• Battle for Aleppo has ended in 'uncompromising military victory': UN
    154 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Crumpet;51548250]some of you guys are so naive like do you even know whats happening outside your armchair and how some people live? 'great, send them back!' how sheltered do you have to be, your attitude perpetuates suffering.[/QUOTE] What about the refugees that did get jobs, and did work to try and make their lives better in wherever they arrived? Should they have their lives uprooted [I]again?[/I]
[QUOTE=Dave_Parker;51548739]Sadly, they're a minority. >50% of the refugees over here are on welfare.[/QUOTE] So you're saying that said people should be removed from a life that they've made. k
[QUOTE=Mingebox;51547969]You don't have to support anyone.[/QUOTE] I'm amazed by such people who are "you are not required to pick anyone!!! if you support assad then you're as bad as him!!!!!!!" obviously not literally, but you get it. What the fuck do you want from this conflict then? Any conflict is an alteration between two or more sides, and there always must be a winner, no matter how bitter the win is for everyone involved. Assad is a bastard, but he is the only reasonable choice. If you think he isn't, then suggest something else or otherwise quit acting like you live in a black and white world where good and bad are solidly identified and happy ends are everywhere. [editline]19th December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Crumpet;51548250]some of you guys are so naive like do you even know whats happening outside your armchair and how some people live? 'great, send them back!' how sheltered do you have to be, your attitude perpetuates suffering.[/QUOTE] IMO if you continue to live on welfare in a state that granted you asylum after your crisis has been averted you are overstaying your welcome and go prove your place in new society or choo choo back to where you came from.
Considering only one out of five of the migrants entering Europe are actually from Syria, I find it hard to really find that much sympathy. Not only are four out of five running from established homes to come to Europe for money, they are bogging down the actual refugee programs, and making it far more difficult for the actual refugees from Syria to get some temporary establishment while the war settles down. In short, they are being pretty scumbaggish. All refugee programs should have the end goal of returning refugees to their homelands once the conflict is over or at least down to a point of low-level insurgency. Countries have established methods of immigration, and if Syrians intend on starting a new life in the EU, they should go through the same programs as everyone else. Those which are pretending to be refugees should be deported immediately. They are taking resources away from those who actually need those resources, and are mainly becoming leeches to the host nation.
[QUOTE=CruelAddict;51548920]I'm amazed by such people who are "you are not required to pick anyone!!! if you support assad then you're as bad as him!!!!!!!" obviously not literally, but you get it. What the fuck do you want from this conflict then? Any conflict is an alteration between two or more sides, and there always must be a winner, no matter how bitter the win is for everyone involved. Assad is a bastard, but he is the only reasonable choice. If you think he isn't, then suggest something else or otherwise quit acting like you live in a black and white world where good and bad are solidly identified and happy ends are everywhere. [/QUOTE] I want people to maybe put away the pennants and foam hands and remember that the lesser of two evils is still evil.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51547140]Yay, the guy who started this in the first place by shooting unarmed protesters and then proceeded to drop packet munitions and chemical weapons on civilians is going to win! If you support Assad, seriously rethink your life's decisions.[/QUOTE]What's your solution? No, really, I want to hear your opinion, and what you think would be better. You don't have to support anyone, but I know you don't like the current way this is panning out.
[QUOTE=yff;51547145]Who do you support? You have a choice: "moderate" rebels, ISIS, Assad. There are no other options. Choose.[/QUOTE] The moderates are all dead, fled, or have no power. Your options are various terror groups fighting for control, or Assad. [QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51547163]He's not in Syria, he's not a Syrian. Why do those who have no direct link to the conflict have to choose a "best side" when there clearly is none?[/QUOTE] Well why don't we just extend the war then, after all it's not us dying! [editline]18th December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Mingebox;51549004]I want people to maybe put away the pennants and foam hands and remember that the lesser of two evils is still evil.[/QUOTE] It's also the only option other than full scale invasion, and the world is sick of failed interventions.
