Google Donates €1 Million To Help Refugees In Need

Mark Wilson writes: The on-going refugee crisis in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East has grabbed hearts and headlines around the world. As European governments argue over who should take in the thousands of desperate people, European citizens have criticized the speed and scale of the help offered, whilst simultaneously donating money, food, and equipment to help those in desperate need. Now Google has stepped in, offering €1 million ($1.1 million) to the organizations providing help to refugees. In addition to this, Google.org (the branch of the company 'using innovation to tackle some of the world's biggest challenges') is setting up a page to make it easier for people to make donations, and says that it will match any money donated by Google users.

Comments

That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

but it's a drop in the bucket of resources needed for this migration. What I'm wondering is, where's the U.S pledge to take in migrants? After all, it's the U.S who is dropping bombs and seeding weapons into the regions these migrants are fleeing from. Or maybe they're just not interested because you can't have any cherry-picking under these circumstances?

Re:That's nice

[WORLOK]

Where is the Saudi and other muslim duty to take in their islamic brethren?

Re:That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Sweden and the United States give asylum to about the same number of refugees every year. Not per capita, but in absolute numbers. Also, the US gives 0.19% of their gross national income to foreign aid, compared to 1.02% of the above example.

It's the usual scenario. USA creates a big mess, other countries are stuck in it or have to clean it up.

Re:That's nice

[buchner.johannes]

This comic claims that climate change is one of the triggers (combined with the authoritarian regime, of course):
https://www.upworthy.com/tryin...

The UN has warned for years that climate change will lead to water and food shortages, and therefore political instabilities. This seems to be the first clear example, with probably many to follow as deserts expand.

Re:That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

On which side should they fight then? Maybe you didn't notice but there are no "good guys" in the war in Syria.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

Muslims don't view non-Muslims as "brothers and sisters." We are "Kafirs" to them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Re:That's nice

[amightywind]

What a crock of shit. These are the same people killing Christians by the tens of thousands in their real homes.

Re:That's nice

[ColdWetDog]

Sweden and the United States give asylum to about the same number of refugees every year. Not per capita, but in absolute numbers. Also, the US gives 0.19% of their gross national income to foreign aid, compared to 1.02% of the above example.

It's the usual scenario. USA creates a big mess, other countries are stuck in it or have to clean it up.

And the US funds 22% of UN operating needs. Then it's Japan (19%), Germany (9.8%), France and the UK. That rounds out the top 10.

Sweden isn't in there. Neither is Saudi Arabia (sitting on piles of cash and basically a neighbor), neither is Russia (who contributes mightily to the Syrian war effort).

You should spend some quality time understanding how the world works. It's complicated.

Re:That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Google - funding an invasion.

Re:That's nice

[PopeRatzo]

This succinctly shows why you are posting as an Anonymous Coward. Take a quick google over the Moors in Spain or over the Muslim siege of Vienna.

While you're at it, you might want to do a quick search for "The Crusades".

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

Re:That's nice

[Pinky's Brain]

Up to a point, presently Europe is being driven into a situation where a future civil war with ethnic cleansing on a scale unknown in history is on our doorstep (regardless of who wins). Giving migrants more aid and convincing more people to try their luck in Europe is a dangerous game, easy to play for American liberals though who at worst have a bunch of Catholics with a few drug problems on their doorstep.

Google should spend that money in Africa and the Middle East.

Re:That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Sweden isn't in there.

Sweden pays 1% of the UN funding. The US pays 22%, since they have a GDP that is 28 times bigger (they should have paid even more, but of course they've always whined about it, often by refusing to pay their fair share, and the UN reduced their quota accordingly).

Anyway, back to the refugees. If the US took in the same amount of refugees per capita as Sweden, they would receive about two and a half million refugees per year. That would alleviate a lot of suffering, and is all that matters in the end.

Re:That's nice

[amiga3D]

The nice thing about the people from Central America is that they are willing to work when they get here.

Re:That's nice

[Pinky's Brain]

Overpopulation is depleting resources far faster than climate change.

PS. yes, there's plenty for plenty more people ... but not correctly distributed among the people, which you can't redistribute without destroying civilization.

Re:That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

It's nothing. Google have cost the tax payers around the world several billion dollars with their schyster tax dodging antics. All we're seeing is a few corporations and mega-wealthy people making publicity stunts. Not one will come out and address the issues with the extremist muslims hell bent on destroying lives and history.

Re:That's nice

[allcoolnameswheretak]

The ISIS war in the Middle East is Muslim against Muslim. Any action from the U.S. or other civilized nations is irrelevant. It's Muslim against Muslim, they cooked their own stew,

Not quite right. ISIS was founded by former Sunni members of Saddam Husseins armed forces. After the invasion of Iraq, the US had the genius idea of sanctioning all military personnel that served under Saddam by permanently excluding them from serving under any new government. This left thousands of officers and ten thousands of other enlisted personnel without any perspective at all in the new, Shia dominated Iraq.
The leadership of ISIS are disgruntled, unemployed former officers of the Iraqi army. The whole religious undertone is a means to attract foot soldiers and to keep the simple minded folk in line. The real war is about power and control of resources, as it has always been.
Had the US followed a policy of reconciliation and inclusion, none of this might have happened.

Re:That's nice

[Rei]

I know it's common to blame the US for everything - and I'm generally no big fan myself. But the US just hasn't been a big player in this thing up until recently. And their local "dog in the game", the FSA, hasn't exactly had the largesse showered down on them. Here's a rough timeline:

March 2011: Protests start
July 2011: FSA forms
October 2011: Turkey lets the FSA operate a command headquarters on its side of the border.
April 2012: Reporters covering describe the FSA as flush with well trained soldiers, but with little intel or weapons available to them. A ship containing small arms believed to be destined for the FSA was intercepted.
November 2012: After infighting, the FSA joins as part of the Syrian National Coalition.
December 2012: Saudi Arabia begins arming the FSA with weapons shipped from Croatia.
March 2013: Due to a lack of weaponry, many fighters start deserting the FSA to the much better armed Al-Nusra Front. Al-Nusra (and increasingly with time, Daesh) begin coming into conflict with FSA over territory, and invariably winning as they do.
April 2013: US begins shipping nonlethal aid to the FSA
Late 2013: Reports of the first light arms shipments from the US to the FSA.
February 2014: FSA replaces its chief of staff due to "paralysis within the military command". The "Southern Front" of the FSA forms
April 2014: Small numbers of US anti-tank weapons systems start showing up in Syria. Southern Front of the FSA starts a string of successes against government forces.
August 2014: Unconfirmed reports of a nonagression pact between the FSA and Daesh to focus on Assad
Sep 2014: US begins bombing Daesh, increases light arms transfer to FSA. No approval given for transfer of antiaircraft systems, however.

ISIS and al-Nusra wouldn't be anywhere near as powerful as they are today had the US helped arm the FSA properly and early. But the US has been trying to avoid getting its hands dirty until the very last minute (for example, the Yazidi slaughter), and so these things happen.

The vast majority of the deaths in this conflict, according to international monitors, come from Assad, who's been using chemical weapons, barrel bombs on towns, long-range surface to surface missiles against cities, etc, as well as running a vast network of intelligence centers believed to have killed tens of thousands of prisoners. He has the air superiority and he's been using it. He also gets around one ship per week loaded with heavy arms from Russia and Iran - the former which has recently been reported to have significantly upped their local presence, building a base to handle over a thousand Russian soldiers. While Russia is reportedly planning to focus on Daesh, not the FSA, and the US isn't officially focusing on Assad, there's some serious potential for the two sides to butt up against each other, particularly as Daesh weakens.

Daesh, while gaining great notoriety for its efforts to publicize its brutal means of execution, its destruction of antiquities, its reestablishment of slavery (particularly sex slavery), and many other factors, nonetheless ranks a far second in the number of casualties caused. That said, it's obvious why the main international focus has been on them and the threat they present rather than on Assad.

What's the solution? Damned if I know. Way too many people have a dog in this game now. Russia thinks Assad is geopolitically too important to let go. Huge numbers of Syrians would rather die fighting than live under him - whether serving in secular or Islamist militias to try to bring him down. Daesh is the most powerful and wealthy of the militias, and this acts as a draw - not just locally, but for international fighters as well, even for those who don't give a rat's arse about Assad and just want to see a caliphate resurrected. The US, for obvious reasons, will never accept a super-well-funded and armed terrorist state establishing itself, and large numbers of people in the west aren't too keen on the c

Re:That's nice

[drooling-dog]

I'm non-Muslim and have friends who are Muslim. This may come as a shock, but they are not all the same, any more than all conservative Christians are ignorant xenophobes. They're not all ignorant xenophobes, right?

Re:That's nice

[fustakrakich]

Had the US followed a policy of reconciliation and inclusion, none of this might have happened.

It's hard to sell mass quantities of weaponry that way. If you want them to buy more, they have to use what they already have.

Re:That's nice

[drooling-dog]

Are they really? The very same people? That's quite an accusation, coming from the very same person who bombed the hell out of Iraq.

Re:That's nice

[Rei]

Absent, clearly.

Now are you saying that the west should strive to be moral equals of middle eastern despots?

Re:That's nice

[Rei]

There's already lots of people in Syria who want to fight both Daesh and Assad, but are poorly armed. If you want a military solution, why don't you start with actually arming them properly rather than involuntarily drafting refugees?

Re:That's nice

[JaredOfEuropa]

The vast majority of people currently flocking to Europe are not refugees from the war, but emigrants with economic motives. Throwing money at them is only going to encourage even more of them to make the (often dangerous) trek.

Refugees in Greece arrive with money and iPhones, checking with friends on the best places to go. Many arrive in Greece, Italy and Hungary, but very few stay in those countries even though they are safe there. They prefer Germany, Sweden and the UK, where the welcome is much warmer and comes with a house, medical care, a generous stipend, and the possibility of work. In Belgium, they see a large influx of young males (mostly from Iraq), all with identical rehearsed story about Syria and of course no papers to prove their identity. A great example is the story behind little Aylan, made famous by that heart-wrenching picture showing him washed ashore on a beach in Turkey. As it turns out, his family was already living in prefect safety in Istanbul for a few years, after fleeying the troubles in Syria. The father had tried to get asylum status in Canada (he has a relative there) but was denied. He then decided to try Europe, possibly because here he'd get the $14k in dental work he needed for free. He loaded his family in a crappy little boat and tried the crossing, which failed terribly as we know. The father lived, and is now back in Syria of all places to bury his family. This is a great tragedy, but it was brought on not by the war in Syria, not by ISIS, not by cold-hearted Europeans denying such people refuge, not by ruthless human trafficers, but by the man's own god-damned stupidity.

We in Europe (the vast majority of the people, not the politicians) do not want these people here. We'll take real refugees and care for them as best we can, but there are limits to what we can take. The social fabric in Sweden, Germany, France and other countries is already under tremendous strain, despite desperate attempts by media and government to paint a rosy picture. Should we do nothing? Of course not. One of the things we can do for example is to help Turkey manage the vast influx of refugees, help set them up in decent camps, and ensure that they stay there. Another thing we can do is what Australia does: tow these immigrants back from where they came, and destroy the boats. But the one thing we should be doing is to make it crystal clear: if you are not a real refugee, there is no future for you here.

