. Meaning in effect WE have to integrate to meat THEIR demands 9 times out of 10. "Assimmilaton" is out, it's a proof you're a brown shirt at the very least.
Well, in that case, the ‘old Swedes’ are gonna be the ‘new Swedes’, congratulations on that, by the way way, and the Muslims will still be Middle-Eastern Muslims.
Lee, it wasn't the Americans who fought back the hordes of Islam. It was the Austo-Hungarians at Vienna.
There wouldn't even have been a USA if those brave knights of christianity hadn't fought back the Ottomans and saved the western continent. So don't be so smug over there.
I don't want 8,000 Syrians. Maybe we can upgrade Guantànamo into a reputable location, like a new Puerto Rico or something.
Missed this. The Dakotas are still fairly empty, I think, even with the oil boom/bust. I think there are some Iraqis up near Fargo. But it seems that new immigrants are sent to where someone can give them a hand in starting out. In the video I posted it was California (personally I'd avoid it with the water issues and all those earthquakes and fires), or I saw another video where Chicago was the place to be.
*whispers softly* You're sounding very Republican, Lee. ;)
Here is a Canadian conservative commentator (ala Glenn Beck) on the role played by immigrants from non liberal countries in the rise of rapes in Sweden.
I can understand the knee jerk reaction of people who don't want to appear to be bigots. But I can also understand those who are frustrated with the higher crime rate, and rape is a crime. In the case of immigrants I would not hesitate to deport an offender. Hopefully if it was done often enough the clueless would start to understand that the rule of law applies to them just like everyone else.
Your anti-immigration party is a bit like Donald Trump's platform here. Unfortunately, he managed to offend some decent people by lumping all immigrants in with the criminal element. And I know there are immigrants in Sweden who are just as angry about crime there. They didn't come all that way to reprise the problems they had back home.
Lynnette: "But I can also understand those who are frustrated with the higher crime rate, and rape is a crime. In the case of immigrants I would not hesitate to deport an offender. Hopefully if it was done often enough the clueless would start to understand that the rule of law applies to them just like everyone else."
It appears, after all the shootings, grenades, muggings and rape that we have a new crime here now.
Serial gang rape.
As in a woman on her way home in a previously peacful neighborhood in Strängnäs being raped. And then on her way after the first rape gangraped by a few more different men. Just in between two "asylum houses".
I tell you now: we're in for bloody times here. We put up with much but not this. We are fucking Westeros in the Lord of the Rings invaded by awful fucking ORCHS! And THEY DIE!!!!!
Yeah, well, I think there's plenty ‘nuff people in this country already. We could use more space, less bodies takin’ up space. (I grew up out in the back country.)
Ya know… there is the possibility that this Trump thing could get away from Ailes and his minions at FoxNews. The Teabaggers got away from them a few years ago, proved totally uncontrollable. This Trump thing could get away from them too.
And, quite simply, I'm big on the separation of Church and State. Consequently, I'm not real eager to see a wholesale influx of people who're committed to the integration of religion and government. We have, for years, allowed immigration on a case-by-case basis, everybody gets individual consideration. I'd like to see that continue. I think we should try to limit immigration to people who actually want to be here, not necessarily including those who just want to get away from wherever they've made uncomfortable just now.
I know, it's hard not to react with anger when you see something like that happen. Laws need to be enforced and the guilty punished, otherwise the hatred just feeds on itself.
Yeah, well, I think there's plenty ‘nuff people in this country already.
Judging by all the cars on the roads on my day off, and the housing developments sprouting up where there used to be fields, at times I would agree.
(I grew up out in the back country.)
I grew up in a smaller town, not too far from the Twin Cities. But the area was open with a lot of land to run around in. It was great. I have never really liked crowded places.
I think we should try to limit immigration to people who actually want to be here, not necessarily including those who just want to get away from wherever they've made uncomfortable just now.
I can agree with this. But looking at the people in the video, those interviewed that is, I would say they are not the ones who made their home country "uncomfortable". So by that criteria they should be given a chance to make a home here. I mean, that poor family on the Greek island were obviously middle class business owners who were stuck in the middle of a civil war that they probably had no clue as to how to survive in.
And, quite simply, I'm big on the separation of Church and State. Consequently, I'm not real eager to see a wholesale influx of people who're committed to the integration of religion and government.
Ahh, but that makes the assumption that they would pursue that type of government here. There is also the possibility, a strong one at that, that our separation of church and state would work just fine for them, just as it has us. And we also have home grown integration of religion and government believers. They seem to be strong in the Republican side of the aisle.
Perhaps there are those in the Middle East who support the integration of religion and government who might find it unnecessary in a country where they have some fair representation. I am not talking about the extremists here, but reasonable people who don't want to feel disenfranchised because their religion isn't the flavor of the moment.
"And we also have home grown integration of religion and government believers."
The fact that we already got some don't mean we need to allow more to come over. I say we look over the prospective newcomers and decide on admission on a case-by-case basis.
I say we look over the prospective newcomers and decide on admission on a case-by-case basis.
I think that they do that already. That's why it can take so long. But even that isn't always going to weed out those who may commit a crime or even follow a path to terrorism. We can only do the best we can to be fair and compassionate. There will always be those, both native born and foreign born, who commit crimes.
But I do have to admit that what is happening in Sweden is rather extreme. People may criticize us for throwing people in jail on minor charges, but there it seems like the laws aren't stringent enough. There should be something that can be done about grenades on the street or gang rapes.
And yet, the phraseology used, ‘refugees from Syria. 8000 next year’, that sounded suspiciously non-individualized. Sounds like something that might have been decided on a bulk basis rather than as the result of individualized, case-by-case determinations.
Requiem for Rick Perry. Sam Clovis, the prominent conservative Iowa operative, and sometime Radio-Right-Wing program host, who departed Rick Perry’s campaign this week, is heading to Donald Trump’s camp to serve as his national co-chairman and policy adviser. WaPo (Chris Cristie looks to be next on the chopping block.)
"I know, it's hard not to react with anger when you see something like that happen. Laws need to be enforced and the guilty punished, otherwise the hatred just feeds on itself."
It's reaching boiling point I would say. And I do believe I have my ear to the ground here.
What has slowly dawned on me and on many others is they hate us. They really do hate us and do not respect us in the slightest. They only want to partake in the riches we've created but really do not like us as a people or our society or norms. A bit like Lee said earlier "I see kafir being taxed for the benefit of Muslims--the jizya in proper application".
Now, why would I feel OK with paying the economic cost so that hordes of military age men who leave their women and children behind to "flee" here for economic reasons and who hate us and who only bring violence, fragmentation and problems with them?
And as long as we're looking at film clips look at this recent one from Hungary:
https://youtu.be/SJ0CfOi4tYM
Notice the constant "Allah Akhbars" and notice the Hungarian flag at the end desecrated by the Islamic crecent. Now, doesn't that look much like an invading force to you? Why would we willingly let that horde in? Would you?
"Privately, Clinton's allies think the problem right now is primarily Democratic anxiety and not anything intrinsic to the candidate — they're going to win the nomination, and then they're going to make the American people absolutely terrified of the Republican nominee (something Republicans are helping them do right now), and they'll win the campaign. They just need to stick to their strategy. They can't let the media or restive Democrats knock them off their game. "In a new interview with CNN, Clinton said as much." Ezra Klien ― Vox
Lee: "You might want to learn to accept the things you cannot change. They say there is wisdom in that."
And I try to. But when we speak about the topic I can't really not speak my mind. And there's been a drumbeat of news here lately that've pissed me off something awful so I guess I need to vent. Better I vent here I think, and try to be more accepting IRL.
(Chris Cristie looks to be next on the chopping block.)
Yeah, I saw some rankings yesterday, and Christie was one of the lowest. The only one even close to Trump was Carson, and even he was way behind. It seems Trump is sucking all the life and energy out of the party, kind of like a magnet.
Better I vent here I think, and try to be more accepting IRL.
That's all right, Marcus. We all need to vent sometimes. Here is as good a place as any.
Now, why would I feel OK with paying the economic cost so that hordes of military age men who leave their women and children behind to "flee" here for economic reasons and who hate us and who only bring violence, fragmentation and problems with them?
Believe me I understand that no one wants to bring into their home people that hate them. But I am speaking about helping families and those who are willing to start over in a new culture. Those who are let in and commit crimes should be sent back. They have trampled on the welcome mat that was put out.
...and then they're going to make the American people absolutely terrified of the Republican nominee (something Republicans are helping them do right now),...
Lynnette: "Believe me I understand that no one wants to bring into their home people that hate them. But I am speaking about helping families and those who are willing to start over in a new culture. Those who are let in and commit crimes should be sent back. They have trampled on the welcome mat that was put out. "
So basically no one should be allowed in then, since just a tiny few want to assimmilate.
Isn't it easier then just to place obstacles in their way to come here in the first place, than to have 'em come and then deal with the serious problem of mass-deportation?
Or maybe you'd like those 1.8 million muslims that'd be the equivalent to swedens recent intake like I demonstrated earlier. It's mainly your wars after all. Maybe we should join forces Europe and America to have 'em all sent over to you, since you seem to have such a bleeding heart over there?
BTW: did you look at the film clip I provided? Thoughts?
The bureaucratic tendency will be to view this ‘limit’ as a goal.
"I'm sure they'll have someone doing security checks…"
And, there we have it. You've already accepted the reversal of incentives, and you've not even gotten out of the first paragraph. But you've already switched your goal to ‘security checks’ for the 8000 instead of concentrating on making sure that anybody gets to come actually wants to be in America. And ya haven't even cleared the first paragraph.
So basically no one should be allowed in then, since just a tiny few want to assimmilate.
I think you said that Sweden was accepting 40K this year? Not all of them are committing crimes. And it is probably repeat offenders that are driving up the numbers.
Isn't it easier then just to place obstacles in their way to come here in the first place, than to have 'em come and then deal with the serious problem of mass-deportation?
Been there, done that, the obstacle bit that is. Doesn't always work, as seen from the number of illegal immigrants we have.
As for mass-deportation, I don't see why a case by case scenario won't work. Do you not deport anyone who commits a crime now?
It's mainly your wars after all.
Nope, it's the result of people who can't get along unless they have someone to force them to. It's the result of people who have for decades, if not centuries, used extremely violent tactics to achieve their goals. You recall the fate of the Armenians in WWI? We certainly weren't there at that point. No, this is not something that can be laid at our door. It is a region that has been soaked in blood for years.
BTW: did you look at the film clip I provided? Thoughts?
I haven't had a chance to do so, yet. I will this evening. Although I understand that Hungary is building a wall to try to keep migrants out? Kind of like The Donald proposes for here. I doubt it will work. As someone pointed out, they will find a way under, over, or around.
I have noticed that "Allahu Akbar" is a common phrase for rebels in Syria, as well as Islamic extremists, such as ISIL. As for any desecration of someone's flag, perhaps that's a signal that that person shouldn't be admitted?
I'm not saying Europe doesn't have a problem. I'm just saying that finding a partial solution may be better found, for all concerned, through tougher laws for crime. Obviously, the ideal solution would be to end the violence in migrants home countries...
But you've already switched your goal to ‘security checks’ for the 8000 instead of concentrating on making sure that anybody gets to come actually wants to be in America.
Hmmm...I suppose I was actually thinking of this...
And, an equally important question: "Is this somebody we want?"
...when I said that about security checks.
I just assumed that anyone who would apply to come here actually wants to be here. Obviously, if they didn't they would be going somewhere else.
"The way Trump is going after Kelly makes him look a bit psycho. Not a good look in a President."
I blew on by that the first time on account of I suspected I was gonna find this before too long, explaining how Trump and Ailes have made peace yet once again. (Ailes needs the eyes Trump is bringing to the FoxNews debates; Megyn's gonna havta just put up with it for awhile yet.)
I noticed that during the Great Recession the influx slowed considerably. In fact one could say it turned into a reflux. But tanking the economy seems a little extreme.
I blew on by that the first time on account of I suspected I was gonna find this before too long, explaining how Trump and Ailes have made peace yet once again.
It does seem that Trump and Kelly are making nice nice noises. For now anyway. I'm not sure what I think of a Presidential candidate spending his time twittering nasty comments though.
Tanking the economy is a little extreme. Especially as the problem can be addressed successfully with better tactics. Lock up a few white Christian Republican Country Clubbers for hiring illegals. Lock up a few titans of industry for doing the same. Put some Republican white people in jail for hiring illegals instead of rounding up the illegals for looking for work.
Problem be solved inside of a year or so. And you'd only have to lock up just a few rich, white people.
"I'm not sure what I think of a Presidential candidate spending his time twittering nasty comments though."
Me neither, but it does appear that Ailes has considered the possibility that he's no longer in charge of this one. (The teabaggers got away from him; this Trump thing may have too.)
I'm not sure what is being said in that video, but it looks like some kind of protest, rather than an invasion of Islamic extremists.
I found this article about the migrant situation in Hungary. These people have been traveling some distance and are desperate to get to some place to settle. The whole situation is bad for everyone.
"What do you personally think of Hillary as president?"
Since she's not been President yet, I don't actually have an opinion of her performance as President. I've never been particularly fond of Hillary. My opinion of her did improve during her tenure as Secretary of State. Not because she had any great accomplishments or signature policy triumphs, but rather because she showed a willingness to do the job she was given. She went to work for Obama (and for her country) and she worked hard and did the jobs she was given to do without bitching when the policy decisions didn't go her way. Industry, loyalty, and a team player; I was impressed with that--she did improve her standing with me with that.
She's generic Democrat so far as I can see so far, except that she has been rather too quick to call for military action to suit me. Perhaps that's been a function of her position within the Obama administration, but I thought she was a bit too eager to send in the troops as a senator also. Other than that, I'm waiting to see more particulars (her policy speeches and position papers have been generic "New Democrat" so far).
No, me either. But I thought she handled the Russians rather well with Libya, if not with that reset button thing.
She went to work for Obama (and for her country) and she worked hard and did the jobs she was given to do without bitching when the policy decisions didn't go her way.
It was rather refreshing to see someone who just buckled down and did their job.
She's generic Democrat so far as I can see so far, except that she has been rather too quick to call for military action to suit me.
This is where you and I differ. Perhaps she is still old school, but sometimes it is the lesser of two evils.
If the election were held today and my choices were Trump or Clinton, I would choose Clinton.
"If the election were held today and my choices were Trump or…"
I'd pretty much go with ‘or’. I can't think of any of the 17 Republicans running whom I'd like to see as Prez less than Trump, with the possible exception of Ted Cruz.
