With so much going on I have struggled
to find a new topic to compile a post about. As I was cruising
through some YouTube footage I ran across a video that seemed to
encompass a spectrum of ideas about what is going on in Europe. We
here in America have always received immigrants to our shores,
welcome or not, and have tried hard to integrate them into our
society. It has not always been easy. But what we are seeing
happening in Europe today seems to be a mass shift in populations
from one area of the world to another. For integration to occur on
this scale would be a challenge of historic proportions.
You will note that some of the
following video has no sound. I believe they had to do that in order
not to violate copyright laws. But the scenes portrayed speak for
themselves. I realize that some of the views are extreme, on both
sides, but they are real, and they speak to the danger ahead for
Europe.
84 comments:
"For integration to occur on this scale would be a challenge of historic proportions."
A lot of these immigrants just want to escape poverty, war, and, quite frankly, other Muslims. Integration into a heterogeneous, secular, western society was never high on their list of things to do--for some not on the list at all. That makes the integration more difficult, seein’ as the newcomers still ain't all that interested in it. (Which is why I say we should not scrap the current immigration system in favor of a blanket minimum number of ‘refugees’ we pledge to take. I say we look them over one at a time--each by each, and take the ones who want to live in America, and only the ones who want to live in America (and whom we want to be here)). I'm still against takin’ in those who'd just as soon stay home and live in an Arab society, ‘cept for the unfortunate circumstance of they happened to come up on the losin’ side of the persecutions and famines and wars and genocides and such whatnot that seemingly come with livin’ in an Arab society.
While integration into a different society may not be an obvious goal for some of these people, it is a necessary one. That is if they want to succeed in a new country. And for the countries who are receiving the new immigrants integration is necessary to maintain a stable environment. Those who have not thought ahead to what moving to a new country really entails must be made to understand that abiding by the laws and the norms of their new country is a must for their future success.
As for the US policies, I think they have not changed them to anything other than the current screening they do now. They are just talking about increasing the numbers. From what I have read those numbers would not be more than the number of people who are already waiting in the pipeline. Our immigration problems seem to be more on the lines of illegal immigrants from Mexico or other countries to the south.
What I found rather disturbing about those series of clips in the video I posted was the shear numbers of people and the unruly behavior. I can't imagine mass demonstrations occurring in the US as you saw there.
I did rather sympathize with the fellow who talked about there being nothing to do in the small village that he and his fellow immigrants had been sent to. There really needs to be some kind of process to give these people a path to a future in their new countries. Some job training, language courses or other schooling, and help with regular housing would seem to be basic needs to start them in a new life. Simple lessons on what is considered acceptable, or unacceptable, in European society wouldn't come amiss either.
And, frankly, those who cause problems or commit crimes should be weeded out. Violence is not acceptable. Nor is preaching hate.
"Simple lessons on what is considered acceptable, or unacceptable,
in European society wouldn't come amiss either."
There is a theory out there to the effect that they already know that molesting the local women is considered ‘unacceptable’ by the locals (how could they not?), but they don't much care.
Assuming this theory is correct, they should probably be taught to care.
[Lynnette]: "I did rather sympathize with the fellow who talked about there being nothing to do in the small village that he and his fellow immigrants had been sent to. There really needs to be some kind of process to give these people a path to a future in their new countries."
How about a nice friendly sniper training course? ;-)
(somewhat debunked in the Huff Post).
Assuming this theory is correct, they should probably be taught to care.
That would be where that deportation thing comes in...
How about a nice friendly sniper training course? ;-)
lol!
I was thinking more along the lines of teacher or nurse or engineer.
Islamic State's double standards
The local Sunni probably need to enjoy the governance of Da’esh a little longer, but they do seem to be comin’ ‘round a little bit.
It's being reported that Germany is considering support for a ‘mini-EU’ comprised of Germany, Austria, Belgium, Luxembourg, France and the Netherlands, and specifically excluding Italy and Greece in the hopes of stranding future Muslim immigrants in Italy and Greece. EURactive.com (last paragraph)
Yeah, fine idea, like that's gonna work.