Re:That's nice

[thegarbz]

Yes climate change is what is making people flee to Germany. Not Turkey, Greece, Macedonia, Kosovo, Serbia, Hungry, Slovakia, or the Czech Republic, but Germany (give or take a country depending on the path to German). Clearly Germany is the only place left in the world with food and water. This is all about climate change and they couldn't possible get food, water, or even a life free from war in any of the other countries they are passing through on the way to Germany. This has nothing to do with the almighty Euro at all.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

If you want a military solution, why don't you start with actually arming them properly rather than involuntarily drafting refugees?

We tried arming Muslims with Iraq . . . guess where all those armaments are being used now . . .

Re:That's nice

[buchner.johannes]

Give me a break, it's just a couple of thousand people. Millions are staying, in Lebanon and Turkey, because that is the region that they call home. There is no mass migration, that is a news bias.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

There is an ancient Arab Proverb, that goes something like this:

I fight against my brother. But my brother and I fight against others in my neighborhood. The boys in my neighborhood fight together with us, against people in other parts of the city. All the people in my city fight against people in other cities.

Scale that as you will.

Shias have been fighting Sunnis since day one. When Muslims are not killing Westerners, they are killing each other.

Re:That's nice

[dunkelfalke]

The second I in ISIS stands for Iraq. Which is a country that has been invaded by the USA and had its secular government destroyed.
So yep, they are to blame.

Re:That's nice

[alvinrod]

A lot of Muslims are as afraid of the extremists as everyone else. When the government can't maintain control and order and extremists can murder other Muslims who speak out against them with impunity, you're not going to see many people standing up to the extremists. Look at what they did to one girl who just wanted to get an education. Standing up to that takes a kind of bravery that most people simply don't have.

Re:That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

It's irrelevant. I prefer diversity and part of that diversity is that European culture exists and white people aren't bred out of existence.

Re:That's nice

[ultranova]

Overpopulation is depleting resources far faster than climate change.

AFAIK there's no region on Earth currently over its carrying capacity with the sole exception of Antarctica, which has around 5,000 people total.

PS. yes, there's plenty for plenty more people ... but not correctly distributed among the people, which you can't redistribute without destroying civilization.

That's a rather extraordinary assertion, especially in the context of deciding over other people's life and death. Please give some concrete examples of resources that need redistributing and why redistributing them is more likely to destroy civilization than the hate earned through hoarding them?

Because frankly, that sounds nothing more than an excuse for selfishness to me, and since reality isn't an Ayn Rand fantasy novel, that will likely end badly for us.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

A long time ago, the folks in a country ruled by a formidable Imperialist Empire got up the courage to fight against them. The folks will ill-armed, untrained, and just country bumpkins, more or less. You can fight tyranny. But the will of the people needs to be there.

Islamic countries tolerate persecution of females wanting to get an education . . . because that is what Islam says. Get rid of Islam, and then your girls can go to school safely. Otherwise, don't bother me with your own problems.

Re:That's nice

[Rei]

So your plan is to send 200,000 people unarmed against Assad's tanks and air force? Do you also plan to send in several dozen bulldozers to dig the mass grave for them?

And really, the concept that sometimes weapons get taken by groups they're not intended for, and therefore, the world is always better if no weapons are used in any concept... please. Should nobody have armed Nazi resistance groups because the Nazis might perchance get ahold of the weapons? Does the fact that a student don't always get 100% perfect marks on tests in school mean that they failed out? Demanding perfection as a condition for doing anything is an absurdity. Yes, one needs to take into account a full risk-benefit analysis for every decision, and one of the "risks" is the odds of weapons capture or misuse - it's most definitely a real risk. But you want to simply write off the whole benefit side because that value is nonzero. Which is an absurdity, given that the reason for giving the weapons would be to destroy the power of two groups to wage war, one of said groups who's dropping chemical and barrel bombs on cities, and the other who's a sex-slaving antiquities-destroying terrorist group.

Re:That's nice

[Hognoxious]

Crazy idea, but how about starting their own?

Re:That's nice

[aevan]

It's true. Sweden's crime statistics entirely backs this up. Sweden Yes.

http://www.thelocal.se/20051214/2683

Re:That's nice

[Rei]

Daesh and al-Nusra were tiny entities until the Syrian civil war - it's the Syria chaos that allowed them to flourish, and eventually conquer chunks of Iraq with forces armed and trained in Syria. And part of the reason that they flourished in Syria was because they were far better armed than their secular competition.

That said, the Maliki government too most definitely contributed to helping Daesh gain membership, he did a bang-up job of alienating Iraq's Sunni population. And Maliki would never have been elected had Saddam not been overthrown. But you know that once you start playing this game of stepping back through history you can blame almost anything on almost anything else, it becomes Degrees of Kevin Bacon-ish. It should also be mentioned that Maliki was elected. It should furthermore be mentioned that Maliki and the US weren't exactly friends.

I say this as someone who was very much opposed to the Iraq invasion... as a general rule, I oppose taking peace and turning it into chaos. But I sometimes support taking chaos and giving it at least a chance to turn into peace.

Re:That's nice

[robi5]

The thing is, at the time there had to be a f..ing WAR to claim territory, because the defense mechanisms of European countries worked at the time.

Now Muslim masses just show up, gently escorted through Europe by Europeans with humanitarian thinking. Add a bit of family unification, birth rate differences, adhesion to their traditional way of life and the inevitable resentment of their first few generations against European values, and bingo, Europe is part of the Muslim world.

Buy real estate in Eastern Europe, maybe this will be the last refuge of the European way of life, a reservatum of the future. Even now, when you travel to Eastern Europe, it'll be like a culture shock, white people everywhere you look!

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

It's not about the arms or the training . . . it's about the will of the people to fight. Germany could give 200,000 folks all the arms and training they need . . . including anti-tank weapons and flak weapons. But the will of the soldiers must be there. They must want to end the Islamic Tyranny . . . otherwise the project is doomed to failure. Read some von Clausewitz for more ideas about what war really is.

Taking in refugees is not going to solve the root of the problem.

Re:That's nice

[Hognoxious]

Yes, one needs to take into account a full risk-benefit analysis for every decision

The easiest way is to do it afterwards, just like you do.

Re:That's nice

[robi5]

It's ironic that the result of what is essentially a Muslim - Muslim fight (irrespective of the West breeding instability or not) is the outpouring of Muslims to Europe, i.e. the continued, aggressive Islamization of Europe. Not only will there be large cities where the original citizenry feel like visitors to some different country, but also it'll make it remarkably easy to establish jihadist cells, train and brainwash the Muslim masses.

It is established that even a minority can impose its will and its way of life on a culture or country if it's more dedicated, militant and less concerned about the negative consequences of its aggression. Europeans are wussies as compared to the Muslims whose stated mission is to impose Islam everwhere.

Re:That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

The UN is hosted in New York. The US "funds" the UN through indirect but expensive means such as free security, free land, and free infrastructure. You didn't really believe the security requirements of having a couple hundred top-level diplomats in the same building at the same time were free did you? Have you checked the price tag on G8 and similar gatherings to the hosting country? Hundreds of millions per event are spent just for security services. What the US pays is fine, just hidden. The same thing happens with financial aid. During the tsunami aftermath European governments sent money, the US government sent two Naval Fleets each larger than nearly any other country's combined armed forces and thousands of people.

Here is the trick about refugees and where they are choosing to go to. They don't want to go to the US. They don't want to go to Russia. They don't want to go to India. They don't want to go to Poland, or China, or Italy, or Spain, or Israel, or France. Why? They are looking for the biggest safety net they can find. Countries with the strongest social support systems are their target locales. This isn't just about avoiding a war-torn region (lest why not stay in northwest Hungary, it is quite nice there). This is about being attracted to money.

Re:That's nice

[ultranova]

Up to a point, presently Europe is being driven into a situation where a future civil war with ethnic cleansing on a scale unknown in history is on our doorstep (regardless of who wins). Giving migrants more aid and convincing more people to try their luck in Europe is a dangerous game, easy to play for American liberals though who at worst have a bunch of Catholics with a few drug problems on their doorstep.

The threat to Europe comes from nationalistic forces who would love to see EU dissolved and are using the migrant crisis to drum up support. While that's understandable - nobody likes taking orders from a faraway central government - without EU the endless cycle of European wars will start again, and probably fast due to those very same nationalistic forces. I don't particularly fancy starring in live-action re-enacments of my grandfather's war stories, especially since their epilogy was being invalid for life. Also, does anyone want Putin to gain a stronger position, as he inevitably will if his main regional opposition collapses?

On the other hand, population boom could cause a corresponding economic boom, and we could certainly use one right about now. Islam itself opens new possibilites to kill off the remaining vestiges of authoritarian religion in politics by forcing people to confront the possibility of having to deal with someone else's religious bullcrap rather than merely forcing theirs down everyone's throats. It's even conceivable people might not be quite so easy to hoodwink by demagogues of the future if they're used to dealing with heterogenous societies, though I'm not holding my breath on that one.

So it seems that the cost/benefit analysis leans to the side of bleeding hearts in this one.

Re:That's nice

[Pinky's Brain]

I meant you can't redistribute the people to where the resources are without destroying civilizations (and productivity with it). You can obviously redistribute the resources as long as there is political will ... but that will can disappear and then you have countries with unsustainable populations and no food aid.

Re:That's nice

[robi5]

To add to this: while Vienna wasn't captured by the Muslims, 1/3rd of neighboring Hungary was occupied by the Ottoman empire for a whopping 150 years, and another 1/3rd, Transylvania, retained its nominal independence as a vassal state partner of the Ottoman empire.

Another difference is that while the Ottoman empire was pretty lax about religious freedom and Christianty and local languages could be practised, good luck with that if something like the Arab Spring sweeps over Europe that's rapidly becoming Islam territory - some IS Caliphate won't tolerate the slightest diversity.

So if we know the Muslims, due to their religious and cultural background, are prone to turn whatever they can into their own fundamentalist territory, why hand them the key?

European liberals are selfish and egotistic if they project their own tolerance and acceptance of diversity to an essentially medieval value system.

Re:That's nice

[Hognoxious]

Two words: taquiya, kitman.

Re:That's nice

[robi5]

Whatever the history was, there is a strong pattern in the Islamic world that breeds aggression, oppression and backwardness. For the most part of their territory, even many of the richest oil states look like Third World countries where human rights are stomped on as a way of life. There is also the pattern that while many of their countries got a fortune, in the form of oil, they haven't spent that to diversify their economy, educate their people or improve their surroundings. Instead of that, they are at war against each other and the rest of the World, based on concepts that were en vogue in the medieval times, like holding slightly different views of what Islam is.

Re:That's nice

[Pinky's Brain]

Has little to do with European values.

It's not like the media doesn't successful push the US in the same direction ... they just have neighbours and immigrants slightly less hostile to their way of life, thanks to geography.

Re:That's nice

[Rei]

People who complain about people from other countries having cell phones and stuff like that have a strange concept of what life is like in poorer countries, As if everyone either lives like they do in America, or they're a mud farmer who sleeps in the dirt every night.