Perhaps you are comfortable with ‘old school’ reactions. But, the fact remains, in almost every instance in which Hillary would have committed us to intervention, it would have been a mistake. One can only hope she has learned better from having been exposed to better thinking.
We'll skip the deeper involvement in Libya that she wanted, and the intervention in Mali that she didn't get either; let's just go with Syria for now:
Can you think of any plan hinted at that would have dealt with the facts on the ground that we found? The Saudi supporting one Islamist group, the Turks supporting another, and we only later found out that our supposed ‘moderate’ Sunni insurgents, especially the Free Syrian Army, were working hand-in-glove with the Islamists wherever they could. You remember any discussions of an intervention in Syria that recognized those difficulties or planned to deal with them?
And, our support for the Saudi intervention in Yemen hasn't exactly turned out well either. (I kind of give her a pass for Libya--I thought at the time it was a mistake, but that if we ever expect to get support from Europe for an intervention, we have to occasionally support their interventions, and that was one we had to back them on just ‘cause we had to back them on that, if we ever expect them to back us.)
Lee: "I kind of give her a pass for Libya--I thought at the time it was a mistake, but that if we ever expect to get support from Europe for an intervention, we have to occasionally support their interventions, and that was one we had to back them on just ‘cause we had to back them on that, if we ever expect them to back us."
The worst "interventions" post 2003 Iraq for several reasons. And indeed it was the Europeans making. Based, is my best guess, on Total and to a lesser extent ENI, feeling squeezed out by the ever increasing chinese presense. Old Europe decided on some old school colonialism, and brought ya'll along for the parts old Europe didn't have the military means to do on its own - such as acccurate intel and survelliance mostly.
I think you've got the motivation wrong. The biggest howls were originally coming out of Italy where they were terrified of the specter of a total Libyan collapse leading to mass refugee flight into Italy (as happened anyway, but probably not on the scale that could have been if Kadifi had held on to power and commenced the slaughter he had in mind as his retaliation). The Brits and the French thought they could hold off the Italians' calls for full-on NATO involvement if they half-assed it, air power but no troops.
Can you think of any plan hinted at that would have dealt with the facts on the ground that we found?
Facts found when? The Syrian civil war has been ongoing for some time now, with alliances shifting due to the situation on the ground. Right now that whole area is a gargantuan mess with one of the main actors a barbaric terrorist group seemingly intent on playing out some sort of end of times scenario. Or so goes some speculation. Everyone says there are no moderate rebel groups to aid. Well, by now probably not. A lot of people have been killed or have fled the country.
Here is an article from 2014 which talks about Hillary Clinton's assessment of Syria way back when. Yes, she pushed for arming the "moderate" rebels. I used quotes around that word but perhaps back then, before hopes were dashed that help would arrive, there actually were moderate rebels.
Clinton had to call Obama and apologize after the publication of her Atlantic interview, in which she said Obama’s “failure to help build up a credible fighting force of the people who were the originators of the protests against Bashar al-Assad—there were Islamists, there were secularists, there was everything in the middle—the failure to do that left a big vacuum, which the jihadists have now filled.”
She might have apologized to the President, but that doesn't mean she wasn't right.
“The State Department warned as early as 2012 that extremists in eastern Syria would link up with extremists in Iraq. We warned in 2012 that Iraq and Syria would become one conflict,” said former U.S. ambassador to Syria Robert Ford. “We highlighted the competition between rebel groups on the ground, and we warned if we didn’t help the moderates, the extremists would gain.”
There was a vacuum and it was filled with some very nasty people. In the Middle East the strongest will prevail, we have seen it time and time again. That is why you now see the FSA and other rebel groups hedging their bets, it is a matter of survival. It is either that or a refugee camp in Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey or Iraq; and from there it is a long and dangerous journey to Europe. That is what we are seeing now.
Could things have been different if we had intervened early on when hopes were still high in Syria? We won't ever really know. But seeing what we are dealing with now, if we could go back in time, I would try something other than the non-intervention that Obama chose.
Not knowing and not being able to prove it are two different things. I think we know. I think Hillary does too.
But, let's make the question simpler: Do you really think that we were prepared for the duplicity we would have run into inside what was ostensibly to be our own ‘side’, whilst Saudi Arabia and Turkey were both trying to advance their pet Islamist faction of the moment and improve their own positions, vis-à-vis each other and against us, all while supposedly opposing Iranian expansion? Do you really think Hillary had a clue what sort of rat's nest she was advocating we crawl into?
And, just by the way, while you're pondering things, the State Department had it wrong.
"The State Department warned as early as 2012 that extremists in eastern Syria would link up with extremists in Iraq."
The important part is that the extremists in Iraq had already ‘linked up’ with the remnants of Saddam's Ba‘athi organization. That had already happened; the State Department had missed it. And, they didn't ‘link up’ with the extremists in eastern Syria; they went to war with the extremists in eastern Syria (al-Nusra), and they won.
And we had CIA and everybody else we could tap (read Israel, specifically but not exclusively) looking for moderates we could support. We didn't find them because they didn't exist. (Marcus was falling all over himself at the time, howling about the ‘secret support’ we were supposedly providing the Islamists. They were just looking for moderates to support.) Wishing them into existence didn't work. Wishing it would have worked wouldn't have made it work either.
Do you really think that we were prepared for the duplicity we would have run into inside what was ostensibly to be our own ‘side’, whilst Saudi Arabia and Turkey were both trying to advance their pet Islamist faction of the moment and improve their own positions, vis-à-vis each other and against us, all while supposedly opposing Iranian expansion?
Prepared? No clue. But if we did not make the assumption that our erstwhile allies may put themselves first in events in their own neighborhood then we would have been very foolish indeed. I can't imagine that Hillary was that.
Do you really think Hillary had a clue what sort of rat's nest she was advocating we crawl into?
Only Hillary knows for sure. But the point I was trying to make was that if we had stepped in perhaps this rat's nest might have been slightly different. We walked away from Afghanistan and got Al-Qaida, we walked away from Iraq and Syria and got ISIS.
The important part is that the extremists in Iraq had already ‘linked up’ with the remnants of Saddam's Ba‘athi organization. That had already happened; the State Department had missed it.
Perhaps they were too busy withdrawing and going on to other things to see it? Or perhaps there were those who did see it, but they were not given any credence because of the supposedly different ideologies involved? Perhaps the old axiom of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" was simply forgotten?
And, they didn't ‘link up’ with the extremists in eastern Syria; they went to war with the extremists in eastern Syria (al-Nusra), and they won.
Because they could. There was no one on the ground that would stop them.
And we had CIA and everybody else we could tap (read Israel, specifically but not exclusively) looking for moderates we could support. We didn't find them because they didn't exist.
I have come to the conclusion that moderates don't exist, at least not in public, because it doesn't pay. All it does is get you killed, because there is no one of a moderate inclination to give you back up.
"we walked away from Iraq and Syria and got ISIS."
No, we got ISIS while Dubya and Cheney were too busy hunting for some remnant WMDs to bother putting his intelligence assets to tracking down and eliminating Zarqawi, gave him about 18 months of organizing before they gave up on finding any WMDs and got serious about letting our best Arab speakers and analysts go after him. It's a popular fiction that ISIS is a new organization just because they got them a new name. It's not a new organization it's Zarqawi's old ‘al-Qaeda in Iraq’ grown bigger still and gone over the Sikes-Picot border line is all it is. They been fuckin’ with us since just after Dubya first sent troops to Iraq.
"Because they could. There was no one on the ground that would stop them."
I fail to see where we'd be much better off if the other al-Qaeda faction, al-Nusra, had won that intramural contest. The Arab governments keep pretending that they can somehow tame one of these Islamist groups. I was hoping we have better sense.
"I have come to the conclusion that moderates don't exist, at least not in public, because it doesn't pay. All it does is get you killed"
Or pushed aside when the votes are counted. It turns out that there are insufficient democrats (that's small ‘d’ democrats) in Arab society to form the basis of a government. Whether by ballot or bullet, the Arabs choose sectarian factions (Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas) or outright Islamist actors when offered the choice. The liberal democrats do not constitute enough of the population to form a critical mass. Their pile always shuts down for lack of enough active elements.
"I used quotes around that word but perhaps back then, before hopes were dashed that help would arrive, there actually were moderate rebels."
Weren't enough in Iraq, or Egypt, or Libya, or Gaza (elections have been kept in abeyance in the West Bank ever since). What makes you think Sunni Syria was the source of some sort of secret concentration of ‘moderates’ in spite of the fact that a diligent American search by all our spook agencies over the course of better than two years failed to find them?
I'm not recallin’ Hillary tryin’ to sell it on the basis of ‘here's an absolute rat's nest we can crawl into’. If she knew what was what, then she was keepin’ it to herself.
If I may pose a related question. What's the chances that you believe that the reason ya'll ain't found commercially exploitable amounts of oil in Minnesota is cause ya'll ain't looked hard enough?
Lynnette: "Perhaps the old axiom of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" was simply forgotten?"
That axiom is just plain false. At least in Syria it is with regards to ya'll. If you pick ISIS as your enemy, does that mean Assad and Nusra are your friend? Pick Assad as your enemy does that mean Nusra and ISIS are friends? Pick them all as enemies and maybe the Kurds are your friends (and they may deserve it) but then Turkey is also an ally of yourse and not that much of a friend to the Kurds. However way you want to spin it you cannot make that axiom stick. Impossible.
Of course you could try. Give it a shot and I'll tear your analysis to shreds.
Lee: "I fail to see where we'd be much better off if the other al-Qaeda faction, al-Nusra, had won that intramural contest."
There are those who argue it would actually be more dangerous in terms of blowback at home. The reasoning is that ISIS are indeed committed to their "caliphate" and will use as much force as they can muster in that theatre. But Nusra is more in line with the old AQ which advocates strikes at the "far enemy", meaning the US first and foremost, but given the problem with actually getting at the US strikes at Europe may suffice.
"Pick them all as enemies and maybe the Kurds are your friends (and they may deserve it) but then Turkey…"
I'm all in favor of picking the Kurds as friends. They're the only ones who've been secular enough to suit me and consistent and conservative enough to be dependable. (And, by ‘conservative’ I mean a real conservative--no radical departures from what works, not the American political ‘conservative’ who often is anything but…) The Kurds have some serious corruption problems, but, considering them in comparison to their neighbors, they almost qualify as good government types. I'm also in favor of telling the Turks and the Saudi that they're on pretty damn thin ice with us. Although I don't much reckon that last position will gain much currency in American government circles.
And there is the problem of the Syrian Kurds being nominally Marxists, and the Iraqi Kurds being enthusiastic capitalists. They manage to stand together against the Turks and the Arabs, but they've got that problem to work out.
No, we got ISIS while Dubya and Cheney were too busy hunting for some remnant WMDs...
The organization that we have now that goes by the name Islamic State, which we refer to as ISIL, is far beyond anything that Zarqawi had set up. It is international in scope and has shown that it can influence people in not just Iraq and Syria but western countries as well. When I say that we got ISIS after we walked away from Iraq and Syria, I meant that we let something get loose that could possibly have been contained within that region if we had tried a little harder to understand the dynamics. To do that we had to have some sort of presence on the ground, and be willing to listen to any assessment given.
I fail to see where we'd be much better off if the other al-Qaeda faction, al-Nusra, had won that intramural contest.
No, I can't see where they would have been a good choice either to win that contest.
The liberal democrats do not constitute enough of the population to form a critical mass. Their pile always shuts down for lack of enough active elements.
The environment is not conducive to liberal thinking, no. To encourage that one would have to change the environment.
What makes you think Sunni Syria was the source of some sort of secret concentration of ‘moderates’ in spite of the fact that a diligent American search by all our spook agencies over the course of better than two years failed to find them?
Maybe they weren't looking in the right place, or maybe the definition of moderate has to be adjusted, at least in the short term.
What's the chances that you believe that the reason ya'll ain't found commercially exploitable amounts of oil in Minnesota is cause ya'll ain't looked hard enough?
I'm all in favor of picking the Kurds as friends. They're the only ones who've been secular enough to suit me and consistent and conservative enough to be dependable. The Kurds have some serious corruption problems, but, considering them in comparison to their neighbors, they almost qualify as good government types.
That's enough for tonight, I think. I have to turn in a little early, I'm going to the fair tomorrow and have to meet my friend at 8:00 to catch the express bus.
I hear there is going to be a Black Lives Matter march tomorrow at the Fair. But it's a big place so don't know if I'll see anything of that or not.
If yer lookin’ for moderation, war-torn Sunni Syria is almost certainly the wrong place.
"…or maybe the definition of moderate has to be adjusted, at least in the short term."
You may be able to adjust the definitions enough to sustain an argument, at least in the short term. But, you'll not be able to adjust them enough to sustain a successful foreign intervention. Your new definitions will run into reality on the ground, and suffer much, almost certainly suffer fatally, from the collision.
"The organization that we have now that goes by the name Islamic State, which we refer to as ISIL, is far beyond anything that Zarqawi had set up."
The addition of the Ba'athi with governmental and military experience is the difference. Otherwise, they acknowledge Zarqawi as their founder, and the vision behind the organization as his. (And let's not forget that bin-Laden and Zawahiri were chastising him for the same brutality still on display with ISIS, not that he paid them any attention on that score. The savagery, the brutality, that isn't new either.)
"Otherwise, they acknowledge Zarqawi as their founder, and the vision behind the organization as his."
ISIS did not grow out of al-Qaeda in Iraq. ISIS is al-Qaeda in Iraq, grown larger and given a new name, and having absorbed the Ba'athi still in rebellion, much to their benefit. But this is still Zarqawi's organization.
"So perhaps the devil's bargain made by the Ba'ath and the Islamists will not last."
I've said before, often. I'll be saying it again before this is done. I expect the Islamists and the Ba'athi to wage war over who gets the new Sunnistan as soon as they've got breathing room to turn on each other. But, they neither feel safe enough to turn on the other, not yet, but it's comin’ if they don't get defeated first by outside forces. (And, I'm expecting them to hold on long enough to make their new Sunnistan a fixture, long enough to turn on one another. This is gonna be a long war.)
Absolutely irrelevant response. Total non-sequitur. We were talking about finding moderates. Whether or not ‘people are static’ matters only if you're now talking about creating moderates. That's another question entirely.
But, we can do that question if you want. Wanna go there? Move; I'll follow.
A brief piece on Turkish/Kurdish/American interactions. Not especially enlightening other than that Turkish elections are now set for November of this year.
