Van hits 6 on London bridge.

[The Serbian Empire]

Name a time when internment in the US resulted in a good outcome.

The Civil War.

That was more to keep Confederates captured from rejoining the Confederate Army.

[Ambarii]

The Civil War.

That was more to keep Confederates captured from rejoining the Confederate Army.

And I am suggesting that we lock up jihadists and other extremists to prevent them from committing acts of terror.

[Napkiraly]

Except Americans wouldn't flood in to take those jobs, and the farmers wouldn't want to take them on. Long story short, migrants are better at things like farmwork than the average westerner. They've probably done it back home, and - on average (#NotAll) have a much stronger work ethic than a native. They have come to a different country to work, sometimes for illegally low wages.

Note how the Trump estate is continually filing migrant labour requests for their fucking wineries, when those could be "American jobs".
Even the Trumps know that Americans won't do the work, and they don't want them to because they'd have to pay a decent wage.

Capitalist exploitation.
This is before considering the inevitable issue of what happens when these crops can no longer be effectively or expediently picked.

You're god damn right.
Source: I worked as an agricultural field hand.
I literally don't take anyone's opinion about migrants seriously unless they worked with them. They're amazing people.

Them being good people isn't the issue. If they were pillars of the community I'd still want them deported.

[Grinning Dragon]

That was more to keep Confederates captured from rejoining the Confederate Army.

And I am suggesting that we lock up jihadists and other extremists to prevent them from committing acts of terror.

While I don't understand killing for religion, your proposal sets a very dangerous precedent and is akin to setting a forest on fire to prevent a forest fire.

[Tekeristan]

You're god damn right.
Source: I worked as an agricultural field hand.
I literally don't take anyone's opinion about migrants seriously unless they worked with them. They're amazing people.

Them being good people isn't the issue. If they were pillars of the community I'd still want them deported.

For being migrants?
Illegal migrants maybe but just regular migrants?

Why?

[Fartsniffage]

You're god damn right.
Source: I worked as an agricultural field hand.
I literally don't take anyone's opinion about migrants seriously unless they worked with them. They're amazing people.

Them being good people isn't the issue. If they were pillars of the community I'd still want them deported.

Why?

[The East Marches II]

When did I say that? IWhat I am suggesting wouldn't even be against the Constitution since it allows for the suspension of habeas corpus. But admittedly, yes, there are quite a few things I would change about the US Constitution. I don't think this is that unusual. For instance, their is quite a large movement of Americans that are opposed to the 2nd ammendment.

Name a time when internment in the US resulted in a good outcome.

Are we counting rounding up the Irish in Chicago during riots?

[Fartsniffage]

Name a time when internment in the US resulted in a good outcome.

Are we counting rounding up the Irish in Chicago during riots?

What was the outcome?

[Torrocca]

Them being good people isn't the issue. If they were pillars of the community I'd still want them deported.

For being migrants?
Illegal migrants maybe but just regular migrants?

Why?

Them being good people isn't the issue. If they were pillars of the community I'd still want them deported.

Why?

Probably fear.

[The East Marches II]

Are we counting rounding up the Irish in Chicago during riots?

What was the outcome?

No more riots, law and order restored. Then they became the police force.

Edit: Actually this was a poor outcome, you were correct

[Tekeristan]

For being migrants?
Illegal migrants maybe but just regular migrants?

Why?

Why?

Probably fear.

Guessing from the cultural nationalist thing, it has to do more with 'purity'.
Which is ballux, since just from that alone they had no idea how agriculture actually works in this country.

[Torrocca]

Probably fear.

Guessing from the cultural nationalist thing, it has to do more with 'purity'.
Which is ballux, since just from that alone they had no idea how agriculture actually works in this country.

Well, yeah it might be that too.

[The Greater Aryan Race]

So, what is to be done now? More hemming and hawing by the politicians? More collective shuffling about with hands in pockets, fingers crossed that another attack like this won't happen?

[Fartsniffage]

So, what is to be done now? More hemming and hawing by the politicians? More collective shuffling about with hands in pockets, fingers crossed that another attack like this won't happen?

What would you suggest?

[Nakena]

And I am suggesting that we lock up jihadists and other extremists to prevent them from committing acts of terror.

While I don't understand killing for religion, your proposal sets a very dangerous precedent and is akin to setting a forest on fire to prevent a forest fire.

You're suggesting appeasement then? Appease the islamist in the vain hope that they will refrain from comitting violent acts or provide an environment for those.