New Republican polling, NBCNews/SurveyMonkey: Trump―38%; Cruz―21%; Rubio―11%; Carson―8%; everybody else―4% or less.
Just a quick comment for now. I have heard back from both my local representative and Amy Klobuchar's office regarding the email I sent them earlier about BCBS. They have both tried to be helpful. I am now waiting to see if the Commerce Dept. finds out anything.
UnitedHealth to lose nearly $1 billion on ObamaCare. I suspect BCBS is having the same problem, which has led it to some rather execrable business practices.
I think there have always been people in Europe who favor a north/south split. But that will just lead to other problems down the road. Right now the critical thing for Europe is to get the flow of migrants/refugees under control. That is best handled at the source. But that is easier said than done.
Peter Van Buren in TomDispatch on what to do about Da'esh. (It's a couple of days old, but has just gotten some significant notice, quotes and reprints, here in the last 24 hours..) Worth a read; not too long.
Even if he weren't dissing the American military:
... talking about a military that, since its last significant victory in World War II, hasn't won much of anything against any force that offered it serious opposition, no matter how lightly armed or informally trained. It’s a military that, since 9/11, has proven incapable of effectively building allied armies in the Greater Middle East and has stumbled from one disaster to another in the region.
I would tend to disagree with him on some things. His is a simplistic view that we can just walk away from this fight. I suspect that is not the case. If only because Europe is now in the thick of the blowback from what is happening in the Middle East, and Europe is a major ally and trading partner of ours. But I do agree that putting pressure on countries like Turkey to not cooperate with Daesh might be a good idea, one that maybe the administration has thought of. As for going after Daesh's revenue stream, we are doing that. And, like legitimate oil exporting countries, I imagine that oil trading below $27 a barrel now won't help Daesh either.
Oh, and to address that dig about not building armies in the Middle East that are effective, we can only supply and train, we can't instill a will to fight for whatever government is in control.
"Even if he weren't dissing the American military:"
The quote you pulled was from the editors of TomDispatch, not from the author Peter Van Buren.
And, if you'll read it a little closer, you'll find that Van Buren makes several recommendations, none of which are to ‘walk away from this fight’.
Ahhh...it was that Posted by Peter Van Buren at 5:00pm, January 17, 2016. at the top that messed me up.
Yeah, odd format there.
Kind of an interesting story on the American immigration experience.
Ellis Island of the South
It tends to illustrate what I think of as the positive impact of immigrants to this country. Of course, the numbers here are not the same as in Europe, and they are more gradual.
Did I read it right? A town that once was 90% white is now 14% white; the rest taken up by browner immigrants? So the native population has abandoned the area and this is taken as an indication of great success?
Did I read it right? A town that once was 90% white is now 14% white; the rest taken up by browner immigrants? So the native population has abandoned the area and this is taken as an indication of great success?
No, actually, you didn't get it right, Lee. You only looked at the end result of what was a lengthy process of deterioration in that region. You forgot this part:
Developers built dozens of apartment complexes, which housed upwardly mobile white-collar workers, many of them engineers from overseas. But by the early 1980s, these newcomers had moved on to tonier towns, and the well-worn apartment warrens they left behind began to fall into disrepair while property values went down.
Like so many American cities the original inhabitants have moved on to other places, leaving a shell of a town with deteriorating infrastructure. What the newcomers did was help rebuild. They brought life and hope to a region that was stagnating. The color of their skin, or their ethnicity, is irrelevant. Or should be. What is relevant is that they are creating a badly needed productive tax base.
I am rather surprised at you, Lee. You have usually seemed to be more even handed in your judgement.
"The color of their skin, or their ethnicity, is irrelevant. Or should be."
In this case it did help establish the flawed nature of the writer's analogy. This place was no Ellis Island, more like one of the ghetto neighborhoods of New York City which have sequentially served as first havens for the Irish, then the Italians, then the Jews, then the Vietnamese, then Puerto Ricans and other Caribbeans, sometimes with majority black populations interspersed in there at times (and not necessarily always in that sequence).