Saker has some thoughts on the matter off refugees. I'd like to direct you to the second chapter in this article:
http://thesaker.is/europe-in-free-fall/
And I'd like to point out that I do not agree with all of the rest of it, nor am I interested in debating or defending anything other than that second chapter "The EU is on the verge of a social and cultural collapse".
There's too much worth quoting so it's better if you just read the whole thing.
Lee: "The Kurds have some serious corruption problems, but, considering them in comparison to their neighbors, they almost qualify as good government types. I'm also in favor of telling the Turks and the Saudi that they're on pretty damn thin ice with us."
I tend to agree with you, but then there are...issues.
You seem to believe the Kurds are democracy-loving kinda westerners, compassinatly conservative folks in a region of insane terrorists or malignant powers.
I can tell you then that the Kurds do have their repressive culture intact. I believe they top the list for balcony-tossings in Sweden (that'd be when a kurdish girl strays from the community and the family toss her off a high rise- happens a few ties every year) and one of the highest ratios of cousin-marriage.
Fact is: it's a fiercly tribal and greatly pathirarchal society.
And me, for my part, have no problems with that. As long as they don't try to expand and push that shit onto me and mine. Which the kurds don't. Which is why I kinda like 'em.
Long lines at the fair yesterday. I didn't see any of the Black Lives Matter marchers. I heard it was a peaceful demonstration. They did end up cancelling a parade, though, which was a disappointment for the high school band who had traveled over four hours to get here. They didn't re-schedule.
It might take me a little bit to catch up on the comments. I see there are some rather interesting links as well.
They have scored a triumph over every theory of human progress that has ever been proposed.
I think I take exception to this point. They have scored a triumph over a region that was broken. They have managed to reach out and lure those in the West who are, for various reasons, drawn to their brand of violence and coercion. If they were to run up against someone who felt as strongly as they do about a different form of lifestyle, they may not do so well. The Kurds, with our help, managed to turn the tide in Kobani. So, no, I don't think they have triumphed over "every theory of human progress that has ever been proposed".
Btw, I have that book the author was talking about. *sigh* Haven't had a chance to read it yet.
But, you'll not be able to adjust them enough to sustain a successful foreign intervention. Your new definitions will run into reality on the ground, and suffer much, almost certainly suffer fatally, from the collision.
If there is no hope for moderation in the Middle East, then there is no hope for a just peace. There is only a future of endless war.
Moderation is a relative term. I understand that moderation as we view it in the West may not be possible, at least not in the short term, for the Middle East. But I would hope that there is some chance that the brutality shown by ISIL will not be the end for that region.
[Lynnette]: LOL! Oil is a static substance. People are not.
[Lee]: Absolutely irrelevant response.
No, no, indeed, it was not! We are talking about people, who are emotionally charged, sentient beings, not a thing, which is what oil is.
Whether or not ‘people are static’ matters only if you're now talking about creating moderates. That's another question entirely.
But, we can do that question if you want. Wanna go there? Move; I'll follow.
Yes, I think it would be a very interesting side trip to slip into with this discussion.
How do people develop liberal, moderate tendencies? Is it possible to do so without some guiding hand? Is it possible for those who are less liberal to become more so if the environment they live in becomes more liberal (a question that Sweden, and indeed all of Europe, is, and will be, struggling with)?
Usually, exhaustion. That's what happened in Europe in the 30 Years War leading to the Treaty of Westphalia. Exhaustion and horror. The survivors couldn't be convinced anymore that it was worth it. It happened again in Europe after WWI and WWII when the survivors got exhausted and horrified by the deaths wrought by fascism and nationalism, and repudiated fascism in general and even nationalism to a lesser extent.
I expect the various Muslim powers will continue to kill whomever they can get at until an exhausted population can no longer summon the energy to hate people they don't really know on account of some classification the leaders have been selling as the reason for hating (hating the son-of-a-bitch down the street, whom ya do know, on account of he's a son-of-a-bitch will still be quite possible and probably popular). After a while exhaustion will set in among the population and they will demand leaders who lead them in a different direction, one that lets them live in peace. But, it took Europe a long history of religious wars, and secular wars dressed up as religious wars, culminating in the conflicts known as the 30 Years Wars, before the exhaustion won out.
I expect the Middle East has a couple of decades yet to go.
A brief piece on Turkish/Kurdish/American interactions. Not especially enlightening other than that Turkish elections are now set for November of this year.
This was in my paper the other day:
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan approved an interim government, which allowed pro-Kurdish party lawmakers to take up ministerial posts for the first time in the country's history. Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu was assigned to form a caretaker government for Turkey until a Nov. 1 snap election. Davutoglu's Justice and development Party lost its parliamentary majority in an election June 7 and was unable to find a junior coalition partner.
Any thoughts? Is it a real concession or just window dressing?
It would seem to me that giving the Kurds more say in Turkey's government would perhaps go a long way to calming a desire for a separate state. At least in Turkey.
"[F]emales, on average, were about twice as likely [as males] to associate cash flow with love… Science Mag
"Diamonds are a girl's best friend"? Probably a built in survival instinct. :) Nowadays women are just as likely as men to make their own "diamonds", but that instinct still lives on, in some.
"Any thoughts? Is it a real concession or just window dressing?"
Hard to say without more detailed knowledge of the comparative strengths of the various Turkish political parties and entities. I could speculate four of five different ways, or even more, but I don't know enough about relative political positions today to know what exactly to make of that.
...the reality is that there is absolutely nothing the EU has to offer to these refugees to make them want to integrate it.
Do you really believe that to be true, Marcus? We have any number of people who come to the US who are quite anxious to open their own businesses or get an education to further their economic progress. Both of those things take some integration if one is to be successful.
I realize that the number of refugees is overwhelming, but Europe has seen refugees before and has dealt with them. Do you feel this time to be different? As the Saker said a lot of these people are families fleeing war. I would think that they are more likely to want to fit in than single young men. They have children to look after and try to provide a future for.
Do I think Europe is on the verge of cultural collapse? As an American who doesn't live there I really can't say. What are your thoughts, not just on Sweden, but Europe as a whole?
There was one other thing, that kind of reminded me of what one of our Republican politicians said about no-go zones in England. Are there such places in Europe where there is no local law enforcement? Are there such places in Sweden?
I believe they top the list for balcony-tossings in Sweden (that'd be when a kurdish girl strays from the community and the family toss her off a high rise- happens a few ties every year)...
er...I think I would have a problem with this, yes, I do think so. While I'm willing to cut the Kurds a little slack, murder is a little much. Lock up enough of them or deport them and maybe they would think twice of breaking the law.
"Does Europe have a couple of decades worth of patience to deal with all of the refugees?"
It may be that Europe is providing a release valve for the social pressures which would otherwise cause blowback against the Islamists at an earlier date. The persons who'd be first to provide social reinforcement for a resistance to sectarian violence are fleeing instead, just ‘cause it's easier, thus delaying the day when the Islamic world actually deals with this cancer head-on. I don't have any solid evidence to support that theory; it's just a theory.
The persons who'd be first to provide social reinforcement for a resistance to sectarian violence are fleeing instead, just ‘cause it's easier, thus delaying the day when the Islamic world actually deals with this cancer head-on.
Usually, exhaustion. That's what happened in Europe in the 30 Years War leading to the Treaty of Westphalia. Exhaustion and horror. The survivors couldn't be convinced anymore that it was worth it.
That entire comment was excellent. I know we've had our differences in the past, but I have to say that your argument that people become moderate and accommodating due to "exhaustion and horror" is sadly true.
Okay, let me read the rest of your exchange with Lynnette.
Does Europe have a couple of decades worth of patience to deal with all of the refugees?
Yes, "Europe" does, as long as the Germans pay for and house the majority of the refugees.
I've read of a plan of making the recently finished (but not yet opened) Tempelhof Airport in Berlin into a huge refugee camp. Man, that would be perfect.
That's because you turn into a dickhead over losing an argument.
No, me being a dickhead had nothing to do with the source of our different views or opinions. But you're mostly right about the charge of me being a dickhead, although back then my enemies categorized me as the Psycho Sicko American (as you will recall).
As most of the IBC commenters know, I wasn't that interested in winning or losing arguments as taking a look at the entire range of views that the Iraqi blogosphere could produce. I should also add that the arguments made in most debates can't really be won or lost. Some are just more persuasive (at that moment, given the evidence available) than others.
Sometimes I agreed with the majority opinion, and sometimes not -- just like you. Still, I could definitely get all heated up every now and then. And I certainly didn't mind the barroom brawls at Kurdo's Wild West Saloon. They were, in my book, just good, clean fun (with lots of cussing and fisticuffs).
I've noticed you changed your tone here. In the past, your manner of interacting with others suggested that you thought most other people were morons and simply wrong about whatever they happened to be thinking at the moment, and presented this attitude in a peculiar backwoods shtick. It was unique, that's for sure.
Now you really seem to accept that other people might have intelligent thoughts. You engage with them and even accord them a pretty healthy amount of respect.
Obama has returned Denali to its original name (means ‘the high place’), undoing the imposition of the moniker "Mount McKinnley". I expect Radio-Right-Wing will be incensed and pronounce this as further proof that Obama is "Un-American".
Heh heh. Let me see. There's Zeyad, Marcus, Lynnette, Petes, and myself. Hm. Marcus, Lynnette, and Petes are pretty bright and articulate, so I would never classify them as morons.
Okay, then I guess it's down to either me or Zeyad representing the moron sector of this comments page. Well, heck, even though Zeyad lost his ability to write at all in English (or even to be civil in any language) once he landed in the USA, I wouldn't call him a moron.
Okay, okay, I guess I'll have to nominate myself. I actually don't feel like a moron, but I imagine that's what most morons also think.
Moron you're not, Jeffrey. Nor is anyone else who has commented here. One of the things I enjoyed at Zeyad's comments section was the different views and, yes, some of the arguments. Arguing, when done at least somewhat civilly, can make you think about things from different angles.
I've read of a plan of making the recently finished (but not yet opened) Tempelhof Airport in Berlin into a huge refugee camp. Man, that would be perfect.
Short term, yes. But I can't imagine that they would want to turn it over for two decades.
No, I fear that Marcus is right, there will be repercussions if too many people are let in at once and over an extended period of time.
I'm not sure that increasing support for Dr. Ben Carson constitutes ‘waking up’ from the faerie tale, more like an attempt at an alternate route to fulfilling the fantasy. I take this as evidence that they don't intend to come to grips with reality without puttin’ up one hell of a fight first.
Here is an interesting discussion I found on Musings on Iraq blog with Graeme Wood, who wrote the article "What ISIS Really Wants". It is rather long, but worth a listen.
Immigrants to Europe across the porous southern borders are already up to 300,000 (by EU estimates). And the EU has announced that they will convene an emergency meeting in two weeks on the issue of immigration when it becomes an emergency in two weeks. (I believe the emergency is scheduled to strike on or about 14th of September.)
Lee: "Immigrants to Europe across the porous southern borders are already up to 300,000 (by EU estimates)."
Not quite. 300K are the numbers to date who have crossed the Meditteranian. Total numbers are way higher. Germany alone expects to receive 800K asylum seekers this year:
"US stock market down again today on China fears."
It looks very volatile right about now. I'm not that convinced about technical analysis but apparently today many indexes, including S&P-500 reached a so called "true death cross", which is supposed to signal a major downturn in the near future and is a sell-indicator for those who trade based on TA.
I think the land route from Turkey, via Greece (or Bulgaria) and up through Serbia would count as the southern porous border. Maybe you see that as the eastern border, I don't know, but I see it as the southern one and it's a major transit route, especially lately.
...S&P-500 reached a so called "true death cross", which is supposed to signal a major downturn in the near future and is a sell-indicator for those who trade based on TA.
It looks like other indicators are flashing a caution signal too.
I got the 300,000 figure from BBC World Report (half hour news broadcast Sunday mornings on PBS) specifically about the influx up through Serbia and towards Hungary, and more specifically about the new 100 km razor-wire fence on the Hungarian border, and it included that with the boat transit across the Mediterranean to get to 300,000 ytd. So, one of you needs to check your figures and your assumptions, either you or the BBC; I'm guessing it's you.
Can't access that article, Marcus. It keeps wanting to sell me a subscription. lol!
The second video clip in the post talks about the numbers that are expected in Germany.
But while we have focused on the refugees coming to Europe we are forgetting the numbers of displaced people in various Middle Eastern countries. They still need support, which is apparently being cut due to lack of contributions. I would guess the numbers to Europe will increase or at least continue like we are seeing now.
People are voting with their feet, and those feet are saying they don't want any part of the war in Syria or the rule of the Islamic State.
Lynnette: "But while we have focused on the refugees coming to Europe we are forgetting the numbers of displaced people in various Middle Eastern countries. They still need support, which is apparently being cut due to lack of contributions. I would guess the numbers to Europe will increase or at least continue like we are seeing now."
Well one reason for that is that many countries, and I know for certain Sweden is among them, take a large and increasing share of their foreign aid budget to cope with the massive costs of immigration at home.
It's one policy I think is completely backwards. It's way cheaper to help a refugee in a near country in a refugee camp than an asylum seeker in the west. It's actually a fraction of the cost involved.
So in terms of helping as many as possible with the limited (and it's always going to be limited, would be even if it was doubled) resources available we're not doing that by allowing mass-immigration to the west.
If you have't seen this yet you should:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE
Although I might add that I factor the social costs here in my country higher than the economic costs. I don't mind foreign aid, and I wouldn't mind increasing it. But I do mind the feeling of not imminent but eventual social collapse and I do mind the increased violence and general disrespect and ungratfulness shown, not by all or even a majority but by far too many recent immigrants.
Lee: "I got the 300,000 figure from BBC World Report (half hour news broadcast Sunday mornings on PBS) specifically about the influx up through Serbia and towards Hungary, and more specifically about the new 100 km razor-wire fence on the Hungarian border, and it included that with the boat transit across the Mediterranean to get to 300,000 ytd"
Well I don't get those figures to add up. If Germany expects 800K this year and we're in September now. And given that Germany does take in a large share but not anywhere close to 50% total. Well, seems to me that we must be way above 300K by now ytd. And like you I don't expect that many to have come via the North Atlantic, The Baltic Sea or in over the Carpathians. Where then do the rest come in?
I know there is a flow via airplane, from Lebanon for instance, but I doubt it's that large a share.