Travel to a poorer country some time and see how people live. You still find things like smartphones, TVs, washing machines, etc. They're generally lower quality or older, but most definitely present. You find a lower average number of "modern conveniences" per household, but that number is certainly not "zero". Buildings aren't built to as high of standards, but they're still fine for getting a night's sleep. People still have cars, even if the number per capita is lower and they average older/cheaper models. People in countries with ~$5k/yr per-capita GDP are not mud farmers. And that's exactly what Syria's per-capita income was before the civil war.

Different refugees have had different levels of luck. Some have lost everything they had, such as shells hitting their house. Others are simply in areas about to be overrun, but still have their possessions. When a person flees, they sell everything they can't take with them, and take with whatever they can. In a country where so much has been destroyed, there's always a market for replacement possessions - as well as a market for opportunistic groups to get goods for cheap. The money from selling whatever they couldn't take with becomes their funds for their trip. Small, important things like phones are one of the least likely things a person would sell. The biggest worry of a fleeing family is of becoming separated. The ability to get information is also critical. We live in a modern era.

Re:That's nice

[Pinky's Brain]

Maliki government, Turkish government, Saudi Arabian government ... extremist Sunni militias rarely have to look very hard for sponsors.

Re:That's nice

[Rei]

. it's about the will of the people to fight. ... But the will of the soldiers must be there

As I just said - there's large numbers of people, in Syria today, who want to fight both Daesh and Assad. By now, almost all veterans. So again, I'll repeat: If you want a military solution, why don't you start with actually arming them properly rather than involuntarily drafting refugees?

Re:That's nice

[Hognoxious]

A long time ago, the folks in a country ruled by a formidable Imperialist Empire got up the courage to fight against them. The folks will ill-armed, untrained, and just country bumpkins, more or less.

And now they're turning up with H1Bs in another country once ruled by that formidable Imperialist Empire.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

The folks in Syria are voting with their feet . . . they are trotting up to Hungary, and trying to get into Germany.

Who should you arm in Syria? The Kurds, who were until recently on the list of terrorist organizations?

Who is fighting with ISIS . . . or, who is against them . . . ? Does anyone know for sure?

Re:That's nice

[dunkelfalke]

Take a dictionary, look up what a secular government is. And saying that the States have invaded a country and destroyed its government is not hate speech, it is just the sad truth. Even sadder is the fact, that Iraq was just one of too many countries USA has invaded and destroyed their governments.

Re:That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Conservative Christian ignorant xenophobes are quite annoying, like the Westboro Baptist Church . . . but they are not killing anybody, unlike the Muslim extremists.

You mean like George W Bush didn't kill anyone?

Re: That's nice

[guruevi]

Syria didn't have a problem with water until the oil dried up. The Middle East is trading water for oil and is fairly good at it. A decade ago the oil exports in Syria started tumbling and so followed it's food/water supply and then it's government as more pressure came from other groups to take the remaining oil fields.

Global warming is not a problem as long as you can afford fixing it (the Dutch have been submerged for over a century). But when people's livelihoods get threatened they'll take matters in their own hands.

Eventually more governments will be unable to afford water and subsequently defend it's resources; a decade later they'll also be ruled by warlords fighting over the scraps.

Re:That's nice

[fustakrakich]

They're not all ignorant xenophobes, right?

Well, you are half right :-)

Sorry

Re: That's nice

[guruevi]

I think perhaps the op should've mentioned or at least meant pre-gulf war Iraq. The U.S. funded, trained and armed Iraqi citizens. They grouped into Al-Qaeda to fight of the invading Soviet oppressors and installed Hussein as the leader. In hindsight, they would've been better off being a Soviet vassal state like Poland.

Re:That's nice

[Pinky's Brain]

Carrying capacity of land when farmed by well equipped, well educated farmers with a plentiful supply of oil and chemicals supplying a vegetarian diet is not exactly the same as the practical carrying capacity of land. Throw in economic disparity and meat consumption, throw in the fragility of international supply chains, throw in brain drain, white flight and dispossession and the carrying capacity can quickly go to complete and utter shit.

Re:That's nice

[fustakrakich]

it's because of Muslims.

Hired actors. Nobody's doing this shit for free.

Only good cops themselves can solve this problem with bad cops. Ask your good cop friends to speak out in their union hall against bad cops . . . oh, they won't . . . I get it. That is the root of the problem. good cops condone bad cops. Once they reject it, it will be gone. When non-cops condemn bad cops, cops don't listen.

You confirm the power of propaganda over the weak, uninquisitive mind.

Re:That's nice

[Hognoxious]

On the other hand, population boom could cause a corresponding economic boom

It might if we had jobs going unfilled and land waiting for someone to farm it. Are you posting from modern Europe or 18th century America?

Islam itself opens new possibilites to kill off the remaining vestiges of authoritarian religion in politics by forcing people to confront the possibility of having to deal with someone else's religious bullcrap rather than merely forcing theirs down everyone's throats

I'm not sure how gangs of islamicist vigilantes roaming the streets confiscating beer and telling women how to dress is going to cause an anti-Vatican movement.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

Hired actors. Nobody's doing this shit for free.

Oh, for free? Muslims do the ISIS thing because they the buy teenage sex slaves and kill people, without any reason . . . except that they don't adhere to their abhorrent version of Islam.

If a few Muslims would stand up, and say, "This is not Islam!", it would help a lot. But Muslims won't do that, because they don't want to. They like it the way it is. We get our balls fried at the airport, and they get the free benefits of liberal democracies.

Is there anyone Muslim there that would dare to disagree . . . ?

I thought not.

Re:That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

We in Europe (the vast majority of the people, not the politicians) do not want these people here.

Please speak for yourself.

Re:That's nice

[ultranova]

It might if we had jobs going unfilled and land waiting for someone to farm it. Are you posting from modern Europe or 18th century America?

For every job there's someone who needs some need fulfilled. Current economic crisis is ultimately due to lack of demand, which in turn is because our bookkeeping system has been incapable of dealing with increases in productivity. While a long-term solution requires some form of citizen wage to offset the falling job-derived ones, the ideological commitment to austerity is in the way, so in the short term providing a minimum income to a lot of people so they don't starve should provide a politically expedient way to kickstart demand through hundreds of thousands of little pushes.

I'm not sure how gangs of islamicist vigilantes roaming the streets confiscating beer and telling women how to dress is going to cause an anti-Vatican movement.

I haven't seen any such gangs. That's not exactly surprising, since EU has some 500 million people, so the entire Middle East could move here and still be outnumbered. I have, however, seen a lot of de facto fascist groups using them as rhetorical devices to gain power for themselves.

And frankly, this whole anti-immigrant thing looks like a moral panic to me. They begin as real-life role-playing but end up taking a life of their own as confirmation bias kicks in. Unfortunately, anti-immigrant moral panics tend to lead to outright wars and genocides, and this one could potentially set the stage for World War III if it gives nationalistic forces the support they need to dissolve the EU itself.

Re:That's nice

[PopeRatzo]

The cruel joke about that, is that if the Crusades had succeeded, the Muslim folks there would have eventually had a liberal, tolerant government . . . instead of the feudal tribal oligarchy mess that they now have.

They did, until Europe (and then the US) started engaging in colonialism and exploitation.

Hell, Iran was the most liberal, pro-Western country in the Middle East until the CIA installed the Shah.

Re:That's nice

[fustakrakich]

You're just trolling with bullshit. Nothing to see there...

Re:That's nice

[spyfrog]

We Europeans are getting extremely feed up with US of A starting wars and then expecting us to wipe up after them. You started the Iraq war. Where did the refugees come? Here. You started the invasion of Afghanistan. Where did the refugees come? Here. Every single time you start a wars, we pay the price with floods of refugees. You should really clean up your act. US never, every, takes its responsibility of the clean up. You never takes all the refugees. We are always the ones who have to make your work. USA took in about 232000 refugees last year. Sweden took over 100 000 with a population of 9 millions. United states is simply not doing its share. Fix this problem. Now.

Re:That's nice

[Blaskowicz]

Why would war break out if the EU is dissolved? That's like pretending the US and Canada might fight a war if they're not integrated in the NAFTA. Well no it won't happen, and it won't happen in (most of) Europe for the same reasons : war would mean economic ruin, would not be supported by the population and is ultimately prevented by nuclear weapons.

In fact, EU membership is now almost synonymous with NATO membership, esp. after enlargement and then France joining in in 2009. So NATO is good for peace, right? I don't think so. NATO just means do as the US tells to. The US is responsible for that whole mess in the first place, by causing a decade of Iraqi civil war, which is still going on. Then Europe supported the US in extending war to Libya and Syria, for whatever crazy geopolitical reasons. Which means that Europe now causes war, not prevent it.

Re:That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

We in Europe (the vast majority of the people, not the politicians) do not want these people here.

Please speak for yourself.

He is, and, for better or worse, he's also speaking for a lot more people than you'll probably be comfortable admitting feel the same way as he does.

A straw poll on Friday at my place of work, one person in thirty was pro taking these people in, so there's a wee bit of a difference betwixt what I'm hearing from people at work and on the street, and what I'm being fed by the media and the politicians.

(For the record, I wouldn't be here if my country of origin hadn't taken in my Huguenot ancestors)

Re:That's nice

[KeensMustard]

You're talking about Iran, right?

Re:That's nice

[jareth-0205]

With subtle and intimate knowledge of the situation like that, no wonder you're winning the argument.

Oh, no, wait, all you've done is generalise and completely ignore everything the parent poster said. Great stuff.

Re:That's nice

[jareth-0205]

If a few Muslims would stand up, and say, "This is not Islam!", it would help a lot. But Muslims won't do that, because they don't want to.

Yeah, they do that all the fucking time, but you're so embedded in your us-vs-them mindset you choose to ignore it. You want a simple 'evil' enemy that you can just demonise. I would put real money that you know no Muslim people at all.

Troll on.

Re:That's nice

[Pinky's Brain]

If we want to create demand by having more people on welfare we can just send the checks abroad.

Re:That's nice

[phantomfive]

Why would war break out if the EU is dissolved? That's like pretending the US and Canada might fight a war if they're not integrated in the NAFTA.

NAFTA wasn't created to keep the countries from going to war. The EU was created largely to keep the countries from going to war. Read the writings of Altiero Spinelli for more information.

it won't happen in (most of) Europe for the same reasons : war would mean economic ruin,

It's been shown over and over that people are willing to go to war, even if it means their economic ruin. Consider that in 1913 people were making that exact argument in Europe.
The economic argument is sometimes phrased as the McDonald's argument: "No two countries that both had McDonald's had fought a war against each other since each got its McDonald's." Well, since that argument was made, two countries with McDonald's have fought a war.

Re:That's nice

[phantomfive]

It doesn't matter. I view them as brothers and sisters.

Re:That's nice

[saigon_from_europe]

As a citizen of Serbia, I can confirm you that economic prosperity won't prevent countries from going to war. EU is much more than economy and it is fundamental to long-term peace in Europe. What I recall was when former Yugoslavia has just solved most of the economic problems it had in 80's, and new wealth *did not* prevent its constituent republics to go to extremely bloody war. You have no idea how easily you can fool people.

Re:That's nice

[zennyboy]

A long time ago, the folks in a country ruled by a formidable Imperialist Empire got up the courage to fight against them. The folks will ill-armed, untrained, and just country bumpkins, and a large French army

FTFY

During the American Revolutionary War (American War of Independence; 1775–1783), France recognized and allied itself with the United States in 1778, declared war on Great Britain, and sent its armies and navy to fight Britain while providing money and matériel to arm the new republic. French intervention made a decisive contribution to the U.S. victory in the war.