The major difference is that it's written about as if it were a separate entity, an independent southern town, unlinked to Atlanta, which it now serves in the infamous Atlanta "sprawl". If it ever were an independent community, that community was wiped out a long ago, probably about the time those ‘apartment warrens’ went in and it got connected up with Atlanta via the ‘perimeter bypass’ highway.
I think I would have stayed home.
I have to say that so far this winter we have had it easy comparatively speaking. I hope that will remain the case (not wishing ill on anyone else, of course).
Asylum seeker stabs refugee center worker to death. They say it was an accident. *sigh*
Lynnette, before you buy that it was a 15 YO kid who stabbed that woman you need to keep in mind that this is Sweden, the epicentre of politically correct doublethink on this world, where a lot is not what it seems. A few examples for you to digest and consider:
http://www.exponerat.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Ensamkommande_flyktingbarn_Australien_big-600x338.jpg
Do those guys look like the age they claim to be? What about this dude:
http://www.exponerat.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/2012-11-24-05-30-40_ahmed_14_ar_2.jpg
Our PM at a shelter for refugee-children:
https://cdn3.cdnme.se/4334771/9-3/hur_dum_far_man_bli_dag_selander_om_mxp_55df340a2a6b2272855f9b02.png
Sometimes it borders on the comical when obviously adult economic migrants are treated as if they were the children they claim to be:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7ZxQSqK-w3w/Tu_HCVz4ZSI/AAAAAAAAJGU/E8yq6OlmHlk/s400/lycklig-med-sin-nalle.jpg
We usually call them “children” instead of children and likewise we would say that the murderer was not a 15-YO but a “15-YO”. Everyone knows the difference by now. He might just as well be 25.
A report (from AEI, "Neocon-INC.") is out claiming Al Nusra is a bigger threat than Daesh:
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/25/politics/al-qaeda-al-nusra-isis-threat-experts/index.html
Here's the whole report:
https://www.aei.org/publication/al-qaeda-and-isis-existential-threats-to-the-us-and-europe/
The American Enterprise Institute is probably is probably flogging the issue for the upcoming national elections. However, Americans actually are at a higher risk for being hit by lightning than killed in a Muslim terrorist attack. That's hardly an existential threat. (Which is not to say that the right-wing crazies aren't all bent ‘bout it.) In fact, we're also at a statistically higher risk from armed right-wingers out to ‘take our country back’ (from whom is never quite clear) than from Muslim jihadi types.
I agree, muslim extremism isn't an existential threat even to Europe and certainly not to the US. It will probably be a major headache in Europe in the coming years, but most likely only a minor nuisance in the US.
Granted, one successful attack perhaps not 9/11-big but semi-big could theoretically cause havoc in the US also, but it wouldn't be close to an existential thing. I don't think they could aim for something much bigger than say the Boston bombings or a mass shooting in the US these days. A 9/11 scale attack would almost certainly be detected and stopped.
But I do think the report may be correct in pointing to Al Nusra which is part of "old Al Qaeda" as a bigger terror threat to the US than Daesh.
In Europe it might well be the other way around though. Daesh-trained returnees or infiltrators is probably the bigger risk here.
I'll have to check out your links later, Marcus. But my first thought when I read that article about the woman being stabbed was why was she alone with a group of kids that age? Kids that age can be an unruly bunch in any country, let alone a refugee center with different nationalities who may not get along and who are probably very street wise. I can well see that a fight might have broken out and she tried to intervene. That is a dangerous thing to do alone.
Yes, I can see where an AQ affiliate would be more of a danger to the US and Daesh more so in Europe. AQ seems to be fixated on us. But, you know me, I still feel the major danger to the world, in any region, is climate change. AQ and Daesh can rattle their swords and explode their bombs, but they are not the massive threat that is climate change.
I'm not sure Lynnette but it seems they are supposed to be at least two employees but she was alone for some reason. Might be that the "refugee entrepreneur" who runs the business was keeping costs low. If so there may be repercussions. Not sure of that though.
Lee,
Have you been following the Democratic machinations as you do the Republican? I have to admit to getting a little concerned about whether or not they can muster a candidate that will stand up to...*choke*...a Donald Trump. It just seems as if he won't go away.
