How can people be so brutal with refugees, really?

Post Reply New Topic

All pro-immigration idealists posting from the U.S, why don't you go on vacation to Malmö in Sweden for a week and spend some time in the "culturally enriched" areas, then come back here and share your experience.

Until then, I don't consider you eligible to have an opinion on this subject.

Thats plain silly. From the stats I posted above, it should be obvious that living with large numbers of immigrants is the norm in many places, particularly in and around cities the USA, and has been for generations. But it is not exclusively in cities as people choose different locals purposely sometimes.

Its just the way it is, wave after wave. There was even a Swedish wave once upon a time.

What is different is this is a relatively new situation for some european countries.

Rather then arguing with others who do take in refugees and immigrants, consider those that take in none.

If you want to know ask the Australians and British they'll tell you (both countries treat foreigners something awful to the point BBC can't even spin it good).

How many of these refugees are actually fleeing the war in Syria? If it wasn't the fact that we started this war then I wouldn't feel so bad not like we'd actually that tho but a good portion of these people are just economic migrants and the simple fact is that we can't support these people. There are 7 billion people in the world right now, probably 2 billion at least would move to the west at the drop of the hat if given the chance. We wouldn't be raising these people up, they would be bringing us down. We can't save the world, we can't sustain the insanity we have going on right now. I don't really care to sacrifice my standard of living, I'm struggling as it is so the thought of things getting worse doesn't make me want to help them do it. To me immigration is all about integration, creating enclaves and ethnic ghettos doesn't help anyone. Multicultural is a sham, if you move to a country then you are joining another culture and should be expected to respect their values and way of life because if you didn't then why did you move here in the first place? Demographic shocks should probably be avoided.

Actually that is a misconception.

The Total Fertility Rate (TFR) for the world is 2.36 (as of now), 2.1 is needed for 0 population growth.
The Global TFR and Global Birth Rate is falling faster than all predictions which is being caused by economic growth.
As people make more money, the have less children.

The Global TFR and Global Birth Rate is expected to be negative by 2020.

Right now the Global TFR and Global Birth Rate are both negative for every continent except for Africa.

The global population is expected to stabilize by 2030 at the current rate and start declining by 2040.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate

Human population should stabilize between 8 - 9 Billion by 2020.

Actually, it can be said that George W. had created the situation by invading Iraq without just cause, upsetting the balance of power, and leaving the Iraqi army jobless, humiliated, and looking for revenge - - and taking revenge when they became ISIS. So yes, you can say the US had helped create that situation from which the Syrian refugees are fleeing.

You also can say that the US just straight up gave ISIS guns, we used Islamist militants to overthrow Gaddafi and tried the same in Syria. The soldiers we spent billions training and sacrificed the lives of thousands of servicemen for just laid down their weapons when faced with ISIS, how many of these cowards are refugees now? The US was there every step of the way during the development of ISIS and bare the most responsibility out of any country for their existence. Shout out to Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf!

The Syrian civil war and increasing world population aside there is yet another bit of cheery news. If the global warming based predictions many climatologists have made concerning the degration of the equatorial zone for agriculture and cattle raising come true, even partially, truly huge numbers of people will be dislocated.

The primary path used is by land and or short sea transits. The path in the americas, south to north, is easy to see and already well used. Looking at at map I would guess Europe is going to be swamped from Africa, The Middle East, Southwest Asia, and possibly including a significant flow from the Indian Subcontinent. I do not know what will happen further east as the northern countries there have no modern precedent for taking in refugees.

There are a lot of chicken littles out there.

As I understand it, a great many of the Iraqi troops who laid down their guns and ran did so primarily because their officer corps, who were more interested in being on the take, grabbed as much cash as possible, and got the hell out of Dodge. Basically, the officers had often been unqualified douche bags who bought their ranks, and saw the military as a means of making money through graft and corruption. When it finally came down to having to fight for their country, they instead decided they wanted to live rich cowards than die as heroes, so they deserted their men. This is the outcome of the policy of paying bribes to Iraqi military and civilian leaders, which the US government had been doing since we had overthrown Saddam Hussein and his gang of thugs.

This is what the UN scientists are saying.

UN projects world population to reach 8.5 billion by 2030,
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?N ... kWBzvmrSCg

"8.5 billion by 2030"
"9.7 billion in 2050" and
"11.2 billion in 2100".

There is no reason to think it will slow at 11.2 billion, since there is much uninhabited land.

"World population to hit 11bn in 2100 – with 70% chance of continuous rise"
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... -11bn-2100

African population expected to go from 1 billion today to 5 billion by 2100.

The UN has constantly been wrong on it's estimates regarding population growth.
They are constantly revising the model.

U.S. and EU demographers have been closer to accurate, but no one has an accurate model.
No one came close to predicting how face the countries of Central America, South America, Asia and Eastern Europe would transition through the demographic phases and wind up with a birth rate and TFR dropping faster than developed countries.
All African who have seen decent economic development such as South Africa, Ethiopia, Tanzania and other Southern African countries are seeing their population growth rapidly slow as their economics develop.

If nothing changes Southern Africa should see population stabilization between 2020-2050, with population decline starting between 2030-2060.
Western Africa population growth is gradually slowing, but not expected to peak for another 60-80 years.
Northern Africa (includes the countries Mediterranean coast), is expected to peak by 2050, sooner if economies pick up.
Middle Africa is expected to see it's population peak by 2080.
Eastern Africa is expected to see it's population peak between 2080 and 2100.

Once Africa's economies start developing as a whole in a significant way, it will speed up the decline population growth and TFR. Eventually following the rest of the world into negative territory.


The UN's population charts by area:
http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Graphs/

World
[img]=centerhttp://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Graphs/2_Probabilistic%20Projections/1_Population/1_Total%20Population/WORLD.png[/img]

Africa


Asia


Europe


Latin America (including all of South America)


North America


Oceania (including Australia)

The good Samaritan sometimes gets stamped out with no one but history caring about it.

As far as the USA causing the Syrian War, I would say no it did not. The Syrian Civil War began as part of the so-called 'Arab Spring'. Something Julian Assange claimed to have begun. *

However the USA's actions in Iraq did contribute to developments within that war as expatriot Iraqis were a prime element in the formation of ISIS.



* It began when a fruit seller in Tunisia self-imoliated himself in protest of government harassment.

Regardless. None of them are among the refugees we are talking about. The subject is the families fleeing westward from the barrel bombs in Syria, not the rich Iraqi guys fleeing ISIS by running east to their second homes far from enemy lines in Iraq.

So imprison them like criminals?