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

Re:That's nice

[Hognoxious]

If you like them that much why don't you fuck off to Syria and take ultranova with you.

You can harmonise on KumBaYaa while they set you both on fire.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

Talk to some folks who call themselves "Persian", as opposed to Iranian. Iran was totally screwed up since before the World Wars. In fact, the Russians wanted to move in after WWII since it would have been a pushover, but Harry Truman told the Russians he would drop "the bomb" on them if they did.

The Russians backed off.

Note that the Russians later invaded Afghanistan . . . and had the same success that the US had later.

Muslims? Just leave them alone, in their own country. And do not let them into yours.

Re:That's nice

[phantomfive]

Aren't you a pleasant person.

Re:That's nice

[Hognoxious]

For every job there's someone who needs some need fulfilled.

And there aren't any needs unfullfilled, or there would be jobs - which there aren't. We don't have a labour shortage, which an influx of people might alleviate. We do have a housing shortage, which an influx of people would exacerbate.

I haven't seen any such gangs.

It was all over the news. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... You're a liar or you're thick, possibly both.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

Aren't you a pleasant person.

Huh? Is he kidnapping you and beheading you? Like Muslims do? Is he bombing planes, like Muslims do? Or shooting up trains, like Muslims do?

No, an unpleasant person is someone who ignores the facts and is apologetic to Muslim aggression.

Re:That's nice

[phantomfive]

Huh? Is he kidnapping you and beheading you? Like Muslims do? Is he bombing planes, like Muslims do? Or shooting up trains, like Muslims do?

That's a little more than unpleasant. You seem to lack a sense of proportion, which isn't surprising since you sound outraged at the moment.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

I know and work with a bunch of folks whose religion is Islam . . . but they would never call themselves "Muslims" . . . they call themselves Turks. When a Turk addresses you as "My Friend!", he really means it . . . an I always feel honored when I hear that.

On a hilarious Christmas Evening, a colleague from Turkey pinged me online. He needed help with a system of servers. I explained to him that it was Christmas Evening and my girlfriend was cooking dinner in the kitchen, but that I could help him. He asked me, "What is Christmas all about?", and I explained to him as best as I could.

But I told him that me helping him getting his servers running again, was really what Christmas was all about!

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

OK, let me pin it on your nose for you, and see if you can understand. Sunni and Shia Muslims have been fighting each other since time began. If they are not busy fighting each other, they will join together to fight any non-Muslims. Like, by shooting up trains, bombing planes, etc.

Show me the Presbyterian Grandmothers from Ohio that do that.

You are welcome to invite all the Muslims you want to live in the country that you live in . . . but you, yourself, will have to deal with the problem later!

Re:That's nice

[Hognoxious]

and less people would prefer to come here as it'll cost more for them to go back too.

As if any of them were planning to.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

You're just trolling with bullshit. Nothing to see there...

Well, you are welcome to take in all the Muslim immigrants that you want into your country. When they come up and smack you in the face with the bullshit . . . it's not called trolling anymore.

Beating their wives, killing their daughters for going to school . . . fine folks, these Muslims are.

My personal favorite is what Muslim clerics say should be done with folks who are left handed . . . like me, or ~17% of the populations of civilized countries. I know. The reason for their fear about left handed people is because Muslims use their left hand to wipe their asses, and Muslims are too stupid, ignorant and arrogant to use the "Western" invention of toilet paper. But that is their problem, and not mine. "Boko Haram", indeed: "Western Toilet Paper Forbidden!"

Re:That's nice

[fustakrakich]

Eh, keep on blabbing if you like, but the gag is lame...

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

That's a little more than unpleasant. You seem to lack a sense of proportion, which isn't surprising since you sound outraged at the moment.

Well, if I can't take a train from Frankfurt to Paris, without having to worry about some Islamic bat-shit crazy nut-job shooting up the whole carriage with a Kalashnikov . . . yeah, I'd have a right to be outraged.

If folks in the US could not drive to a KFC, Subway or a Seven Eleven without getting sniped at by a Muslim . . . they would probably be angry too.

Re:That's nice

[phantomfive]

We don't have that problem. We have guns. :)

Re:That's nice

[Rei]

You realize that Maliki was a Shia ally of Iran, right?

Re:That's nice

[fustakrakich]

Pffft!

Re: That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

The bravery of being out of range.

Re:That's nice

[unixisc]

Where is the Saudi and other muslim duty to take in their islamic brethren?

THIS!!! Mod GP down, but leave this up. Why the fuck is it the job of the US to take in people who have demonstrated the willingness to kill Americans once in the US, or demand the Islamization of services, like Muzzie cabdrivers not allowing dogs or alcohol in their cars. Last thing that the US needs is more Muslims: they're even worse than illegal Mexicans here.

I haven't exactly followed whether the refugees from Syria are fleeing ISIS, or the Assad regime. Whatever the case, it doesn't matter!!! If they are fleeing Assad, chances are that they are Sunnis, and they could cross the border into Turkey, and then try making their way into any of the oil rich Sunni shekhdoms in the region - Saudi Arabia, Emirates, Qatar, Oman, Libya, et al. Let those countries, that are very under-populated and completely dependent on foreign slave labor, take them. If they are Shi'ites, they could flee into Southern Iraq. The advantages:

• - Since the refugees are Arabs, they'd be much more compatible w/ locals than expats from Philippines, India, Malaysia and other East Asian countries. The host countries won't have to worry about a non-Arab population outgrowing the local Arab population.
• - In Europe, there has been the trend of Islamization - things like Shariah banking, restaurants having to go halal and so on. Won't be necessary if they were to go to places like Qatar. There, they will find hosts that are already Islamic, and the only argument they need have is how truly Islamic is each other
• - Countries in Europe are already overcrowded, and in most cases, the Muslim population there is largely on welfare, thereby contributing nothing to their tax base. Send them to one of the sheikhdoms, and let the regimes there in Riyadh, Tripoli, Doha et al decide whether they can sponge off their oil riches or work as slaves instead. There ain't a real estate issue in countries like Saudi Arabia or Libya. Even factoring in the deserts.
• - The Saudis and others will get a new supply of servants from Syria and Iraq, who know the local customs a lot better than unwitting workers from East Asia
• - The regimes there are a lot better equipped to deal w/ ISIS or Hizbullah terrorists, than the West is
• - The refugees can continue w/ their honor killings of wayward daughters w/o running afoul of local laws - something they can't get away w/ in the West

The reason the refugees are trying to come to Europe & the West is that they know that Western societies and countries are suckers, and that they can change in those countries anything they don't like. Something they wouldn't dream of trying in a Saudi Arabia or a Qatar. But that doesn't make it incumbent on the West to accommodate them.

Re:That's nice

[unixisc]

A lot of Muslims are as afraid of the extremists as everyone else. When the government can't maintain control and order and extremists can murder other Muslims who speak out against them with impunity, you're not going to see many people standing up to the extremists. Look at what they did to one girl who just wanted to get an education. Standing up to that takes a kind of bravery that most people simply don't have.

'A lot of' is a nebulous quantity: it could mean 10% or it could mean 90%. Either way, it doesn't mean jackshit!!! If Muslims as a whole were as advanced as people in other countries, there is no way that Muslim fanatics would be that powerful in any Muslim country, let alone most. The reason 'a lot of' Muslims are afraid is that they know that a majority of Muslims are on the side of the Jihadis. This has been born out by Pew polls taken of people over a range of Muslim countries.

There is a reason that we don't see or hear much about Christian/Jewish/Buddhist/Hindu/Shinto/Taoist terror anywhere remotely near the scale that we hear of Muslim terror. It being that such groups don't have even an iota of the percentage of support that Jihadis have from normal Muslims. A big reason for that is that the other religions don't demand a permanent state of warfare against non-believers. Islam, by contrast, does!!!

Re:That's nice

[unixisc]

The Turks you are describing are the Turks of Ataturk's generation - going back to World War I. They're largely dead. Right up to the 90s, the Turks were fiercely nationalistic in a way that trumped their Islamic identity, and they had dreams of becoming a part of the EU.

Maybe the EU does deserve the blame for not accepting Turkey when it was a dictatorship. The Kemalian dictatorship kept Islam on a leash and prevented such sentiments from taking hold, and that the Europeans didn't like. They wanted Turkey to be as democratic as, say, France. Only problem: Turks were not and are not Europeans: they are Muslims. Culturally, they have more in common w/ the Arabs and Iranians than w/ the Brits, Germans, French or Italians. So while the Brits, Germans, French or Italians being democratic doesn't bring out any savage impulses, in the case of the Turks, it did. Once the army loosened its grip - at the behest of the EU so that Turkey would find it easier to enter, Turks supported Erdogan and Islamic parties that were now free to run.

Now, the Islamic parties were more interested in bringing Turkey back to its Ottoman era leadership of all Muslims, such as the Caliphate, than the membership of the EU. They had a good reason to - the breakup of the Soviet Union resulted in 5 new Turkic countries that they could influence, and create a bloc within the OIC. Plus the Arabs prefer the Sunni Turks to the Shi'ite Iranians as the dominant power. So all of a sudden, Turkey had the potential of being a leader of 50+ Islamic countries, vs one of the equals in the EU. Guess what their Islamic leadership chose?

In case one thinks I'm trolling, the evidence is out there. Why is Turkey the choice of Jihadis leaving the US and Europe to go and join ISIS? Reason is that Turkey was the one country in the OIC that opposed military action against all Jihadis - something that even the Saudis didn't do. The leaders in Riyadh, Amman, Cairo and elsewhere ain't too happy about a Caliphate being set up in Raqqa, which is a new center of power that they would have to swear allegance to, had its Caliphate claims been endorsed by the majority of Muslims. But Turkey is more than happy to let that group escalate, since it also means trouble for the Kurds - enemies that they hate.

Re: That's nice

[unixisc]

That's b'cos in most Muslim countries, the non-Muslim population has fled. Why did they flee? In most cases, it was b'cos under Islamic law, their status was that of dhimmis, or 3rd class citizens. That exodus has become more pronounced in recent years, w/ Egyptian Copts, Lebanese Maronites, Iraqi and Syrian Assyrians, et al moving to non-Islamic havens.

So once they're gone, Muslims are only surrounded by other Muslims. Normally, that should make them all very happy, but guess what? There is that small question about what is the true Islam? In all other societies, people of different sects of a religion recognize their differences and move on. In Israel, you don't have Reform Jews or Orthodox Jews trying to obliterate each other. In France or Austria, you don't have Catholics try and persecute Protestants. In Britain or Germany or Netherlands, you don't have Protestants try making life hell for Catholics. Even in Russia, you don't have the Orthodox Church persecuting Catholics or Protestants. In Sri Lanka or Thailand, you don't have Mahayana or Theravada Buddhists trying to wipe out each other. In India or Nepal, you don't have Vaishnavs and Shaivyas try and obliterate each other. Main reason being none of their scriptures say anything on the subject.

