Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

No, smoothy, she hasn't been a teen for many years. Please answer my questions as to what you would do and which group you would fight for if you lived in Syria. And yes, that country is a mess.

---

Well she certainly writes and acts like someone in their late teens to early 20's who has not been out in the real world for long if ever. Debating style is VERY high school like. Based on Ideology instead of fact.

And who would I support if I was in Syria? I would be on Assad's side... no he isn't a nice person... but then neither is Obama. At least Assad kept the less desirable crowd under control. And because he isn't a Muslim Fanatic like most of the opposition.

I have no use for Muslim fanatics....ever, anywhere. All they do is cause trouble and oppress anyone NOT like them anywhere they are.

Quote:

---

I would be on Assad's side.

---

I always thought you would make a great dictator, so it's no wonder you would take the side of a brutal dictator and Vlad the Conqueror.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

I always thought you would make a great dictator, so it's no wonder you would take the side of a brutal dictator and Vlad the Conqueror.

---

The lesser of evils... choices we as adults frequently have to make. And sometimes the dictator is the better choice than the opposition. Look at Libya, Egypt... not to mention Syria. Your choices aren't always Good vs. Evil. But often who is the least evil.

Is there more the US could do to resolve the Syrian problem?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Is there more the US could do to resolve the Syrian problem?

---

That point has long past... Obama and his stooges decided to back the Muslim Brotherhood ergo... ISIS... vs the right group in the beginning and made it worse.

We saw what happened in Libya and Egypt. Anyone who didn't see this mess coming a mile away is blind.

I say we arm everyone over there, (small arms only, nothing big) let them kill each other... then go in and kill whomever wins if they aren't what we consider "good people".

People in that part of the world are not civilized... nor do they grasp the concept of Democracy. And none of them can be trusted. Few of them have progressed in mindset in over 1,400 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Is there more the US could do to resolve the Syrian problem?

---

The US could negotiate between the Turkish and the Peshmerga and with both armies fight as an allied force against Assad and all the terrorists. Maybe other armies are willing to join, like Jordan, Israel, Egypt, they are all fighting against the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda and IS.

Except they don't like each other and don't really share enough common interest...(which is a HUGE thing) and who is going to pay for it? Assad as bad as he might have been... is still far better than all the alternatives in that area. THe last thing the world needs is another Muslim theocracy oppressing everyone and committing genocide against all non-Muslims.

And what I mean is..a common enemy isn't usually enough reason for people to work together that don't like each other....

Logistics and Command are two HUGE aspects besides the costs incurred with Military actions.

So smoothy I would think your solution has been tried anyone who wanted to fight over there has been armed, obviously it isn't important enough for millions so maybe Assard is right he has been fighting terrorists, and the arab spring never happened. To me it all comes down to the dirty dealings the US has been involved in over a long time, this is George Bush's legacy and it will be Obama's because when it comes down to it it is about projecting power something Putin understands

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

So smoothy I would think your solution has been tried anyone who wanted to fight over there has been armed, obviously it isn't important enough for millions so maybe Assard is right he has been fighting terrorists, and the arab spring never happened. To me it all comes down to the dirty dealings the US has been involved in over a long time, this is George Bush's legacy and it will be Obama's because when it comes down to it it is about projecting power something Putin understands

---

George Bush had NOTHING to do with the Arab Spring don't put the blame on him... that was all Obama's Doing... on Obamas watch. HE sided with the Muslim brotherhood despite everyone's advice and objections.

And its more like an Arab winter because its been one disaster after another. And even then.. with all the degenerates and malcontents and the lunatic radicals in that armpit of the world... its not even all Obama's fault. ( Hate to find myself defending HIM of all people)

Libya, Egypt and Syria were all better off under dictators....none of them really deserved any better...and their behavior ( the people) in recent years proves it. It took brutal dictators to keep them from trying to kill each other. As proven by what happened when that balance was disturbed or the Dictators removed....they resort to trying to kill each other like the animals they are.

Like the American during the Civil War?