[QUOTE=yff;51547145]Who do you support? You have a choice: "moderate" rebels, ISIS, Assad. There are no other options. Choose.[/QUOTE] Hey what about "none all factions have become utterly disgusting over time and there is no 'good guy' end game in one of the most brutal wars in recent memory" I wouldn't be happier if either of the other factions were winning as they currently are most likely but the leader of the winners kicked things off by massacring civilians and he's still sitting in leadership for now
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51549119] Well why don't we just extend the war then, after all it's not us dying! [/QUOTE] So what's your solution then?
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51549299]So what's your solution then?[/QUOTE] Let Assad and the SAA come out on top, so they can put this behind them and start to rebuild.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;51548944]Considering only one out of five of the migrants entering Europe are actually from Syria, I find it hard to really find that much sympathy. Not only are four out of five running from established homes to come to Europe for money, they are bogging down the actual refugee programs, and making it far more difficult for the actual refugees from Syria to get some temporary establishment while the war settles down. In short, they are being pretty scumbaggish. All refugee programs should have the end goal of returning refugees to their homelands once the conflict is over or at least down to a point of low-level insurgency. Countries have established methods of immigration, and if Syrians intend on starting a new life in the EU, they should go through the same programs as everyone else. Those which are pretending to be refugees should be deported immediately. They are taking resources away from those who actually need those resources, and are mainly becoming leeches to the host nation.[/QUOTE] You're an idiot. Refugees also come from Iraq and Afghanistan. If they're peaceful places why don't you go there on holiday? Syria isn't the only country in the world where people have legit claims to refugee status from. sure there are some people who abuse the system, trying to get to Europe from a safe country but the majority are fleeing war and oppression. Of those who do flee safe countries if they're prepared to throw it all away and risk a boat trip where 1000 die weekly then maybe that country Wasn't that much of a safe place to be. We can't take everyone but saying 4/5 come from stable places is an absurd attempt to spread malicious misinformation. Your posts seem to have gotten far worse this past year. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - rilez))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Mingebox;51549004]I want people to maybe put away the pennants and foam hands and remember that the lesser of two evils is still evil.[/QUOTE] I dare you to propose a better solution or quit sitting on that high horse.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;51550588]You're an idiot. Refugees also come from Iraq and Afghanistan. If they're peaceful places why don't you go there on holiday? Syria isn't the only country in the world where people have legit claims to refugee status from. sure there are some people who abuse the system, trying to get to Europe from a safe country but the majority are fleeing war and oppression. Of those who do flee safe countries if they're prepared to throw it all away and risk a boat trip where 1000 die weekly then maybe that country Wasn't that much of a safe place to be. We can't take everyone but saying 4/5 come from stable places is an absurd attempt to spread malicious misinformation. Your posts seem to have gotten far worse this past year.[/QUOTE] But why do they come to Europe then when there are plenty of stabel islamic countries like the gulf states, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Egypte, Tunis, Algeria or Morocco? Why go to countries were the culture, people and religion are so different? Unless they got some other ulterior motive like for example a financial one.
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;51550588] Of those who do flee safe countries if they're prepared to throw it all away and risk a boat trip where 1000 die weekly then maybe that country Wasn't that much of a safe place to be. We can't take everyone but saying 4/5 come from stable places is an absurd attempt to spread malicious misinformation. Your posts seem to have gotten far worse this past year.[/QUOTE] Maybe this tells more about system which rewards you if you make it to here rather than anything else. How about you severely cut the benefits to immigrants, and then observe the outcome. Don't allow them to become your citizens either.
[QUOTE=TheNukeNL;51550864]But why do they come to Europe then when there are plenty of stabel islamic countries like the gulf states, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Egypte, Tunis, Algeria or Morocco? Why go to countries were the culture, people and religion are so different? Unless they got some other ulterior motive like for example a financial one.[/QUOTE] Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Turkey, and a few others [B]are[/B] taking in refugees. In fact, Lebanon has a population of 4 million and a refugee population of 1.5 million. Several other Arab countries are not, like Saudi Arabia or the UAE. They are not signed to the 1951 Refugee Convention of the UN (quite like the US, in fact).
