It's time for leftists to wake up before they destroy Europe

[Greater Hunnia]

"It's time for leftists to wake up before they destroy Europe"

No it's time for the UKIP, FN and other right wing, neonazi and fascist like parties to wake up go away before they destroy europe. It always intrigued me why the UKIP was running for a European Parliament that it wants to abolish... No sense...

Yes, it's horrible how FN shot up Charlie Hebdo and then Paris, UKIP raped over 1400 children while the police did everything to cover it up, and all those neonazi fascist pigs went all "Ficki! Ficki!" in Cologne. There's hardly a week without those God-damn right wing nuts trying to blow up something. And there isn't a single day without them sexually assulting someone in Germany or Sweden.

[New DeCapito]

"It's time for leftists to wake up before they destroy Europe"

No it's time for the UKIP, FN and other right wing, neonazi and fascist like parties to wake up go away before they destroy europe. It always intrigued me why the UKIP was running for a European Parliament that it wants to abolish... No sense...

Yes, it's horrible how FN shot up Charlie Hebdo and then Paris, UKIP raped over 1400 children while the police did everything to cover it up, and all those neonazi fascist pigs went all "Ficki! Ficki!" in Cologne. There's hardly a week without those God-damn right wing nuts trying to blow up something. And there isn't a single day without them sexually assulting someone in Germany or Sweden.

People like you are why statistics like this have to exist.

[Greater Hunnia]

Yes, it's horrible how FN shot up Charlie Hebdo and then Paris, UKIP raped over 1400 children while the police did everything to cover it up, and all those neonazi fascist pigs went all "Ficki! Ficki!" in Cologne. There's hardly a week without those God-damn right wing nuts trying to blow up something. And there isn't a single day without them sexually assulting someone in Germany or Sweden.

People like you are why statistics like this have to exist.

How exactly is it the fault of people like me that these migrants are willing to cross half of the world to get to the Western welfare states? Perhaps you should blame those who invited them instead? People like mama Merkel, and her voters. Or the people who destabilised the Middle East the first place?

[New DeCapito]

People like you are why statistics like this have to exist.

How exactly is it the fault of people like me that these migrants are willing to cross half of the world to get to the Western welfare states? Perhaps you should blame those who invited them instead? People like mama Merkel, and her voters. Or the people who destabilised the Middle East the first place?

Of course, it is bad that they are being forced out of their own countries, but it is those right wing parties that refuse to let them in, letting them die instead. What would you have done with them?

[Aequitatia]

People like you are why statistics like this have to exist.

How exactly is it the fault of people like me that these migrants are willing to cross half of the world to get to the Western welfare states? Perhaps you should blame those who invited them instead? People like mama Merkel, and her voters. Or the people who destabilised the Middle East the first place?

Where else can they go? They are not wanted in the Gulf states, and they actually have opportunities in Europe. We're rich enough to take them.

[The balkens]

How exactly is it the fault of people like me that these migrants are willing to cross half of the world to get to the Western welfare states? Perhaps you should blame those who invited them instead? People like mama Merkel, and her voters. Or the people who destabilised the Middle East the first place?

Where else can they go? They are not wanted in the Gulf states, and they actually have opportunities in Europe. We're rich enough to take them.

Just because you can, doesnt mean you should.

[Greater Hunnia]

How exactly is it the fault of people like me that these migrants are willing to cross half of the world to get to the Western welfare states? Perhaps you should blame those who invited them instead? People like mama Merkel, and her voters. Or the people who destabilised the Middle East the first place?

Of course, it is bad that they are being forced out of their own countries, but it is those right wing parties that refuse to let them in, letting them die instead. What would you have done with them?

The first part of your statement is a blatant lie, the majority of the "refugees" aren't coming from war zones, but even if they did, there are plenty of safe countries between Europe and their countries of origin, so not letting them in Europe wouldn't sentence them to death either. And what would I do? I wouldn't let them in. I'd also stop funding various terrorist organisations to overthrow regimes and destabilise countries in the name of "democracy". I would reassign the funds that are used to shelter these people inside Europe to sheltering them in their own countries, if they truly need it.

