Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Climate change and Nationalism Surge

Page 3 of 7 [ 106 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Shahunshah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,225
Location: NZ

09 Apr 2018, 6:09 am

Daniel89 wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
I know it doesn't. But let's face it the fight we are talking about is either compassion or death. The Western World can either choose to accommodate these refugees or risk seeing their lives fall apart entirely. Judging by the way the world is now, the borders in 20 years and going to be closed with a few outliers. When that day comes, there will almost certainly be millions that need to be catered for in which if our government refuses them, we are paving the way for their demise.


And how many are starving around the world already? If we let them in they will just be replaced by another person having a child they cannot feed. Its not our fault they choose to have children they cannot look after. The best way to help them is to help them in their own countries, through selective foreign aid and free trade.
As for the second part of your argument. Places like Kiribati and Bangladesh are massively unsustainable for allot of their populations to live in the near future. Right before our eyes now Bangladesh and much of the country is being eroded, with an estimated 33% of the country being flooded last year. It doesn't matter about international aid. A country of that population in such a small hostile piece of land, cannot survive much longer in its present form if we don't accept refugees and migrants from the region. As for Kiribati, the whole country is estimated to quite literally disappear in the next few decades. In that case, it won't matter how much international aid we'll be sending if there is no country and no people to send it towards.



Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

09 Apr 2018, 6:10 am

Shahunshah wrote:
Your analogy over starving children to me seems very bloody weird. Here is the thing when you accept refugees into the western you put them in a place where even for the poorest individuals there is easy access to food. But let's say your twisted analogy which I do not agree with one bit is right. If we let refugees in and they have many children we will be giving them a place where they have easy access to food, security and healthcare as of opposed to letting them stay in outside in say Africa where the continent is likely to face massive massive food shortages and desertification.


No I meant the people in their home country continue to have children and that country will still be a mess. The money used to feed and house them in the west could help so many more in their home country.



Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

09 Apr 2018, 6:13 am

Shahunshah wrote:
As for the second part of your argument. Places like Kiribati and Bangladesh are massively unsustainable for allot of their populations to live in the near future. Right before our eyes now Bangladesh and much of the country is being eroded, with an estimated 33% of the country being flooded last year. It doesn't matter about international aid. A country of that population in such a small hostile piece of land, cannot survive much longer in its present form if we don't accept refugees and migrants from the region. As for Kiribati, the whole country is estimated to quite literally disappear in the next few decades. In that case, it won't matter how much international aid we'll be sending if there is no country and no people to send it towards.


I would be very opposed to Muslims from Bangladesh being allowed into my country. At the end of the day who does a country belong to? Does Britain belong to the world or does it belong to the British?



Shahunshah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,225
Location: NZ

09 Apr 2018, 6:21 am

Daniel89 wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
Your analogy over starving children to me seems very bloody weird. Here is the thing when you accept refugees into the western you put them in a place where even for the poorest individuals there is easy access to food. But let's say your twisted analogy which I do not agree with one bit is right. If we let refugees in and they have many children we will be giving them a place where they have easy access to food, security and healthcare as of opposed to letting them stay in outside in say Africa where the continent is likely to face massive massive food shortages and desertification.


No I meant the people in their home country continue to have children and that country will still be a mess. The money used to feed and house them in the west could help so many more in their home country.
When these countries become very perilous and even more unstable than they already are in the near future, international aid is likely to be very costly and ineffective. So in those circumstances the best we can do is help those fleeing the carnage. I'll give you a picture. In Myanmar there is currently an ongoing genocide in which the Rohingya people are being murdered by the day. In the future, these kinds of ethnic cleansing and conflicts are likely to be what we are dealing with, as climate change worsens. In that case, it won't matter how much aid we send through, it is very unlikely to be of any help to an ethnic group or a community on the brink of destruction.

The reason why we need to help refugees. Is because if we do not do so, we are enabling a tenuous, hostile political environment to worsen in every way possible. In addition, we have a choice here if we do not help these refugees who need a home and a place to stay at we are paving way for their demise to a wave of tragedy.



