|
|
Post by Orac on May 4, 2024 16:32:58 GMT
The 'upstream problem' is intractable - i.e. part of the culture these people have used to survive. Moving them here and thereby destroying our culture's ability to help anyone should be entirely off the table as self destructive and daft, but for some reason, it seems to be the only option allowed. I disagree, I would say that removing them from the grasp of the warlord to a land of peace is ideal. There is no such thing as a 'land of peace'. War is fought between people, not rocks, |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 4, 2024 16:38:20 GMT
I disagree, I would say that removing them from the grasp of the warlord to a land of peace is ideal. There is no such thing as a 'land of peace'. War is fought between people, not rocks, Don't talk rot, we live in the land of peace. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on May 4, 2024 16:44:21 GMT
There is no such thing as a 'land of peace'. War is fought between people, not rocks, Don't talk rot, we live in the land of peace. Presently. If we were to transport two warring tribes onto that land, it would be a 'land of war'.The only thing your ideal approach seems to solve is making sure functioning societies lose their territory and people gain territory by being unreasonable. Is that your aim here? |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 4, 2024 16:51:24 GMT
Don't talk rot, we live in the land of peace. Presently. if we were to transport two warring tribes onto that land, it would be a 'land of war'.The only thing your ideal approach seems to solve is making sure functioning societies lose their territory and people gain territory by being unreasonable. Is that your aim here? If land is just rocks how come this is our land? Of course the people make the land and they decide if the land is peaceful or not. Bringing two warring tribes here wholesale would be stupid, but bringing people wishing to escape the warring tribes is not. Normally the reason to invite people fleeing war is that we are compassionate, do you see that as a flaw? |
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 3,365
|
Post by Steve on May 4, 2024 17:50:15 GMT
. . Normally the reason to invite people fleeing war is that we are compassionate, do you see that as a flaw? I don't but someone who is already in France is no longer fleeing a war |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on May 4, 2024 17:59:23 GMT
Presently. if we were to transport two warring tribes onto that land, it would be a 'land of war'.The only thing your ideal approach seems to solve is making sure functioning societies lose their territory and people gain territory by being unreasonable. Is that your aim here? If land is just rocks how come this is our land? Of course the people make the land and they decide if the land is peaceful or not. Bringing two warring tribes here wholesale would be stupid, but bringing people wishing to escape the warring tribes is not. Normally the reason to invite people fleeing war is that we are compassionate, do you see that as a flaw? It's either our land or all land belongs to everyone, everyone can go where we want and you don't own your house. So which is it? Everyone wishes to escape negative consequences - that doesn't mean they have dropped the behaviours that causes those negative consequences. This true of war and culture. People want to have their cake and eat it - or be dumb and get the rewards of being clever. Yes it is a flaw - it's foggy thinking that will take is into a disaster (significantly already has) |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 4, 2024 18:05:44 GMT
. . Normally the reason to invite people fleeing war is that we are compassionate, do you see that as a flaw? I don't but someone who is already in France is no longer fleeing a war So long as the French agree to feed and house them. |
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 3,365
|
Post by Steve on May 4, 2024 18:10:06 GMT
No that is not a condition. A significant number do not make themselves known to the authorities in countries they travel through before attempting to cross the channel because such application weakens their supposed asylum case considerable.
IMHO the French act questionably is denying asylum to anyone that travelled through Germany and Germany acts unreasonably in denying asylum to those that travelled through it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 4, 2024 18:17:45 GMT
If land is just rocks how come this is our land? Of course the people make the land and they decide if the land is peaceful or not. Bringing two warring tribes here wholesale would be stupid, but bringing people wishing to escape the warring tribes is not. Normally the reason to invite people fleeing war is that we are compassionate, do you see that as a flaw? It was you not me that said land is just rocks. It only takes one person to start a fight, the other party is the victim. You think the victim deserves no succour? So? Is it not true in this country too? So you claim, I have yet to see significant effect. And we have been giving succour to humans from around the globe for several hundred years. At what point in history did that start to damage our precious country? The Huguenots escaping the Catholics, The Irish escaping famine, the Jews escaping Hitler, Place your peg in the correct date when this became a bad thing. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on May 4, 2024 18:51:12 GMT
The land is ours and it is just rocks - it's humans who are at peace or at war, not land. This point is totally superficial - you are just tangled in an argument for no reason here. My point is uncontentious - if you import war or bad culture, your land will not be 'at peace'
Everyone wants their cake and eat it and that it includes us. However, we don't (yet) live in a dangerous shit-hole and so aren't looking for a way to offload ourselves en mass on to another society that functions and so has resources.