Fact is I'd say the vast majority comes in via the "southern porous borders". So either those 300K are close to the total amount ytd. Or the figure 300K is for the boat refugees crossing in overcrowded vessels and there are also other and larger streams in paralell. Or there are some mysterious routes I have not yet heard about accounting for a large, probably majority, share. Or we're expecting the last 4 months influx to be many times the first 8 months influx this year.
It appears from here that Europe is getting a lot of refugees who're not fleeing war per se (and many from lands where there is no significant fighting). They've been wanting to get to rich Europe for a while now, since before the Islamic wars broke out. And now the borders are loose. Why stay and fight for ones home when rich Europe beckons with open borders? Why stay, fighting or no fighting; it's not like these people have strong nationalist identities anyway.
Another possible explanation that I think might actually be onto something. Maybe the 300,000 ytd are the ones who've actually registered as asylum seekers while a great share have not yet done so.
Not done so because according to the Dublin Treaty an asylum seeker who's been granted asylum in one EU country cannot get it in another and will be sent back to the original country if they try. So they try to pass those countries at the "southern porous borders" where asylum is less likely to be given, jobs are scarcer and wellfare is MUCH scarcer and get farther north before applying.
Might mean that the 300K figure is correct but not accounting those still in transit but already inside the EU who might well number in the hundreds of thousands (in Italy, Serbia, Greece, Macedonia, Bulgaria and Hungary).
"I know there is a flow via airplane…but I doubt it's that large a share."
You may want to look again at the number of legal entries into Europe as tourists and such that are simply staying when they get there. Doesn't have to be by plane.
(Student visas are especially popular among young military aged males; often they never bother to ever see the school they're supposed to attend, just move on out.)
I'm thinking about expanding my construction and repair budgets to take advantage.
My neighbors got a heck of a deal on windows back in '09 at the height of the Great Recession. While I don't want to see that kind of economic crisis again, it would be nice to be able to get something on "sale".
Putin's Way on PBS Frontline; one hour; I've not seen it; don't know if it's worth the time but thought I'd mention it.
Yeah, when you mentioned PBS earlier it reminded me to check to see what was on tonight and noticed that about Putin. I think I may see if I can stay awake for some of it.
It's way cheaper to help a refugee in a near country in a refugee camp than an asylum seeker in the west. It's actually a fraction of the cost involved.
I should think it would be, yes.
But I think a lot of those people are starting to understand that their sojourn in a refugee camp is not going to be temporary, that is they won't be returning home any time soon. They are starting to look around and realize that there is no future for them in the camps, so they are willing to take the risk of a dangerous journey to Europe.
I'm thinking Europe would still have a refugee crisis on its hands even if the EU countries did send more money for refugees in the camps.
Want to get into Europe as a refugee? Easy. Just use the "Refugee Trip Advisor."
Ripley is a guy from Alabama who worked for the US military in Germany and is now retired and living there. He has a great blog called Schnitzel Republic that I read almost every day. Of course, he's been covering the refugee situation in Europe. Here's the entry referred to above.
My humble guess....if I wanted to spend money and ride most of the way.....I could make the trip in fifteen days easily.....walking maybe ten-percent of the whole trip. If I went the hard way.....walking maybe half of the whole trip......maybe four weeks.
Here's the thing....it's out in the open for millions to view. A cousin comes over to your place tonight and you weren't eager to leave your homeland but he talks you into it because of various emails he's gotten from friends. You gather up some cash from friends and relatives, and make the expedition.
He has lots of other good blog entries on refugees (and other matters related to Germany and Europe).
"But I think a lot of those people are starting to understand that their sojourn in a refugee camp is not going to be temporary, that is they won't be returning home any time soon. They are starting to look around and realize that there is no future for them in the camps, so they are willing to take the risk of a dangerous journey to Europe. "
Sure. And I can respect that. But then we're talking about "quality of life migrants" and not refugees, aren't we? And that's the majority. The really downtrodden can't make it to Europe at all (look at a Sudanese refugee camp for examples).
I've been very clear that I don't blame the "economic migrants" for wanting a better life. I'm saying it's our own spineless politicians who let them in that are to blame.
There's a push and a pull factor here. The push factor is the degree of poverty/danger at home or close to home. The pull factor is what there is to be had IF you can cross the med, get into Europe and make your way to the more generous countries.
My opinion is that we, and I mean Europe as a whole, should strive to decrease BOTH factor, both push and pull.
To decrease the push factor we should ramp up aid to refugees across the ME and Africa. Ideally we should also work to end the (often american instigated) wars there, which we have very limitied means to do.
To decrease the pull factors there are a host of issues we must adress. Such as lowered financial gains (the danes just cut them down by half - but then the danes were always sensible folks), temporary residency as opposed to permanent and so on.
Maybe another way would be to hire a fleet of large ships to embark from Greece and carry millions of ME/African refugees to the USA. I can't see there would be any protests in the US over that. You said it already "give me yoour poor, give me your tired, give me your wellfare dependents ane give me a whole bunch of would be terrorists". Right?
210 comments:
1 – 200 of 210 Newer› Newest»Given the Muslim tradition of preaching a single Ummah, I'm looking forward to the soon-to-be-unleashed, massive, ‘large scale’, charitable response of the ‘ummat al-Islamiyah’. No doubt that'll take care of the problem and serve as an inspiration to us all in the years to come.
You're quick, I didn't even get a chance to adjust my title.
I'm going to sleep on my response to your comment though. :)
You're gonna adjust the title?
The Chinese stock market has opened ugly.
You're gonna adjust the title?
Oh, I just took out the caps on some of the letters and put in quotation marks as it came from a phrase in a poem. I didn't like the caps.
Given the Muslim tradition of preaching a single Ummah, I'm looking forward to the soon-to-be-unleashed, massive, ‘large scale’, charitable response of the ‘ummat al-Islamiyah’.
Hmmm...while many share a common religion, they don't necessarily share common beliefs. So I'm thinking that the single Ummah that is preached is only an illusion.
No doubt that'll take care of the problem and serve as an inspiration to us all in the years to come.
I see you agree.
The Chinese stock market has opened ugly.
Ours isn't too pretty either.
Hang on, it's going to be a rough ride, I'm thinking.
One number means everything in China right now
"Those illiquid assets mostly consist of investments in things like
natural resources and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank."
Now that could turn out to be a major problem. If our major creditor goes belly-up it's gonna make it a bit harder to keep up our perpetual deficit.
I did wonder about what would happen if China starts cashing in massive amounts of US Treasury obligations...
One of the things that will happen is that the American voter will be more amenable to turning out the current dominant political party. If the Republicans take the White House in 2016 the likelihood they'll demand an ideological response to an economic problem (i.e. an austerity budget) goes way up.
If the Republicans take the White House in 2016 the likelihood they'll demand an ideological response to an economic problem (i.e. an austerity budget) goes way up.
Depends how angry the American voters are. If they split the branches of government, giving control of the White House to the Republicans and the Congress to the Democrats, it will be more gridlock.
It looks like China is down again. But some markets, like Japan, are up.
I'm wondering how the gunman on that French train got the Ak on the train? And what was the purpose of taking off his shirt?
He claims he was just going to rob the train. I don't think having that much weaponry and ammo was just to rob a train! He's setting up his defense.
"…giving control of the White House to the Republicans and the
Congress to the Democrats…"
That prospect is so remote I didn't bother with it.
"He's setting up his defense."
But, not very well. He's in bad need of a better story than that.
Lynnette:
"I'm wondering how the gunman on that French train got the Ak on the train?"
Anyone can walk onto most trains in Europe with a bag sufficiently large to hide an AK, or worse, with minimal risk of discovery. Basically, unless you're under surveillence or is acting extremely strange no one will challenge you.
Lynnette: "And what was the purpose of taking off his shirt?"
I didn't hear about that before. Does seem strange.
Lynnette: "He claims he was just going to rob the train. I don't think having that much weaponry and ammo was just to rob a train! He's setting up his defense."
And he claims to have found the weapons cache in a park in Brussels.
I'm thinking he went to Turkey, trying to get to Syria, to join Jihad. But the Jihadists seeing he was a f-ckup and of little use to them told him to go back and attack at home in stead. He did, and f-cked up. Just a theory.
Other stock markets are steadying down around the world, as the Chinese market keeps falling.
Quaere then: Does the Chinese market stop falling soon, or do the rest of them start falling again?
Probably Chinese continues to fall for a few more days, then plateaus off.
I heard on the radio today that the US is going to take on a "greater responsibility" for the refugees from Syria. 8000 next year apparently.
Lee: "Other stock markets are steadying down around the world, as the Chinese market keeps falling. Quaere then: Does the Chinese market stop falling soon, or do the rest of them start falling again?"
If one knew that for sure there would be easy money to be made.
"Probably Chinese continues to fall for a few more days, then plateaus off."
Seems like a reasonable middleground in between the optimistic and the pessimistic scenarios.
I would say though that I think (or feel) that there's a larger downside than upside. That is, if panic sets in the drop could be significant even from todays numbers.
"That is, if panic sets in the drop could be significant even from
todays numbers."
I'm expecting that, but I'm expecting it to be more or less restricted to the Chinese stock market.
And he claims to have found the weapons cache in a park in Brussels.
Yes, that seemed a little strange too. If it had been Syria or Iraq I wouldn't have thought anything of that, but Brussels?
I'm thinking he went to Turkey, trying to get to Syria, to join Jihad. But the Jihadists seeing he was a f-ckup and of little use to them told him to go back and attack at home in stead. He did, and f-cked up. Just a theory.
Kind of reminds me of the underwear bomber.
"I heard on the radio today that the US is going to take on a
‘greater responsibility’ for the refugees from Syria. 8000 next year…"
I don't want 8,000 Syrians. Maybe we can upgrade Guantànamo into a reputable location, like a new Puerto Rico or something.
I heard on the radio today that the US is going to take on a "greater responsibility" for the refugees from Syria. 8000 next year apparently.
Well, that is an increase, but a drop in the bucket compared to the numbers that need a home.
Of course, who knows what could happen if Trump gets in office. *sigh*
On the topic of economics I'm expecting something drammatic in Sweden, the only question is: when?
As I have mentioned before we never had a housing bubble crisis here, back when so many did.
I know I argued agaist Pete in the past giving reasons for why Sweden was different from Ireland, and those reasons were valid. (The two main ones were we have basically no market for secondary homes for investment reasons - we do have a housing shortage. And we have a better export economy and our own currency so in the case of a financial crisis we have a better opportunity to devalue the currency and at least keep the private sector humming)
But I also acknowledged that we did in fact have a housing bubble and that a drop in prices was likely to come, I just argued it wouldn't be as bad here a it was in Ireland.
Well, from then (a few years ago) until now our housing prices have continued a steady rise to what I consider insane levels. I believe now that the potential drop could easily be in the 30-40% range. And that would be absolutely catastrophic to our economy.
I see no real way around it either. Any "soft landing" is IMO unlikely given the magnitude of the bubble at hand here.
It sounds like US stock futures are signaling an uptick in the market. I also think Europe has recovered a little.
[Marcus] "That is, if panic sets in the drop could be significant even from
todays numbers."
[Lee] "I'm expecting that, but I'm expecting it to be more or less restricted to the Chinese stock market."
I think of all those ghost cities in China and am thinking they have some serious underlying problems to deal with. Their government's actions in trying to stabilize the stock market probably won't help because their economy has been overblown. It's all a house of cards.
Our economy has been looking up. Whether or not it is because of the effects of QE I don't know. But at least people have been paying down debt, which bodes well for future economic activity. At least if there is turbulence ahead we are a little better positioned to weather it.
"I believe now that the potential drop could easily be in the 30-40%
range. And that would be absolutely catastrophic to our economy."
The Germans should be able to help you with an austerity budget, a kind of ‘Greece of the North’.
Lee:
"I'm expecting that, but I'm expecting it to be more or less restricted to the Chinese stock market."
It depends on what you call significant I guess, but a 20% drop to year end I would call pretty significant, and that's still a possibility even in western markets.
I saw some TA-guy (technical analysis) who claimed that if the markets break the "floor" they are at right now the next "floor" is 20% down. Sounds like mumbo-jumbo to me but the more who base their models on that sort of analysis the likelier it's to become a "truth" that the collective market agrees on and responds to.
I believe now that the potential drop could easily be in the 30-40% range. And that would be absolutely catastrophic to our economy.
Hmm...sounds a bit like the run up to the Great Recession that we went through. We have rebounded, yes, but to what extent we won't know until they start raising interest rates. It's like taking a band aid off of an open wound. Is it healed, or will it start bleeding again?
But they may be looking at delaying that interest rate rise until they see the direction China is heading and the effect it will have on the global economy.
Lee:
"The Germans should be able to help you with an austerity budget, a kind of ‘Greece of the North’."
We're the opposite of Greece. The greeks had fairly low private debt but insanely high public debt. Our state finances are really well managed but it's our private debt that's spun completely out of control.
Now, of course the scenario that may play out is that private lenders go under water, our Bank's balance sheets turn red, foreign lenders raise rates or cut off funding and the state has to move in to save our banks. So the private debts (or the responsibility for them) turn public and suddenly we're talkning about the need for austerity measures here too.
I believe you're right about that, but I don't think we'll have to be prodded and poked by the Germans to reach that conclusion. We'll come to that conclusion on our own.
I suspect the Muslim immigrants will have to be shielded from those consequences. After all, one can hardly blame them for Swedish banking practices.
Stocks are up over 300 points at open.
Analysis of US economy
Lynnette:
"I think of all those ghost cities in China and am thinking they have some serious underlying problems to deal with."
I'm thinking and I have been thinking: I wonder how big that problem actually is and how much is just hype.
If the Chinese build a city intended for 50K people and no one moves in you can do all those "dramatic" videos we've seen about "ghost cities". Even a 10K housing complex would look dramatic if shown empty on video.
But, given the 1.3 Billion population and the continuing urbanisation maybe a couple of 10K+ housing complexes that were built in vain is not that big a deal?
Say the live 4 to a unit. That'd mean 3250000000 housing untits needed in China. Say they build 1% too many. That'd be 3.250.000 units. So a complec of 10K unused units might look alaming but it's not THAT big a deal.
I'm not saying I know, I'm not saying I have a good guess even, I'm just saying alarmist news with serious loooking footage should be put into perspective.
"We're the opposite of Greece."
So was Spain. Germany prefers ‘one-size-fits-all’ solutions.
Lee:
"I suspect the Muslim immigrants will have to be shielded from those consequences. After all, one can hardly blame them for Swedish banking practices."
What on earth did you mean by that comment?
