Muslim migration into European countries

a reply to: Phrygian

They did? Then you Know something i dont

a reply to: Kantjil

Obviously I do... I don't understand what do You mean. Who did what?

Well we know every European is clamoring to move to the Middle East and live that way of life ... wait they aren't?

originally posted by: Kantjil
a reply to: Thetan

Sweden will not survive without refugees

It wont survive with them either, what with the aid workers being murdered.

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: Thetan

Well, this is just Europe, having to pay the piper for meddling in international affairs of the last 30 years.

You can't have a proxy war among members of NATO and non members, destroy a whole country and then not have to take care of the aftermath.

Exporting democracy has a few side effects, namely a lot of people are displaced and become refugees, they have no real other option but to go away somewhere else or get killed in the crossfire.

So is it good they are migrating? No. But not because they are all criminals who want to take over the country.

Was it preventable? Yes.

It's also an issue for the Gulf States. They aren't contributing enough. Muslims should be taking care of other displaced Muslims. They should have a greater part in fighting ISIS and helping deal with the fallout than the likes of Germany, France and Sweden for example.

~Tenth

With that logic, the US should be taking in the biggest amount of ME refugees.

A large part of refugees is not even from a warzone, so no reason whasoever to take them in.

And just bcause my government may have supported destabilisation of certain countries, doesn't mean that our population now is reponsible for dealing with refugees from those countries. I never supported such actions so I don't feel any responsibility for it.

Furthermore, you must be aware by now that this influx is part of an orchestrated plan, so I don't see why you think that your explanation on why we should take them in, is a valid one.

originally posted by: Thetan
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

So you think its both possible and probable that they will assimilate? If you moved to Syria, would you and your family assimilate?


Further more, is there a reason Europe should take them in, in the first place?

Syria is being destroyed. A formerly successful secular state is being destroyed and we should help take in survivors. We always take in people who are in danger, this is the same. Syria is on our doorstep, it isn't China or Argentina, it's very close and we can help.

Syria, a successful state? All the states in the Middle East have been in turmoil for hundreds of years, well before western countries interfered. They like to portray themselves as successful but are nothing but states utterly controlled by despotic tyrants or despotic religious leaders. If these people were in danger there are quite a few safe countries a lot closer than western Europe. What about Jordan, Saudi, Egypt, Turkey etc. etc. the list is long. But no they choose to travel through multiple countries to get where THEY want.
Tenth, Tenth, what silly reasoning" a lot of people left because we exported democracy so they were displaced and became refugees". Then why the hell did they run to democratic countries then if the didn't like democracy. Think that one through again.
Thetan, They came and still are coming for one reason only, an answer already given. They come for the easy touch, something for free, no need to work for it we give it to them automatically and as you've probably learnt by now if you question, in any way, 1,we caused their suffering, 2 we destroyed their country, 3, (the biggie) because we have to because we must. If you question any of that then you are labelled racist or any other nasty title they can come up with.

originally posted by: Thetan
a reply to: nwtrucker

Shouldn't Europe be concerned about it's own well being and interests? Another question. Do you think a large migration of Muslim migrants into Europe will hurt European people, European culture, or European countries in any way; that is will it hurt European culture, people, and countries more than it will help them?

I would be and am concerned.

One would assume the immigrant flow started as a smallish flow. Insignificant in the larger scheme of European issues. It grew...fast. Consequences are now appearing. Rear-view mirrors showing North America what Europe didn't/couldn't see then.

Heck, I'm just a truck driver, not a spiritual or social expert. My view is we can do more to help, just not in my house. At least, not yet. Help Europe help the refugees? Perhaps. Somehow help for sure.

a reply to: Sargeras

One German politician openly stated that native Germans (Nazis as he called them) have an obligation to help as many people as they can because of Hitler and World War 2 and he actually relished the thought of native Germans becoming extinct. The Southern US is under similar cultural assault due to slavery (never mind Northern merchants, bankers and shipping made a fortune off slavery).

Multiculturalism is the wedge driven into predominately White nations as part of Marxist strategy. You bring in mass migration and allow birth rates to slowly but surely replace the dominant culture. High birth rates coupled with low educational levels forces the expansion of the welfare state. This is key to government controlling all aspects of our lives and destroying the freedoms our forefathers fought to preserve.

originally posted by: crayzeed
Syria, a successful state? All the states in the Middle East have been in turmoil for hundreds of years, well before western countries interfered.

Syria was a successful state. It had a decent economy. Good standard of living. Had a very diverse population that was protected by a secular regime under Assad. Sure no angel from the heavens but he has protected all the people from the excesses of bad style religious nutters. When one considers this, in addition to the fact that Syria is an artifical creation of British and French creators and under constant attack in one way or another from the Israelis then it was a miracle how well it was doing.

Now it has been destroyed by and for a multitude of reasons and major world nations. It is in our backyard and if we can take in people who are fleeing for their lives then we have to do it. It is the right thing to do. Don't get me wrong, all the pretend Syrians from other countries should be stuck on planes and delivered straight back to where they came from no messing around just deport them. In addition the last thing I want to see is the Islamification of Europe, more Mosques everywhere and a build up that will inevitably lead to Bosnia version 2 and Kosovo version 2 in other European capitals. I want us to retain our Judeo Christian cultures as I believe we are better that way. But we should help out and take in the genuine Syrian refugees as their country is being destroyed and their lives need saving from a very real hell over there.

I love how you throw refugees and regular migrants who want work in your country for example in one pot. Nobody sayed that the mass flood of muslims is good for your country. Some of you are also extreme blind, can't see who is behind all this, there are mainly european (politicians, bankers) and not refugees pushing your downfall.

Common sense that ATS got invaded by stormfronters.

originally posted by: Kantjil
a reply to: Thetan

Sweden will not survive without refugees

Why not?