How exactly is it the fault of people like me that these migrants are willing to cross half of the world to get to the Western welfare states? Perhaps you should blame those who invited them instead? People like mama Merkel, and her voters. Or the people who destabilised the Middle East the first place?

Where else can they go? They are not wanted in the Gulf states, and they actually have opportunities in Europe. We're rich enough to take them.

Europe doesn't want them either. A very small but very loud minority wants them. I'd sanction the living sh!t out of the gulf states until they start taking in refugees, especially Saudi Arabia, who is one of the main supporters of the terrorists messing up Syria.

[Vassenor]

Of course, it is bad that they are being forced out of their own countries, but it is those right wing parties that refuse to let them in, letting them die instead. What would you have done with them?

The first part of your statement is a blatant lie, the majority of the "refugees" aren't coming from war zones, but even if they did, there are plenty of safe countries between Europe and their countries of origin, so not letting them in Europe wouldn't sentence them to death either. And what would I do? I wouldn't let them in. I'd also stop funding various terrorist organisations to overthrow regimes and destabilise countries in the name of "democracy". I would reassign the funds that are used to shelter these people inside Europe to sheltering them in their own countries, if they truly need it.

You mean the "Safe" countries that have emphatically stated they are not welcome and have used force to keep them out? Some safety.

[Greater Hunnia]

The first part of your statement is a blatant lie, the majority of the "refugees" aren't coming from war zones, but even if they did, there are plenty of safe countries between Europe and their countries of origin, so not letting them in Europe wouldn't sentence them to death either. And what would I do? I wouldn't let them in. I'd also stop funding various terrorist organisations to overthrow regimes and destabilise countries in the name of "democracy". I would reassign the funds that are used to shelter these people inside Europe to sheltering them in their own countries, if they truly need it.

You mean the "Safe" countries that have emphatically stated they are not welcome and have used force to keep them out? Some safety.

Europe would be more than capable of putting enough diplomatic and even economic pressure on these countries so they take in their fair share of the migrants.

[Aequitatia]

You mean the "Safe" countries that have emphatically stated they are not welcome and have used force to keep them out? Some safety.

Europe would be more than capable of putting enough diplomatic and even economic pressure on these countries so they take in their fair share of the migrants.

Or, you know, as some of the richest countries in the world by far we could just take in our share and give them the opportunity to build a new life.

[Greater Hunnia]

Europe would be more than capable of putting enough diplomatic and even economic pressure on these countries so they take in their fair share of the migrants.

Or, you know, as some of the richest countries in the world by far we could just take in our share and give them the opportunity to build a new life.

The gulf states are THE richest countries on Earth. Just saying. We have only so many resources, and considering that the European working and middle class work their asses off to achieve this relatively good standard of living, I don't think we should put the burden of the third world on them (because I guarantee you, it won't be the billionaries who will pay the price, both literally and in a figurative sense). And of course, there are the security risks, ethnic and religious tensions, which actually put native Europeans in grave danger, this is the greater problem, especially on the long run.

[New DeCapito]

Or, you know, as some of the richest countries in the world by far we could just take in our share and give them the opportunity to build a new life.

The gulf states are THE richest countries on Earth. Just saying. We have only so many resources, and considering that the European working and middle class work their asses off to achieve this relatively good standard of living, I don't think we should put the burden of the third world on them (because I guarantee you, it won't be the billionaries who will pay the price, both literally and in a figurative sense). And of course, there are the security risks, ethnic and religious tensions, which actually put native Europeans in grave danger, this is the greater problem, especially on the long run.

The Gulf States are some of the richest countries in the world, but where the money is is not important. How much of that wealth is going towards the country's citizens, do you think? Do you know what the wage gap is in, for instance, Israel?
As for the religious tensions in Europe... do you not think that those tensions (Not really tensions. All out war.) in the Gulf States are worse?

[Aequitatia]

Or, you know, as some of the richest countries in the world by far we could just take in our share and give them the opportunity to build a new life.

