Trump Bans Muslim in USA

Discussion in 'World News & Debates' started by stereox, Dec 10, 2015.

  1. Mognakor

    Mognakor Well-Known Member

    Do you have any idea what this would cost? Military spendings aren't cheap.
  2. Petique

    Petique Well-Known Member

    They went through Hungary and did a lot of damage to the country in the process. They couldn't go into Hungary when the fences were built, at least not in mass numbeers and if everyone would have done the same they would have had no way to go to Germany. You can only go around so far until every door is shut.
  3. Mognakor

    Mognakor Well-Known Member

    And once people start realising that shit will start to explode.

    But hey, the EU is following your wishes:
    They are negotiating deals with exactly those autocrates and human rights violators those people are fleeing from. They'll be given money to keep refugees locked into their countries. A fitting analogy would be paying NK money to prevent their citizens from escaping.

    Doesn't that make us feel great as developed humans? Spending money to keep up those very regimes we use as example for the lack of civilisation.
  4. Lithary

    Lithary Well-Known Member

    Read what Petique said.
    Also, they are illegal immigrants (aka criminals), not unarmed civilians (which is technically correct, but strongly misguiding).

    Less than letting those animals in and allowing them to destroy us.
  5. Mognakor

    Mognakor Well-Known Member

    The EU is funding the true animals, in the name of our safety. Autocrats, dictators, murderers. We are funding those very guys that are the cause for people running for their lives. Tell me - who are the true monsters?

    There are many milion refugees. What about them? What about people fleeing from tyrants? Are they nothing but illegal immigrants, too?
  6. Madasahat

    Madasahat Well-Known Member

    They don't have to spend much on military to keep refugees out. Just ask citizens to show their IDs on casual occasions, such as shopping, and vast majority of refugees who potentially made it inside the country will be found.

    Of course this won't stop all of them, heck many Jews were able to hid in heart of Nazi Germany despite being actively hunted. However the small number that can hide wont change much.
  7. Mognakor

    Mognakor Well-Known Member

    Because nothing will make people feel as safe as a constant climate of fear, right?

    Who will be in charge to check those IDs?

    The police? They aren't working for free either and have more important stuff to do.

    Shop owners? What if they don't want to? Will it be mandatory for every little shop owner to do this?
  8. kildat017

    kildat017 Well-Known Member

    Oh the irony. Just look at who's judging the tree (Islam) by its fruits (ISIS).
  9. Madasahat

    Madasahat Well-Known Member

    All of those questions you asked enables the small portion to hide, which I already said they will be able to.

    Illegal immigrants in the US are usually not discovered unless they somehow get investigated by police by simply being in a crime scene when it happens or car accident etc... If the US did something similar to what I suggested, its safe to assume 90% of these immigrants would be found.

    First of all, illegal immigrants wouldn't have a degree from the country nor they would be able to have a "good" job, the vast majority of them would be doing minimum wage jobs. This narrows down the search immensely already.

    TL;DR its very easy to find 90% of illegal immigrants.
  10. Petique

    Petique Well-Known Member

    I'd rather have a dictator ruling a country with an iron fist than jihadists trying to take over the whole middle east while casually attacking Europe both directly and indirectly. Btw Syria under the Assad regime was a wealthy and pretty developed country, just saying.
    Society isn't equal. Not every country can be developed and as you can see not everyone wants to take part in the development of Europe. Instead they want to degrade and pull it down to their level with force, if needed.
  11. kildat017

    kildat017 Well-Known Member

    small illegal immigrants are fine as long as they shut up and just continue hiding. it only becomes a problem once they start in droves.
  12. Petique

    Petique Well-Known Member

    Even if you are a refugee, it doesn't give you the right to cross the borders illegally, that is considered a crime in many countries, regardless of who you are or where you come from. Secondly, many of these people can't even prove that they are actual refugees and come from war zones. If you can't prove it then tough luck. No border guard should let someone in just because they CLAIM to be a this or that whether it be a woman, a child or an elderly person. Laws are made to be respected and obeyed. They aren't based on feelings nor on solidarity.
  13. Mognakor

    Mognakor Well-Known Member

    Whats the point of being a refugee if you aren't allowed to flee?
  14. MWaser

    MWaser Well-Known Member

    Even if they'd ALL start hiding, it wouldn't be a problem. Since hiding means they cannot actively take welfare and wouldn't cause any trouble out of fear of being discovered if they couldn't afford to be discovered. In which case suddenly it wouldn't matter how many refugees/illegal immigrants you have here, they would literally become a non-factor since people started hating them for what they do (not assimilating - impossible if you're trying to stay incognito; getting free money from the government - once again impossible; causing trouble, demanding law changes to accommodate them, creating ghettos within city borders - once again self explanatory).

    Yes, and instead of trying to fix the problem over there, just fuck shit up there, then let these problems spread to your countries thanks to the cuck guilt mentality you've build up within yourself thanks to fucking shit up there earlier. Not that it matters, the people who caused this problem aren't the ones suffering from it, everyone else is - first over there, now over here.
  15. Petique

    Petique Well-Known Member

    Way to completely miss the point. Of course you are allowed to flee, but you can't just cross the border wherever you want to without any documentation whatsoever about who you are and where you come from. How can you prove that you are a refugee otherwise? Anyone can claim that, I can pack up and leave to Germany by foot saying that I come from Syria if we follow your logic.
    Of course he might very well be a guy or girl who is fleeing from war or he might be from a completely different country where there is no war or he might be a member of ISIS. The border guard doesn't know, in fact no one knows and no one can check it if they don't bring the necessary papers. We don't live in the middle ages or in the early colonial period where you can just pack up with your family and go try your luck somewhere else.
  16. Mognakor

    Mognakor Well-Known Member

    What? That paragraph is barely understandable because you're not using a single name. Anyways i'll try to refer to what i understood.

