Since I have no particular need for moral high-ground...and couldn't take or hold it if I tried (lol)...I'm willing to be the guy who hates muslims who act upon their religious ideologies in the manner we've become so accustomed to recently.  Believe that General Becc summarized my position on the matter succinctly in another thread.  We have plenty of walls and plenty of bullets. A better use for either can scarcely be imagined.

(November 20, 2015 at 8:21 am)AtlasS33 Wrote:

(November 19, 2015 at 10:51 am)SofaKingHigh Wrote: I said dry your eyes because of your offence at my question, I asked it because I didn't know and for no other reason.  If you hadn't noticed, if I want to offend, I'll go straight out and do it, hence my "cretin" comment, if I ask a question, it's because i don't know the answer.

Subtlety has never been a strong point of mine.

I personally think not; I personally think you asked because :

1-I'm a Muslim
2-I allowed my mind to extend and question the forces that cause "real" wars in the world; you know, forces that invade countries like Iraq & Libya, open military bases in every possible country, forces that use drones to bomb 24/7.

And that's okay. They programmed you to be like that; and you just followed. See the hate crimes against Muslims (and hate crimes in general); most of them start like that. By a person who "didn't understand".

It's not about being subtle, but it's about logic. I'm questioning your "employer" who sent you to Iraq for a lie (weren't you in the army and served in Iraq ?). The W.M.Ds weren't found and that's a fact. All those people dead, for a lie. So, I have every reason to question the France incident. 

I'm not defending ISIS by that, or "sympathizing" with terrorism,  but I learned from Iraq's invasion that MSM-Official reports-eye witnesses can actually be orchestrated to produce a lie (WMD anyone ?). And to be truthful ? your past employer proved a brutality in war, that matches ISIS ; see the drone attacks or pictures of "Abu Ghuraib".

I just try to look through those poor lives wasted, to see the truth. Because obviously; the lies of your previous employer aren't that convincing anymore (to me at least).

Being accused of being brainwashed by a Muslim.......fuck me, the world has gone mental.  For your information, I left the British army because I was against pretty much every reason they used for us being sent to the places we were.  I saw friends and local civilians die and suffer in ways I care not to repeat.  Soldiers do as they're told, when they're told, end of story.

I asked your opinion because I was truly interested and absolutely because you are a Muslim, 100% right.  I make no apology for it either.  Truth is, no matter the conflict, there is always someone else to blame, dependent on the conflict in question.

You bring up the Iraq war, maybe because you're talking to me, that's fine, but don't forget that France didn't take any part, they were against the invasion, so in terms of this attack in Paris, it is an irrelevance.

Quote:Welcome to the forum Gormo! 

Can I ask why you think this might contribute to 'socioeconomic collapse within Europe'?

Excuse my manners, I'm not used to proper introductions and tend to be a misfit.

What I mean is, for example, how Merkel plans on taking on a million immigrants even though they already took on 1.5 last year. I'm all for humanitarian causes, but this is ridiculous.

When you are talking about countries like Germany who have a system in place that demands a high tax rate, I imagine that would leave such a system particularly vulnerable to a sudden influx of people... unless you can somehow create enough jobs to keep pace.

It's not just Germany either, there are a number of European countries who owe their prosperity in large part to their exemplary social programs. However, in these cases the demands on the taxpayers are going to be invariably high. Unless you can somehow grow your economy to meet the demand, large scale immigration has the potential to create disaster.

(November 20, 2015 at 11:13 am)Rhythm Wrote:  We have plenty of walls and plenty of bullets.  A better use for either can scarcely be imagined.

And nevermind that this single minded approach worsens the situation, since civilian casualties are inevitable. That's the most formidable PR campaign for all kinds opf radicals since 2003. If your gran, your brother, wife or child were smashed to smitherins, you would consider going after the ones having done it too.

I for one consider that quote as stupid and bare of any consideration of the consequences. It's gorilla style chestpounding, which sadly seems to be the only strategy in the so called war on terror. Time to come up with a more clever approach.

France, it would seem, has had enough.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34904931

Quote:European countries cannot accept any more refugees, the French prime minister has been quoted as saying.

Manuel Valls said stricter control of the EU's external borders would determine the bloc's fate, in comments published by the Sueddeutsche Zeitung.