It's a different story w/ Islam. Mohammed himself once was at war w/ a group of Muslim insurgents, and massacred them and destroyed their mosque. So the question of 'what is true Islam' is a pretty major one in any Muslim country, and usually, it's defined by the major sect/madhab in force in that country. So in Saudi Arabia, true Islam is Wahabism. In Iran and Iraq, it's Shi'ite Islam. In Yemen, Egypt, Indonesia and Malaysia, it's the Shafi'i. In most of North Africa as well as Emirates, it's Maliki. In most of Sunni Asia - Jordan, Turkey, Afghanistan, Pakistan and the 'stans', it's Hanafi. And in each of these countries, it's forcefully enforced (except in the stans, which still have their Communist era rulers).

So your implication above that Muslims are more tolerant of non-Muslims than they are of each other is hogwash. Best example being India's partition in 1947: there was a forced exodus of Hindus from the 2 Pakistans (one of which is today Bangladesh). In Muslim countries that still have significant non-Muslim populations, such as Malaysia or Indonesia, the majority of victims of Muslim violence are not Muslims: they are non-Muslims. In Iraq, ISIS still prefers persecuting non-Muslim Yazidis and Assyrians, even if they look at Shi'ites w/ equal contempt.

Re: That's nice

[unixisc]

Anybody who knows what the Qur'an and Hadiths say knows that Islam is exactly what the guys @ ISIS, Hizbullah, al Qaeda, Hamas, Jaish e Mohammed, Abu Sayyaf, Jemiah Islamiah, Lashkar Jihad, et al say it is. So the only question mark over Muslims is how aware are they of those facts, and to what extent do they endorse them vs reject them in the event that they know? So claiming that the majority of the 1.5 billion Muslims are harmless b'cos they don't carry guns is totally worthless. Due to Islamic concepts like taqiyya and kitman, it's almost impossible to know to what extent Muslims endorse the principles of Jihad within Islam. Which is why all Muslim refugees should be kept out of non-Muslim lands, and required to settle in other Muslim countries, like Saudi Arabia, Libya and so on.

Re:That's nice

[unixisc]

Nice way to work in the irrelevant moral equivalence b/w Muslims and everyone else

Re:That's nice

[unixisc]

That's a good point. Otherwise, there's no shortage of jobs in countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Libya, Emirates, et al, which already have a huge expat population from East Asia. Those people can never become citizens of these countries by law, since they're not Arabs. So if these Syrian refugees went there, they'd be more compatible w/ the local population and blend in more smoothly than people from Philippines, Sri Lanka or India, many of who are not Muslim. These countries can stop taking in non-Muslims from countries whom they are then gonna exploit, and instead just take Arabs fleeing from Syria and Iraq.

Re:That's nice

[unixisc]

Only the PKK, or the Turkish Kurds, were on the terror list. Not the ones in either Iraq nor Syria. Also, while the US did support Iraq's Kurds, Syria's Kurds have gotten squat. They've done a valiant job holding their fort, given that ISIS has captured US weaponry from cowards in the Iraqi army and are using that against them

Re:That's nice

[dave420]

They do speak out. Time and time again. The fact you assume they don't speaks more about your stilted, short-sighted, reactionary, xenophobic view of Muslims and Islam than it does anything else. Seriously. You are fucking pathetic. They do precisely that which you call for, yet you can't be bothered to even disprove your own fucked-up attitude before you launch an attack on millions of good people. Fuck you very much. Your attitude is lazy and dangerous, and you can't even be bothered to fix it.

Re:That's nice

[dave420]

And those guys doing the patrolling were condemned by their mosque and the law, which sentenced 3 of them. But I guess that didn't happen.

Re:That's nice

[Hognoxious]

If we want to stimulate demand we can spend more on public services. Pay the unemployed who are already here to do something rather than paying them to do nothing.

Re: That's nice

[Hognoxious]

Yes, that's was he's proposing, only on a bigger scale. It'll save us from popish oppression, or something.

Re:That's nice

[Hognoxious]

For every incident that gets reported there are dozens that don't.

As for the mosque condemning it, well they would do, wouldn't they? They haven't got the numbers to just say "fuck off" yet. They're working on it, though.

Re:That's nice

[dave420]

The old "no true Muslim" canard. Brilliant. So when a Muslim does something you like, he's not a Muslim. Gotcha. It's nice of you to show us all just how cretinous your thought process is.

Re:That's nice

[dave420]

We don't worry about that because we're not pussies. It sounds like you'd be worried about it, though, which explains a lot. No wonder you are so hate-filled if you are so scared all the time. It must suck to be stuck in your tiny head, scared of shadows, hating a world you made up 5 minutes ago.

Re:That's nice

[dave420]

Your ignorance is astounding. That you felt it positive to the discussion to air your "knowledge" on this subject is incredible. You really have no idea just how little you know about this subject, do you?

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

No, that is a personal decision that everyone can make for themselves. Are you an American? Or are you a Christian who just happens to live in the USA? What laws do you follow? Those of the Bible, the Koran or the US Constitution?

After the Muslim terrorist attacks in Paris earlier this year, French anti-terrorist protesters carried signs stating: "I am Charlie Hebdo!" I recently watched a documentary in French television titled "I am NOT Charlie Hebdo!" They interviewed a bunch of Muslim kids in the suburbs of Paris. They spoke French, but that was the end of their affinity to French culture. They all stated that they were Muslims first, and didn't like living in France at all, and that France needed to change to fit their ideals.

Well, if you don't like France . . . go somewhere else. But don't expect France to be implementing Sharia any time really soon now. I'm also concerned about all the Syrian refugees heading for Germany. They have very high expectations. What will happen, if they get there, and discover that they don't like the place or the culture at all . . . ?

Re:That's nice

[KeensMustard]

I meant the description: the folks in a country ruled by a formidable Imperialist Empire got up the courage to fight against them. The folks will ill-armed, untrained, and just country bumpkins, more or less. applied to the Iranians.

My bad, I wasn't very clear.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

I'm not afraid of terrorism . . . I just think that we shouldn't be tolerating it and the folks who do it. If you listened to the words of Francois Hollande after the train attacks, he said stuff like, "Terrorism is part of our daily life now", "We all need to be aware and vigilant", etc., etc.

Sure, this is in part fear mongering. In the US, politicians use this as an excuse to tear away our rights to privacy. But in reality the politicians don't know what to do about terrorism, and so they allow spying on their own citizens to pretend that they are doing something about terrorism.

Re:That's nice

[oobayly]

It also gets income from all the diplomats and their entourages.

Re:That's nice

[3.5 stripes]

You obviously don't live in London, well more than 50% of the black people here are from former British colonies in the Carribean, most of the Muslems come from Pakistan and Bangladesh, and the largest group of non white folks are Indians (and additional Asians), not Arabs..

Re: That's nice

[unixisc]

Precisely!!! Only question is whether he gets oil money from ISIS in Syria, or from the sheikhs in Riyadh or the imams in Teheran.

Re:That's nice

[unixisc]

Muslim definition of terrorism is 'anyone who kills Muslims'. They don't include in that terror attacks on Jews in Sderot, Hindus in India, Buddhists in Yala (Thailand), or Catholics in Mindanao. So their claim of 'hating terrorism', once put under the lens, is as hollow as haram swiss cheese

Re: That's nice

[sackvillian]

In France or Austria, you don't have Catholics try and persecute Protestants.

I guess you intentionally didn't mention Ireland in this sentence?

In Israel, you don't have Reform Jews or Orthodox Jews trying to obliterate each other.

What about the assasination of the Prime Minister of Israel by a Jewish extremist, for starters?

You can find extremist nutters in every religion, but the root of country-wide religious warfare is always economic and political, first and foremost. The difference between Islam and Christianity in terms of modern-day violence has everything to do with the fact that the Middle East has been continually torn up by colonial powers and local warlords, whereas most Christian countries enjoy relative stability.

I'm proudly agnostic, but if you read through any of the holy texts, you'll find more than enough justification for violence if you're motivated to -- Islam isn't unique. It's the readers' lives that are the determining factor in extremism.

Re:That's nice

[unixisc]

Hell, Iran was the most liberal, pro-Western country in the Middle East until the CIA installed the Shah.

No they weren't. In fact, the country got its current name 'Iran' during WWII, when the ruling monarchy tried to ally w/ the Nazis - using the name for Aryan to signify solidarity w/ the Nazis claim of being the sole Aryans, and a British intervention in time managed to pre-empt the Soviets. But Iran was certainly not pro-Western, and the Pahlevis were the successor dynasty to the Qajars, duly elected in 1925, long before any CIA involvement

Re:That's nice

[unixisc]

Robi said 'Arab and/or Muslim'. It doesn't matter whether the Muslims in question are Arabs or not - Britain's problem is that they are trying to demographically Islamize Britain. There have been a lot of stories there - the attempted mega-mosque near the London Olympics, orienting grave sites in a lot of cemetaries to face Mecca, even if most of those buried there weren't Muslim, banks offering Shariah compliant loans to Muslims, and so on. His bottom line was correct - once Muslims become even a significantly large group in any of the cities in Europe, they'll take over the entire place. What happened in Malaysia from the 60s - when Muslims were a mere plurality - to today, when they are the majority lording it over the Chinese & Tamils - would be the story of Europe and the Americas if this was allowed to continue.

Re:That's nice

[3.5 stripes]

On one hand you call us wusses, on the other hand, you're quite quick to point out that the two biggest wars started in the 20th century were directly due to Europeans. Don't forget where the nazis came from, just remember we're a little less prone to dick waving in the rest of the world because all of our citizens got to see what war is like close up, not just our young men (and a few women).

Re:That's nice

[PopeRatzo]

No they weren't. In fact, the country got its current name 'Iran' during WWII, when the ruling monarchy tried to ally w/ the Nazis - using the name for Aryan to signify solidarity w/ the Nazis claim of being the sole Aryans, and a British intervention in time managed to pre-empt the Soviets.

Germany is considered part of "the West".

Re: That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

Actually, the sad part of this is that a lot of the ISIS fighters are confused kids. The want to buy twelve year old girl slaves at auctions, and have the thrill of shooting weapons and killing people. It's a kick for them. And their Islamic "Scholars" back them up, and say that this is what the Koran and Islam is all about.

I would welcome a loud voice from Muslim protesters saying, "No, this is not what Islam is about!" But I can wait for a long time before I hear a Muslim denounce Islamic terrorists. Muslims blame all the violence on non-Muslims.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

The Kurds were dealt a bad hand in life. Their military performance is exceptional. But forces outside of their control have prevented them from getting the support that they deserve.

Number 1 . . . the PKK has "communist" leanings. That doesn't roll well with American Congressional committees that are thinking about giving them support.

Number 2 . . . the Turkish Military has an excellent relationship with the US Army. The PKK leader Abdullah Öcalan was captured by the CIA, who turned him over to the Turks.

So, yeah, the relationship between the Kurds and the US could be a lot better. Maybe this ISIS conflict could be an opportunity for the both of them to get to know each other better . . . ?

Re: That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

"A long time ago, the folks in a country ruled by a formidable Imperialist Empire got up the courage to fight against them. The folks will ill-armed, untrained, and just country bumpkins, more or less. "

The leaders of that revolution were wealthy slave owners. Don't try to rewrite history as if the American revolution was somehow a movement of only working class people.

Re:That's nice

[thegarbz]

Give me a break, it's just a couple of thousand people. Millions are staying, in Lebanon and Turkey, because that is the region that they call home. There is no mass migration, that is a news bias.