Did you mean to say I blame all problems in Sweden on (muslim) immigration?
I am aware we're in a thread debating immigration but due to recent events we moved onto the stock market and from there to economics in general.
"I am aware we're in a thread debating immigration but due to
recent events we moved onto the stock market and from there to
economics in general."
I'm guessing your Muslims haven't studied much on economics in general and are expecting continued support in the manner to which they've become accustomed.
Lee: "I don't want 8,000 Syrians. Maybe we can upgrade Guantànamo into a reputable location, like a new Puerto Rico or something."
Lynnette: "Well, that is an increase, but a drop in the bucket compared to the numbers that need a home."
We'll take 40K this year.
Given your population versus our that'd equate to: 40K/10*400=1.6M
So go the swedish route and ya'll can resolve the entire syrian refugee crisis in a year or two. 1.6 million syrians a year, no problems at all. Then add 2 million more from somalia, eritrea and iraq, yearly. No fuss. Easy peasy.
Lee:
"I'm guessing your Muslims haven't studied much on economics in general and are expecting continued support in the manner to which they've become accustomed."
That's obviously a whole other challenge to our society. But it's completely separate from the housing bubble (well, unless you factor the white flight in our cities which is a real factor but hard to measure).
But yeah, that too is a "bubble" that will pop, if I might use a very careful description as to the real problems that will soon hit us.
Probably they are also interlinked. Housing bubble pop --> economic downturn --> less social wellfare --> riots among the "new swedes" a "rights" are stripped away --> even increased anomosity towards them from "old swedes", and so on.
What's with this ‘new Swedes’ and ‘old Swedes’ stuff?
I see kafir being taxed for the benefit of Muslims--the jizya in proper application. This is as it should be.
Lee: "What's with this ‘new Swedes’ and ‘old Swedes’ stuff?"
You're right. Sorry about that. I capitulate completely and agree it's insane language.
But, you see, it's the sort of coded language we have to use here to not be either demonised or have the comment removed.
A Gypsy is an "EU-migrant". An 18 year old Syrian man is an "alone coming refugee child", etc. It's just like a page out of Orwell - first they change the language.
Sorry I infested this blog by that cowardly commie-speak. I'll be more careful in the future.
They aren't ‘new Swedes’ until after they assimilate, if they're willing to assimilate
Lee: assimilation is a BAD word here, and certainly not PC. A BAD, BAD word it is. You mention it and you'll be compared to Hitler for sure. You can't advocate assimilation and be in good grace with either Public Service or private MSM media here.
It's "integration" which is the answer to all problems. Meaning in effect WE have to integrate to meat THEIR demands 9 times out of 10. "Assimmilaton" is out, it's a proof you're a brown shirt at the very least.
I'm sorry to say it but that's the way it is.
Well, in that case, the ‘old Swedes’ are gonna be the ‘new Swedes’, congratulations on that, by the way way, and the Muslims will still be Middle-Eastern Muslims.
Not if I have anything to say about it. And "my side" is rising rapidly and constantly in our opiniion figures. We'll see who wins.
Lee, it wasn't the Americans who fought back the hordes of Islam. It was the Austo-Hungarians at Vienna.
There wouldn't even have been a USA if those brave knights of christianity hadn't fought back the Ottomans and saved the western continent. So don't be so smug over there.
I don't want 8,000 Syrians. Maybe we can upgrade Guantànamo into a reputable location, like a new Puerto Rico or something.
Missed this. The Dakotas are still fairly empty, I think, even with the oil boom/bust. I think there are some Iraqis up near Fargo. But it seems that new immigrants are sent to where someone can give them a hand in starting out. In the video I posted it was California (personally I'd avoid it with the water issues and all those earthquakes and fires), or I saw another video where Chicago was the place to be.
*whispers softly*
You're sounding very Republican, Lee. ;)
Marcus,
Here is a Canadian conservative commentator (ala Glenn Beck) on the role played by immigrants from non liberal countries in the rise of rapes in Sweden.
I can understand the knee jerk reaction of people who don't want to appear to be bigots. But I can also understand those who are frustrated with the higher crime rate, and rape is a crime. In the case of immigrants I would not hesitate to deport an offender. Hopefully if it was done often enough the clueless would start to understand that the rule of law applies to them just like everyone else.
Your anti-immigration party is a bit like Donald Trump's platform here. Unfortunately, he managed to offend some decent people by lumping all immigrants in with the criminal element. And I know there are immigrants in Sweden who are just as angry about crime there. They didn't come all that way to reprise the problems they had back home.
Lynnette: "But I can also understand those who are frustrated with the higher crime rate, and rape is a crime. In the case of immigrants I would not hesitate to deport an offender. Hopefully if it was done often enough the clueless would start to understand that the rule of law applies to them just like everyone else."
It appears, after all the shootings, grenades, muggings and rape that we have a new crime here now.
Serial gang rape.
As in a woman on her way home in a previously peacful neighborhood in Strängnäs being raped. And then on her way after the first rape gangraped by a few more different men. Just in between two "asylum houses".
I tell you now: we're in for bloody times here. We put up with much but not this. We are fucking Westeros in the Lord of the Rings invaded by awful fucking ORCHS! And THEY DIE!!!!!
"You're sounding very Republican, Lee. ;)"
Yeah, well, I think there's plenty ‘nuff people in this country already. We could use more space, less bodies takin’ up space. (I grew up out in the back country.)
Ya know… there is the possibility that this Trump thing could get away from Ailes and his minions at FoxNews. The Teabaggers got away from them a few years ago, proved totally uncontrollable. This Trump thing could get away from them too.
And, quite simply, I'm big on the separation of Church and State. Consequently, I'm not real eager to see a wholesale influx of people who're committed to the integration of religion and government. We have, for years, allowed immigration on a case-by-case basis, everybody gets individual consideration. I'd like to see that continue. I think we should try to limit immigration to people who actually want to be here, not necessarily including those who just want to get away from wherever they've made uncomfortable just now.
I tell you now: we're in for bloody times here.
I know, it's hard not to react with anger when you see something like that happen. Laws need to be enforced and the guilty punished, otherwise the hatred just feeds on itself.
Yeah, well, I think there's plenty ‘nuff people in this country already.
Judging by all the cars on the roads on my day off, and the housing developments sprouting up where there used to be fields, at times I would agree.
(I grew up out in the back country.)
I grew up in a smaller town, not too far from the Twin Cities. But the area was open with a lot of land to run around in. It was great. I have never really liked crowded places.
I think we should try to limit immigration to people who actually want to be here, not necessarily including those who just want to get away from wherever they've made uncomfortable just now.
I can agree with this. But looking at the people in the video, those interviewed that is, I would say they are not the ones who made their home country "uncomfortable". So by that criteria they should be given a chance to make a home here. I mean, that poor family on the Greek island were obviously middle class business owners who were stuck in the middle of a civil war that they probably had no clue as to how to survive in.
And, quite simply, I'm big on the separation of Church and State. Consequently, I'm not real eager to see a wholesale influx of people who're committed to the integration of religion and government.
Ahh, but that makes the assumption that they would pursue that type of government here. There is also the possibility, a strong one at that, that our separation of church and state would work just fine for them, just as it has us. And we also have home grown integration of religion and government believers. They seem to be strong in the Republican side of the aisle.
Perhaps there are those in the Middle East who support the integration of religion and government who might find it unnecessary in a country where they have some fair representation. I am not talking about the extremists here, but reasonable people who don't want to feel disenfranchised because their religion isn't the flavor of the moment.
Ya know… there is the possibility that this Trump thing could get away from Ailes and his minions at FoxNews.
The way Trump is going after Kelly makes him look a bit psycho. Not a good look in a President.
"And we also have home grown integration of religion and government believers."
The fact that we already got some don't mean we need to allow more to come over. I say we look over the prospective newcomers and decide on admission on a case-by-case basis.
I say we look over the prospective newcomers and decide on admission on a case-by-case basis.
I think that they do that already. That's why it can take so long. But even that isn't always going to weed out those who may commit a crime or even follow a path to terrorism. We can only do the best we can to be fair and compassionate. There will always be those, both native born and foreign born, who commit crimes.
But I do have to admit that what is happening in Sweden is rather extreme. People may criticize us for throwing people in jail on minor charges, but there it seems like the laws aren't stringent enough. There should be something that can be done about grenades on the street or gang rapes.
"I think that they do that already."
And yet, the phraseology used, ‘refugees from Syria. 8000 next year’, that sounded suspiciously non-individualized. Sounds like something that might have been decided on a bulk basis rather than as the result of individualized, case-by-case determinations.
Requiem for Rick Perry.
Sam Clovis, the prominent conservative Iowa operative, and sometime Radio-Right-Wing program host, who departed Rick Perry’s campaign this week, is heading to Donald Trump’s camp to serve as his national co-chairman and policy adviser. WaPo (Chris Cristie looks to be next on the chopping block.)
Lynnette:
"I know, it's hard not to react with anger when you see something like that happen. Laws need to be enforced and the guilty punished, otherwise the hatred just feeds on itself."
It's reaching boiling point I would say. And I do believe I have my ear to the ground here.
What has slowly dawned on me and on many others is they hate us. They really do hate us and do not respect us in the slightest. They only want to partake in the riches we've created but really do not like us as a people or our society or norms. A bit like Lee said earlier "I see kafir being taxed for the benefit of Muslims--the jizya in proper application".
Now, why would I feel OK with paying the economic cost so that hordes of military age men who leave their women and children behind to "flee" here for economic reasons and who hate us and who only bring violence, fragmentation and problems with them?
Give me one reason why I should be OK with that?
And as long as we're looking at film clips look at this recent one from Hungary:
https://youtu.be/SJ0CfOi4tYM
Notice the constant "Allah Akhbars" and notice the Hungarian flag at the end desecrated by the Islamic crecent. Now, doesn't that look much like an invading force to you? Why would we willingly let that horde in? Would you?
"Give me one reason why I should be OK with that?"
You might want to learn to accept the things you cannot change. They say there is wisdom in that.
(They're not figurin’ on goin’ back ya know.)
Why Hillary's not getting all excited:
"Privately, Clinton's allies think the problem right now is primarily
Democratic anxiety and not anything intrinsic to the candidate —
they're going to win the nomination, and then they're going to make
the American people absolutely terrified of the Republican nominee
(something Republicans are helping them do right now), and they'll win
the campaign. They just need to stick to their strategy. They can't let
the media or restive Democrats knock them off their game.
"In a new interview with CNN, Clinton said as much."
Ezra Klien ― Vox
Lee: "You might want to learn to accept the things you cannot change. They say there is wisdom in that."
And I try to. But when we speak about the topic I can't really not speak my mind. And there's been a drumbeat of news here lately that've pissed me off something awful so I guess I need to vent. Better I vent here I think, and try to be more accepting IRL.
Lee:
"Why Hillary's not getting all excited"
What do you personally think of Hillary as president? Would you, or could you, or wouldn't/coulndn't you vote for her? Pros and cons?
Sounds like something that might have been decided on a bulk basis rather than as the result of individualized, case-by-case determinations.
Nah, just a limit. I'm sure they'll have someone doing security checks before they are let in.
(Chris Cristie looks to be next on the chopping block.)
Yeah, I saw some rankings yesterday, and Christie was one of the lowest. The only one even close to Trump was Carson, and even he was way behind. It seems Trump is sucking all the life and energy out of the party, kind of like a magnet.
Better I vent here I think, and try to be more accepting IRL.
That's all right, Marcus. We all need to vent sometimes. Here is as good a place as any.
Now, why would I feel OK with paying the economic cost so that hordes of military age men who leave their women and children behind to "flee" here for economic reasons and who hate us and who only bring violence, fragmentation and problems with them?
Believe me I understand that no one wants to bring into their home people that hate them. But I am speaking about helping families and those who are willing to start over in a new culture. Those who are let in and commit crimes should be sent back. They have trampled on the welcome mat that was put out.
...and then they're going to make
the American people absolutely terrified of the Republican nominee
(something Republicans are helping them do right now),...
lol! You can say that again!
Lynnette: "Believe me I understand that no one wants to bring into their home people that hate them. But I am speaking about helping families and those who are willing to start over in a new culture. Those who are let in and commit crimes should be sent back. They have trampled on the welcome mat that was put out. "
So basically no one should be allowed in then, since just a tiny few want to assimmilate.
Isn't it easier then just to place obstacles in their way to come here in the first place, than to have 'em come and then deal with the serious problem of mass-deportation?
Or maybe you'd like those 1.8 million muslims that'd be the equivalent to swedens recent intake like I demonstrated earlier. It's mainly your wars after all. Maybe we should join forces Europe and America to have 'em all sent over to you, since you seem to have such a bleeding heart over there?
BTW: did you look at the film clip I provided? Thoughts?
"Nah, just a limit."
The bureaucratic tendency will be to view this ‘limit’ as a goal.
"I'm sure they'll have someone doing security checks…"
And, there we have it. You've already accepted the reversal of incentives, and you've not even gotten out of the first paragraph. But you've already switched your goal to ‘security checks’ for the 8000 instead of concentrating on making sure that anybody gets to come actually wants to be in America. And ya haven't even cleared the first paragraph.
Post Script:
"…making sure that anybody gets to come actually wants to be in America…"
And, an equally important question: "Is this somebody we want?"
Not, ‘How we coming on that 8000 to clear security checks?’
So basically no one should be allowed in then, since just a tiny few want to assimmilate.
I think you said that Sweden was accepting 40K this year? Not all of them are committing crimes. And it is probably repeat offenders that are driving up the numbers.
Isn't it easier then just to place obstacles in their way to come here in the first place, than to have 'em come and then deal with the serious problem of mass-deportation?
Been there, done that, the obstacle bit that is. Doesn't always work, as seen from the number of illegal immigrants we have.
As for mass-deportation, I don't see why a case by case scenario won't work. Do you not deport anyone who commits a crime now?
It's mainly your wars after all.
Nope, it's the result of people who can't get along unless they have someone to force them to. It's the result of people who have for decades, if not centuries, used extremely violent tactics to achieve their goals. You recall the fate of the Armenians in WWI? We certainly weren't there at that point. No, this is not something that can be laid at our door. It is a region that has been soaked in blood for years.
BTW: did you look at the film clip I provided? Thoughts?
I haven't had a chance to do so, yet. I will this evening. Although I understand that Hungary is building a wall to try to keep migrants out? Kind of like The Donald proposes for here. I doubt it will work. As someone pointed out, they will find a way under, over, or around.