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51548674]What about the refugees that did get jobs, and did work to try and make their lives better in wherever they arrived? Should they have their lives uprooted [I]again?[/I][/QUOTE] I think you misunderstood or I was unclear, I agree with you. [editline]19th December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=CruelAddict;51550793]I dare you to propose a better solution or quit sitting on that high horse.[/QUOTE] Dismissing things you don't agree with as taking the high ground is dumb as fuck and a sure fire way to make you look like an idiot. Why must we propose a better solution? Do you understand what criticism is? Of course we need to recognise that the lesser of two evils is still evil or things like this are legitimised. You don't get a free pass to be a terrible human being just because you ousted some more terrible humans.
[QUOTE=yff;51550882]Maybe this tells more about system which rewards you if you make it to here rather than anything else. How about you severely cut the benefits to immigrants, and then observe the outcome.[/quote] How much less benefits would you want them to have? [t]http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/md/public/2016/01/22/germany.jpg[/t] [t]https://i.cbc.ca/1.3286372.1445628382!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/16x9_620/germany-migrants.jpg[/t] [t]http://calebreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/refugees-missing.jpg[/t] The outcome would be more homeless people or more ghettos. Fuck that for a laugh. That's called cutting off your nose to spite your face. [quote] Don't allow them to become your citizens either.[/QUOTE] What if the war/terror goes on for another decade? What if Assad retains control and those people (who fled assad) can't go back. Why not at least let their kids gain citizenship and give them their best shot at making someone of their lives, instead of spending their entire life in a converted hanger with no hope of getting a job or education or bettering their situation.
[QUOTE=Samiam22;51550907]Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Turkey, and a few others [B]are[/B] taking in refugees. In fact, Lebanon has a population of 4 million and a refugee population of 1.5 million. Several other Arab countries are not, like Saudi Arabia or the UAE. They are not signed to the 1951 Refugee Convention of the UN (quite like the US, in fact).[/QUOTE] The point i am trying to make is that there are a lot more countries that would be a lot more compatible for these people then Europe. Btw neither did Lebanon sign the 1951 convention so one has to wonder why other islamic countries that did not sign at the convention are not willing to help out there fellow muslims.
[QUOTE=duckmaster;51547136]I like how you only entered the thread at the mention of hillary. but to not derail further I don't think you can leave a man like Assad in power, otherwise you're just going to be in the same situation a couple years from now, evil bringing stability is barely a reason to keep it around.[/QUOTE] I like how that is not true at all, since i posted before that post about stuff nothing related to Hillary but that you are sensitive enough about it that you use that as arguments.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51551143]What does "compatibility" mean? They dont thik of "compatibility", they think of life prospects. See Lebanese refugee camps. There are middle-aged Palestinians born and raised in those camps. Do you think anybody wants to end up like that, when they are aware Europe exists?[/QUOTE] What i mean with that is that most of these people have values that are incompatible with those we value in Europe. I think you know what i mean whith that. So there for i advocate that they go to countries that are more in line with there values instead of coming to such a different environment like Europe. Also i think Australian approach to immigration policy is something that Europe should strive to and calling there detention centres concentration camps is just all kinds of wrong. [QUOTE=Trebgarta;51551143]Garbage, who wants to live there, these people are escaping the Middle East after all, why would they go back to Middle East? Tunis, Algeria and Morocco are like Lebanon. They offer survival yes, but no life. SA And Gulf would just kick them back to Iraq or something.[/QUOTE] I give you that Lebanon does not give you do most prospects however to call countries like Tunis, Algeria and Morocco garbage is just wrong. As for SA and the gulf states they would great places to live if you were a conservative sunni and if they let you in. But the fact that they don't just shows how much they value there fellow sunni's. As for conservative Shiite there is alway's Iran for them. [QUOTE=Trebgarta;51551143]Go half the world away for a poor country?[/QUOTE] I would not call Malaysia a poor country by any economic standard. [QUOTE=Trebgarta;51551143]Military junta[/QUOTE] Much more a stable then the country they came from.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51551414]Go live in Iran? What sane person would do that? Even for a conservative. [/QUOTE] You do realize that not everybody wants to live in a country with western values right and there for countries with vastly different cultures and values exist right? [QUOTE=Trebgarta;51551414]You know, Vietnamese boat people were branded "eonomic migrants" and denied access a lot of places because they wouldnt go to Laos or Cambodia or Indonesia or Malaysia and preferred Hong Kong, Thailand(some), Australia. You want to repeat that?