Wow. And someone modded you informative? The numbers being talked to are more like a few thousand shy of a million. I didn't know news bias originated from the Hungarian PM who has called this the biggest migration since WWII, or the German chancellor who are projecting to take in 800,000. I also didn't know bias came from agreement of two people with politically opposite views on the situation.

Re:That's nice

[Vlado]

I know and work with a bunch of folks whose religion is Islam . . . but they would never call themselves "Muslims"

That is like saying that you know people who's religion is Christianity but they don't call themselves Christians.

When a Turk addresses you as "My Friend!", he really means it . . . an I always feel honored when I hear that.

Go to any market in Istanbul. You will have a chance to feel honored over and over again.

Re:That's nice

[Vlado]

Who is shooting at kids in US schools. Muslims?

You are very conveniently ignoring all the atrocities that any non-muslim people are doing and focusing on a group of extremists, who cover under the guise of religion.
You're pretty much describing what KKK was doing while they were (are) pretending to be Christians. No difference.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

When some kook shoots up a US school or movie theater, he will be universally condemned by all Americans, with screams of outrage. When a Muslim terrorist shoots up a train, or the office of a comic book publisher, the Islamic community remains deafeningly silent. I would have hoped that they could have rallied up at least 10 Muslims to protest and chant, "Terrorist acts are not the true Islam!" But no way. That doesn't work. It demonstrates the greater support that the Muslim communities have for the terrorists.

What is extremely sad . . . is the fact that the filthy rich Islamic Oil Gulf states are doing nothing to support the refugees from Syria. The refugees are mostly Muslim, and would have an easier time acclimating to the culture in the Gulf states. But no . . . not even Muslim countries want to take in Muslim refugees . . . because they know how Muslims really are.

Oh, and the US has pooped out, as well. That's interesting. Obama won't touch it, because that would be like shaking a political beaker full of nitroglycerin. The Republicans would be all over him for being "soft" on terrorists. And Donald Trump . . . he seems to be making fine political mileage out of blaming the Mexicans for everything.

At least Trump could show a sense of humor, and "Blame Canada" . . .

Re:That's nice

[robi5]

No contradiction there, I wasn't talking about our ancestors, rather, the current peaceloving nations of Western Europe, who do a lot more than even the Americans to stay out of armed conflicts, especially ground battle. Being too peaceful isn't particularly good for self-preservation.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

That is like saying that you know people who's religion is Christianity but they don't call themselves Christians.

Yes, I do know a lot of folks whose religion is Christianity . . . but if you ask them who they are . . . they will say, first and foremost, that they are Americans. They will tell you that the Constitution of the US guarantees their right to practice whatever religion they want. But that, more importantly, no one can force their wacky religious views on you. Case in point: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

So if you want a job where serving alcohol is not involved, get another job. Don't try to force your religious views on others. That's the problem with Muslims. If you don't do what their religion believes, they feel obligated to kill you. I know a women from Iran who doesn't drink alcohol for religious reasons. But she is completely happy at parties where some folks drink alcohol, and some folks don't.

Go to any market in Istanbul. You will have a chance to feel honored over and over again.

Oh, a peddler in the Bazaar will drop that comment liberally . . . but it is my experience that older folks in the Turkish IT community use it very conservatively.

Re:That's nice

[robi5]

Don't make assumptions, I happened to live in a borough where the largest ethnic group was Bangladeshis, and it was a rather central location. While what you say about distributions may be valid for London or Greater London, there are a lot of boroughs where Muslims are above 20-30 percent, and the demographic trends point toward rapid increases. A more minor point is that Indians doesn't mean non-muslim - there are quite a few muslims in India. Another point is that there's a commonality between hindu people and muslims that their culture differs more from that of the host country than the traditional cultural and religious differences in Europe, e.g. Roman Catholic vs. Protestant; I believe people from India, irrespective of their religion, also have a higher birth rate than Caucasians.

Also, while there may be nitpicking along ways of segmenting places geographically - down to the street level, where a lot of people still live among those who are close to them in terms of heritage, or one can look at the entire Britain, France and Western Europe and determine that transcontinental immigrants and their offspring are still a minority overall, it masks the trends and the fact that a lot of parts of even London are markedly non-European, or resembling some third world place.

Here's an interesting article from 2009, no less, that describes e.g. the duplication of muslims in Europe over just 30 years. History isn't always written in just a couple of years, and the Western civilisation traces its roots to 2-3k years, mainly back to the Greek civilisation, so it's understandable that if someone is concerned about the loss of Western values in its very home territory, then those people don't just look at today's statistics, but also project clear trends, such as demography, and the remarkably slow uptake of European values and customs, and perhaps mass defiance, indifference and antagonism by migrant communities.

Re:That's nice

[unixisc]

In the US, Atheists and Agnostics are bunched separately from people of faith. Therefore, if someone and his/her spouse is Christian, it doesn't imply that their kids are Christian if they actually happen to be Atheists or Agnostics.

This is different from elsewhere in the world - particularly non-Western countries, where if a person follows a certain religion, his family is assumed to belong to the same religion unless they explicitly convert to something else.

Re:That's nice

[Vlado]

If you don't do what their religion believes, they feel obligated to kill you. I know a women from Iran who doesn't drink alcohol for religious reasons.

You seem to be stepping on your own argument. First you say that muslims want to kill you if you don't do what their religion believes and in the very next sentence you say that a muslim woman has no problems if people around her don't do what her religion believes. What is it then?
And just to make myself clear: your statement that muslims want to kill you if you don't support their beliefs is absolutely wrong. They will be quite happy to talk to you and debate the reasons for why their religion dictates certain things. And, if they go out of the Gulf area some of them will actually go and have a (alcoholic) drink with you. I've been with more than a single muslim who drank heavy liquor quite liberally but at the same time still held most of his or her other religious beliefs quite dear.

Oh, a peddler in the Bazaar will drop that comment liberally . . . but it is my experience that older folks in the Turkish IT community use it very conservatively.

Ahh... Here is the catch. You're differentiating between one type of Turks and another type of Turks now? You didn't do that before, did you? The thing is, before you were wrong! Not all the Turks are the same. You're quite right that the same thing spoken by one person will ot have the same meaning as when spoken by someone else.
You know why? Because no nation, or religion or any group is ever homogeneous There are always differences. And saying that all muslims are homicidal, violent terorists is as wrong as saying that all european women sunbathe topless.

And as for muslim leaders denouncing terorist attacks: that happens pretty much every time in Europe, after some such outrage happens. Even more, there are joint events where muslim, catholic, jewish and orthodox leaders come together and decry those acts together, while at the same time urge young people of all religions ("christian" youths are also the ones who "convert" to ISIS teachings, by the way) not to fall for the propaganda that brainwashes them from ISIS.

You should really try and check a wider range of news sources. I understand that mainstream media only shows sensationalist type of news and that type is rarely positive. But the fact that you don't see it doesn't mean that it's not there.

Re: That's nice

[unixisc]

This might come as a shock to you and most people here, but the reason that Muslims don't protest such behavior is that they know that the Islamic scholars are right, or at best, are scared of finding out that they are. Most Islamic scholars have cited at length verses from the Qur'an, Hadiths and Tafseers to back up what they assert, and there is nothing to contradict them. Particularly when the way Mohammed lived his life was far more extreme than what even ISIS does today. For instance, he married a 6 year old girl and thighed her when she was 9. He got his adopted son to divorce his wife so that he could marry her himself. He personally supervised beheadings of Jews after the battle of Khaybar Oasis. And the list goes on and on and on.

The thing about Islam is that it appeals to the basest elements of people, and worst of all, condones anything they do that's vile if it's done w/ the intention of advancing Islam, or even merely in the name of Islam. Islamic history is replete w/ massacres that would make Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot blush. That's how Islam spread from the shores of Morocco to the East Indies, and Muslims take major pride in that. The current campaign against the West is a continuation of the conquests that stopped at Tours, Vienna and Leponto in the Middle Ages. That's the problem - while we live in the third millenium, Muslims are more than happy to continue living in the first. And what's worse - try and drag us back where they are. Not in terms of technology, which they are happy to embrace, but in terms of culture, where they want to extinguish non-Islamic culture and replace it w/ theirs.

Re: That's nice

[unixisc]

I guess you intentionally didn't mention Ireland in this sentence?

So what do the Irish do? TODAY!!!

What about the assasination of the Prime Minister of Israel by a Jewish extremist, for starters?

So you pick ONE instance of a murder, and then try and draw a moral equivalent b/w that, and what Jihadis do every day? Brilliant!!!

First of all, that assassination was done not b'cos Rabin wasn't being an observant Jew, but b'cos he laid the foundation for making Israel vulnerable to terror. While Yegal was wrong to murder Rabin, what he thought that Rabin had done happened to be right. The Oslo accords laid the foundation of the start of the Intifada and repeated terror attacks against Israel. The Palestinians got back not just Gaza, but most of the West Bank, including sacred Jewish cities, in return for nothing. And they continue to this day shelling Sderot w/ rockets.

And again, what are Jewish extremists doing? TODAY? (And no, a one off attack by Jews on Gays doesn't count)

You can find extremist nutters in every religion, but the root of country-wide religious warfare is always economic and political, first and foremost. The difference between Islam and Christianity in terms of modern-day violence has everything to do with the fact that the Middle East has been continually torn up by colonial powers and local warlords, whereas most Christian countries enjoy relative stability.

I'm proudly agnostic, but if you read through any of the holy texts, you'll find more than enough justification for violence if you're motivated to -- Islam isn't unique. It's the readers' lives that are the determining factor in extremism.

The Middle East has been independent of Colonial powers for now 70+ years. So sadly, that excuse just won't wash. Also, during the relatively short time that the colonial powers were there, nothing was done to displace the local Arabs the way they did when they were on the warpath. Yeah, the Brits controlled Iraq, Transjordan & Egypt, the French controlled Syria and Lebanon, the Italians Libya and so on, but that was so brief so as to be almost an asterisk.

In reality, the main reason that the Muslim world is in the shithole that it's in is that democracy, free expression and liberties are anathema to Islam. Search where you will throughout Islamic history anywhere - you just won't find it. So during the last 70 years, Arab countries were either ruled by Sheikhs who ran their countries like personal fiefdoms - Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Emirates, Kuwait, et al and used whatever cash they didn't spend on themselves to spread Islam outside the Islamic empire, or they were run by dictators who blew their cash either on themselves (like Saddam did) or became a solid cash supply for the Soviets, and later the Russians. That's why despite $20 TRILLION being transferred from the rest of the world to these oil rich countries, they are still largely shitholes, despite a few glitzy malls and buildings in Dubai.

Re:That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

You seem to be stepping on your own argument. First you say that muslims want to kill you if you don't do what their religion believes and in the very next sentence you say that a muslim woman has no problems if people around her don't do what her religion believes.

Did I say that the woman was Muslim? I did not. An she's not. I just said that she doesn't drink alcohol for religious reasons . . . which doesn't make her Muslim. She's a Baha'I. A religion that is seriously persecuted against in an "An Islamic State". Folks who are Baha'I in Iran cannot go to universities, cannot get jobs in the public center, etc., etc.

And just to make myself clear: your statement that muslims want to kill you if you don't support their beliefs is absolutely wrong. .