The gulf states are THE richest countries on Earth. Just saying. We have only so many resources, and considering that the European working and middle class work their asses off to achieve this relatively good standard of living, I don't think we should put the burden of the third world on them (because I guarantee you, it won't be the billionaries who will pay the price, both literally and in a figurative sense). And of course, there are the security risks, ethnic and religious tensions, which actually put native Europeans in grave danger, this is the greater problem, especially on the long run.

The Gulf states, as I already said, do not want the refugees. They cannot go there.

[Greater Hunnia]

The gulf states are THE richest countries on Earth. Just saying. We have only so many resources, and considering that the European working and middle class work their asses off to achieve this relatively good standard of living, I don't think we should put the burden of the third world on them (because I guarantee you, it won't be the billionaries who will pay the price, both literally and in a figurative sense). And of course, there are the security risks, ethnic and religious tensions, which actually put native Europeans in grave danger, this is the greater problem, especially on the long run.

The Gulf States are some of the richest countries in the world, but where the money is is not important. How much of that wealth is going towards the country's citizens, do you think? Do you know what the wage gap is in, for instance, Israel?
As for the religious tensions in Europe... do you not think that those tensions (Not really tensions. All out war.) in the Gulf States are worse?

First, Israel isn't a gulf state and I never proposed moving the "refugees" there. Second, I don't know the exact values of the gulf states, but frankly, I really care either. I know that they are more than capable of taking care of a whole bunch of people, but they don't do because they priorise the interests of their own people, and they are right to do so. They could be and should be forced to take their part nevertheless. And finally, I absolutely do think that even with the Shia-Sunni conflict, there would be less tensions. There are many reasons for it. First of all, most of these "refugees" are not refugees at all but simply freeloaders. If Europe stopped taking them in, they wouldn't even leave their countries to begin with. Actual refugees on the other hand, stay only temorarily, or at least most of them do, so there would be no long term consequences at all. Second, unlike the morons in the EP, the gulf states would probably be smart enough to have the backgrounds of the refugees checked, so criminals and terrorists could not enter those countries so easily. And finally, Shia or Sunni, both are muslims after all. They beliefs are different, but their customs are mostly the same. Large scale conflicts, such as those between these two religious groups can be prevented by isolating the groups, and by the UN and international cooperation if they are prepared, but day to day conflicts that are caused by the radical differences between the European and Islamic cultures (ie.: "multiculti") can't.

[New DeCapito]

The Gulf States are some of the richest countries in the world, but where the money is is not important. How much of that wealth is going towards the country's citizens, do you think? Do you know what the wage gap is in, for instance, Israel?
As for the religious tensions in Europe... do you not think that those tensions (Not really tensions. All out war.) in the Gulf States are worse?

First, Israel isn't a gulf state and I never proposed moving the "refugees" there. Second, I don't know the exact values of the gulf states, but frankly, I really care either. I know that they are more than capable of taking care of a whole bunch of people, but they don't do because they priorise the interests of their own people, and they are right to do so. They could be and should be forced to take their part nevertheless. And finally, I absolutely do think that even with the Shia-Sunni conflict, there would be less tensions. There are many reasons for it. First of all, most of these "refugees" are not refugees at all but simply freeloaders. If Europe stopped taking them in, they wouldn't even leave their countries to begin with. Actual refugees on the other hand, stay only temorarily, or at least most of them do, so there would be no long term consequences at all. Second, unlike the morons in the EP, the gulf states would probably be smart enough to have the backgrounds of the refugees checked, so criminals and terrorists could not enter those countries so easily. And finally, Shia or Sunni, both are muslims after all. They beliefs are different, but their customs are mostly the same. Large scale conflicts, such as those between these two religious groups can be prevented by isolating the groups, and by the UN and international cooperation if they are prepared, but day to day conflicts that are caused by the radical differences between the European and Islamic cultures (ie.: "multiculti") can't.

You realise, that in order to actually get to the Gulf States, the refugees must first pass through Saudi Arabia. Which is a thousand-mile wide desert. Which doesn't approve highly of refugees to begin with. And summer's approaching, which means 50 degree (Celsius) weather. The number of deaths would be uncountable.
I suggested statistics for Israel because I assumed there was no way anyone would be insane enough to travel through that hellhole.
And remember - Iraq is literally the centre of a massive conflict that's killing thousands of people. They can't travel through there, either.