I have noticed that "Allahu Akbar" is a common phrase for rebels in Syria, as well as Islamic extremists, such as ISIL. As for any desecration of someone's flag, perhaps that's a signal that that person shouldn't be admitted?
I'm not saying Europe doesn't have a problem. I'm just saying that finding a partial solution may be better found, for all concerned, through tougher laws for crime. Obviously, the ideal solution would be to end the violence in migrants home countries...
But you've already switched your goal to ‘security checks’ for the 8000 instead of concentrating on making sure that anybody gets to come actually wants to be in America.
Hmmm...I suppose I was actually thinking of this...
And, an equally important question: "Is this somebody we want?"
...when I said that about security checks.
I just assumed that anyone who would apply to come here actually wants to be here. Obviously, if they didn't they would be going somewhere else.
The bureaucratic tendency will be to view this ‘limit’ as a goal.
That probably depends on which bureaucrats you are talking about.
"I just assumed that anyone who would apply to come here
actually wants to be here."
Not necessarily a safe assumption; some of them seem to want this to be somewhere else.
"That probably depends on which bureaucrats you are talking about."
That'd be the ones thinking like bureaucrats.
"Doesn't always work, as seen from the number of illegal immigrants we have.
"…the obstacle bit that is."
The problem is that we mix the obstacles in with bait, need to cut out the bait part.
"The way Trump is going after Kelly makes him look a bit psycho.
Not a good look in a President."
I blew on by that the first time on account of I suspected I was gonna find this before too long, explaining how Trump and Ailes have made peace yet once again. (Ailes needs the eyes Trump is bringing to the FoxNews debates; Megyn's gonna havta just put up with it for awhile yet.)
...some of them seem to want this to be somewhere else.
Seems like a lot of work coming here then. Should just stay put.
That'd be the ones thinking like bureaucrats.
Just like dough in a cookie press. Go in unformed and get squeezed out looking like everyone else...
...need to cut out the bait part.
I noticed that during the Great Recession the influx slowed considerably. In fact one could say it turned into a reflux. But tanking the economy seems a little extreme.
I blew on by that the first time on account of I suspected I was gonna find this before too long, explaining how Trump and Ailes have made peace yet once again.
It does seem that Trump and Kelly are making nice nice noises. For now anyway. I'm not sure what I think of a Presidential candidate spending his time twittering nasty comments though.
Tanking the economy is a little extreme. Especially as the problem can be addressed successfully with better tactics.
Lock up a few white Christian Republican Country Clubbers for hiring illegals. Lock up a few titans of industry for doing the same. Put some Republican white people in jail for hiring illegals instead of rounding up the illegals for looking for work.
Problem be solved inside of a year or so. And you'd only have to lock up just a few rich, white people.
"I'm not sure what I think of a Presidential candidate spending his
time twittering nasty comments though."
Me neither, but it does appear that Ailes has considered the possibility that he's no longer in charge of this one. (The teabaggers got away from him; this Trump thing may have too.)
Video link:
https://youtu.be/SJ0CfOi4tYM
Lock up a few white Christian Republican Country Clubbers for hiring illegals
ROFL! Yeah, right.
Marcus,
I'm not sure what is being said in that video, but it looks like some kind of protest, rather than an invasion of Islamic extremists.
I found this article about the migrant situation in Hungary. These people have been traveling some distance and are desperate to get to some place to settle. The whole situation is bad for everyone.
"What do you personally think of Hillary as president?"
Since she's not been President yet, I don't actually have an opinion of her performance as President.
I've never been particularly fond of Hillary. My opinion of her did improve during her tenure as Secretary of State. Not because she had any great accomplishments or signature policy triumphs, but rather because she showed a willingness to do the job she was given. She went to work for Obama (and for her country) and she worked hard and did the jobs she was given to do without bitching when the policy decisions didn't go her way. Industry, loyalty, and a team player; I was impressed with that--she did improve her standing with me with that.
She's generic Democrat so far as I can see so far, except that she has been rather too quick to call for military action to suit me. Perhaps that's been a function of her position within the Obama administration, but I thought she was a bit too eager to send in the troops as a senator also. Other than that, I'm waiting to see more particulars (her policy speeches and position papers have been generic "New Democrat" so far).
I've never been particularly fond of Hillary.
No, me either. But I thought she handled the Russians rather well with Libya, if not with that reset button thing.
She went to work for Obama (and for her country) and she worked hard and did the jobs she was given to do without bitching when the policy decisions didn't go her way.
It was rather refreshing to see someone who just buckled down and did their job.
She's generic Democrat so far as I can see so far, except that she has been rather too quick to call for military action to suit me.
This is where you and I differ. Perhaps she is still old school, but sometimes it is the lesser of two evils.
If the election were held today and my choices were Trump or Clinton, I would choose Clinton.
"If the election were held today and my choices were Trump or…"
I'd pretty much go with ‘or’. I can't think of any of the 17 Republicans running whom I'd like to see as Prez less than Trump, with the possible exception of Ted Cruz.
"…but sometimes it is the lesser of two evils."
If we had intervened earlier in Syria, as she wanted, it'd still be the mess it is today, but we'd be getting the blame for it; not an improvement.
Yes, I'd probably even vote for Biden. *sigh*
54 migrants found dead in hull of boat
"Perhaps she is still old school…"
Perhaps you are comfortable with ‘old school’ reactions. But, the fact remains, in almost every instance in which Hillary would have committed us to intervention, it would have been a mistake. One can only hope she has learned better from having been exposed to better thinking.
But, the fact remains, in almost every instance in which Hillary would have committed us to intervention, it would have been a mistake.
Ahhh...you knew I would bite on this, didn't you? Which ones?
We'll skip the deeper involvement in Libya that she wanted, and the intervention in Mali that she didn't get either; let's just go with Syria for now:
Can you think of any plan hinted at that would have dealt with the facts on the ground that we found? The Saudi supporting one Islamist group, the Turks supporting another, and we only later found out that our supposed ‘moderate’ Sunni insurgents, especially the Free Syrian Army, were working hand-in-glove with the Islamists wherever they could. You remember any discussions of an intervention in Syria that recognized those difficulties or planned to deal with them?
And, our support for the Saudi intervention in Yemen hasn't exactly turned out well either. (I kind of give her a pass for Libya--I thought at the time it was a mistake, but that if we ever expect to get support from Europe for an intervention, we have to occasionally support their interventions, and that was one we had to back them on just ‘cause we had to back them on that, if we ever expect them to back us.)
Lee: "I kind of give her a pass for Libya--I thought at the time it was a mistake, but that if we ever expect to get support from Europe for an intervention, we have to occasionally support their interventions, and that was one we had to back them on just ‘cause we had to back them on that, if we ever expect them to back us."
The worst "interventions" post 2003 Iraq for several reasons. And indeed it was the Europeans making. Based, is my best guess, on Total and to a lesser extent ENI, feeling squeezed out by the ever increasing chinese presense. Old Europe decided on some old school colonialism, and brought ya'll along for the parts old Europe didn't have the military means to do on its own - such as acccurate intel and survelliance mostly.
I think you've got the motivation wrong. The biggest howls were originally coming out of Italy where they were terrified of the specter of a total Libyan collapse leading to mass refugee flight into Italy (as happened anyway, but probably not on the scale that could have been if Kadifi had held on to power and commenced the slaughter he had in mind as his retaliation). The Brits and the French thought they could hold off the Italians' calls for full-on NATO involvement if they half-assed it, air power but no troops.
Can you think of any plan hinted at that would have dealt with the facts on the ground that we found?
Facts found when? The Syrian civil war has been ongoing for some time now, with alliances shifting due to the situation on the ground. Right now that whole area is a gargantuan mess with one of the main actors a barbaric terrorist group seemingly intent on playing out some sort of end of times scenario. Or so goes some speculation. Everyone says there are no moderate rebel groups to aid. Well, by now probably not. A lot of people have been killed or have fled the country.
Here is an article from 2014 which talks about Hillary Clinton's assessment of Syria way back when. Yes, she pushed for arming the "moderate" rebels. I used quotes around that word but perhaps back then, before hopes were dashed that help would arrive, there actually were moderate rebels.
Clinton had to call Obama and apologize after the publication of her Atlantic interview, in which she said Obama’s “failure to help build up a credible fighting force of the people who were the originators of the protests against Bashar al-Assad—there were Islamists, there were secularists, there was everything in the middle—the failure to do that left a big vacuum, which the jihadists have now filled.”
She might have apologized to the President, but that doesn't mean she wasn't right.
“The State Department warned as early as 2012 that extremists in eastern Syria would link up with extremists in Iraq. We warned in 2012 that Iraq and Syria would become one conflict,” said former U.S. ambassador to Syria Robert Ford. “We highlighted the competition between rebel groups on the ground, and we warned if we didn’t help the moderates, the extremists would gain.”
There was a vacuum and it was filled with some very nasty people. In the Middle East the strongest will prevail, we have seen it time and time again. That is why you now see the FSA and other rebel groups hedging their bets, it is a matter of survival. It is either that or a refugee camp in Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey or Iraq; and from there it is a long and dangerous journey to Europe. That is what we are seeing now.
Could things have been different if we had intervened early on when hopes were still high in Syria? We won't ever really know. But seeing what we are dealing with now, if we could go back in time, I would try something other than the non-intervention that Obama chose.
"We won't ever really know."
Not knowing and not being able to prove it are two different things. I think we know. I think Hillary does too.
But, let's make the question simpler: Do you really think that we were prepared for the duplicity we would have run into inside what was ostensibly to be our own ‘side’, whilst Saudi Arabia and Turkey were both trying to advance their pet Islamist faction of the moment and improve their own positions, vis-à-vis each other and against us, all while supposedly opposing Iranian expansion? Do you really think Hillary had a clue what sort of rat's nest she was advocating we crawl into?
And, just by the way, while you're pondering things, the State Department had it wrong.
"The State Department warned as early as 2012 that extremists in
eastern Syria would link up with extremists in Iraq."
The important part is that the extremists in Iraq had already ‘linked up’ with the remnants of Saddam's Ba‘athi organization. That had already happened; the State Department had missed it. And, they didn't ‘link up’ with the extremists in eastern Syria; they went to war with the extremists in eastern Syria (al-Nusra), and they won.
And we had CIA and everybody else we could tap (read Israel, specifically but not exclusively) looking for moderates we could support. We didn't find them because they didn't exist. (Marcus was falling all over himself at the time, howling about the ‘secret support’ we were supposedly providing the Islamists. They were just looking for moderates to support.) Wishing them into existence didn't work. Wishing it would have worked wouldn't have made it work either.
The Clinton 'Scandal' That Isn't
By David Ignatius - WaPo
71 Migrants found dead in abandoned truck
Do you really think that we were prepared for the duplicity we would have run into inside what was ostensibly to be our own ‘side’, whilst Saudi Arabia and Turkey were both trying to advance their pet Islamist faction of the moment and improve their own positions, vis-à-vis each other and against us, all while supposedly opposing Iranian expansion?
Prepared? No clue. But if we did not make the assumption that our erstwhile allies may put themselves first in events in their own neighborhood then we would have been very foolish indeed. I can't imagine that Hillary was that.
Do you really think Hillary had a clue what sort of rat's nest she was advocating we crawl into?
Only Hillary knows for sure. But the point I was trying to make was that if we had stepped in perhaps this rat's nest might have been slightly different. We walked away from Afghanistan and got Al-Qaida, we walked away from Iraq and Syria and got ISIS.
The important part is that the extremists in Iraq had already ‘linked up’ with the remnants of Saddam's Ba‘athi organization. That had already happened; the State Department had missed it.
Perhaps they were too busy withdrawing and going on to other things to see it? Or perhaps there were those who did see it, but they were not given any credence because of the supposedly different ideologies involved? Perhaps the old axiom of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" was simply forgotten?
And, they didn't ‘link up’ with the extremists in eastern Syria; they went to war with the extremists in eastern Syria (al-Nusra), and they won.
Because they could. There was no one on the ground that would stop them.
And we had CIA and everybody else we could tap (read Israel, specifically but not exclusively) looking for moderates we could support. We didn't find them because they didn't exist.
I have come to the conclusion that moderates don't exist, at least not in public, because it doesn't pay. All it does is get you killed, because there is no one of a moderate inclination to give you back up.
P.S.
If there were any moderates they are busy running the refugee road into Europe.
Off to do errands an chores...
"an" = "and"
"we walked away from Iraq and Syria and got ISIS."
No, we got ISIS while Dubya and Cheney were too busy hunting for some remnant WMDs to bother putting his intelligence assets to tracking down and eliminating Zarqawi, gave him about 18 months of organizing before they gave up on finding any WMDs and got serious about letting our best Arab speakers and analysts go after him. It's a popular fiction that ISIS is a new organization just because they got them a new name. It's not a new organization it's Zarqawi's old ‘al-Qaeda in Iraq’ grown bigger still and gone over the Sikes-Picot border line is all it is. They been fuckin’ with us since just after Dubya first sent troops to Iraq.
"Because they could. There was no one on the ground that would stop them."
I fail to see where we'd be much better off if the other al-Qaeda faction, al-Nusra, had won that intramural contest. The Arab governments keep pretending that they can somehow tame one of these Islamist groups. I was hoping we have better sense.
"I have come to the conclusion that moderates don't exist, at least
not in public, because it doesn't pay. All it does is get you killed"
Or pushed aside when the votes are counted. It turns out that there are insufficient democrats (that's small ‘d’ democrats) in Arab society to form the basis of a government. Whether by ballot or bullet, the Arabs choose sectarian factions (Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas) or outright Islamist actors when offered the choice. The liberal democrats do not constitute enough of the population to form a critical mass. Their pile always shuts down for lack of enough active elements.
"I used quotes around that word but perhaps back then, before hopes were
dashed that help would arrive, there actually were moderate rebels."
Weren't enough in Iraq, or Egypt, or Libya, or Gaza (elections have been kept in abeyance in the West Bank ever since). What makes you think Sunni Syria was the source of some sort of secret concentration of ‘moderates’ in spite of the fact that a diligent American search by all our spook agencies over the course of better than two years failed to find them?
"Weren't enough in Iraq, or Egypt, or Libya, or Gaza…"
Nor in Iraq for that matter.
"Only Hillary knows for sure."
I'm not recallin’ Hillary tryin’ to sell it on the basis of ‘here's an absolute rat's nest we can crawl into’. If she knew what was what, then she was keepin’ it to herself.
