Crowdfunded Alt-Right Pirates Of The Libyan Coast

[Aelex]

Is it? I'm looking for a proper source right now, but I seem to remember the US stopping the Honduran mass migration with foreign aid

The whole of Middle East and parts of West, East and North Africa =/= Honduras
The scale is just way to fucking different, mate.

[Nova Stephania]

I didn't know the alt-right was actually getting people killed. There's no choice but to crack down on this funding.

It's ironic that the only radical extremists they see are Islamic ones, despite looking in the mirror every day.

[San Regada]

By all means, send the fuckers home (yknow, the military aged men) and tell them to go sort out their own problems (I think we should at least accept the vulnerable women and children), but at least wait until they get to land before to kick em back home. Because yknow, if you turn them around in the sea, they might drown and die directly because you turned them around, and then there's a shit storm, plus, I do believe vessels (no matter how unconventional they are) have the freedom of navigation in international waters so it would also be violating international law. At least if you kick em out from home, you aren't doing anything wrong.

[Great Minarchistan]

Why not simply reduce the welfare state dude

I agree with the necessity to cut down on some things like healthcare (tho not all the maternity related shit, we need it to keep our birthrate up) but education and subside are merely investment to keep the country running, reducing them would be folly.
Over all, I'd rather not weaken the State unnecessarily and destroying the welfare state would do that.

Education isn't welfare however. It's a way to skill the population so they can be better workers. On the other hand, healthcare, social security, benefits overall and welfare by itself composes the welfare state.

[Internationalist Bastard]

Is it? I'm looking for a proper source right now, but I seem to remember the US stopping the Honduran mass migration with foreign aid

The whole of Middle East and parts of West, East and North Africa =/= Honduras
The scale is just way to fucking different, mate.

One country at a time then, or create an organization to handle it on a larger scale

[Thermodolia]

By all means, send the fuckers home (yknow, the military aged men) and tell them to go sort out their own problems (I think we should at least accept the vulnerable women and children), but at least wait until they get to land before to kick em back home. Because yknow, if you turn them around in the sea, they might drown and die directly because you turned them around, and then there's a shit storm, plus, I do believe vessels (no matter how unconventional they are) have the freedom of navigation in international waters so it would also be violating international law. At least if you kick em out from home, you aren't doing anything wrong.

You do know that that you'd be sending many of those men to their almost immediate deaths? Not all of those refugees are Muslims, many are Christians and many are secularists.

[Aelex]

One country at a time then, or create an organization to handle it on a larger scale

Why not simply just re-colonise them if we need to go through all this hassle ?

[Kubra]

Is it? I'm looking for a proper source right now, but I seem to remember the US stopping the Honduran mass migration with foreign aid

The whole of Middle East and parts of West, East and North Africa =/= Honduras
The scale is just way to fucking different, mate.

>the whole of the middle east
we're not dealing with saudi migrants, bruv.

[Internationalist Bastard]

One country at a time then, or create an organization to handle it on a larger scale

Why not simply just re-colonise them if we need to go through all this hassle ?

Because the idea is that they will be able to become financially independent over time

[Kubra]

One country at a time then, or create an organization to handle it on a larger scale

Why not simply just re-colonise them if we need to go through all this hassle ?

well because the french are no good at colonialism compared to us good english

[Aelex]

well because the french are no good at colonialism compared to us good english

And yet we managed to conserve our in West Africa, unlike you. :^)

[Aelex]

Because the idea is that they will be able to become financially independent over time

But why should we invest all this money and effort for someone else's profit? The more you're talking, the more it appears that simply expelling the migrants is way better, simpler and cheaper.

[Kubra]

well because the french are no good at colonialism compared to us good english

And yet we managed to conserve our in West Africa, unlike you. :^)

a good gambler knows when to cash out

[Internationalist Bastard]

Because the idea is that they will be able to become financially independent over time

But why should we invest all this money and effort for someone else's profit? The more you're talking, the more it appears that simply expelling the migrants is way better, simpler and cheaper.

No, because it'll stop all those deportation expenses, and think, less terrorism and crime means more safety and access to resources

[Kubra]

Because the idea is that they will be able to become financially independent over time

But why should we invest all this money and effort for someone else's profit? The more you're talking, the more it appears that simply expelling the migrants is way better, simpler and cheaper.

is economics zero sum

[Aelex]

a good gambler knows when to cash out

But a bad one always do it too early.

[Aelex]

No, because it'll stop all those deportation expenses, and think, less terrorism and crime means more safety and access to resources

Why not just follow my own solution and simply recolonize them and deal with the problem directly 'till they can stand on their own again?
The same result could be achieved but way more easily since we would hold the reins.

[Ifreann]

Ideally the Italian navy or coast guard or someone will put a few shots across their bows and they'll fuck off without any problems.

Can't do that. If they could, they would have done it to all the human traffickers, be them the one that are honest about their job or the ones that call themselves "humanitarian movements", who are smuggling people over the Mediterranean Sea.
Just listen to some Italians Sailors talk about the fuck they have to go trough during Operation Trident. They're very angry, and legitimately so.

A boat full of refugees isn't a threat. They can be picked up, taken ashore, and processed. Pirates trying to interfere with rescue operations could be a threat. The sea is dangerous. Getting in the way of other boats, especially over-filled RIBs, is dangerous. I don't know if the Italian navy would think that enough to warrant warning shots.