[/QUOTE] Rightfully so the vietnam war has been over now for 41 years. [QUOTE=Trebgarta;51551414]You really have no idea what you are talking about, how the refugees think, or what they lack and what they want and need.[/QUOTE] And you do? [QUOTE=Trebgarta;51551414]Also values dont matter. All that matters is having a full stomach, average life and a future for your kids.[/QUOTE] Yes becuase look at this starving refugee [IMG]http://nikosxeiladakis.gr/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/please-help-feed.jpg[/IMG] But seriously i know that not all of them are like this. But you do know that you don't need to life in Europe to have a average life right? [QUOTE=Trebgarta;51551414]What are you paying, exactly? And are you sure they are receiving it for free?[/QUOTE] I am paying taxes that in turn get used for there welfare once they are here.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51551414]Go live in Iran? What sane person would do that? Even for a conservative. You really have no idea what you are talking about, how the refugees think, or what they lack and what they want and need. You know, Vietnamese boat people were branded "eonomic migrants" and denied access a lot of places because they wouldnt go to Laos or Cambodia or Indonesia or Malaysia and preferred Hong Kong, Thailand(some), Australia. You want to repeat that? [editline]19th December 2016[/editline] Also values dont matter. All that matters is having a full stomach, average life and a future for your kids.[/QUOTE] You realize that Iran isn't some dirt poor backwater 3rd world country dictatorship right? They have a relatively oppressive government and they support terrorist regimes the west doesn't agree with (even though the west arguably supports terrorist regimes that Iran doesn't agree with), but it's a perfectly fine place to live. Don't give into the shit you see in the media.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51551711]- You went to school, right? 12 years? 13? - You know, they will start paying taxes, and their contribution will only grow as time passes, after a time they will start paying your pesions. You are approaching it extremly one sidedly.[/QUOTE] You know with all the extra costs the state needs to make at the end of the line the net result will still most likely be a net lose for the host country. Then i am not even taken into account the fact that some leave the country for what ever reason after some considerable ammount of money has already been invested. Besides most of these people got the most basic of education and let it just be the fact that in Europe low education jobs are disappearing due to automation.
There really aren't the resources to do anything with most of these refugees. Most of Europe have austerity measures. It's a pipe dream to think that they can all come over, learn the lingo, integrate, happily accept western culture, get jobs and everyone will live happily ever after. It ain't working now and it ain't never going to work.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51552467]There really aren't the resources to do anything with most of these refugees. Most of Europe have austerity measures. It's a pipe dream to think that they can all come over, learn the lingo, integrate, happily accept western culture, get jobs and everyone will live happily ever after. It ain't working now and it ain't never going to work.[/QUOTE] We absolutely have the resources - [URL=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_European_Union]"The European Union is the second largest economy in the world (if treated as a single country) in nominal terms and according to purchasing power parity (PPP). The European Union's GDP was estimated to be €16.5 trillion (nominal) in 2016 according to the International Monetary Fund, representing 22,8% of nominal global GDP."]The European Union is the second largest economy in the world (if treated as a single country) in nominal terms and according to purchasing power parity (PPP). The European Union's GDP was estimated to be €16.5 trillion (nominal) in 2016 according to the International Monetary Fund, representing 22,8% of nominal global GDP."[/URL] The problem is is that those resources aren't managed properly nor used effectively outside of a few countries. But we have 22.2% of the world's entire GDP - we definitely have the resources to handle this issue. Whether we have the [I]will[/I] is another thing.
[QUOTE=Dave_Parker;51552613]This is only assuming those resources are managed 100% efficiently and there's a surplus of resources. To think that entire amount (22.2% of the GDP) can be spent on refugees is incredibly naive. Also, if the EU was treated as a single country. It's not, and no single country has the monetary resources or manpower to deal with the refugee crisis.[/QUOTE] Did I suggest that we'd spend all of that GDP on refugees? I should have made this more clear: we absolutely have the resources to deal with the refugee crisis if we didn't lead lives that are absolutely out of whack compared to the rest of the world. We aren't efficent at all with what we have and we over-consume like crazy. If we had the will to change both those factors we could totally take care of the refugee crisis very easily. But we don't. That's always been the problem - we don't [I]have the will[/I] not that [I] we don't have the resources[/I]. The US [URL="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect"]apparently throws away[/URL] [I]half it's food produce.[/I] Imagine if it sold it for cheap to African countries instead.