If I may pose a related question. What's the chances that you believe that the reason ya'll ain't found commercially exploitable amounts of oil in Minnesota is cause ya'll ain't looked hard enough?
Lynnette: "Perhaps the old axiom of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" was simply forgotten?"
That axiom is just plain false. At least in Syria it is with regards to ya'll. If you pick ISIS as your enemy, does that mean Assad and Nusra are your friend? Pick Assad as your enemy does that mean Nusra and ISIS are friends? Pick them all as enemies and maybe the Kurds are your friends (and they may deserve it) but then Turkey is also an ally of yourse and not that much of a friend to the Kurds. However way you want to spin it you cannot make that axiom stick. Impossible.
Of course you could try. Give it a shot and I'll tear your analysis to shreds.
Lee: "I fail to see where we'd be much better off if the other al-Qaeda faction, al-Nusra, had won that intramural contest."
There are those who argue it would actually be more dangerous in terms of blowback at home. The reasoning is that ISIS are indeed committed to their "caliphate" and will use as much force as they can muster in that theatre. But Nusra is more in line with the old AQ which advocates strikes at the "far enemy", meaning the US first and foremost, but given the problem with actually getting at the US strikes at Europe may suffice.
"Pick them all as enemies and maybe the Kurds are your friends
(and they may deserve it) but then Turkey…"
I'm all in favor of picking the Kurds as friends. They're the only ones who've been secular enough to suit me and consistent and conservative enough to be dependable. (And, by ‘conservative’ I mean a real conservative--no radical departures from what works, not the American political ‘conservative’ who often is anything but…) The Kurds have some serious corruption problems, but, considering them in comparison to their neighbors, they almost qualify as good government types.
I'm also in favor of telling the Turks and the Saudi that they're on pretty damn thin ice with us. Although I don't much reckon that last position will gain much currency in American government circles.
And there is the problem of the Syrian Kurds being nominally Marxists, and the Iraqi Kurds being enthusiastic capitalists. They manage to stand together against the Turks and the Arabs, but they've got that problem to work out.
Counter-point to an ‘Anonymous former NATO member official’. Not too long.
No, we got ISIS while Dubya and Cheney were too busy hunting for some remnant WMDs...
The organization that we have now that goes by the name Islamic State, which we refer to as ISIL, is far beyond anything that Zarqawi had set up. It is international in scope and has shown that it can influence people in not just Iraq and Syria but western countries as well. When I say that we got ISIS after we walked away from Iraq and Syria, I meant that we let something get loose that could possibly have been contained within that region if we had tried a little harder to understand the dynamics. To do that we had to have some sort of presence on the ground, and be willing to listen to any assessment given.
I fail to see where we'd be much better off if the other al-Qaeda faction, al-Nusra, had won that intramural contest.
No, I can't see where they would have been a good choice either to win that contest.
The liberal democrats do not constitute enough of the population to form a critical mass. Their pile always shuts down for lack of enough active elements.
The environment is not conducive to liberal thinking, no. To encourage that one would have to change the environment.
What makes you think Sunni Syria was the source of some sort of secret concentration of ‘moderates’ in spite of the fact that a diligent American search by all our spook agencies over the course of better than two years failed to find them?
Maybe they weren't looking in the right place, or maybe the definition of moderate has to be adjusted, at least in the short term.
What's the chances that you believe that the reason ya'll ain't found commercially exploitable amounts of oil in Minnesota is cause ya'll ain't looked hard enough?
LOL! Oil is a static substance. People are not.
Lynnette: "Perhaps the old axiom of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" was simply forgotten?"
[Marcus]" That axiom is just plain false. At least in Syria it is with regards to ya'll."
But it is true of the Ba'ath and the Islamic extremists in ISIL, to whom I was referring. Or at least so it would appear.
However way you want to spin it you cannot make that axiom stick. Impossible.
I tend to agree with you. So perhaps the devil's bargain made by the Ba'ath and the Islamists will not last. We can only hope.
I'm all in favor of picking the Kurds as friends. They're the only ones who've been secular enough to suit me and consistent and conservative enough to be dependable. The Kurds have some serious corruption problems, but, considering them in comparison to their neighbors, they almost qualify as good government types.
One might even think them moderate. ;)
That's enough for tonight, I think. I have to turn in a little early, I'm going to the fair tomorrow and have to meet my friend at 8:00 to catch the express bus.
I hear there is going to be a Black Lives Matter march tomorrow at the Fair. But it's a big place so don't know if I'll see anything of that or not.
Night all.
I'll have to read the counterpoint piece tomorrow...
"Maybe they weren't looking in the right place…"
If yer lookin’ for moderation, war-torn Sunni Syria is almost certainly the wrong place.
"…or maybe the definition of moderate has to be adjusted, at
least in the short term."
You may be able to adjust the definitions enough to sustain an argument, at least in the short term. But, you'll not be able to adjust them enough to sustain a successful foreign intervention. Your new definitions will run into reality on the ground, and suffer much, almost certainly suffer fatally, from the collision.
"The organization that we have now that goes by the name Islamic State,
which we refer to as ISIL, is far beyond anything that Zarqawi had set up."
The addition of the Ba'athi with governmental and military experience is the difference. Otherwise, they acknowledge Zarqawi as their founder, and the vision behind the organization as his. (And let's not forget that bin-Laden and Zawahiri were chastising him for the same brutality still on display with ISIS, not that he paid them any attention on that score. The savagery, the brutality, that isn't new either.)
"Otherwise, they acknowledge Zarqawi as their founder, and the vision
behind the organization as his."
ISIS did not grow out of al-Qaeda in Iraq. ISIS is al-Qaeda in Iraq, grown larger and given a new name, and having absorbed the Ba'athi still in rebellion, much to their benefit. But this is still Zarqawi's organization.
"So perhaps the devil's bargain made by the Ba'ath and the Islamists
will not last."
I've said before, often. I'll be saying it again before this is done. I expect the Islamists and the Ba'athi to wage war over who gets the new Sunnistan as soon as they've got breathing room to turn on each other. But, they neither feel safe enough to turn on the other, not yet, but it's comin’ if they don't get defeated first by outside forces. (And, I'm expecting them to hold on long enough to make their new Sunnistan a fixture, long enough to turn on one another. This is gonna be a long war.)
"LOL! Oil is a static substance. People are not."
Absolutely irrelevant response. Total non-sequitur. We were talking about finding moderates. Whether or not ‘people are static’ matters only if you're now talking about creating moderates. That's another question entirely.
But, we can do that question if you want. Wanna go there? Move; I'll follow.
A brief piece on Turkish/Kurdish/American interactions. Not especially enlightening other than that Turkish elections are now set for November of this year.
On an entirely unrelated topic…
"[F]emales, on average, were about twice as likely [as males] to
associate cash flow with love…
Science Mag
Guess that's all the comment that needs from me.
I'll be real world most of the day.
Saker has some thoughts on the matter off refugees. I'd like to direct you to the second chapter in this article:
http://thesaker.is/europe-in-free-fall/
And I'd like to point out that I do not agree with all of the rest of it, nor am I interested in debating or defending anything other than that second chapter "The EU is on the verge of a social and cultural collapse".
There's too much worth quoting so it's better if you just read the whole thing.
Lee: "The Kurds have some serious corruption problems, but, considering them in comparison to their neighbors, they almost qualify as good government types. I'm also in favor of telling the Turks and the Saudi that they're on pretty damn thin ice with us."
I tend to agree with you, but then there are...issues.
You seem to believe the Kurds are democracy-loving kinda westerners, compassinatly conservative folks in a region of insane terrorists or malignant powers.
I can tell you then that the Kurds do have their repressive culture intact. I believe they top the list for balcony-tossings in Sweden (that'd be when a kurdish girl strays from the community and the family toss her off a high rise- happens a few ties every year) and one of the highest ratios of cousin-marriage.
Fact is: it's a fiercly tribal and greatly pathirarchal society.
And me, for my part, have no problems with that. As long as they don't try to expand and push that shit onto me and mine. Which the kurds don't. Which is why I kinda like 'em.
"You seem to believe the Kurds are democracy-loving kinda westerners,
compassinatly conservative folks…"
That what ‘Marxists’ means in Swedish?
Long lines at the fair yesterday. I didn't see any of the Black Lives Matter marchers. I heard it was a peaceful demonstration. They did end up cancelling a parade, though, which was a disappointment for the high school band who had traveled over four hours to get here. They didn't re-schedule.
It might take me a little bit to catch up on the comments. I see there are some rather interesting links as well.
From Lee's counterpoint link:
They have scored a triumph over every theory of human progress that has ever been proposed.
I think I take exception to this point. They have scored a triumph over a region that was broken. They have managed to reach out and lure those in the West who are, for various reasons, drawn to their brand of violence and coercion. If they were to run up against someone who felt as strongly as they do about a different form of lifestyle, they may not do so well. The Kurds, with our help, managed to turn the tide in Kobani. So, no, I don't think they have triumphed over "every theory of human progress that has ever been proposed".
Btw, I have that book the author was talking about. *sigh* Haven't had a chance to read it yet.
But, you'll not be able to adjust them enough to sustain a successful foreign intervention. Your new definitions will run into reality on the ground, and suffer much, almost certainly suffer fatally, from the collision.
If there is no hope for moderation in the Middle East, then there is no hope for a just peace. There is only a future of endless war.
Moderation is a relative term. I understand that moderation as we view it in the West may not be possible, at least not in the short term, for the Middle East. But I would hope that there is some chance that the brutality shown by ISIL will not be the end for that region.
[Lynnette]: LOL! Oil is a static substance. People are not.
[Lee]: Absolutely irrelevant response.
No, no, indeed, it was not! We are talking about people, who are emotionally charged, sentient beings, not a thing, which is what oil is.
Whether or not ‘people are static’ matters only if you're now talking about creating moderates. That's another question entirely.
But, we can do that question if you want. Wanna go there? Move; I'll follow.
Yes, I think it would be a very interesting side trip to slip into with this discussion.
How do people develop liberal, moderate tendencies? Is it possible to do so without some guiding hand? Is it possible for those who are less liberal to become more so if the environment they live in becomes more liberal (a question that Sweden, and indeed all of Europe, is, and will be, struggling with)?
Gotta run now. I will be back later...
Usually, exhaustion. That's what happened in Europe in the 30 Years War leading to the Treaty of Westphalia.
Exhaustion and horror. The survivors couldn't be convinced anymore that it was worth it.
It happened again in Europe after WWI and WWII when the survivors got exhausted and horrified by the deaths wrought by fascism and nationalism, and repudiated fascism in general and even nationalism to a lesser extent.
I expect the various Muslim powers will continue to kill whomever they can get at until an exhausted population can no longer summon the energy to hate people they don't really know on account of some classification the leaders have been selling as the reason for hating (hating the son-of-a-bitch down the street, whom ya do know, on account of he's a son-of-a-bitch will still be quite possible and probably popular). After a while exhaustion will set in among the population and they will demand leaders who lead them in a different direction, one that lets them live in peace. But, it took Europe a long history of religious wars, and secular wars dressed up as religious wars, culminating in the conflicts known as the 30 Years Wars, before the exhaustion won out.
I expect the Middle East has a couple of decades yet to go.
That's supposed to be in answer to the question:
"How do people develop liberal, moderate tendencies?"
Some fella just being optimistic today; it'll make Lynnette feel good; give Marcus a reason to make raspberry noises. RealClearPolitics
A brief piece on Turkish/Kurdish/American interactions. Not especially enlightening other than that Turkish elections are now set for November of this year.
This was in my paper the other day:
President Recep Tayyip Erdogan approved an interim government, which allowed pro-Kurdish party lawmakers to take up ministerial posts for the first time in the country's history. Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu was assigned to form a caretaker government for Turkey until a Nov. 1 snap election. Davutoglu's Justice and development Party lost its parliamentary majority in an election June 7 and was unable to find a junior coalition partner.
Any thoughts? Is it a real concession or just window dressing?
It would seem to me that giving the Kurds more say in Turkey's government would perhaps go a long way to calming a desire for a separate state. At least in Turkey.
"[F]emales, on average, were about twice as likely [as males] to
associate cash flow with love…
Science Mag
"Diamonds are a girl's best friend"? Probably a built in survival instinct. :) Nowadays women are just as likely as men to make their own "diamonds", but that instinct still lives on, in some.
"Any thoughts? Is it a real concession or just window dressing?"
Hard to say without more detailed knowledge of the comparative strengths of the various Turkish political parties and entities. I could speculate four of five different ways, or even more, but I don't know enough about relative political positions today to know what exactly to make of that.
...the reality is that there is absolutely nothing the EU has to offer to these refugees to make them want to integrate it.
Do you really believe that to be true, Marcus? We have any number of people who come to the US who are quite anxious to open their own businesses or get an education to further their economic progress. Both of those things take some integration if one is to be successful.
I realize that the number of refugees is overwhelming, but Europe has seen refugees before and has dealt with them. Do you feel this time to be different? As the Saker said a lot of these people are families fleeing war. I would think that they are more likely to want to fit in than single young men. They have children to look after and try to provide a future for.
Do I think Europe is on the verge of cultural collapse? As an American who doesn't live there I really can't say. What are your thoughts, not just on Sweden, but Europe as a whole?
There was one other thing, that kind of reminded me of what one of our Republican politicians said about no-go zones in England. Are there such places in Europe where there is no local law enforcement? Are there such places in Sweden?
I believe they top the list for balcony-tossings in Sweden (that'd be when a kurdish girl strays from the community and the family toss her off a high rise- happens a few ties every year)...
er...I think I would have a problem with this, yes, I do think so. While I'm willing to cut the Kurds a little slack, murder is a little much. Lock up enough of them or deport them and maybe they would think twice of breaking the law.
I expect the Middle East has a couple of decades yet to go.
Does Europe have a couple of decades worth of patience to deal with all of the refugees?
Some fella just being optimistic today; it'll make Lynnette feel good; give Marcus a reason to make raspberry noises. RealClearPolitics
lol! Yes, it did make me feel good, and Marcus can make whatever noises he wants to. :)
Now I'm off to bask in the sun for a bit and read the paper...
"Does Europe have a couple of decades worth of patience to deal
with all of the refugees?"
It may be that Europe is providing a release valve for the social pressures which would otherwise cause blowback against the Islamists at an earlier date. The persons who'd be first to provide social reinforcement for a resistance to sectarian violence are fleeing instead, just ‘cause it's easier, thus delaying the day when the Islamic world actually deals with this cancer head-on.
I don't have any solid evidence to support that theory; it's just a theory.