---

Presumably you would have no objection to refugees bring along some guns to defend against pirates. If the pirates die trying to prevent rescue operations at sea, according to you that's the consequences of their crime.

Oh sure thing. Twould be neato if they could bring cameras too so to broadcast it. Naumachia is sweet as fuck, after all.

I'm surprised you would find entertainment in the deaths of your political comrades and countrymen.

---

I don't get the problem here. These "pirates" are cutting engines from migrant invasion boats and routing them back to Libya where they belong. The invasion of Muslim migrants (many of them hostile and most, but not all, of them men of prime breeding age too cowardly to fight for their nation) should entirely cease. Europe has enough Muslims already, the last we need is more of them.
Haven't the multiple terror attacks performed by these groups that sneak in convinced you enough that this group is NEEDED?

I'm not afraid of Muslims because some of them are terrorists, no.

First, this isn't piracy; piracy is the unlawful boarding of a ship without the ship master's consent (regardless of intent, Greenpeace was charged with piracy for trying to board a Russian oil tanker to protest).

I'm sure forcing other ships to cut their engines and change course is contrary to several laws of the sea.

Second, they're not going to be killing these people where they stand.

Keeping them from being rescued is a small difference from trying to kill them.

Third, European countries are supposed to be doing this by their own laws.

What law requires refusing to aid people in distress at sea?

Simply sending them back to the coast they tried to launch from is neither a crime nor a bad act.

The crime would be in forcing them to stop, forcing them to change course, forcing other ships attempting rescue away.

These people are patriots and governments should subsidize them for as long as they are refusing to do their job.

They're criminals and should be arrested.

---

There is nothing good about the people coming into Europe, what don't people understand about this?!

Personally I don't care. They need help, we can help. That's good enough for me.

---

That looks like an oncologist telling a patient that instead of removing the cancer definitely, it's better for him just to make several surgeries to limit the size of the cancer.

Meh, unlike a doctor, we have no oath binding us to try to save the patient or merely look for his best interests so if we get to increase our fees that way...

Maybe I'm wrong, or the law has been changed, but I thought it was the law in France that people had a duty to try and help other people in danger, even if only by calling the relevant emergency services.

---

The migrants have no right crossing the Mediterranean as it is. They don't need rescuing, they need to be sent back.

It's mostly open sea, you don't need permission to travel across it.

[Napkiraly]

Aid their development so that our companies have better access to their resources - now that the DRC is calming down, mining is becoming more profitable there for many firms for instance. In the meanwhile, expel all illegal immigrants trying to come in.

[Internationalist Bastard]

No, because it'll stop all those deportation expenses, and think, less terrorism and crime means more safety and access to resources

Why not just follow my own solution and simply recolonize them and deal with the problem directly 'till they can stand on their own again?
The same result could be achieved but way more easily since we would hold the reins.

Because it would seem after centuries of trying it didn't work

[Ifreann]

Aid their development so that our companies have better access to their resources - now that the DRC is calming down, mining is becoming more profitable there for many firms for instance. In the meanwhile, expel all illegal immigrants trying to come in.

And the pirates?

[Napkiraly]

Why not just follow my own solution and simply recolonize them and deal with the problem directly 'till they can stand on their own again?
The same result could be achieved but way more easily since we would hold the reins.

Because it would seem after centuries of trying it didn't work

Widespread European colonization of Africa barely lasted over a century.

[Kubra]

a good gambler knows when to cash out

But a bad one always do it too early.

and the especially bad one waits too long
no one wants to be the guy thrown out of the casino by Mr. Viet Minh

[San Regada]

By all means, send the fuckers home (yknow, the military aged men) and tell them to go sort out their own problems (I think we should at least accept the vulnerable women and children), but at least wait until they get to land before to kick em back home. Because yknow, if you turn them around in the sea, they might drown and die directly because you turned them around, and then there's a shit storm, plus, I do believe vessels (no matter how unconventional they are) have the freedom of navigation in international waters so it would also be violating international law. At least if you kick em out from home, you aren't doing anything wrong.

You do know that that you'd be sending many of those men to their almost immediate deaths? Not all of those refugees are Muslims, many are Christians and many are secularists.

We accept the ones that are willing to integrate into society and do their best to not depend on the state (unless it is absolutely needed, disabilities etc) and kick out the rest of them. There's no point waiting resources that could be directed else where and creating a hassle accepting those that cant accept or embrace a new way of life. A nation has the right to defend its sovereign borders, undocumented migrants storming them from land and from sea in the hundreds of thousands is an invasion, thus, if the government cant protect its borders, subsequently not protecting its citizens, then I cannot be 100% outraged that the citizens have taken it upon themselves to protect their borders. We can't accept everyone because they have some sob story, it will be economically suicidal to do so - instead we can accept some and send the ones not willing to integrate (hardline Muslims etc) to yknow, Arab countries such as Morocco, Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Oman etc, yknow, the countries that have literal empty 4 star apartment blocks and economic resources to do so?

[Oudland]

The huff post article literally says this guy Mohamed was tasked by his smuggler with steering a boatful of illegals. So, yeah, they are smuggling unvetted "refugees". But fuck borders and law and shit.

The point of contention is that they're fucking with NGO's that rescue vessels in distress, not the smugglers themselves.

Right... it seems the point of contention in this thread is quite fluid, depending on who disagrees with the morally outraged posters.

It does, it means they ain't on our soil anymore. Problem solved for us. :^)

Till they come back

By they, you mean someone who disagrees with you.

Oh, hai