Were those the northern animals, or the southern animals, Tal? Both sides handed out some brutal treatment. Look, smoothy, is right! Those arabs in Syria, Iraq and Libya are little more than animals, settling their age old grieviences and Egypt isn't much better. While these characters fight amonst themselves no one has to worry about Israel which gets on with subjecting the palestinians who are tarred with the same brush. I expect that if you subscribe to a medieval philosophy, your thinking and actions will be medieval. We want to end this? End Islam and its rabid philosopy of world domination. The Arabs know nothing but allegiance to a strong leader usually one with the backing of religion, democracy is only an idea they have heard of, but they don't understand it. This is why they run into the streets shouting when ever anything happens

And how do you end Islam?

Let us be honest here most of us are not born racist, we become racist, or intolerant of certain groups, because of the behaviour we observe and are subjected to.

I agree that migrants should assimulate, if there is any country where the multiracial experiment has failed it is mine. What have we got out of it, large number of unwanted migrants calling themselves refugees. Some are refugees from war zones but many are economic migrants, particularly the young men who are sent and financed by their families. Whole surburbs have been turned into ghettos and we have asian crime gangs, home invasions, gun violence, drugs. We only have to read the court lists or newspaper reports to see the ethnicity of most of the offenders. There aren't too many Smith's or Jones' among them. We even have New Zealand complaining we are sending their criminals back.

Now I understand that to most of the world this is paradise, rarely known war on its soil, good climate, good welfare and medical system, modern housing, modern transport, religious tolerance, stable government, etc. Is it too much to ask that a new comer might learn to speak english? Or abide by our laws such as the age of consent? But what do we get? Welfare cheats, criminals

All those things you have mentioned are conditions already found in most societies already. It's a bit much though to expect migrants (You say refugees but we all know you mean foreigners) to assimilate instantly to the new climate they find themselves in, fraught with prejudice and demands from the new people who they encounter.

You have to expect they need help to acclimate. Directing them to a ghetto that's already poor and (Not to mention the subhuman condition of "processing centers") destitute and dependent on your goodwill is the choice of the ruling class policy makers.

You know your elected representatives.

Other ethnic groups managed to assimilate under those conditions... but then... maybe they were just more evolved.

Of course.. there is this novel concept... they stay in the general region they are from and NOT think they are entitled to go anyplace they want halfway around the world. There are a LOT of countries they had to pass through before getting to Europe. They should stay in one of them...

And no they aren't refugees... they are economic opportunists...

My German ancestors came to this country to get away from the German revolutions of 1848-49 and for economic reasons. They bought land (coincidentally, a mile or two from where I live now), farmed, and eventually learned English. Were they refugees? immigrants? economic opportunists?

THey didn't have Islamic Terrorists bend on killing non-muslims (outside of the area they infested anyway) in the 1800's. There also wasn't welfare in the 1800's you worked or you starved to death,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

My German ancestors came to this country to get away from the German revolutions of 1848-49 and for economic reasons. They bought land (coincidentally, a mile or two from where I live now), farmed, and eventually learned English. Were they refugees? immigrants? economic opportunists?

---

Well, if their lifes were in danger because of the revolutions they were refugees. They were also immigrants: every refugee is also an immigrant, but not every immigrant is a refugee.

Everybody in the US, except for the slaves and the native Americans, is either an immigrant or a descendant of immigrants.

Really... Why JUST America... how about The Caribbean, South America, and Central America too.. not to mention Canada, and Austailian etc... Everyone in THOSE places NOT 100% native Indian were Immigrants there too... and that's MOST of the populations in those places.

Same with Blacks anywhere outside of Africa... Asians anywhere outside of Asia... Or is this really just about bashing the USA....who pays for almost everything these days? Perfect reason to kick the UN out of the USA and stop funding ANYTHING outside the USA.

Let the rest of the world step up for once and pay their fair share.

If the slaves weren't immigrants, what would they be called?

And most of the Native Americans came from somewhere else, so they were refugees or immigrants.