[Kuruinullah]

How exactly is it the fault of people like me that these migrants are willing to cross half of the world to get to the Western welfare states? Perhaps you should blame those who invited them instead? People like mama Merkel, and her voters. Or the people who destabilised the Middle East the first place?

Where else can they go? They are not wanted in the Gulf states, and they actually have opportunities in Europe. We're rich enough to take them.

Bullshit. As a muslim myself i believe you shouldn't take all of these people. The ones who are skilled and are willing to learn our culture, respect our women, learn the language, and fucking work can come. The rest can stay in a refugee camp in turkey and Lebanon. You wouldn't be saying that if they raped your daughter, wife, sister etc.

[Kuruinullah]

Europe would be more than capable of putting enough diplomatic and even economic pressure on these countries so they take in their fair share of the migrants.

Or, you know, as some of the richest countries in the world by far we could just take in our share and give them the opportunity to build a new life.

Saudi Arabia is pretty fucking rich dipshit

[Juristonia]

It's a good thing 99.99999% of them have no intention of raping anyone then.
Although that gets in the way of your hyperbolic nonsense a bit.

[Aequitatia]

Where else can they go? They are not wanted in the Gulf states, and they actually have opportunities in Europe. We're rich enough to take them.

Bullshit. As a muslim myself i believe you shouldn't take all of these people. The ones who are skilled and are willing to learn our culture, respect our women, learn the language, and fucking work can come. The rest can stay in a refugee camp in turkey and Lebanon. You wouldn't be saying that if they raped your daughter, wife, sister etc.

I'm sorry but I don't presume all refugees or all Muslims are a rape waiting to happen, if any refugees come here and commit rape then I'm going to be right there demanding they be brought to justice. Besides, we have enough rapists here who are not refugees or Muslims so maybe we could do a trade.

Or, you know, as some of the richest countries in the world by far we could just take in our share and give them the opportunity to build a new life.

Saudi Arabia is pretty fucking rich dipshit

You should have read further in the thread before replying and calling me a "dipshit" (I'm going to overlook that this one time, by the way), I already responded to that point. The Gulf states do not want refugees, they are not taking them in.

[The Rich Port]

Where else can they go? They are not wanted in the Gulf states, and they actually have opportunities in Europe. We're rich enough to take them.

Bullshit. As a muslim myself i believe you shouldn't take all of these people. The ones who are skilled and are willing to learn our culture, respect our women, learn the language, and fucking work can come. The rest can stay in a refugee camp in turkey and Lebanon. You wouldn't be saying that if they raped your daughter, wife, sister etc.

Welcome to the West, where nobody cares what Muslims think, especially conservative ones.

[Major-Tom]

There needs to be a pragmatic approach to the European migrant crisis.

First, I'll begin with addressing the supposed "nationalists." Civic nationalism is fine, but when you use it to hate people of other religions or races, you're using it as an excuse for your own bigotry. Refugees aren't all "rapists," statistics show that many are middle class families, and many are escaping Daesh and Assad. They can also bring skills to the economy, and once integrated, can be loyal citizens. Case in point.

Now, many leftists are being extraordinarily naive as well. Europe can't just accept everyone with open arms, and Merkel should be ashamed for letting Germans take the burden while other European countries like the UK and Italy barely take a single refugee. Its just ludicrous. Furthermore, an influx without proper border controls hinders efforts to integrate, spurring terrorism and segregated neighborhoods. To protect the secular states of Europe, integration must happen, and it must be be stringent. The multiculturalists feel as if an influx can come in without problems, whereas the populist right thinks that Muslims will somehow destroy Europe.

Both of those notions are fundamentally idiotic, and the multicultural left and populist right need to recognize this. European leaders need to work together to integrate, shelter, and help immigrants while simultaneously not hanging countries like Sweden and Germany out to dry. I'd advocate a meritocracy immigration system alongside a refugee program, by letting in skilled and educated immigrants in before those who simply can't assimilate/occupy decent jobs.

[Kubra]

Where else can they go? They are not wanted in the Gulf states, and they actually have opportunities in Europe. We're rich enough to take them.

