Immigration rant

bisleybisley Senior MemberPosts: 10,781 Senior Member
It's time for this argument to be shifted to the United Nations.

In the first place, what is the UN doing, these days? If the UN cannot come up with a solution to this problem, what the hell are they good for? The only thing they have ever done, with any success at all, is humanitarian aid. Let the neutral countries come up with all the ideas, and we use our veto power to reject anything that is unfair to us. Of course, the UN has blown humanitarian projects as often as not, but it is still the closest they have ever come to success. Western countries can make the argument that if they cannot even succeed at non-military problems, what is the purpose of even having such an organization.

What I'm talking about is establishing subsistence level housing, food, etc. in refugee compounds in the region, with UN peace keepers in charge. Refugees should be able to come and go as they please, as long as they are returning to the country they left, or one that has invited them. It may be that, without western supervision, the camps will probably become shiit holes, but it will be the responsibility of the UN to fix it.

The countries that are trying to restore order by killing the bad guys should not also have to bear the heaviest burden for humanitarian aid - let all of the other members divide that cost in money and manpower.

I know it will probably never happen, but it is a damn good argument for whether the UN is worth the bother.
«1

Replies

  • knitepoetknitepoet Senior Member Posts: 19,435 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    but it is a damn good argument for whether the UN is worth the bother.
    You actually still believe there's a chance that they are?

    Unfortunately, I do not share your optimism
    Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates, Rule #37: There is no “overkill”. There is only “open fire” and “I need to reload”.


  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,947 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    It's time for this argument to be shifted to the United Nations.

    In the first place, what is the UN doing, these days? If the UN cannot come up with a solution to this problem, what the hell are they good for? The only thing they have ever done, with any success at all, is humanitarian aid. Let the neutral countries come up with all the ideas, and we use our veto power to reject anything that is unfair to us. Of course, the UN has blown humanitarian projects as often as not, but it is still the closest they have ever come to success. Western countries can make the argument that if they cannot even succeed at non-military problems, what is the purpose of even having such an organization.

    What I'm talking about is establishing subsistence level housing, food, etc. in refugee compounds in the region, with UN peace keepers in charge. Refugees should be able to come and go as they please, as long as they are returning to the country they left, or one that has invited them. It may be that, without western supervision, the camps will probably become shiit holes, but it will be the responsibility of the UN to fix it.

    The countries that are trying to restore order by killing the bad guys should not also have to bear the heaviest burden for humanitarian aid - let all of the other members divide that cost in money and manpower.

    I know it will probably never happen, but it is a damn good argument for whether the UN is worth the bother.
    Did you even bother to look at what the UN was already doing before you posted your rant? They're spending almost $8B in Syria and surrounding counties. Like 4 million refugees are being housed in the adjacent and nearby countries including Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, and Iraq for those complaining about their neighbors not helping.

    http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/syria-emergency.html
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • earlyearly Senior Member Posts: 4,950 Senior Member
    If you can watch the BBC on PBS they have pretty good reporting on what is being done.
    My thoughts are generally clear. My typing, not so much.
  • therewolftherewolf Member Posts: 90 Member
    IMO, the U.N. is the problem, not the solution.

    They need to give Turtle Bay back to the Rockefellers,

    with appreciation for their Grandfather's efforts in

    helping set up the once venerable institution.


    Any nation with any sense is kicking these middle east

    ruffians out of their country, tout-suite.
  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 7,327 Senior Member
    Did you even bother to look at what the UN was already doing before you posted your rant? They're spending almost $8B in Syria and surrounding counties. Like 4 million refugees are being housed in the adjacent and nearby countries including Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, and Iraq for those complaining about their neighbors not helping.

    http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/syria-emergency.html

    Then why are they flooding Europe and maybe the U.S. ? Personally I think the U.N. is as useless as mammaries on a bull. Most of the member countries are either Socialists or Communists and generally opposed to whatever the U.S. is in favor of, and they put member states like Iran and Saudi Arabia on Human Rights committees. Give me a break.
    JOE MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT:
    THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW COMMUNISTS!
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,947 Senior Member
    Then why are they flooding Europe and maybe the U.S. ? Personally I think the U.N. is as useless as mammaries on a bull. Most of the member countries are either Socialists or Communists and generally opposed to whatever the U.S. is in favor of, and they put member states like Iran and Saudi Arabia on Human Rights committees. Give me a break.
    We have accepted a fraction of 1% of the refugees even under Obama (he agreed to take like 10k). Turkey alone is currently holding 2.7M. Our contribution is a rounding error in the global effort.

    With that in mind sure, us no longer accepting them doesn't make a huge difference in the scheme of things. It mostly just makes us look selfish and goes against our national identity as a great nation that used to help those in need around the world. It seems most conservatives don't really care about that. Sure it's not our problem and I we don't have to help. I certainly get the impulse. Not everything is our problem to solve. But being "the good guy" who helped out those in need has always been one of the things that "made American great". At least in many people's minds. It is disappointing to many to see that go away.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,781 Senior Member
    Did you even bother to look at what the UN was already doing before you posted your rant? They're spending almost $8B in Syria and surrounding counties. Like 4 million refugees are being housed in the adjacent and nearby countries including Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, and Iraq for those complaining about their neighbors not helping.

    http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/syria-emergency.html

    8 billion dollars is about $1600 a head, if you only count the estimated 5 million Syrians, so obviously they need more money and a cheaper solution, like camps closer to their homeland. That $1600 just about pays their passage to some city, where they will either live in slums or become wards of the taxpayers. There are 192 other member nations of the UN, most of which are doing nothing to oust the criminals that have taken over their countries, so they need to pony up the money and figure out how to do it cheaper.