Or, maybe it'd be more accurate to describe it as a naked hypothesis.
The persons who'd be first to provide social reinforcement for a resistance to sectarian violence are fleeing instead, just ‘cause it's easier, thus delaying the day when the Islamic world actually deals with this cancer head-on.
I'd say this was a pretty good hypothesis.
Lee C.,
Usually, exhaustion. That's what happened in Europe in the 30 Years War leading to the Treaty of Westphalia.
Exhaustion and horror. The survivors couldn't be convinced anymore that it was worth it.
That entire comment was excellent. I know we've had our differences in the past, but I have to say that your argument that people become moderate and accommodating due to "exhaustion and horror" is sadly true.
Okay, let me read the rest of your exchange with Lynnette.
Lynnette,
Does Europe have a couple of decades worth of patience to deal with all of the refugees?
Yes, "Europe" does, as long as the Germans pay for and house the majority of the refugees.
I've read of a plan of making the recently finished (but not yet opened) Tempelhof Airport in Berlin into a huge refugee camp. Man, that would be perfect.
"I know we've had our differences in the past…"
That's because you turn into a dickhead over losing an argument.
…sometimes, not every time I guess, but…
Lee C.
That's because you turn into a dickhead over losing an argument.
No, me being a dickhead had nothing to do with the source of our different views or opinions. But you're mostly right about the charge of me being a dickhead, although back then my enemies categorized me as the Psycho Sicko American (as you will recall).
As most of the IBC commenters know, I wasn't that interested in winning or losing arguments as taking a look at the entire range of views that the Iraqi blogosphere could produce. I should also add that the arguments made in most debates can't really be won or lost. Some are just more persuasive (at that moment, given the evidence available) than others.
Sometimes I agreed with the majority opinion, and sometimes not -- just like you. Still, I could definitely get all heated up every now and then. And I certainly didn't mind the barroom brawls at Kurdo's Wild West Saloon. They were, in my book, just good, clean fun (with lots of cussing and fisticuffs).
I've noticed you changed your tone here. In the past, your manner of interacting with others suggested that you thought most other people were morons and simply wrong about whatever they happened to be thinking at the moment, and presented this attitude in a peculiar backwoods shtick. It was unique, that's for sure.
Now you really seem to accept that other people might have intelligent thoughts. You engage with them and even accord them a pretty healthy amount of respect.
*tips brim of hat*
G'day, Sheriff.
*
"…your manner of interacting with others suggested that you thought
most other people were morons…"
Most of the morons are gone.
Obama has returned Denali to its original name (means ‘the high place’), undoing the imposition of the moniker "Mount McKinnley".
I expect Radio-Right-Wing will be incensed and pronounce this as further proof that Obama is "Un-American".
Glenn Beck opened with Mount McKinley.
Lee C.,
Most of the morons are gone.
Heh heh. Let me see. There's Zeyad, Marcus, Lynnette, Petes, and myself. Hm. Marcus, Lynnette, and Petes are pretty bright and articulate, so I would never classify them as morons.
Okay, then I guess it's down to either me or Zeyad representing the moron sector of this comments page. Well, heck, even though Zeyad lost his ability to write at all in English (or even to be civil in any language) once he landed in the USA, I wouldn't call him a moron.
Okay, okay, I guess I'll have to nominate myself. I actually don't feel like a moron, but I imagine that's what most morons also think.
*muffled laughter*
Moron you're not, Jeffrey. Nor is anyone else who has commented here. One of the things I enjoyed at Zeyad's comments section was the different views and, yes, some of the arguments. Arguing, when done at least somewhat civilly, can make you think about things from different angles.
I've read of a plan of making the recently finished (but not yet opened) Tempelhof Airport in Berlin into a huge refugee camp. Man, that would be perfect.
Short term, yes. But I can't imagine that they would want to turn it over for two decades.
No, I fear that Marcus is right, there will be repercussions if too many people are let in at once and over an extended period of time.
Obama has returned Denali to its original name (means ‘the high place’)...
I have always preferred Denali, myself.
Is Trump's bandwagon starting to get a flat tire?
(Please God, let them wake up in time!)
I'm not sure that increasing support for Dr. Ben Carson constitutes ‘waking up’ from the faerie tale, more like an attempt at an alternate route to fulfilling the fantasy.
I take this as evidence that they don't intend to come to grips with reality without puttin’ up one hell of a fight first.
Here is an interesting discussion I found on Musings on Iraq blog with Graeme Wood, who wrote the article "What ISIS Really Wants". It is rather long, but worth a listen.
Immigrants to Europe across the porous southern borders are already up to 300,000 (by EU estimates). And the EU has announced that they will convene an emergency meeting in two weeks on the issue of immigration when it becomes an emergency in two weeks. (I believe the emergency is scheduled to strike on or about 14th of September.)
A bit reminiscent of their handling of the Greek financial crisis.
US stock market down again today on China fears.
ISIL demolishes 2,000 year old temple.
Sometimes it just doesn't pay to read the news. *sigh*
This has more ramifications than this woman realizes. If she cannot perform her duties she should resign.
Lee: "Immigrants to Europe across the porous southern borders are already up to 300,000 (by EU estimates)."
Not quite. 300K are the numbers to date who have crossed the Meditteranian. Total numbers are way higher. Germany alone expects to receive 800K asylum seekers this year:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1099e22c-467e-11e5-b3b2-1672f710807b.html
Lynnette:
"US stock market down again today on China fears."
It looks very volatile right about now. I'm not that convinced about technical analysis but apparently today many indexes, including S&P-500 reached a so called "true death cross", which is supposed to signal a major downturn in the near future and is a sell-indicator for those who trade based on TA.
"Not quite. 300K are the numbers to date who have crossed the
Meditteranian."
And you think ‘porous southern borders’ refers to what? The North Atlantic? The Baltic Sea? Coming in over the Carpathians perhaps?
I think the land route from Turkey, via Greece (or Bulgaria) and up through Serbia would count as the southern porous border. Maybe you see that as the eastern border, I don't know, but I see it as the southern one and it's a major transit route, especially lately.
...S&P-500 reached a so called "true death cross", which is supposed to signal a major downturn in the near future and is a sell-indicator for those who trade based on TA.
It looks like other indicators are flashing a caution signal too.
Global Meltdown?
So much for the raft of house repairs that are heading in my direction. I guess I'll just have to work on the fix as needed mantra.
I got the 300,000 figure from BBC World Report (half hour news broadcast Sunday mornings on PBS) specifically about the influx up through Serbia and towards Hungary, and more specifically about the new 100 km razor-wire fence on the Hungarian border, and it included that with the boat transit across the Mediterranean to get to 300,000 ytd. So, one of you needs to check your figures and your assumptions, either you or the BBC; I'm guessing it's you.
Can't access that article, Marcus. It keeps wanting to sell me a subscription. lol!
The second video clip in the post talks about the numbers that are expected in Germany.
But while we have focused on the refugees coming to Europe we are forgetting the numbers of displaced people in various Middle Eastern countries. They still need support, which is apparently being cut due to lack of contributions. I would guess the numbers to Europe will increase or at least continue like we are seeing now.
People are voting with their feet, and those feet are saying they don't want any part of the war in Syria or the rule of the Islamic State.
"So much for the raft of house repairs that are heading in my
direction."
Wages flat probably at best; supplies dropping in price; I'm thinking about expanding my construction and repair budgets to take advantage.
Lynnette: "But while we have focused on the refugees coming to Europe we are forgetting the numbers of displaced people in various Middle Eastern countries. They still need support, which is apparently being cut due to lack of contributions. I would guess the numbers to Europe will increase or at least continue like we are seeing now."
Well one reason for that is that many countries, and I know for certain Sweden is among them, take a large and increasing share of their foreign aid budget to cope with the massive costs of immigration at home.
It's one policy I think is completely backwards. It's way cheaper to help a refugee in a near country in a refugee camp than an asylum seeker in the west. It's actually a fraction of the cost involved.
So in terms of helping as many as possible with the limited (and it's always going to be limited, would be even if it was doubled) resources available we're not doing that by allowing mass-immigration to the west.
If you have't seen this yet you should:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE
Although I might add that I factor the social costs here in my country higher than the economic costs. I don't mind foreign aid, and I wouldn't mind increasing it. But I do mind the feeling of not imminent but eventual social collapse and I do mind the increased violence and general disrespect and ungratfulness shown, not by all or even a majority but by far too many recent immigrants.
Lee: "I got the 300,000 figure from BBC World Report (half hour news broadcast Sunday mornings on PBS) specifically about the influx up through Serbia and towards Hungary, and more specifically about the new 100 km razor-wire fence on the Hungarian border, and it included that with the boat transit across the Mediterranean to get to 300,000 ytd"
Well I don't get those figures to add up. If Germany expects 800K this year and we're in September now. And given that Germany does take in a large share but not anywhere close to 50% total. Well, seems to me that we must be way above 300K by now ytd. And like you I don't expect that many to have come via the North Atlantic, The Baltic Sea or in over the Carpathians. Where then do the rest come in?
I know there is a flow via airplane, from Lebanon for instance, but I doubt it's that large a share.
Fact is I'd say the vast majority comes in via the "southern porous borders". So either those 300K are close to the total amount ytd. Or the figure 300K is for the boat refugees crossing in overcrowded vessels and there are also other and larger streams in paralell. Or there are some mysterious routes I have not yet heard about accounting for a large, probably majority, share. Or we're expecting the last 4 months influx to be many times the first 8 months influx this year.
It appears from here that Europe is getting a lot of refugees who're not fleeing war per se (and many from lands where there is no significant fighting). They've been wanting to get to rich Europe for a while now, since before the Islamic wars broke out. And now the borders are loose. Why stay and fight for ones home when rich Europe beckons with open borders? Why stay, fighting or no fighting; it's not like these people have strong nationalist identities anyway.
Another possible explanation that I think might actually be onto something. Maybe the 300,000 ytd are the ones who've actually registered as asylum seekers while a great share have not yet done so.
Not done so because according to the Dublin Treaty an asylum seeker who's been granted asylum in one EU country cannot get it in another and will be sent back to the original country if they try. So they try to pass those countries at the "southern porous borders" where asylum is less likely to be given, jobs are scarcer and wellfare is MUCH scarcer and get farther north before applying.
Might mean that the 300K figure is correct but not accounting those still in transit but already inside the EU who might well number in the hundreds of thousands (in Italy, Serbia, Greece, Macedonia, Bulgaria and Hungary).
"I know there is a flow via airplane…but I doubt it's that large a share."
You may want to look again at the number of legal entries into Europe as tourists and such that are simply staying when they get there. Doesn't have to be by plane.
(40% of our illegal aliens are people who had tourist or transit visas who simply stayed after they got here.)
(Student visas are especially popular among young military aged males; often they never bother to ever see the school they're supposed to attend, just move on out.)
@ Lynnette,
Putin's Way on PBS Frontline; one hour; I've not seen it; don't know if it's worth the time but thought I'd mention it.
I'm thinking about expanding my construction and repair budgets to take advantage.
My neighbors got a heck of a deal on windows back in '09 at the height of the Great Recession. While I don't want to see that kind of economic crisis again, it would be nice to be able to get something on "sale".
Putin's Way on PBS Frontline; one hour; I've not seen it; don't know if it's worth the time but thought I'd mention it.
Yeah, when you mentioned PBS earlier it reminded me to check to see what was on tonight and noticed that about Putin. I think I may see if I can stay awake for some of it.
It's way cheaper to help a refugee in a near country in a refugee camp than an asylum seeker in the west. It's actually a fraction of the cost involved.
I should think it would be, yes.
But I think a lot of those people are starting to understand that their sojourn in a refugee camp is not going to be temporary, that is they won't be returning home any time soon. They are starting to look around and realize that there is no future for them in the camps, so they are willing to take the risk of a dangerous journey to Europe.
I'm thinking Europe would still have a refugee crisis on its hands even if the EU countries did send more money for refugees in the camps.
I believe I have seen it before, under a different title. It was worth a look the first time, but I don't know if it's worth a re-run.
Yup, I saw it before too. I took a nap.
Want to get into Europe as a refugee? Easy. Just use the "Refugee Trip Advisor."
Ripley is a guy from Alabama who worked for the US military in Germany and is now retired and living there. He has a great blog called Schnitzel Republic that I read almost every day. Of course, he's been covering the refugee situation in Europe. Here's the entry referred to above.
The Refugee Trip Advisor.
My humble guess....if I wanted to spend money and ride most of the way.....I could make the trip in fifteen days easily.....walking maybe ten-percent of the whole trip. If I went the hard way.....walking maybe half of the whole trip......maybe four weeks.
Here's the thing....it's out in the open for millions to view. A cousin comes over to your place tonight and you weren't eager to leave your homeland but he talks you into it because of various emails he's gotten from friends. You gather up some cash from friends and relatives, and make the expedition.
He has lots of other good blog entries on refugees (and other matters related to Germany and Europe).
Dang.
Okay, here's a link that works:
The Refugee Trip Advisor.
Hope that works.
Lynnette:
"But I think a lot of those people are starting to understand that their sojourn in a refugee camp is not going to be temporary, that is they won't be returning home any time soon. They are starting to look around and realize that there is no future for them in the camps, so they are willing to take the risk of a dangerous journey to Europe. "
Sure. And I can respect that. But then we're talking about "quality of life migrants" and not refugees, aren't we? And that's the majority. The really downtrodden can't make it to Europe at all (look at a Sudanese refugee camp for examples).
I've been very clear that I don't blame the "economic migrants" for wanting a better life. I'm saying it's our own spineless politicians who let them in that are to blame.
There's a push and a pull factor here. The push factor is the degree of poverty/danger at home or close to home. The pull factor is what there is to be had IF you can cross the med, get into Europe and make your way to the more generous countries.
My opinion is that we, and I mean Europe as a whole, should strive to decrease BOTH factor, both push and pull.
To decrease the push factor we should ramp up aid to refugees across the ME and Africa. Ideally we should also work to end the (often american instigated) wars there, which we have very limitied means to do.
To decrease the pull factors there are a host of issues we must adress. Such as lowered financial gains (the danes just cut them down by half - but then the danes were always sensible folks), temporary residency as opposed to permanent and so on.
Maybe another way would be to hire a fleet of large ships to embark from Greece and carry millions of ME/African refugees to the USA. I can't see there would be any protests in the US over that. You said it already "give me yoour poor, give me your tired, give me your wellfare dependents ane give me a whole bunch of would be terrorists". Right?
Post a Comment