(November 23, 2015 at 9:11 pm)Gormo Wrote:

Quote:Welcome to the forum Gormo! 

Can I ask why you think this might contribute to 'socioeconomic collapse within Europe'?

Excuse my manners, I'm not used to proper introductions and tend to be a misfit.

What I mean is, for example, how Merkel plans on taking on a million immigrants even though they already took on 1.5 last year. I'm all for humanitarian causes, but this is ridiculous.

When you are talking about countries like Germany who have a system in place that demands a high tax rate, I imagine that would leave such a system particularly vulnerable to a sudden influx of people... unless you can somehow create enough jobs to keep pace.

It's not just Germany either, there are a number of European countries who owe their prosperity in large part to their exemplary social programs. However, in these cases the demands on the taxpayers are going to be invariably high. Unless you can somehow grow your economy to meet the demand, large scale immigration has the potential to create disaster.

Well, the bet that Merkel and her economists are making is that the immigrants will grow the economy by virtue of them working and paying those taxes.  Germany, more than most, can afford it.  Will it pan out the way they planned, probably not exactly.  Will it precipitate a "socioeconomic collapse within Europe?"  I strongly doubt it.

(November 23, 2015 at 9:11 pm)Gormo Wrote:

Quote:Welcome to the forum Gormo! 

Can I ask why you think this might contribute to 'socioeconomic collapse within Europe'?

Excuse my manners, I'm not used to proper introductions and tend to be a misfit.

What I mean is, for example, how Merkel plans on taking on a million immigrants even though they already took on 1.5 last year. I'm all for humanitarian causes, but this is ridiculous.

When you are talking about countries like Germany who have a system in place that demands a high tax rate, I imagine that would leave such a system particularly vulnerable to a sudden influx of people... unless you can somehow create enough jobs to keep pace.

It's not just Germany either, there are a number of European countries who owe their prosperity in large part to their exemplary social programs. However, in these cases the demands on the taxpayers are going to be invariably high. Unless you can somehow grow your economy to meet the demand, large scale immigration has the potential to create disaster.

Merkel is a commie.  She's using the situation as a means to wreck Germany in the belief that it will lead to a resurgence of communism.

(November 25, 2015 at 11:28 am)Minimalist Wrote: France, it would seem, has had enough.

And what have the terror attacks to do with the refugee crisis, other than some politicians riding the wave of public opinion? As I said before, all of the terrorists were either french or belgian citizens. They didn't come as a fifth column.

I find it much more troublesome that France took the opportunity to partly suspend the human rights convention. We don't need terrorists, if our governments do their job. Without killing - so far.

They learned that from us.  We threw the Bill of Rights away on 9-12.

(November 19, 2015 at 3:47 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Apparently, some Turks are not so upset with ISIS, either.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/18/world/pari...index.html

Quote:Moment of silence for Paris victims doesn't pass quietly at soccer game

Quote:It's hard to hear what's happening in the video, but according to reports from Reuters and CBS, some fans of Turkey's team booed, hissed and chanted phrases such as "Allahu akbar" (which was said by the terrorists during the attacks and earlier this year during the attack on Charlie Hebdo in Paris).

Social media was quick to condemn the fans.

Must be some more of those "moderates."

Even after America's calamitous blunders first in Iraq under little bushy, and then during "Arab Spring" under Obama and Hilary, There still wouldn't be an ISIS that's anything like today's ISIS without active assistance of an Islamist led turkey.

It was Erdogan's turkey that made sure a steady stream of recruits flowed to ISIS.  It was Erdogan's turkey that ensured oil produced under ISIS found a market through turkey to continue to fund ISIS, and it was Erdogan's turkey that, while claiming to be fighting ISIS, bombed the Kurds who were the only ones fighting ISIS effectively on the ground.   Erdogan's Turkey calculatingly manufactured the ISIS of today, and erdogan wants nothing more than have ISIS smash all existing power structure and ethnic centers of influence in Syria and Iraq, and then grow to such a size that a coalition of outside powers would have to form to crush it while turkey sits on the sidelines, leaving a long standing political power vacume for turkey to fill as a first step towards resurrecting an Islamist neo-ottoman empire.