    First of all, i don't have any internalized guilt or cuck or w.e. mentality, but it seems to be a nice strawman when arguing with anyone who doesn't refer to refugees as animal.

    Second. Previously the EU had a "human rights for help"-style program. Regimes that improved the situation were given help to feed their population. But what the EU starts doing now is different. We don't pay them to feed their population, we pay them to lock them in and we don't care how their situation looks like. We're not fighting causes of flight, we're intensifying them.

    But once those deals are made with enough country it'll solve it least one problem: We'll be able to know who is refugee and who is a "economic refugee". Those at our borders will be "economic refugees", and the real ones will be locked into their personal hell with our taxes. Brave new world.

    Too bad that warlords etc. don't issue papers for those they terrorize. Some people may never have possessed papers. Do failed states issue passports?

    AFAIK there is little possibility to be aknowledged as refugee without crossing multiple borders first. If your local dictator got word of groups of people trying to escape his reign, do you think he'll let them go?

    Papers don't even proove you're not a terrorist. Nobody is gonna have a passport that states "ISIS - leader of sleeper cell 14". The chance of a terrorist having a proper passport is likely higher than an actual refugee having one.

    Further, terrorists don't need to disguise themselves as refugees they have crossed the border before the crisis and they will do it after. Didn't we discuss this point already?

    Unless we close our borders completly (and i mean absolutly 100%, noone gets in or out), there is no way to be safe. The EU doesn't get bombed because terrorist dislike our open borders, the EU gets bombed because they are radicals and have been provided with weapons for too long and now they show their true face. (Seriously do we have to chew through this time and again?)

    Based on your etnicity i can conclude you're not from Africa or the middle east. On the other hand, most places in Africa and the middle east are shitholes in one way or another.
  17. Ostarion

    Ostarion Well-Known Member

    It actually would be very easy to keep them out if people wanted to do so. If all else fails, sink the boats and shoot anyone who comes too close. In a week nobody will show up. And besides Macedonia already keeps them at bay handily. Do you think a guy will just leave shelter and try to go to germany by foot through forests/mountains? Hungary managed to do it aswell, when the orders were given. Saudia Arabia took no Syrians or anyone else in. Impossible, right?

    And what exactly is wrong with that? I'd rather pay Turkey to keep them out, than to take them in. Why would EU citizens have any obligations to help people they don't know? Not only that, these people bring chaos with them. And like we've been over in previous threads the majority aren't even Syrians.

    But this deal isn't just about that. EU gave 3€bn to stop the flow. Do you think Erdogan will build hotels for the refugees? Or will he buy some blankets and tuna cans? In my opinion Turkey is blackmailing with these refugees, and their goal is to get atleast abit closer into EU.

    And you keep saying people run away from Dictators and shitty regimes. But this simply isn't true. Saudi Arabia is the most undemocratic, hardcore islam country. And people aren't leaving in droves. It's almost as if SA is a rich country with no war going on... But then you have tons of Somalis and Eritreans passing... Also no war, only their countries are shitholes. It sucks really, but this doesn't mean they are entitled to receive free shit from Europeans. Your democracy and freedom mean nothing to these people. Dictatorship isn't inherently evil and also means nothing to them. All they care about is having an easier life. Nothing wrong with that, but it shouldn't be at the expense of European taxpayers.

    They have every right to flee. But EU also has the right not to take care for them and refuse entry.

    Honestly, once again everything you say is motivated by the fact you think helping ''refugees'' is a good and humane thing to do. Therefore it is right. Commendable, but it has zero benefits to EU. Not only that it actually has severe disadvantages. While you type these things, this is what's happening in the real world:



    You can expect small Islamic countries popping up all over Europe in 100 years if nothing is done. Just like it always happened. Also, should we import a million filipinos too? Or downtrodden chinese workers? Have you already adopted your own african child? What are you waiting for?
  18. Saved

    Saved Well-Known Member

    Yet he's somehow one of if not the most popular candidate at the moment. Go figure...

    Honestly I'm shocked at how many supporters he has. And how so many of them seem to be young adults who should really know better. It's worrying.
  19. kildat017

    kildat017 Well-Known Member

    Not sure why you think Trump would be shit, but he's still the better pick among every other candidate. Bernie wants Venezuela to happen in US, which is just nuts. and shillary is basically a kike that /pol/ hates like the plague.

  20. Saved

    Saved Well-Known Member

    I don't know very much about the other candidates. I doubt Bernie *wants* there to be a food shortage here - if you think his policies will bring us to that then that is your opinion. Hilary I've done a little bit of research on, and she seems like an okay candidate overall. She at least seems to care about other people, and has experience with politics. In any case I'd say either of these candidates would be far better than Trump. If Trump gets elected there is in my opinion a very real possibility of a World War 3. The only thing I don't dislike about Trump is how apparent he makes the fact that he would be a terrible choice. That way we at least know we're getting ourselves into.

    I wish people could, instead of voting, anti-vote, which is to subtract a vote from a particular candidate. I wouldn't vote for anyone but I'd definitely anti-vote Trump.