Might be that the "refugee entrepreneur" who runs the business was keeping costs low.
There is a lot of that going around, I'm thinking.
"Have you been following the Democratic machinations as you do
the Republican?"
There's considerably less there to follow. Bernie's got no shot. It's gonna be Hillary. I have no particular fear that she'll be able to stand up to Trump. When it gets down to one-on-one, if Trump is the other one, she'll walk away with it.
I've said it before; I'll probably have to say it again: We can go in and wipe Da’esh off the map; we've got the firepower to make short work of them.
But, we do that, it still ain't over.
So, us doin’ that is not the answer.
"Rob Wainwright, head of the European Police Office (Europol), said at
a meeting of interior ministers that the Islamic State had “developed a
new combat-style capability to carry out a campaign of large-scale
terrorist attacks on a global stage, with a particular focus in Europe.”
Apart from 'lone wolf' attacks, Europe increasingly faces the prospect
of large-scale, organized, mass terror attacks, according to the agency."
WaPo
Doomsday clock stays at 3 minutes to midnight
Their major concerns are nuclear weapons and climate change. They didn't appear to be overly impressed with the Paris agreement.
If Micheal Bloomberg chooses to run a third party campaign, will that hurt the Republican candidate or the Democratic candidate more?
Marcus,
I have never been a good judge of people's ages, but I have to say that those guys do look a little older than 15.
...the Islamic State had “developed a
new combat-style...
I'm not sure if I would call it new. They appear to be trying to do in Europe what they have done in other countries in the Middle East, that is use terror and our own fear against us. It is a slow drip drip drip on a crack in a society's fabric. If left unchecked it could cause problems. The propaganda videos are a cheap way of doing that. Our media should consider that when they give them air time.
Didn't get to the Daesh article by the Telegraph yet. Will have to look at that tomorrow...tired, it's been a long day.
Lynnette: "I have never been a good judge of people's ages, but I have to say that those guys do look a little older than 15."
The danes and the norwegians, being more sane, did age-checks and found that 69% (DK) and 72% (NO) of the "children" seeking asylum were lying and were over 18 YO. I see no reason to believe that Sweden, which does not conduct age checks, should attract more actual children. Rather the opposite I believe the liars will go for the softer target and that our figures may be even worse.
The thing is that an Afghan, for instance, is almost sure to be sent back if he's over 18 YO. Whereas an Afghan who can manage to get processed and get an age of 17 on record is assured of asylum and vastly better conditions during the process. So it ddoesn't really matter if he's 30, he will say he's 17. There's nothing to lose and everything to gain.
The worst case I've yet heard about was a 38-YO Eritrean who posed as a 17-YO Somalian. This was in Norway and he was found out. Here he would most likely been processed as a 17 YO and then sent to school in a class of swedish teenagers.
We're hearing about numerous records in school sports these days too. Lots of "13-year olds" who shatter the shool record in weight lifting or track and field. It's just so great because they are all newly arrived migrants who blossom so when they get to sweden and then bench press twice what their class mates manage.
Here's an article about the "fastest 14 year old", breaking school records in running:
https://i.imgur.com/7JXn9Us.jpg
Isn't that just awesome?
"If Micheal Bloomberg chooses to run a third party campaign, will
that hurt the Republican candidate or the Democratic candidate more?"
Hard to say this far out. Bloomberg has said he won't run unless Bernie Sanders has already knocked Hillary off in the Democratic primary race, which means the world has turned upside down already. Conventional Wisdom is Bloomberg hurts the Democrats more, but we're considering the world turned upside down already, and conventional wisdom may not apply.
Marcus,
I can certainly understand why a person trying to get into a country with that kind of age criteria would lie. Most of them are desperate to get out of the situation they are in and will do almost anything. It really is up to the destination country to have a better age check, if possible. I don't mean to be critical here, it just seems that it would be the logical thing to do.
We're hearing about numerous records in school sports these days too. Lots of "13-year olds" who shatter the shool record in weight lifting or track and field.
lol! No one ever said that liars are always smart. That would seem to be a "tell" regarding a person's age that could be used for deportation procedures.