Its not going to work too out.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -them.html

[Tekeristan]

So, what is to be done now? More hemming and hawing by the politicians? More collective shuffling about with hands in pockets, fingers crossed that another attack like this won't happen?

Pretty much. It'll pass with time.
KEEP CALM AND CARRY ON. GOD SAVE THE QUEEN
Wide spread terror is what they want, that is why they do what they do. Reactionary action is a no good. Instead lets just strengthen our cooperative efforts across nations and keep the police into proper gear for keeping an eye on reasonable suspects.

[Fartsniffage]

While I don't understand killing for religion, your proposal sets a very dangerous precedent and is akin to setting a forest on fire to prevent a forest fire.

You're suggesting appeasement then? Appease the islamist in the vain hope that they will refrain from comitting violent acts or provide an environment for those.

Its not going to work too out.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -them.html

What's the alternative? We can't genocide the Muslim population in the UK. So we keep talking and we keep promoting peace.

[The Greater Aryan Race]

So, what is to be done now? More hemming and hawing by the politicians? More collective shuffling about with hands in pockets, fingers crossed that another attack like this won't happen?

What would you suggest?

The restoration of Diplock courts, the granting of broader search and surveillance powers to the police and military, the reenactment of indefinite detention of suspected terrorists (which would of course mean that the Human Rights Act will have to be repealed), stiffer penalties for aiding, financing or attempting to carry out terrorism and serious efforts to co-opt the different religious leaders (be they Muslim, Christian, Jewish or what have you not) into the state apparatus.

So, what is to be done now? More hemming and hawing by the politicians? More collective shuffling about with hands in pockets, fingers crossed that another attack like this won't happen?

Pretty much. It'll pass with time.
KEEP CALM AND CARRY ON. GOD SAVE THE QUEEN
Wide spread terror is what they want, that is why they do what they do. Reactionary action is a no good. Instead lets just strengthen our cooperative efforts across nations and keep the police into proper gear for keeping an eye on reasonable suspects.

Reactionary action is at times, much better than just sitting around and offering prayers and positive energy. If there are solutions and methods that would be able to nip the problem of terrorism in the bud, why shouldn't the State pursue these solutions vigorously?

[Zanera]

And I am suggesting that we lock up jihadists and other extremists to prevent them from committing acts of terror.

While I don't understand killing for religion, your proposal sets a very dangerous precedent and is akin to setting a forest on fire to prevent a forest fire.

I think that's an actual thing, actually.

[Nationalist Tyrol]

I truly wonder who was behind this and what was the motive.

[Nakena]

You're suggesting appeasement then? Appease the islamist in the vain hope that they will refrain from comitting violent acts or provide an environment for those.

Its not going to work too out.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -them.html

What's the alternative? We can't genocide the Muslim population in the UK. So we keep talking and we keep promoting peace.

The alternative to appeasement would be to set a clear framework of tolerance and rules; specifically making it clear that the followers of radical Islamism in it's various forms are no longer welcome or tolerated and have to submit to the framework or leave.

What the UK and many other european states are currently doing is displaying a great deal of tolerance towards radical Islamism and keeping the more aggressive forms of it under police and intelligence surveillance in the hope that they can track down terrorists timely as long as they keep the whole mess under control.

What they doing is tolerating and managing islamism instead of show it the door.

[Ambarii]

And I am suggesting that we lock up jihadists and other extremists to prevent them from committing acts of terror.

While I don't understand killing for religion, your proposal sets a very dangerous precedent and is akin to setting a forest on fire to prevent a forest fire.

I'd argue that it sets a very good precedent. That extremism, hate, advocating violence won't be tolerated.

[Washington Resistance Army]

While I don't understand killing for religion, your proposal sets a very dangerous precedent and is akin to setting a forest on fire to prevent a forest fire.

I'd argue that it sets a very good precedent. That extremism, hate, advocating violence won't be tolerated.

Thought crime is bad, lets not.

[The Malarttan People]

While I don't understand killing for religion, your proposal sets a very dangerous precedent and is akin to setting a forest on fire to prevent a forest fire.

I think that's an actual thing, actually.

Sadly, it is a thing so the proposal somehow has a chance of working. In a horribly fucked manner, but somehow working.

[Tarsonis Survivors]

I'd argue that it sets a very good precedent. That extremism, hate, advocating violence won't be tolerated.

Thought crime is bad, lets not.

Technically I think that's pre-crime.