You do see it - you just feel presently that having our institutions run by jihadists and child traffickers is going to be okay (for you). You will change your mind shortly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 5, 2024 7:57:25 GMT
The land is ours and it is just rocks - it's humans who are at peace or at war, not land. This point is totally superficial - you are just tangled in an argument for no reason here. My point is uncontentious - if you import war or bad culture, your land will not be 'at peace'Agreed, I don't know why you raised the point in the first place. clearly a country is made of the people customs and laws within its borders. You tried to claim that bringing in people from different countries destroyed this. I still see no evidence that our country is more of a shit hole due to the refugees we have given succour to. Oh yes those British institutions run by Jihadists. Remind me which ones are they? Fact is our laws have not changed despite the number of Muslims living here. With the exception of rules stopping people from assailing them because of their religion. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on May 5, 2024 10:42:23 GMT
Agreed, I don't know why you raised the point in the first place. clearly a country is made of the people customs and laws within its borders. Right - so we are back at the first sentence of the conversation with me just making this point. If you import something you are bringing more of it in. So, your plan of depriving the UK public of their country and using the free territory as a kind of demographic-cultural dustbin for the world's problems, wont work. You will just destroy the UK. It is no good saying 'it isn't happening'. when have just accepted that it is happening. What you mean to say is that you don't care that it is happening. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on May 5, 2024 12:51:54 GMT
If land is just rocks how come this is our land? Of course the people make the land and they decide if the land is peaceful or not. Bringing two warring tribes here wholesale would be stupid, but bringing people wishing to escape the warring tribes is not. Normally the reason to invite people fleeing war is that we are compassionate, do you see that as a flaw? It's either our land or all land belongs to everyone, everyone can go where we want and you don't own your house. So which is it? Everyone wishes to escape negative consequences - that doesn't mean they have dropped the behaviours that causes those negative consequences. This true of war and culture. People want to have their cake and eat it - or be dumb and get the rewards of being clever. Yes it is a flaw - it's foggy thinking that will take is into a disaster (significantly already has) People fleeing negative consequences haven't necessarily created those consequences though. It's not like Jewish refugees fleeing Nazi Germany created mini third Reich's in every country they fled to. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on May 5, 2024 12:53:22 GMT
Agreed, I don't know why you raised the point in the first place. clearly a country is made of the people customs and laws within its borders. Right - so we are back at the first sentence of the conversation with me just making this point. If you import something you are bringing more of it in. So, your plan of depriving the UK public of their country and using the free territory as a kind of demographic-cultural dustbin for the world's problems, wont work. You will just destroy the UK. It is no good saying 'it isn't happening'. when have just accepted that it is happening. What you mean to say is that you don't care that it is happening. And as I say it how many. You must know by now my position on immigration, I think its an idiots way to grow keep taxes down while the public purse needs to grow. BUT. We are talking about refugees. I do not believe we have taken anywhere enough refugees to effect our way of life. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on May 5, 2024 14:13:58 GMT
It's either our land or all land belongs to everyone, everyone can go where we want and you don't own your house. So which is it? Everyone wishes to escape negative consequences - that doesn't mean they have dropped the behaviours that causes those negative consequences. This true of war and culture. People want to have their cake and eat it - or be dumb and get the rewards of being clever. Yes it is a flaw - it's foggy thinking that will take is into a disaster (significantly already has) People fleeing negative consequences haven't necessarily created those consequences though. If we are talking about third world (shit hole) cultures (and we are) you will be bringing in a cloud of third-world dysfunction that makes these things more likely. |
|