Bloomberg has said he won't run unless Bernie Sanders has already knocked Hillary off in the Democratic primary race, which means the world has turned upside down already.
I have a feeling this will be a very interesting, and turbulent, election. I don't know enough about Sanders to know whether I'd vote for him.
Conventional Wisdom is Bloomberg hurts the Democrats more,...
I won't vote for Trump, so if it is between Trump and Sanders, and Bloomberg runs as an Independent, it will be a tough decision for me.
Anti-Islam activist arrested in connection with militia standoff
He says he can't let tyranny reign in his country. He wants the government to abide by the Constitution. *sigh* What he doesn't seem to realize is that he might be the one at fault here (not abiding by the Constitution). The law applies to everyone, religion is not the issue.
Just a small aside...
For the first time in the music industry, older music is outselling newer and current releases according to Nielsen's annual music report.
Found this laying around somewhere (shhhh...don't tell Z)...and it was too good not to comment about it somewhere.
I have to say that I'm not surprised. There is a lot of schlock out there in the current music scene, just like at the movies. There's something to be said about oldies, but goodies. :)
"I don't know enough about Sanders to know whether I'd vote for him."
He's got no shot, so I've not wasted any time checking his resumé in depth; wast of time. I know pretty much what I knew about him before he ran for President, which is, he's got no shot.
"f it is between Trump and Sanders, and Bloomberg runs as an
Independent, it will be a tough decision for me."
Personally, I consider a run by Bloomberg to be the Republican's best chance of winning the Presidency. If none of the candidates gets the 270 electoral votes necessary for a clean win, it goes to the House of Representatives where the Republicans dominate. Or, I suppose it could wind up in the Supreme Court again, where again the Republicans dominate.
Also the chance that the Republicans could hold enough of a wing-nut core together to actually win an electoral vote majority in a three-way.
♫Rock 'n Roll will never die♫
♫Rock 'n Roll will never die♫
You can say that again!
Real talent lasts beyond a lifetime.
Personally, I consider a run by Bloomberg to be the Republican's best chance of winning the Presidency.
I think you may be right. That is the tough decision I would have to make. I don't know enough about Bloomberg to judge whether or not I'd vote for him, but I'm not sure about Sanders either. If I find I actually like Bloomberg, do I vote for him because I genuinely support him, or do I vote for Sanders because he is the Democratic nominee and has the best shot at winning an election?
I know pretty much what I knew about him before he ran for President, which is, he's got no shot.
He does seem to be popular with younger voters.
I hope it doesn't come down to that difficult decision I describe above. Because I really can't stand Trump.
In my case the hypothetical choice between Bloomberg and Sanders would be easily decided. I'd vote for whichever had the best chance of winning my state and thus keeping those electoral votes away from Trump or Cruz. Check the last state-wide polls before the November election and vote for the guy with the best chance of beating Trump or Cruz in my state.
Visa free travel from Europe to the United States is under review on account of passport fraud.
“‘There are certain countries, like Sweden, where you can lose your
passports four to six times in a year and get four to six new passports.
To date I believe there are at least 20,000 duplicates out there,’ said
one EU security official with knowledge of the issue, who spoke on
condition of anonymity."
Politico.com
And apparently Sweden isn't the only, or even the worst, offender. The Obama administration is considering requiring visas from holders of passports from France, Belgium, Germany, Italy and Greece if they don't clean up their acts. Sweden didn't even make the list (yet).
"On Wednesday evening, Republican messaging guru Frank Luntz
posted a Twitter poll asking users whether they intended to watch
Trump’s [competing] event or the Republican debate. With roughly
5,000 votes cast, respondents had chosen Trump’s event over the
debate by a 2-to-1 margin."
Politico.com
David Ignatius tells us that the folks in the Middle East still want The United States to fight their battles for them. Even the Israeli and the Jordanians. They're willing to hold our coats while we save them. Washington Post But they're not that interested in saving themselves.
(They really need to get over that. The Soviet Union is no more. We can risk them gettin’ seriously scuffed up, or even worse.)