Google on Islam and left-handedness and Islam, and see what the Muslims really want to do.

Ahh... Here is the catch. You're differentiating between one type of Turks and another type of Turks now? You didn't do that before, did you? The thing is, before you were wrong! Not all the Turks are the same. You're quite right that the same thing spoken by one person will ot have the same meaning as when spoken by someone else.

There are Turks that will tell you that they are Turks . . . and there are Turks that will tell you that they are Muslims. That's the difference. Try traveling to there sometime and work with them to see the difference.

As to the rest of your comments, Palestinians celebrate terrorist attacks in Israel by passing out sweet pastries on the streets. After the 9/11 attacks they had a big party, and celebrated like a hoot and a half . . . until the one Palestinian politician decided that it was maybe not such a good idea.

When I was in Egypt on business, I was instructed not to use my left hand for writing . . . since that would be a reason for the local religion police to kill me. I tried to write on a white board with my right hand, but it just didn't work. When I was in Turkey giving a course at a University, the professors did not mind that I used my left hand.

Islam is incompatible with liberal democracies. You can argue it, dice it and slice it . . . but when push comes to shove . . . it just doesn't work.

Re:That's nice

[unixisc]

They may have other differences in terms of languages, ethnicities, cultures and so on, but the principles of Jihad, which is the underpinning of Islam, is there in the Qur'an. Which is followed by Muslims everywhere from Gambia to Brunei, as well as by those in Paris, Malmo, Bradford, Dearbornistan, and other such places.

Re:That's nice

[unixisc]

NAZI Germany too?

Re: That's nice

[PolygamousRanchKid]

It's really a shame. Islamic scientists and scholars made some really great contributions to mathematics, way back when. If you get a chance, go to see the Alhambra palace in Grenada, Spain. The architecture just literally takes your breath away. The Romans decorated their baths with frescoes of naked woman. Because Islam frowned on this, the Muslims decorated the walls with interesting geometric patterns.

Why those Muslim folks died out, or were killed off, is really a shame.

Re:That's nice

[unixisc]

It would be useful to separate out the 4 groups of Kurds - Iraqi, Turkish, Syrian and Iranian. The US has good relations w/ the Iraqi Kurds - Talabani was the first president of post Saddam Iraq. The US does however have bad relations w/ the Turkish Kurds, due to the PKK being Communist plus Ankara being an 'ally'. In case of Syria and Iran, the US could have good relations w/ the Kurds in both countries, but I doubt that they do. In Syria, there has been no movement to support Syrian Kurds, probably b'cos Turkey opposes not just their own Kurds but ANY Kurds being supported.

Honestly, someone should wake up the State Department and tell them that the Cold War is over, and that Turkey is no longer an ally.

Re:That's nice

[PopeRatzo]

NAZI Germany too?

Do you believe that a political change in Germany to Nazism means that it's no longer part of "the West"?

Did it suddenly move to the Far East because the Nazis took over?

Re:That's nice

[tehcyder]

Wow, the 'word on the street' from an AC. I'm really convinced.

Re:That's nice

[wyHunter]

The US is already taking 70% of UN refugees, so stop. As for the issues, last I noted it was the Syrian civil war and the rise of ISIS that created the problem, and guess what? Neither are American. Oh, the US had come in with boots on the ground to stop ISIS you'd be whining about that too.

Re:That's nice

[wyHunter]

Those of us who actually listened in history class DO know the French gave the US the statue of liberty. And guess what? It was only 3% of the US population who fought in the revolution, and a lot of citizens supported the British until the end - They were BRITISH. This was a civil war, really.

Re: That's nice

[wyHunter]

And slavery was not outlawed throughout the British empire until the mid 1800s, if I recall correctly. Guess what? They weren't perfect, nor were they saints. But last I noted slavery hadn't been in practice in the US since the mid 1860s, rather a long time ago. If individuals choose not to remove their chains, and make something out of themselves with their own efforts, nobody can help them but themselves.

Re:That's nice

[wyHunter]

No. The EEC was pushed by France as a way to control GERMANY. It hasn't really helped, has it?

Re:That's nice

[wyHunter]

Only what they spend as private citizens. These same diplomats etc. are immune even from traffic citations, and boy, do they take advantage of that!

Re:That's nice

[wyHunter]

I dont' think the middle east manages reconciliation well -- it hasn't for 800 years.

Re:That's nice

[fustakrakich]

They might manage it a tiny bit better without the outsiders who profit from the wars stirring them up.

Re:That's nice

[unixisc]

MOD THIS UP!!!

How is this news for nerds

[Anonymous Coward]

and they are not refugees, they are economic migrants. Refugees do not pass through a dozen safe countries to settle in the richest country with benefits. Also they are almost all military age males.
These are not refugees. They are migrants.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[radja]

clearly, they are fleeing from war to another country. That makes them refugees.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[amiga3D]

Exactly. They are on the losing side in a civil war. That's just what you want to take in, an army. The problem with this group of refugee's is the political makeup of the group. The last thing anyone wants is importing a few thousand ISIS followers. There are a lot of military aged males in these groups. The media shows women and children suffering but I watched mostly men of military age boarding the buses for Europe. It makes you take pause.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[Rei]

Have you seen how Turkey treats them? Has Hungary exactly rolled out the red carpet? It should be obvious why they move on.

Europe needs a common policy to spread the load around on this issue. Heck, it needs such policies on a lot of issues.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[thegarbz]

In that case they stopped being refugees when they left the other side of turkey. Then they became economic migrants. But maybe they are escaping arab nations and want some western values. Looks like Greece didn't tickle their fancy either. Or Bulgaria, Serbia, Croatia, Romania, Hungary, Macedonia, Bosnia, Albania, Montenegro, Slovakia, or the Czech Republic. Last I checked, none of those countries were war torn, but Germany has something that sets it apart from all those other countries, money.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[Hognoxious]

clearly, they are fleeing from war to another country. That makes them refugees.

A migrant wants to get to place X. A refugee is just desperate to get out of Y.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[segedunum]

Nope, it doesn't. These people have paid thousand of Euros in many cases to get trafficked into Europe, they are well fed, clean-shaven and seemingly are able to travel to whatever country in Europe takes their fancy. Real refugees settle in the first stable country and are pleased to have got away.

I don't know who these people are or what is going on here but it seems to be a question that Europe doesn't dare ask.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[aevan]

They also don't buy 300 euro a ticket tickets for themselves and their family to queue jump. Or hurl water/food off into ditches when provided, because the train to a 'better safe country' isn't provided. Or when they arrive, post selfies of waving huge bank notes from their monthly stipend.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[aevan]

They were refugees when they fled the country to a safe one. Once they then started trading up the country they were in, they stopped being refugees and turned into opportunists. Nothing wrong with that, but nothing that requires the world to bend over to accommodate them.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[aevan]

I bet you're loved by carnies.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[Rei]

You act as if they were allowed to live in Turkey as regular Turks do. Which is, of course, not the case. This is how Turkey makes them live.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[Rei]

Versus, you know, how normal Turks live

Turkey doesn't give them a chance to do that. It keeps them behind barbed wire in tents exposed to the weather, with their daily activities being to queue for a ration of rice and bread.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[Rei]

The normal price for traffickers is several dozen to a several hundred euros, depending on the situation. Syria's pre-war GDP was about 4000 Euros per-capita. People leaving sell any assets that they have left (home if it's still standing, car if it's not bombed out, appliances, etc) to pay for their journey.

They're well fed and clean shaven because of the pro-refugee European volunteer groups who've been assisting them. And they most definitely have not been allowed to just go wherever, hence the train incident. They've since been allowed to move on to their destination, but it wasn't that way before.

Hungary is not allowing them to settle there, they rounded them up off of the train and moved them to a holding area, which would have resulted either in their deportation or a long-term stay in a refugee camp.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[drooling-dog]

Both refugees and migrants want to find a place where they are safe, can build decent lives, and can provide for their families. Exactly like you would, under comparable circumstances. This idea that they should have no preferences about where they might best do these things is more than a little bizarre (but typical of the dehumanization by many people of others they perceive to be unlike themselves). "Gee, honey, it's a shame that we lost our home and you and the kids are going to be tortured and starved, but Hognoxious says it just wouldn't be right to try moving the family to a better place." This would make them fools in addition to being migrants or refugees. Whether they can satisfy those preferences is another matter, of course.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[Hognoxious]

Terrible, just terrible. If I was in a situation like that I'd go back to Syria to be raped, tortured or gassed.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[Hognoxious]

Both refugees and migrants want to find a place where they are safe, can build decent lives, and can provide for their families. Exactly like you would, under comparable circumstances.

Only the first of those is a right under international law, hence the first country rule.

Perhaps they'd like a pony too?

This idea that they should have no preferences about where they might best do these things is more than a little bizarre

It's not bizarre at all when that place is in someone else's fucking country.

I could probably make more money working in the US, but I can't just turn up there and squat in someone's house.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[Blaskowicz]

So, 600000 people getting in Germany is a big problem and a huge burden on that country, but somehow it would be fair if they all stayed in say Bulgaria? That is weird.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[unixisc]

In that case they stopped being refugees when they left the other side of turkey. Then they became economic migrants. But maybe they are escaping arab nations and want some western values. Looks like Greece didn't tickle their fancy either. Or Bulgaria, Serbia, Croatia, Romania, Hungary, Macedonia, Bosnia, Albania, Montenegro, Slovakia, or the Czech Republic. Last I checked, none of those countries were war torn, but Germany has something that sets it apart from all those other countries, money.

If they wanna embrace Western values, a good first step would be apostatizing from Islam, and becoming something else. Anything. Christian, Buddhist, Jewish, Helenic, Norse....

Re:How is this news for nerds

[unixisc]

Both refugees and migrants want to find a place where they are safe, can build decent lives, and can provide for their families. Exactly like you would, under comparable circumstances. This idea that they should have no preferences about where they might best do these things is more than a little bizarre (but typical of the dehumanization by many people of others they perceive to be unlike themselves). "Gee, honey, it's a shame that we lost our home and you and the kids are going to be tortured and starved, but Hognoxious says it just wouldn't be right to try moving the family to a better place." This would make them fools in addition to being migrants or refugees. Whether they can satisfy those preferences is another matter, of course.

Under normal circumstances, a better place would be a place where one would not have to change a lot of things about oneself while going thru an adjustment. If you were an American who wanted to migrate somewhere, your first choice would be a country like yours where some of the basic things are common, for starters. Like language. You'd prefer moving to Australia or Canada over a place like Japan or Philippines, where you'd have to learn Japanese or Tagalog before you learnt other things that you'd need in order to survive. You wouldn't pick a place where the effort needed would be very high.

As an example, in both Pakistan and Bangladesh, Christians and Hindus have been persecuted by the local Muslim populations. A lot of them have fled to India, and stayed there. They were not looking for a better standard of living as a migrant would, but just wanted to get out of a place where their underage daughters would suddenly end up married and Islamized. So those that could managed to get to India, settled down there, had no problem picking up Hindi, and then assimilated w/ the Indian population. Never asked for any special rights or adjustments.

