refugees welcome?

[YowYan]

[video]https://youtu.be/C52TlPCVDio[/video]

Milton Friedman makes some great points about a very similar topic here.

The answer is no because we have limited resources. If you are the kind of person that won't fight tooth and nail for your home then I don't think you deserve a free out. Look at the Japanese in WWII and the north Vietnamese if you want good ecamples of those who'd fight for their home

Obviously, you live in a conflict-free region so you're not in the position at all to call others out on their lack of 'fighting spirit'. Ignorant. As usual

 

[slimreaper]

Obviously, you live in a conflict-free region so you're not in the position at all to call others out on their lack of 'fighting spirit'. Ignorant. As usual

Thats like saying a doctor isn't qualified to treat you for cancer unless he himself has had cancer.

I like many americans am armed and would gladly fight for my land if need rose. I being the person that owes them nothing, yet is being called on to help am in the perfect position to question their fight.

Ignorant as usual

 

[Uzumaki Macho]

Thats like saying a doctor isn't qualified to treat you for cancer unless he himself has had cancer.

I like many americans am armed and would gladly fight for my land if need rose. I being the person that owes them nothing, yet is being called on to help am in the perfect position to question their fight.

Ignorant as usual

So I guess the Jews in WW2 Germany should have fought the Nazis instead of running away.

 

[slimreaper]

So I guess the Jews in WW2 Germany should have fought the Nazis instead of running away.

They for the most part were tricked. It's also a different situation. The jews were against a government and nation where they had no real allies. In syria there is a civil war (ie sides to chooses and people to arm you). Choose a side and fight. If you choose neither then start your own shit

 

[YowYan]

Thats like saying a doctor isn't qualified to treat you for cancer unless he himself has had cancer.

I like many americans am armed and would gladly fight for my land if need rose. I being the person that owes them nothing, yet is being called on to help am in the perfect position to question their fight.

Ignorant as usual

That's the dumbest comparison I've heard in a while but I expect nothing less from you.
If only you knew your own nation is the most aggressive terrorist military force, responsible for tons of deaths and refugees. As if the war-torn middle-eastern nations weren't tricked. You don't have nothing to worry, domestically. Your country's general deluded sense of patriotism- aah nvm you'll never learn.
Goddamn you're dumb, I don't even..

 

[Fresco]

They for the most part were tricked. It's also a different situation. The jews were against a government and nation where they had no real allies. In syria there is a civil war (ie sides to chooses and people to arm you). Choose a side and fight. If you choose neither then start your own shit

This is just naive. The right to life is greater than any country or border. No one should be obligated to fight their own brothers and sisters if the option to leave and find peace elsewhere is on the table. Not everyone born in Syria is a bloodthirsty killer or a deluded patriot. They have families they have to protect and look over.

You're practically encouraging innocents, including children, to pick the side of Islamic extremists or a ruthless dictatorship, as well. Yeah they could create their own side, but that would do nothing.

Your opinion also doesn't address whether or not countries should take in these refugees, either.

 

[slimreaper]

This is just naive. The right to life is greater than any country or border. No one should be obligated to fight their own brothers and sisters if the option to leave and find peace elsewhere is on the table. Not everyone born in Syria is a bloodthirsty killer or a deluded patriot. They have families they have to protect and look over.

You're practically encouraging innocents, including children, to pick the side of Islamic extremists or a ruthless dictatorship, as well. Yeah they could create their own side, but that would do nothing.

Your opinion also doesn't address whether or not countries should take in these refugees, either.

Did you watch the video I posted? In it friedman suggests that illegal immigration is good for a nation as long as it's illegal ( ie no use of benefits granted to citizens)

In america and i'm sure a great many others, illegals get the same treatment and benefits that a regular citizen gets. Take that advantage away and i'd be glad to let these people in. That said, I will not create a further tax burden for the people of this nation for the well being of others. There simply isn't enough to go around and thats a harsh reality of life that liberals fail to grasp

 

[Fresco]

Did you watch the video I posted? In it friedman suggests that illegal immigration is good for a nation as long as it's illegal ( ie no use of benefits granted to citizens)

In america and i'm sure a great many others, illegals get the same treatment and benefits that a regular citizen gets. Take that advantage away and i'd be glad to let these people in. That said, I will not create a further tax burden for the people of this nation for the well being of others. There simply isn't enough to go around and thats a harsh reality of life that liberals fail to grasp

:lol there is enough to go around, but it's hard when rich people don't pay their fair share in taxes, and there's a whole party dedicated to helping them get away with it.