Shahunshah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,225
Location: NZ

09 Apr 2018, 6:23 am

Daniel89 wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
As for the second part of your argument. Places like Kiribati and Bangladesh are massively unsustainable for allot of their populations to live in the near future. Right before our eyes now Bangladesh and much of the country is being eroded, with an estimated 33% of the country being flooded last year. It doesn't matter about international aid. A country of that population in such a small hostile piece of land, cannot survive much longer in its present form if we don't accept refugees and migrants from the region. As for Kiribati, the whole country is estimated to quite literally disappear in the next few decades. In that case, it won't matter how much international aid we'll be sending if there is no country and no people to send it towards.


I would be very opposed to Muslims from Bangladesh being allowed into my country. At the end of the day who does a country belong to? Does Britain belong to the world or does it belong to the British?
Whole Colonized Bangladesh?

Who grew the opium in the region to forcibly sell to the Chinese whose pockets did the revenue go into, and whose economy grew as a result?



Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

09 Apr 2018, 6:27 am

Shahunshah wrote:
When these countries become very perilous and even more unstable than they already are in the near future, international aid is likely to be very costly and ineffective. So in those circumstances the best we can do is help those fleeing the carnage. I'll give you a picture. In Myanmar there is currently an ongoing genocide in which the Rohingya people are being murdered by the day. In the future, these kinds of ethnic cleansing and conflicts are likely to be what we are dealing with, as climate change worsens. In that case, it won't matter how much aid we send through, it is very unlikely to be of any help to an ethnic group or a community on the brink of destruction.

The reason why we need to help refugees. Is because if we do not do so, we are enabling a tenuous, hostile political environment to worsen in every way possible. In addition, we have a choice here if we do not help these refugees who need a home and a place to stay at we are paving way for their demise to a wave of tragedy.


Ultimately we have to put our people first and its not in our interest to let them in.



DarthMetaKnight
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,105
Location: The Infodome

09 Apr 2018, 6:28 am

Daniel89 wrote:
I would be very opposed to Muslims from Bangladesh being allowed into my country. At the end of the day who does a country belong to? Does Britain belong to the world or does it belong to the British?


Britain belongs to the British, but you seem to have a very narrow view of who is British.

There are black people in Britain. Nearly everyone agrees that they are British.

Therefore, it's not a question of ethnicity. Anyone with British citizenship is British.

Therefore, once a Bangladeshi immigrant passes a citizenship test, he/she becomes British.


_________________
Synthetic carbo-polymers got em through man. They got em through mouse. They got through, and we're gonna get out.
-Roostre

READ THIS -> https://represent.us/


Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

09 Apr 2018, 6:30 am

Shahunshah wrote:
Whole Colonized Bangladesh?

Who grew the opium in the region to forcibly sell to the Chinese whose pockets did the revenue go into, and whose economy grew as a result?


Not me, not modern day Brits. It was the aristocracy who themselves colonised Britain in the first place. Should a child be punished for the crimes of their father? Should a child be punished because someone has the same skin colour as them?



DarthMetaKnight
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,105
Location: The Infodome

09 Apr 2018, 6:32 am

Daniel89 wrote:
Ultimately we have to put our people first and its not in our interest to let them in.


You can't talk about how people need to be spayed and neutered before they receive government aid ... and then claim that you are putting people first.

Supporting an economic system which benefits the wealthy more than anyone else is not "putting the people first".


_________________
Synthetic carbo-polymers got em through man. They got em through mouse. They got through, and we're gonna get out.
-Roostre

READ THIS -> https://represent.us/


Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

09 Apr 2018, 6:33 am

DarthMetaKnight wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
I would be very opposed to Muslims from Bangladesh being allowed into my country. At the end of the day who does a country belong to? Does Britain belong to the world or does it belong to the British?


Britain belongs to the British, but you seem to have a very narrow view of who is British.

There are black people in Britain. Nearly everyone agrees that they are British.

Therefore, it's not a question of ethnicity. Anyone with British citizenship is British.

Therefore, once a Bangladeshi immigrant passes a citizenship test, he/she becomes British.