And, the Senate isn't going to be contemplating any Authorizations to Use Force against Da‘esh any time soon. Politico.com (They got all kinds of goodies over there today.)
"Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.)…
warned that having a debate now would intrude on the presidential
race. He suggested the discussion would likely devolve into how to tie
the hands of the next president rather than a debate over whether the
ongoing air campaign is legally justified by two war authorizations that
are more than a decade old.
(emphasis added)
In other words, Corker wants to debate the legality of Obama's conduct of the fight against Da'esh to date, but he certainly doesn't want to authorize it before they all rant and rave about how Obama's being ‘lawless’ and all that stuff they like to rant about.
I'd vote for whichever had the best chance of winning my state and thus keeping those electoral votes away from Trump or Cruz.
It will probably come to that for me as well.
With roughly 5,000 votes cast, respondents had chosen Trump’s event over the
debate by a 2-to-1 margin."
Because Americans will go for entertainment rather than boring issues, unless they affect them. We will get the country we vote for. We have no one to blame but ourselves.
Lynnette, here's some info that might make you understand my scepticism against the so called "15 year old" in Sweden:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3421150/First-picture-Six-foot-tall-15-year-old-Somali-boy-killer-Swedish-asylum-worker-appears-court-charged-murder.html
Now I was sounding pretty certain when I doubted his age a few days ago even without any solid info at all. That's because I go with the idea that if something ain't what they say it is 95 times out of a hundred then it stands to reason there's a 95% chance of it being bullshit in other cases too.
The thing is the murder took place in a HBV-home with about twenty 15-17 year olds. I would bet good money not a sigle "boy" there is under 20 years old in reality.
...interior ministers called in November for all EU external border control points to be connected to Interpol’s global databases and for automatic screening of travel documents by March this year.
The database was set up in 2002 after the 9/11 attacks. This should have been done a lone time ago. Now you have these things floating around in an area where free movement allows easy transit for criminals as well as your average citizen.
Lee: "And apparently Sweden isn't the only, or even the worst, offender. The Obama administration is considering requiring visas from holders of passports from France, Belgium, Germany, Italy and Greece if they don't clean up their acts. Sweden didn't even make the list (yet)."
This pisses me off. A swedish passport used to be perhaps the best travel document in the world. Granted that was because of our neutrality which you can say was a cowardly stance (and I might agree - depending on the time we're talking about). Nevertheless a swedish passport was great to have, you were welcomed everywhere.
Now you don't think it's swedes that check out 4-6 passports per year, do you? No it's not swedes but "swedes". They are not more real swedes than the "15-YO:s" are real 15-YO:s in our corrupt asylum industry.
Marcus,
Did you read the article Lee left about the duplicate passport issue? It seems that there are others out there that are just as concerned as you were about that, including some in my country.
Ooops, guess you did. lol!
Gotta run.
Its tactical approach has been to draw the West into unwinnable wars in the Middle East.
I finally got a chance to read the Daesh article in the Telegraph. This theory has been floated around for some time now with regard to AQ and its actions. It seems to be the accepted viewpoint of many. I have to disagree though. That AQ deliberately tried to lure us into attacking Iraq is just as much a fallacy as that Saddam was directly involved in 9/11. Iraq could not have been predicted as a result of 9/11. Even Afghanistan couldn't have been. The United States' responses in the past to attacks would not have given anyone the idea that we would invade, with ground forces, as we did. Not when our responses had been more hands off, such as bombing. No, I think people have chosen to read AQ's actions backwards. They were far more likely to conclude that we would pull back. Daesh may be another story. Some of the leaders of that group, who seem to be former Saddam military, would be acting on our more recent responses, which were hands on. And they seem to be acting in such a way as to encourage as much disruption, through terrorist attacks, to the West as possible. I can see where they might try to use a strategy of trying to drain our finances. They have probably been reading all of these theories that we ourselves have been speculating about.
It seems that the Kurds are digging a trench to prevent suicide bombers. It also appears to serve another purpose.
"I have to disagree though. That AQ deliberately tried to lure us into
attacking Iraq is just as much a fallacy as that Saddam was directly
involved in 9/11. Iraq could not have been predicted as a result of 9/11.