Bullshit. As a muslim myself i believe you shouldn't take all of these people. The ones who are skilled and are willing to learn our culture, respect our women, learn the language, and fucking work can come. The rest can stay in a refugee camp in turkey and Lebanon. You wouldn't be saying that if they raped your daughter, wife, sister etc.

You know, it's not for no reason that sunni arab iraqi's and syrians might be somewhat averse to learning Persian or the Persian culture in general.
You're a muslim, sure. by the looks of your list, probably a shia persian. Saying "oh we'll take in the educated ones and the ones most willing to learn our culture of course" is very convenient, insofar as al'awite domination of important roles in Syrian society gives them greater access to educational and economic opportunities, whilst their closer affinity with shia persians compared to sunni arabs makes them the population most capable of integration.
Just speak honestly, man: you only want al'awites.

[Greater Hunnia]

First, Israel isn't a gulf state and I never proposed moving the "refugees" there. Second, I don't know the exact values of the gulf states, but frankly, I really care either. I know that they are more than capable of taking care of a whole bunch of people, but they don't do because they priorise the interests of their own people, and they are right to do so. They could be and should be forced to take their part nevertheless. And finally, I absolutely do think that even with the Shia-Sunni conflict, there would be less tensions. There are many reasons for it. First of all, most of these "refugees" are not refugees at all but simply freeloaders. If Europe stopped taking them in, they wouldn't even leave their countries to begin with. Actual refugees on the other hand, stay only temorarily, or at least most of them do, so there would be no long term consequences at all. Second, unlike the morons in the EP, the gulf states would probably be smart enough to have the backgrounds of the refugees checked, so criminals and terrorists could not enter those countries so easily. And finally, Shia or Sunni, both are muslims after all. They beliefs are different, but their customs are mostly the same. Large scale conflicts, such as those between these two religious groups can be prevented by isolating the groups, and by the UN and international cooperation if they are prepared, but day to day conflicts that are caused by the radical differences between the European and Islamic cultures (ie.: "multiculti") can't.

You realise, that in order to actually get to the Gulf States, the refugees must first pass through Saudi Arabia. Which is a thousand-mile wide desert. Which doesn't approve highly of refugees to begin with. And summer's approaching, which means 50 degree (Celsius) weather. The number of deaths would be uncountable.
I suggested statistics for Israel because I assumed there was no way anyone would be insane enough to travel through that hellhole.
And remember - Iraq is literally the centre of a massive conflict that's killing thousands of people. They can't travel through there, either.[/spoiler]

Saudi Arabia itself is a gulf state. I believe that the number of actual refugees is small enough so that it can be managed without a humanitarian catastrophe. The problem is that mama Merkel basically invited Africa and the Middle East to Europe, and all these people who want better life (ie.: free everything) answered the call. I can't blame them, but they are still freeloaders, undesirable and problematic ones, I might add. If let the world know that we only take in people who are literally running for their lives from their home countries, the number of newcomers would drop immensely.

Of course, we have to ease the suffering of these people, but we can do it without ruining our own countries. The first and most important thing to do would be forcing those politicians who undermined the stability of the Middle East to step aside. Ironically, these polticians speak the most about "democracy", "human rights", while in reality, they are war criminals, and the blood of hundreds of thousands of people are on their hands. This basically means the whole Western political elite. Then, when the warmongering and the funding of terrorists is finally stopped, we can focus on helping Syria, Iraq, Lybia, and Afghanistan to rebuild themselves. Not only with money and supplies, but also by sending back the refugees and migrants from Europe, after all, manpower is desperately needed for such a gargantuan task. The industry and manufacturing capability of these war-torn countries is in ruins. By helping them, the European industry could also take adventage of the situation, and lots of jobs could be created for Europeans.

The problem is, that short-sightedness and excessive empathy is a very dangerous combination, and it drives the European left, or at least those people who I consider to be "usefull idiots". Instead of using their influence and the sheer amount of activists at their disposal to remove the warmongering criminals from power, they outright support them! A few nice words about being humane and democratic, and the ever present threat of those nasty fascistnazibigots is all it takes.