Similarly, if the Syrians in question were refugees, they'd flee to places like Saudi Arabia, Qatar and all these places that have a major labor shortage. They could continue to speak Arabic (maybe a different dialect, but something that's a lot simpler than having to learn English, German or Swedish). Their choice of Europe over the Gulf doesn't make sense for that reason. Yeah, they won't be able to live like welfare queens: that's only for the local populations in those countries. But no reason for them not to go there.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[should_be_linear]

Thats BS. I was refugee at one point, and at that moment, when I had to left everything I had and knew, obviously I chose rather prosper and rich european country. You need to learn language and start over, so it is good idea not to choose country that your children will have to escape from like you did.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[thegarbz]

So it looks like they are provided shelter and food without the threat of being randomly killed. But lets go beyond Turkey and head to Europe where they need to be processed in the landing country. They are then in the EU. Free right? Nope, none of them have any desire to be in Greece or Hungry. They've come out and said so expressing their anger at the Hungarians for keeping them in, not out, but in. You know, war torn famished Hungry.

Regardless of what conditions you think they are in in Turkey they are no longer war refugees when they leave. They are economic migrants in search of a better life. I don't blame them, heck I support them, but I sure as hell don't sugar coat it.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[segedunum]

The normal price for traffickers is several dozen to a several hundred euros

No, it isn't.

They're well fed and clean shaven because of the pro-refugee European volunteer groups who've been assisting them.

I'm sure their nice clothes and smartphones came from there as well.

And they most definitely have not been allowed to just go wherever, hence the train incident.

They got up and walked to where they wanted to go. Refugees most certainly do not do that.

....which would have resulted either in their deportation or a long-term stay in a refugee camp.

So.....they're not refugees then? Refugees don't travel on endlessly to countries where they happen to feel 'comfortable'. They're people who are in desperate need who have travelled to the first country that is stable. I don't know who these people are but they most certainly do not qualify as refugees by any stretch of the imagination.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[Hognoxious]

Well if they did it wouldn't be a problem, because they'd immediately embrace western liberal values rather than carry on with the same behaviour that turned the shit-holes they're fleeing from into shit-holes in the first place.

Re:How is this news for nerds

[Hognoxious]

You need to learn language and start over

Indeed you do. Firstly your writing style is awful. Secondly your reply is only tenuously connected with what I wrote.

P.S. What conflict were you a refugee from? Is it over? Why haven't you gone back, then?

cheap pr, not real help scaled to google revenue

[Anonymous Coward]

Google yearly revenue is about 55 billion dollars
Google yearly profit is about 12 billion

so, by my math, 1 million in charity is less then, roughly, doing the math in my head, 6 hours profit ??? and it is probably tax deductible ?
and they are getting lits of great PR like this slashvertisement ????

another way to look at this would be to take the total salary of the top 100 google employees and ask what % of that google does in charity

Invasion

[Anonymous Coward]

This is not refugees or migrants. This is an invasion, exploiting big hearts and weak political wills. Europe is absolutely fucked.

Re:Invasion

[Anonymous Coward]

A Muslim and African invasion at that. They are looking to set back back Europe a thousand years and wipe out out the existing population by invading, outbreeding and outnumbering.
It's already happening in parts of Paris, Berlin, London, Stockholm, Copenhagen and many European cities. The bleeding heart liberals and their religion of multiculturalism will be their downfall.

Re:Invasion

[Pinky's Brain]

There is no significant number of truly committed bleeding heart liberals. There's only the media and sheep.

In the end liberalism in society is bought with money, conservatism will have to be bought with blood and raped daughters.

Re:Invasion

[segedunum]

No, the line now is that Merkel is their saviour.

Re:Invasion

[ultranova]

There is no significant number of truly committed bleeding heart liberals. There's only the media and sheep.

So... does this mean that Rubert Murdoch is a bleeding-heart liberal? Or did you mean all the media which isn't owned by megacorps and billionaires?

In the end liberalism in society is bought with money,

Which implies lots of commitment. "Putting your money where your mouth is" is the very verbal image of commitment. So if there aren't a "significant number of truly committed bleeding heart liberals", where does all this money come from?

conservatism will have to be bought with blood and raped daughters.

So why do you post internally inconsistent conspiracy theories, then? Do you not believe your own rhetoric?

Re:Invasion

[Blaskowicz]

Invading Libya and Syria will be cheaper than 10 billions a year? Right.

Re:cheap pr, not real help scaled to google revenu

[phantomfive]

another way to look at this would be to take the total salary of the top 100 google employees and ask what % of that google does in charity

What percentage of your money goes to charity? Just curious.

Mainly this article is on Slashdot because it is an important world event......Google just gives it a tech angle (and I for one like world events with tech angles appearing on Slashdot).

Re:cheap pr, not real help scaled to google revenu

[rmdingler]

Of course, this is the Googly equivalent of my annual tip for the paperboy... barely a rounding error.

Nonetheless, a small gift from a big name will cause eyes to fall on the problem.

Mix enough publicity, compassion, & a little guilt; couldn't hurt the cause.

Spend you money here, Google

[Tokolosh]

Blanket the Middle East with free, open and ubiquitous internet, by every practical means, together with Tor. These people have been living in the dark too long.

Then put a fence around the place and let them settle their own differences.

Re:Spend you money here, Google

[Pinky's Brain]

If Google provides the internet through satellites they won't even need Tor.

Developing and air dropping a couple million Young Boy's/Lady's Illustrated Primers into the Middle East, now that would be useful ... not very politically correct of course.

Re:Spend you money here, Google

[trout007]

It's not PC but the problem is that most of the world has inferior cultures compared to the U.S. and Western Europe. In addition we are vastly outnumbered. There is no way to take in all of the people that need help and keep our culture. One of the reasons the U.S. was able to take in so many people in the 1800's was because we didn't have a welfare state and they were European and had similar cultures and ethics and we much more republican (as in the rule of law) and less democratic (as in rule of the majority) so having new voters didn't change the rules too much.

Re:Something I don't understand

[drooling-dog]

Maybe they practice good personal hygiene with the facilities that are available to them. That alone is no reason to kick them out.

Throwing away water and food

[CanEHdian]

So what do we have to make out of this? These people are safe in Hungary.

Re:Throwing away water and food

[hooiberg]

So, fair enough, Let them starve. Problem will be solved in less than 20 days.

Re:Throwing away water and food

[jwhitener]

Or, instead of guessing why they are doing what they are doing, you could google a bit and not speculate...

http://www.quora.com/Why-do-refugees-in-Hungary-throw-away-the-food-they-receive

Re:Something I don't understand

[Rei]

They're being given a lot of support by local pro-refugee groups, I know at least that much. There's even a caravan today of volunteers offering to drive refugees to their destinations so they don't have to walk.

A lot of pro-refugee people are driven to be even more accommodating in order to counter what they see as the attacks from the anti-refugee side. The anti-refugee side makes them feel unwelcome, so they want to do more than they otherwise would to make them feel welcome.

Counter-productive

[Begemot]

Solve the root of the problem, spend this money on education in the ME instead. Given a limited budget, spending it on the current refugee problem, knowing full well that bigger suffering is just around the corner, is counter-productive.

Re:Counter-productive

[wyHunter]

So if western countries intervene militarily in other countries it is bad - but forcing education (propaganda) on them is good? Really? Personally I'm a secular westerner .

Re:Counter-productive

[Begemot]

Education = propaganda? Really?

"Fairl"ly stupid argument

[SuperKendall]

The US pays 22%.., often by refusing to pay their fair share

Since the U.S. has a GDP of around 17.4 trillion, and the world GDP is 77.3 trillon or so... 22% seems just about right.

Not wurde why it's a good idea to fund "world" military forces to go forth and rape little kids though.

Re: US does its part and more

[Anonymous Coward]

Simply not true. You take in as many as Sweden (with a population of nine millions)

Re:"Refugees", Ok...

[aevan]

And according to some reports, how many are ISIS?

Wrong by a factor of 300+

[Hognoxious]

Give me a break, it's just a couple of thousand people.

True, for values of couple in the region of 750.

http://www.theguardian.com/wor...

Re:"Refugees", Ok...

[Hognoxious]

If the ISIS inspector-general of cunning plans hasn't thought of slipping a few 5th columnists in among them, then he or she isn't very bright.

Google's yearly revenue is about $70 billion

[bluegutang]

So them giving 1 million euros is about proportionate to me giving 1 dollar to help refugees.

Plus they get useful good PR from this, unlike me.

So this isn't especially impressive.

So Google donates 1 million Euros for terrorists?

[sethstorm]

The reality is that they're donating 1 millions towards non-assimilating criminals and terrorists that will chain-migrate their families over.

Money down the drain

[Anonymous Coward]

No doubt they will expense it at tax time costing the US taxpayer.

Well, well, well.....

[erp_consultant]

I thought the USA was the only place having to deal with mass illegal immigration. Now it's Europe's turn. In both cases it is largely economic migration. Don't get me wrong - if I were in their shoes I would do the same thing.

What is interesting to me is the fact that the European migrants seem to be marching towards Germany. Why not stop at Turkey or Greece or Hungary? Well, Germany is the richest country in Europe by a wide margin and they have very generous social programs. Sound familiar?

Syrian choices

[unixisc]

No, they should go to Turkey, which is the first safe place next door, and from there, check out Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Libya, Emirates and other Arab oil rich countries that have a labor shortage

Re:Syrian choices

[Blaskowicz]

These countries (barring Libya that doesn't belong in the list and perhaps even isn't a country anymore) are sadistic dictatorships. They're rich, but how about *you* go there and work as a construction worker 72 hour a week for third-world pay?

As for Turkey that's a country where Syrian guerillas operate and they're in some sort of war with the Kurds again.

Re:Syrian choices

[unixisc]

If I were a Muslim Arab not willing to change into a Westerner - as in become a Christian/Atheist and embrace European culture as my own, I'd indeed do what you suggest.

Unless I was a Jihadi who wanted to go to the West just to help make it more Islamic (along w/ all my compatriots)

The ground realities in Syria

[unixisc]

Russia is not focussing on ISIS. Assad has pretty much conceded North East Syria to them - not even trying to retake Tadmur (Palmyra). Syria is the last customer left standing of Moscow & Beijing, which is why Putin is taking interest in saving the Assad regime. As it is, they've lost Libya and Iraq, and only have Iran left as a customer, if the Assad regime were to collapse.

Assad is no saint, but a lot of the stuff said about him - particularly from his Sunni Arab neighbors south of him, like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, et al - is propaganda and an attempt to replace an Alawite regime in Damascus w/ a Sunni one. That's why they've supported the 'Arab Spring' rebellion against him, while suppressing a similar one in Bahrein. During the Iran-Iraq war in the 80s, while the rest of the Arab League supported Iraq, Assad's father - Hafez al Assad - supported Iran. That's one of the big reasons that the Arabs hate him, aside from the fact that he is Alawite - a group they consider as heretical as the Bahais and Ahmadiyas. Also, the FSA, which you praise, is another Sunni Jihadi organization backed by the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas (which ended its relationship w/ Assad once the Arab Spring started and the Saudis made them drop support). Only reason their Jihadi activities are unnoticed is due to ISIS, but those massacres of Christians in Aleppo and Homs was done by them, not ISIS.

Jihadis in other religions?

[unixisc]

Well, show me the equivalent of Jihadis in all the other religions I mentioned, before just doing your simplistic 'all religions are bad' meme. And I'm talking about TODAY - please don't excavate the Crusades or the Thirty Year War