Even Afghanistan couldn't have been. The United States' responses in
the past to attacks would not have given anyone the idea that we
would invade, with ground forces, as we did. Not when our responses
had been more hands off, such as bombing. No, I think people have
chosen to read AQ's actions backwards."
And now I'll disagree. I don't think al-Qaeda wanted to lure us into attacking Saddam specifically; I don't think they necessarily had him in mind for our target, but the did want to get us further involved militarily in the Middle East. They'd seen us bombed in Beruit, and Saudi Arabia (Kohbar Towers bombing), as well as Somolia (of BlackHawk Down fame), and they'd been behind the bombing in Yemen of the USS Cole, as well as bombings in Muslim Africa against our embassies in Tanzania and Kenya.
Bin Laden had taken the credit for ‘bleeding out’ the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, and had made public his inclination and intention to draw us close enough to do the same (he thought) to the United States. But, like his 1998 public ‘Declaration of War’ against the United States, we weren't paying enough attention at the time. Doesn't mean he hadn't made it public though. He may have been as surprised as anybody that they decided to go after Saddam as their first choice, but the notion that he wanted to draw us in is not an ex-post-facto construction. He wanted to draw us in.
"Wednesday’s news – that [Sweden] intends to deport up to 80,000
failed asylum seekers – certainly sounds tough. But in Sweden, the
announcement was greeted with derision. A pattern has now been
established: when asylum seekers have their case rejected, most
disappear. They have no address, no papers and find it fairly easy to
give Swedish authorities the slip. On average, seven out of 10 of those
facing deportation just vanish. Or, rather, they stay in the country and
keep gaming a system that could have been designed for ease of
exploitation."
Telegraph
Foriegn Affairs says Russia is facing disaster and Putin is losing his grip on the ‘power elites’; supposedly bad news all around. (Free registration supposedly required, but I'm not registered and it let me in.)
Lee: "And now I'll disagree. I don't think al-Qaeda wanted to lure us into attacking Saddam specifically; I don't think they necessarily had him in mind for our target, but the did want to get us further involved militarily in the Middle East."
I agree he wanted to draw the US into a fight in the ME. And I agee that Bin Laden/Al Qaeda couldn't have foreseen the US war on Iraq. Most likely he was elated when it did happen though.
Possibly he harbored ideas of creating a split between the US and the KSA. After all they chose 19 out of 20 hijackers that were Saudis. OK, so they may have chosen saudis because those were the best recruits (Bin Laden being Saudi and all) but it's also possible that they went with saudis for the specific reason of pitting the US against Saudi. If so they fdailed at that.
Lee
""Wednesday’s news – that [Sweden] intends to deport up to 80,000
failed asylum seekers – certainly sounds tough. "
I won't happen. And it won't happen because we do not have the means to go through with it.
First of all many nations don't want their "refugees" back and simply will not accept any renditioning aircrafts.
Second we do not have the police recources to launch a large scale repatriation program.
We currently have the means to repatriate 4-5000 per year. We might be able to ramp that up to 10.000 per year, but even that's doubtful.
What we might could do is make conditions in Sweden for those refused asylum bad enough that they go back volontarily. But that would mean drastic changes and I don't see that as politically doable, yet.
Of course if the politics change anything can happen. But as it stands today we will not send denied asylum seekers out of the country at a faster pace than new ones get into the country.
Lee: "Foriegn Affairs says Russia is facing disaster and Putin is losing his grip on the ‘power elites’; supposedly bad news all around. (Free registration supposedly required, but I'm not registered and it let me in.)"
I'm not registered either and it let me in too. Perhaps when they post a bullshit article filled with wishful thinking that stands no chance of being realised and a lot of bogus claims they feel it's prudent to at least not demand payment from readers?
Russia is a bad place for many of its citizens - yes (it always was). Russia is hurting really bad with oil and gas prices as they are - yes.
The people of Russia blaming Putin - no. Russia losing and being stuck in a costly quagmire in the Ukraine - no. Russia losing in Syria - no. Russian troops and "mercenaries" returning from the Ukraine and Syria disllusioned and angry - no. Russia breaking with Kadyrov in Chechnya - no.