And it's funny too because we're the strongest nation on earth with a GDP that is only matched by the EU, and you're suggesting we somehow have our hands tied behind our back in terms of resources?

 

[Dark Sonic]

Thats like saying a doctor isn't qualified to treat you for cancer unless he himself has had cancer.

That's not a convincing analogy. What is the point in this??

 

[slimreaper]

:lol there is enough to go around, but it's hard when rich people don't pay their fair share in taxes, and there's a whole party dedicated to helping them get away with it.

And it's funny too because we're the strongest nation on earth with a GDP that is only matched by the EU, and you're suggesting we somehow have our hands tied behind our back in terms of resources?

Are you suggesting raising taxes? They already get close to 40% of the working man's check. Are you suggesting cutting loop holes for the rich and raising taxes on them?

You must be registered for see links

 

[Fresco]

Are you suggesting raising taxes? They already get close to 40% of the working man's check. Are you suggesting cutting loop holes for the rich and raising taxes on them?

You must be registered for see links

Yes, raising taxes on income for the rich to 70-90%, doubling taxes on capital gains, and lowering income taxes for the middle class.

And you don't have to be lazy. Post a study or something and I'll read it, but I'm not watching a 40 minute video.

 

[slimreaper]

Yes, raising taxes on income for the rich to 70-90%, doubling taxes on capital gains, and lowering income taxes for the middle class.

And you don't have to be lazy. Post a study or something and I'll read it, but I'm not watching a 40 minute video.

Doesn't matter how low income tax tax on the middle class is if they're all unemployed. Seriously is this a joke?

 

[ChicagoJhawk]

It's much more complicated than that. There's levels to this shit

 

[Fresco]

Doesn't matter how low income tax tax on the middle class is if they're all unemployed. Seriously is this a joke?

What? Do you know what an income tax is? Historically, you're wrong, regardless.

Dude, we're off-topic, so create a thread in the future if you want to debate this.

 

[slimreaper]

What? Do you know what an income tax is? Historically, you're wrong, regardless.

Dude, we're off-topic, so create a thread in the future if you want to debate this.

One last rebuttal. How do you tax the income of the unemployed? Destroying the upperclass would decimate the industry of this nation.

You must be registered for see links

It's 4 mins and I don't feel like transcribing it

 

[Aim64C]

So I guess the Jews in WW2 Germany should have fought the Nazis instead of running away.

Bluntly? Yes.

The problem, as I have explained elsewhere to the Europeans around here, is that Germany is for Germans - and the Jews are not Germans. European nations are Nations of Men. They are not Nations of Laws. The law is whatever is reasoned to serve the race the nation is named after, and the nation is empowered to take virtually any action reasoned as being in the service of that race.

They pretend they are not racist bigots at heart, and there are some who truly believe in a world without borders... but the problem is that when you have governments empowered to make decisions for Germans to benefit Germans... but then you get a bunch of French in the middle of all of that who want to make decisions for the French....

Well... that would be why there is a border between Germany and France, and why the two became distinct enough as to have separate languages.

The only reason the Germans and the French were able to move to places like America and blend together is because America -was- a Nation of Laws. The government just simply didn't make decisions regarding many things that are common for governments to do in Europe. The French could move in by the thousand and it wasn't a huge deal because they couldn't force much in the way of lifestyle changes upon local populations. New populations weren't a threat and old populations couldn't use the law to extort new arrivals.

This is not the case in Europe - which is why Europe has had a dozen wars amongst itself in the same time span as America had one with itself.

That said - the Jews should have fought. Many Germans should have fought against Hitler - and many were against him. Funny thing... one of the first things Hitler did was reason that the State could provide sufficient protection to secure Germans... so private ownership of firearms was prohibited. Then they insisted the State would be better at running business than private owners would - and sent in the 'brown shirts' to harass businesses who wouldn't play according to the Nazi's rules.