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51552601]We absolutely have the resources - [URL=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_European_Union]"The European Union is the second largest economy in the world (if treated as a single country) in nominal terms and according to purchasing power parity (PPP). The European Union's GDP was estimated to be €16.5 trillion (nominal) in 2016 according to the International Monetary Fund, representing 22,8% of nominal global GDP."]The European Union is the second largest economy in the world (if treated as a single country) in nominal terms and according to purchasing power parity (PPP). The European Union's GDP was estimated to be €16.5 trillion (nominal) in 2016 according to the International Monetary Fund, representing 22,8% of nominal global GDP."[/URL] The problem is is that those resources aren't managed properly nor used effectively outside of a few countries. But we have 22.2% of the world's entire GDP - we definitely have the resources to handle this issue. Whether we have the [I]will[/I] is another thing.[/QUOTE] So why the austerity and mounting debts? [url]http://www.eudebtclock.org/[/url]
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51552637] The US [URL="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect"]apparently throws away[/URL] [I]half it's food produce.[/I] Imagine if it sold it for cheap to African countries instead.[/QUOTE] Massive overpopulation and the end of humanity
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51552637] The US [URL="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/us-food-waste-ugly-fruit-vegetables-perfect"]apparently throws away[/URL] [I]half it's food produce.[/I] Imagine if it sold it for cheap to African countries instead.[/QUOTE] Will this cheap food be collected from all over the US, whilst staying fresh itself and then teleporting itself to Africa? You my friend are a deluded idealist.
Some thoughts from Aris Roussinos, a VICE news journalist who was embedded with opposition fighters in Libya and Syria as well as the Kurds in Iraq. [QUOTE] Back on Twitter very briefly due to the mass market but analytically very poor Aleppo coverage Firstly, the rebels should have abandoned the city in 2013 when it became clear they couldn't take it; it just got levelled for no purpose The initial purpose- creating a Benghazi Mk II - failed early on. Rebels should have retreated & besieged the city Rebel units in the city were generally from outside the city: commanders were suburban/rural businessmen, fighters insecure working class local takeup to rebels was largely a product of being bombed indiscrimately, but only low ranks came from the city itself On a class dynamic, it was largely lower middle class businessmen from the countryside fucking up upper-middle class pro-regime businessmen The regime, through greater strength of arms, killed 1000s of civilians indiscriminately, mostly by airstrikes The rebels also killed many many civilians on the government side by hell cannons, less effectively but equally indiscrimately The idea that either side held the moral ground is largely dependent on which side you already chose to support [/QUOTE] [QUOTE]The Aleppo rebels only rarely achieved a unified purpose, peaking in IF (Tawhid) dominance in 2014 After the collapse of IF/Tawhid in 2015 Aleppo became an Idlib-like jungle of broadly equivalent groups, with no one strongest player Anecdote: all the Aleppo rebels I filmed in 2014 skipped the city to join the Turks in Jarablus last year By 2015 the fragmented non-AQ Aleppo rebels became naked puppets of outside powers Ethnic Turkmen groups frittered away men and munitions fighting the SDF in Sheikh Maqsud at Turkey's behest, ignoring the coming storm The irony is once the SAA won, same Turkmen units sent their women & children to Sheikh Maqsud for safety, but anyway :S Tl;dr The Aleppo rebels grabbed defeat from the jaws of victory multiple times; they squabbled constantly and weakened each other [/QUOTE] [QUOTE] on a broader level, JN won the rebels tactical victories but made them unsupportable for Western voters the rebels lost the war the day JN wiped out the SRF & Hazm; they won lots of battles after but became politically too toxic to support Tl;dr the one thing missing in current Aleppo coverage is sober analysis of the military and political errors that lost the rebels the city [/QUOTE] [media]https://twitter.com/arisroussinos/status/810662134820519937[/media] TR is referring to the Turkish-backed Euphrates Shield rebels
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.