Possibly Daesh incursions into the "soft underbelly" of Russia will prove a challenge. Other than that I see no real threat to Russia other than gas prices being low in the short term and fertility being low also in the longer term.
Is Englands second largest online newspaper readig my comments on this backwater blog?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3422000/Just-old-think-migrant-children-Alarming-pictures-shed-light-growing-scandal-amid-asylum-crisis.html
Not likely. But they have picked up some of the same pictures I linked to just a few days ago, and the same topic too.
Now that I think about it, where did you first read about the Köln attacks and who was it that first told you it would blow up and cause a major media storm?
"The people of Russia blaming Putin - no."
You seem to have missed the point of the article. It's not ‘the people’ whom they think are Putin's coming problem. It's the oligarchs, the moneyed ‘elite’.
Lee: "You seem to have missed the point of the article. It's not ‘the people’ whom they think are Putin's coming problem. It's the oligarchs, the moneyed ‘elite’."
I saw that. But I don't think there's an "elite" that would go against Putin.
For one it would be very dangerous.
Second what alternative is there?
"I don't think there's an 'elite' that would go against Putin."
I'm fairly confident you are mistaken on that point.
"Second what alternative is there?"
The replacement for Putin would not be obvious until the time comes, as anybody who made themselves obvious would not survive Putin until the time comes. We're not looking for an outbreak of Democracy to occur, just a replacement for Putin at the top of the pile, perhaps accompanied by a general economic upheaval, perhaps not.
Austria won't deport Afghan asylum seeker who raped 72yo woman.
Just a quick link to that article before I have to run errands. Will be back later to read the comments.
No wonder Europe has problems.
h/t to Z.
Bin Laden had taken the credit for ‘bleeding out’ the Soviet Union in Afghanistan,...
The Soviet Union had serious internal shortcomings, not least of which was its political system. Afghanistan was just the last straw. Bin Laden and his followers were only bit players in that process.
All of the attacks by AQ against the US in the Middle East, while of concern to those directly affected, for most Americans were not even on their radar screen, except as a story in the news. If Bin Laden had any idea of hurting the United States financially it was to attack us at home, which he did on 9/11.
He wanted to draw us in.
He wanted to hurt the power that helped the Saudis stay in power by supplying them with military training and weaponry. He didn't care how he did that. He would attack us wherever it was convenient for him to do so.
Possibly he harbored ideas of creating a split between the US and the KSA.
This is certainly a possibility that I could believe in. He resented it immensely when we allied with the Saudis to remove Saddam from Kuwait. He didn't want us in KSA. That was a very touchy subject. A reason why I question the theory that he wanted to actually draw the US into a deeper involvement in the Middle East. I think it more likely that he wanted the American people to throw their hands up in disgust and anger and push their leaders to walk away from the ME.
What we might could do is make conditions in Sweden for those refused asylum bad enough that they go back volontarily.
It's better to make the conditions in their home countries such that they would prefer to go back there than to stay.
I was able to read the Foreign Affairs article as well. It was long, but interesting. I think the author made some interesting points that are a distinct possibility. I don't know that I would call the collapse of Putin's Russia imminent, but I do think he is over reaching in his foreign entanglements. I also suspect that there are people within Russia who are not happy with Putin. The question is whether or not they actually have the organization to do anything about it.
And, you never know, Putin may find an unlikely savior in an American fast food company as well as a few mom and pop startups. lol!
Lynnette: "Austria won't deport Afghan asylum seeker who raped 72yo woman.
Just a quick link to that article before I have to run errands. Will be back later to read the comments.
No wonder Europe has problems."
If I wasn't opposed to the death penalty on principle I'd say he should be shot. Regardless of him being a migrant of course, he should be shot for his crime not his ethnicity. My gut feeling is he should be executed, but my intellect forces me to oppose the death penalty (because it's an irreversible penalty and sometimes we do condemn innocents).
If that had happened in the US there is a good possibility that he would have been tried as an adult. I don't think I would support the death penalty in this case, but I would support deportation, despite his age.
Post a Comment