No having citizenship does not make you British. If I had bought citizenship from Dominica that does not make me Dominican.

The majority of Brits are against mass immigration as it is we are having it imposed upon us.



Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

09 Apr 2018, 6:35 am

DarthMetaKnight wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
Ultimately we have to put our people first and its not in our interest to let them in.


You can't talk about how people need to be spayed and neutered before they receive government aid ... and then claim that you are putting people first.

Supporting an economic system which benefits the wealthy more than anyone else is not "putting the people first".


Yes it is I am putting an innocent child before their selfish parents.



DarthMetaKnight
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,105
Location: The Infodome

09 Apr 2018, 6:35 am

Daniel89 wrote:
Should a child be punished for the crimes of their father?


No ... which is why we shouldn't neuter the children of poor people ... as you previously suggested.


_________________
Synthetic carbo-polymers got em through man. They got em through mouse. They got through, and we're gonna get out.
-Roostre

READ THIS -> https://represent.us/


Shahunshah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,225
Location: NZ

09 Apr 2018, 6:36 am

Daniel89 wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
When these countries become very perilous and even more unstable than they already are in the near future, international aid is likely to be very costly and ineffective. So in those circumstances the best we can do is help those fleeing the carnage. I'll give you a picture. In Myanmar there is currently an ongoing genocide in which the Rohingya people are being murdered by the day. In the future, these kinds of ethnic cleansing and conflicts are likely to be what we are dealing with, as climate change worsens. In that case, it won't matter how much aid we send through, it is very unlikely to be of any help to an ethnic group or a community on the brink of destruction.

The reason why we need to help refugees. Is because if we do not do so, we are enabling a tenuous, hostile political environment to worsen in every way possible. In addition, we have a choice here if we do not help these refugees who need a home and a place to stay at we are paving way for their demise to a wave of tragedy.


Ultimately we have to put our people first and its not in our interest to let them in.
We have debts to pay in the first world and allot of them to say the least.

We have a choice Daniel either take in millions of refugees or seem them face horrible suffering such as rape war, famine, starvation. And quite frankly I would choose to help those people over the less significant domestic concerns of people in the first world. Yes it is true in Germany during the Cologne attacks, an estimated 20 women were raped by migrants. But we have a choice you see, either accept hundreds of thousands of people and lose some security or see them face more trauma and more suffering in the places where they came from.



Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

09 Apr 2018, 6:39 am

DarthMetaKnight wrote:
Daniel89 wrote:
Should a child be punished for the crimes of their father?


No ... which is why we shouldn't neuter the children of poor people ... as you previously suggested.


No I did not. I said adults who choose to claim welfare after a certain amount of time should be required to get sterilised in order to continue claiming welfare. Creating dependant people is selfish, being dependant upon others is degrading and opens you up to a life time of abuse.



Shahunshah
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,225
Location: NZ

09 Apr 2018, 6:40 am

Daniel89 wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
Whole Colonized Bangladesh?

Who grew the opium in the region to forcibly sell to the Chinese whose pockets did the revenue go into, and whose economy grew as a result?


Not me, not modern day Brits. It was the aristocracy who themselves colonised Britain in the first place. Should a child be punished for the crimes of their father? Should a child be punished because someone has the same skin colour as them?

Industrial growth and prosperity are what came of the actions of colonialism and the rise of the British empire. It is people like you that benefited from them and gave you a good life. Is it not rational to say that you have a debt to pay due to your position in the world to the people who brought you that.



Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

09 Apr 2018, 6:41 am

Shahunshah wrote:
We have debts to pay in the first world and allot of them to say the least.

We have a choice Daniel either take in millions of refugees or seem them face horrible suffering such as rape war, famine, starvation. And quite frankly I would choose to help those people over the less significant domestic concerns of people in the first world. Yes it is true in Germany during the Cologne attacks, an estimated 20 women were raped by migrants. But we have a choice you see, either accept hundreds of thousands of people and lose some security or see them face more trauma and more suffering in the places where they came from.


I would rather 10 strangers get raped than 1 person I know get raped. I want them to stay in their countries and make them better rather than them come to our countries and make them worse.