Refugees "flooding" Europe !NEW POLL!

[ecorcheur_brokar]

The Europeans (Mainly France) and Russians (USSR) were by far the biggest suppliers of weaponry to the Middle East in the most volatile nations. Let's take a look at the countries Europeans have invested into.

Syria ( France/Russia ) - hell-hole

Egypt (UK ) - Somewhat stable hell-hole

Pakistan (UK) - hell-hole

Libya (Italy/ France) - hell-hole

Lebanon ( France) - hell-hole

Somalia ( Italy/ UK) - hell-hole

Iran (UK/France/Russia) - somewhat stable hell-hole.

Afghanistan (UK/ Russia) - hell-hole

If you look at the countries the US has invested in, Jordan, Israel, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait they are rich and prosperous. When we were investing into Saddam it was because he was using the trade and aid funds to modernize his country from a 3rd world nation with no literacy, education or jobs to a 1st world economy with high literacy and education. Those who think the US has some kind of nefarious agenda are idiots, just do some research on all the social, economic and industrial changes Saddam (before he thought he was Stalin) and the Shah of Iran implemented to modernize their countries with support and trade from the US. Of course the European media and agenda is to criticize the US to cover their own asses and look innocent. I mean we all know European indecisiveness and cowardice has reached all time record highs after ww2, but it got to the point where they can't even deal with a genocide going on in their own backyards 100's of miles from their own boarders (Kosovo) without the US holding their hands through the whole ordeal.

Egypt- rather alright even tho, it should be a way more powerfull country than what it is
Lebanon ( France) - Democracy and rather stable for the explosive ethnic coctail it is
Iran (on its own) - stable

Israel, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, rich on the paper but fucking hell hole where I wouldn't live for all the money in the world. Libya, Syria and Irak didn't need any foreign support to reach high literacy, it was only a matter of will from the people in charge of those countries.

Pakistan (USA) - hell-hole
Afghanistan (USA) - hell-hole

Even tho, UK had invested in those countries years ago, USA is in recent years the biggest supplier for those country at a point where UK support becomes irrelevant.

I think the main difference between europeans and US citizens is that we are becoming more and more aware of the destabilizing influence of our politicians over 3rd world countries, when US citizens never learn from their past mistakes. So I will not deny the destabilizing influence of EU but I condemn it.

[Molly]

(click to show/hide)

Read his post full of bullshit, actual bullshit. He doesn't even believes in it, he is just like rest of idiots who dwell on somethingawful and thinks he is funny while spreading fabricated prejudiced bullshit and acting stupid in video games. Couldn't come up with proper response to that. Then it came to me, I've watched Mr Robot in past few days. Something Elliot did gave me an idea:

This is great way of dealing with pricks. It is equivalent of hitting them with the sledgehammer when they poke you in the eye. You don't even have to be rude, like Oberyn. Just need to find or hope you'll find a loophole somewhere that will give strength to your words and make them hurt like a bitch, to penetrate the shell of a prick in question.

dafuq?

[Leshma]

Must say I was having same reaction when I found out you are not 15 years old like Tore, but double that age.

[Molly]

Must say I was having same reaction when I found out you are not 15 years old like Tore, but double that age.

You found out, huh?
Some back channel social engineering hacker thing or something?
Not that most people already know that I am an oldfart like Gnjus...

Guess I'll just put you on my ignore list. You're in good company there. Bunch of the DKG dudes... and Vovka

[Kafein]

Heh, I didn't know for sure but it's pretty evident you are in your thirties. The bike and your tastes make it a pretty easy guess.

By the way, my opinion of the matter is that the better solution to the crisis would probably to say fuck it and go in with the boys. Best opportunity to create a real European defense force and keep up our NATO obligations. Plus, securing the Libyan coast and the Syrian border regions and help the refugees *there* isn't as hard as pacifying these territories completely, even if the mission itself goes on for longer. The point is to have controlled refugee camps with decent living conditions and security, not to drive back whatever occupant just to see it replaced a few months afterwards when we're gone.

Of course, this is never going to happen despite Lybia and Syria being countries only by name at this point. What's realistically going to happen is we'll tank the hits and the crisis will end. In a few decades economic immigration will be a largely marginal phenomenon anyway.

[Leshma]

Bunch of the DKG dudes...

They are just kids roleplaying chocolate chip cookies on the internet. You are actual descendant of chocolate chip cookie soldier.

Heh, I didn't know for sure but it's pretty evident you are in your thirties.

That came later. At first he was following me around in game like a lost puppy. Couldn't get him off my tail and didn't want to be rude. Big mistake, being rude is necessary in life and eventually can lead to something more positive than faking nice attitude all the time. Most of the major conflicts I had with cRPG players started with me being overly nice to people acting like underage children. Must say I appreciate Oberyn more than any of those cases.

[Chris_the_Animal]

This is a german Singer/Songwriter on YouTube, Maximnoise.
It takes alot of courage to do, what he did.

For everyone who understands german:
If not, just watch the Video from 1:15

[Grytviken]

Egypt- rather alright even tho, it should be a way more powerfull country than what it is
Lebanon ( France) - Democracy and rather stable for the explosive ethnic coctail it is
Iran (on its own) - stable

Israel, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, rich on the paper but fucking hell hole where I wouldn't live for all the money in the world. Libya, Syria and Irak didn't need any foreign support to reach high literacy, it was only a matter of will from the people in charge of those countries.