[Mugrul]

There needs to be a pragmatic approach to the European migrant crisis.

First, I'll begin with addressing the supposed "nationalists." Civic nationalism is fine, but when you use it to hate people of other religions or races, you're using it as an excuse for your own bigotry. Refugees aren't all "rapists," statistics show that many are middle class families, and many are escaping Daesh and Assad. They can also bring skills to the economy, and once integrated, can be loyal citizens. Case in point.

Now, many leftists are being extraordinarily naive as well. Europe can't just accept everyone with open arms, and Merkel should be ashamed for letting Germans take the burden while other European countries like the UK and Italy barely take a single refugee. Its just ludicrous. Furthermore, an influx without proper border controls hinders efforts to integrate, spurring terrorism and segregated neighborhoods. To protect the secular states of Europe, integration must happen, and it must be be stringent. The multiculturalists feel as if an influx can come in without problems, whereas the populist right thinks that Muslims will somehow destroy Europe.

Both of those notions are fundamentally idiotic, and the multicultural left and populist right need to recognize this. European leaders need to work together to integrate, shelter, and help immigrants while simultaneously not hanging countries like Sweden and Germany out to dry. I'd advocate a meritocracy immigration system alongside a refugee program, by letting in skilled and educated immigrants in before those who simply can't assimilate/occupy decent jobs.

Europe can handle the bulk of what it now holds. Let's remember how there used to be 14 million being dealt with after WW2.

Merkel shouldn't be ashamed as she's made the selfless moral decision to help thousands in need, at the expense of a few incidents. Yes the migrants might not experience persecution in whichever first country they got to, but I don't believe any of those countries (Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan) has the capacity to manage them all right now. Britain and Italy taking few is another issue.

And they can certainly be integrated. Europe's simply not been following the correct philosophy when it comes to integration policy.

[Major-Tom]

There needs to be a pragmatic approach to the European migrant crisis.

First, I'll begin with addressing the supposed "nationalists." Civic nationalism is fine, but when you use it to hate people of other religions or races, you're using it as an excuse for your own bigotry. Refugees aren't all "rapists," statistics show that many are middle class families, and many are escaping Daesh and Assad. They can also bring skills to the economy, and once integrated, can be loyal citizens. Case in point.

Now, many leftists are being extraordinarily naive as well. Europe can't just accept everyone with open arms, and Merkel should be ashamed for letting Germans take the burden while other European countries like the UK and Italy barely take a single refugee. Its just ludicrous. Furthermore, an influx without proper border controls hinders efforts to integrate, spurring terrorism and segregated neighborhoods. To protect the secular states of Europe, integration must happen, and it must be be stringent. The multiculturalists feel as if an influx can come in without problems, whereas the populist right thinks that Muslims will somehow destroy Europe.

Both of those notions are fundamentally idiotic, and the multicultural left and populist right need to recognize this. European leaders need to work together to integrate, shelter, and help immigrants while simultaneously not hanging countries like Sweden and Germany out to dry. I'd advocate a meritocracy immigration system alongside a refugee program, by letting in skilled and educated immigrants in before those who simply can't assimilate/occupy decent jobs.

Europe can handle the bulk of what it now holds. Let's remember how there used to be 14 million being dealt with after WW2.

Merkel shouldn't be ashamed as she's made the selfless moral decision to help thousands in need, at the expense of a few incidents. Yes the migrants might not experience persecution in whichever first country they got to, but I don't believe any of those countries (Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan) has the capacity to manage them all right now. Britain and Italy taking few is another issue.

And they can certainly be integrated. Europe's simply not been following the correct philosophy when it comes to integration policy.

14 million were dealt with after more than 14 million were lost. Even then, it was tough.

I see that Merkel is trying to be a good Christian and moralist, and I can appreciate that. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt and say that she isn't doing it for political brownie points, because it was admittedly a rough political decision. That all said, Germany simply has not been able to handle 1 million refugees, whether it be because of infrastructure, welfare spending, or the German culture itself.

Yes, they can be integrated, but not with this massive influx. I think many refugees can enter Europe, but certain countries like Germany can't take the entire load.