So - yes, they should have fought. They should have never turned over their firearms. They never should have accepted socialism.

That's the dumbest comparison I've heard in a while but I expect nothing less from you.
If only you knew your own nation is the most aggressive terrorist military force, responsible for tons of deaths and refugees. As if the war-torn middle-eastern nations weren't tricked. You don't have nothing to worry, domestically. Your country's general deluded sense of patriotism- aah nvm you'll never learn.
Goddamn you're dumb, I don't even..

From a statistical standpoint, it is an entirely different scenario, and he is correct in that.

The Jews comprised a very small percentage of the population and were listed as a specific lineage that was foreign to Germany and no longer to be tolerated (along with a number of other migrant populations - but the Jews were particularly popular to blame because of their ownership of businesses and activity in banking).

This is a somewhat different scenario.

It is the difference between Non-Japanese fleeing Japan if Japan were to ever decide to start slaughtering the local "round eyes" and a bunch of French fleeing France because a Pro-Imperial revolution erupts, or something.

This is just naive. The right to life is greater than any country or border. No one should be obligated to fight their own brothers and sisters if the option to leave and find peace elsewhere is on the table. Not everyone born in Syria is a bloodthirsty killer or a deluded patriot. They have families they have to protect and look over.

There is no such thing as a right to life.

If there were a right to life, death would not be the default outcome of inaction. IE - if you simply sat and did nothing, then the default action should be that you continue to live. You will, however, die. There is no such thing as a right to life.

Life is an endeavor. You must eat to live, you must hunt or farm to eat, and tools to make these tasks easier must be sourced from other endeavors. Nothing about life is guaranteed.

There are limits to how far one can pursue non-confrontation. Every organism on the face of the planet has a means of self-defense - no matter how simple. At some point, the world makes evident to each generation why this is so.

You're practically encouraging innocents, including children, to pick the side of Islamic extremists or a ruthless dictatorship, as well. Yeah they could create their own side, but that would do nothing.

Why would it accomplish nothing?

Your opinion also doesn't address whether or not countries should take in these refugees, either.

Well, the fact is that many countries have said: "No."

You want the U.S. should bomb them until they agree to take in refugees in compliance with your bigoted opinion that they can't make their own decisions?

 

[iBrezeeh]

smh i dont even get why americans comment on this topic you dont even take any refugees lol

 

[Aim64C]

smh i dont even get why americans comment on this topic you dont even take any refugees lol

You must be registered for see links

" Leaving their homeland had never been part of the picture. Al Roustom had a supermarket and owned their home in the western Syria city of Homs. But a civil war that started with unrest in 2011 had taken its toll, especially on his son Wesam, already dealing with autism and so traumatized by the barrage of violence that he stopped speaking entirely.

"When they would exit the house, it was only to the sounds of war," Al Roustom said through a translator. "When they would sleep, they would hear the sound of bullets."

These days, it's the sounds of passing cars and conversations between people on the street for Al Roustom and his wife, Suha, as they and their children settle into their small apartment in Jersey City, New Jersey. They've been here about three months, among the 1,500 or so Syrian refugees who have been resettled in the U.S. out of an estimated 4 million who fled the country in recent years. "

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see links

Roughly 70,000 refugees enter the United States annually via legal channels. 70,000 every year since 2006.

By all means, come up with another excuse to exclude us Americans from the conversation about "Global Citizens."

Pretentious prick.

 

[BLAZE]

Dunno when this guy will overthrow his goverment :lol ^^^^

 

[SasukeTheEmo]

In don't hate them , but i am against them.

The middle east can NEVER be in peace its a fact. You can't make it normal anymore there will always be war for all enternity.

You've 2 options.

A. Let the refugees in and do actually nothing then providing them food and shelter and people have to pay more taxes and work more , own kids can't even buy their own houses. Obviously more criminality because more people.



B. Take as many refugees from any middle east place to europe or america and blow up the whole middle east.
Then with the help of every country rebult middle east, and send them back


But ofcourse you can have enternal war there fine 2 i guess

Well done for enraging the closet Mujahideens on NB.