Pakistan (USA) - hell-hole
Afghanistan (USA) - hell-hole

Even tho, UK had invested in those countries years ago, USA is in recent years the biggest supplier for those country at a point where UK support becomes irrelevant.

I think the main difference between europeans and US citizens is that we are becoming more and more aware of the destabilizing influence of our politicians over 3rd world countries, when US citizens never learn from their past mistakes. So I will not deny the destabilizing influence of EU but I condemn it.

Destabilizing influence of the EU !!!!!! Yes preaching religious tolerance and encouraging secular governments is bad I hope you learned your lesson you insensitive racist.

[cup457]

Fuck you leshma you dont know anything about me and just call me stupid. fuck off m8. I dont want to live near anyone From other countries I dont care if they are smart or not.

[Turkhammer]

Oberyn's vocabulary and use of language makes it fantastic when it happens though. His mother language is French but he's better at writing English prose than any other visitor on this site I'm aware of.

Except that he is full of eloquent steaming horseshit for much of his rantings.

[Turkhammer]

An American lecturing on 'accountability' xD it's like taking weight-loss advice from a pig

You guys going to give the Malvinas back or fight another war over them without American help next time?

[Oberyn]

Well, in practice EU influence is NATO influence, and NATO influence has been about using Saudi Arabia as "allies" and allowing them to spread their supremacist and violent theocratic political model to the rest of the sunni muslim world for decades (ostensibly as a counter to communist influence) not to mention all the dictatorships/military juntas that were encouraged to the same purpose. So it's not to do with colonialism so much as the immediate aftermath of decolonisation, the context being the Cold War. There's still a proxy cold war going on in important parts of the muslim world, it's just different participants, for different stakes and a different (very religious) context, and NATO is very much implicated. We haven't exactly had a moderating influence on the development of political systems in the muslim world since decolonisation, the opposite in fact, though there are exceptions.

[Oberyn]

Except that he is full of eloquent steaming horseshit for much of his rantings.

Yeah, the "prose" thing is a bit much, I just rant. I wouldn't say much horseshit but I'm biased.

[Casimir]

You guys going to give the Malvinas back or fight another war over them without American help next time?

This is of absolutely no relevance to the migrations crisis but I'd like to point out a couple things here.

First of all America did very little other than serve as an intermediary in negotiations during the Falklands conflict; at the time they said if it came to full scale war they would have supported the UK and I don't see how that would be any different today considering the UK is still a major player in NATO, is one of america's closest security allies (n.b. FVEY), and america are probably even less concerned about their reputation in southern america now than they were in the 1980's.

Secondly the only major power who has publicly supported Argentinian claims on sovereignty over the Falklands is China, but this is probably more to do with their claims on Taiwan and the south china sea where, if UN resolutions passed the Falkland isles to Argentina, China could push for further control over these disputed areas.  An intervention by China in this conflict would undoubtedly result in NATO intervention and as such is unlikely to be directly forthcoming.

Furthermore a direct conflict between Argentina and Britain would likely end exactly as it did before considering the higher combat experience and superior equipment of British armed forces in comparison with Argentinian forces who are still underfunded and inexperienced.  A quick look at the military budget of the two countries outlines the gross disparity in military power. Britain spends around $69 billion p.a. (roughly 2% of their  GDP) while Argentina spends only $5 billion p.a. (around 0.7% of their GDP), on top of this Britain is still a nuclear power while Argentina is not. 

The only likely case of Britain transferring sovereignty to Argentina would be if massive social pressure from either the Falkland residents, the British public or the wider international community (most important UN security council) insisted upon this, until then legacies of British imperialism across the globe will likely remain, disputed as they may be.

[Grytviken]

Well, in practice EU influence is NATO influence, and NATO influence has been about using Saudi Arabia as "allies" and allowing them to spread their supremacist and violent theocratic political model to the rest of the sunni muslim world for decades (ostensibly as a counter to communist influence) not to mention all the dictatorships/military juntas that were encouraged to the same purpose. So it's not to do with colonialism so much as the immediate aftermath of decolonisation, the context being the Cold War. There's still a proxy cold war going on in important parts of the muslim world, it's just different participants, for different stakes and a different (very religious) context, and NATO is very much implicated. We haven't exactly had a moderating influence on the development of political systems in the muslim world since decolonisation, the opposite in fact, though there are exceptions.

That's the problem, Saudi Arabia and Iran are in direct competition. EU influence is much more than just NATO though, it includes aid, incentives, trade agreements etc. The problem throughout the cold war leading up to now is there were no other alternatives other than dealing directly with the leaders in power of these particular countries no matter how corrupt they were. In many cases trade agreements and aid were and still are filtered through corrupt and greedy governments leaving much of their populace in poverty. After stealing from their own people they then solidify their power by blaming the west. Even now having to chose between the guy who uses chemical weapons on his own populace or the radicals who behead people doesn't leave NATO with many options. Arming the Kurds is the best immediate solution but creates tensions with Turkey and won't necessarily help anyone inside Syria.

There was a plan to unify Syria and Iraq into one nation to bolster the population of the Sunnis before Saddam rose to power, but the Assad's were going to assume the leadership of the Union, so Saddam took control of Iraq for himself.  After the Sunni minority in Iraq realized they were no longer going to hold power over the Shia majority like they did when Saddam was in charge they resorted to radicalization and hostilities.