    They are refugees, meaning that the women, children, elderly, and disabled need a place to be safe until it is safe to go home - not receive tickets to one of the welfare states that can still afford to let them in. The men should be forming a UN army to go back in and fight the people who screwed up their country, not fleeing to ours so that our best young men can go risk death in their place.
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,781 Senior Member
    knitepoet wrote: »
    You actually still believe there's a chance that they are?

    Unfortunately, I do not share your optimism


    No, and you didn't read anything in my post that expressed such optimism.

    I'm simply saying that this is one of the counter arguments to our importing perfectly healthy young men that should be over there fighting for their freedom, instead of helping to deplete ours. The UN is a joke, because it does not seek to solve problems. It merely sucks cash out of the western world, sends bottled water and Ramen noodles to starving people, and probably steals the rest.
  • shootbrownelkshootbrownelk Senior Member Posts: 2,033 Senior Member
    I just saw a piece on Fox & Friends that said that a study done on Immigrants/refugees coming into the US showed that over 90% were on food stamps, 75%+ were getting Medicare and over 70% were getting CASH assistance. To the tune of over 5 Billion a year that the citizens with jobs and paying taxes have to come up with. Count me out. Keep them in the sandbox. The United States contributes over 60% of the UN's budget. Time to pull out of the UN. What are we getting out of that entity?
  • Diver43Diver43 Senior Member Posts: 9,073 Senior Member
    We have accepted a fraction of 1% of the refugees even under Obama (he agreed to take like 10k). Turkey alone is currently holding 2.7M. Our contribution is a rounding error in the global effort.

    With that in mind sure, us no longer accepting them doesn't make a huge difference in the scheme of things. It mostly just makes us look selfish and goes against our national identity as a great nation that used to help those in need around the world. It seems most conservatives don't really care about that. Sure it's not our problem and I we don't have to help. I certainly get the impulse. Not everything is our problem to solve. But being "the good guy" who helped out those in need has always been one of the things that "made American great". At least in many people's minds. It is disappointing to many to see that go away.

    do you realize that the number of refugees is more than the population of most US cities with the exception of the largest ones?

    The solution is maybe to assist them in fixing their problems at home, not moving them away
    Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 5,111 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    They are refugees, meaning that the women, children, elderly, and disabled need a place to be safe until it is safe to go home - not receive tickets to one of the welfare states that can still afford to let them in. The men should be forming a UN army to go back in and fight the people who screwed up their country, not fleeing to ours so that our best young men can go risk death in their place.

    This. :agree:
    The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me.

    Ayn Rand
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    Why would any nation with a shred of common sense welcome people too cowardly to stand and fight for their homeland? When the Iraqis dropped the weapons the USA gave them and ran like scared rabbits, we should have washed our hands of the whole mess and stopped the flow of "refugees" into our nation. Ditto for the rest of the ragheads that call the sandbox home. The sniveling cowards need to grow a backbone, and/or a set of balls and fend for themselves.
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,947 Senior Member
    bisley wrote: »
    No, and you didn't read anything in my post that expressed such optimism.

    I'm simply saying that this is one of the counter arguments to our importing perfectly healthy young men that should be over there fighting for their freedom, instead of helping to deplete ours. The UN is a joke, because it does not seek to solve problems. It merely sucks cash out of the western world, sends bottled water and Ramen noodles to starving people, and probably steals the rest.

    Just for the record, which side should they be fighting on? For Bashar Assad a brutal dictator who used chemical weapons against civilians or for ISIS?
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,781 Senior Member
    Just for the record, which side should they be fighting on? For Bashar Assad a brutal dictator who used chemical weapons against civilians or for ISIS?

    They fight ISIS until they no longer exist, because that will put them under the protection of our military and form a revolutionary government and wait to see what we are or are not going to do about Russia. We are going to have a confrontation with Russia, because they won't pull in their horns until we do, and it doesn't matter, at this point whether that happens in Ukraine or Syria, or both. If we back down, they are screwed again, as is Ukraine and Crimea.

    The point is that we are doing the policing, so let the rest of the world take the charity work, until we find a way out of the police business.
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,797 Senior Member
    Just for the record, which side should they be fighting on? For Bashar Assad a brutal dictator who used chemical weapons against civilians or for ISIS?

    Are you sure that there are no other options? Think back about what has happened in the past, you know, something on the lines of fight the bad guys off, have a temporary government in place while legitimate elections are held, then they govern themselves. If they're not capable of doing this, then they have to accept whatever happens to them. We as a country simply cannot afford to rescue every stray in the world. We helped oust Saddam Hussein, provided some aid, and training, and security to the newly freed people, they held elections, we provided modern arms to their people, and they dropped their weapons and ran. Now ISIS is using those weapons. At least we gave them a chance but they may have been better of with their dictatorship as they're not capable of governing themselves.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,781 Senior Member
    Fisheadgib wrote: »
    Are you sure that there are no other options? Think back about what has happened in the past, you know, something on the lines of fight the bad guys off, have a temporary government in place while legitimate elections are held, then they govern themselves. If they're not capable of doing this, then they have to accept whatever happens to them. We as a country simply cannot afford to rescue every stray in the world. We helped oust Saddam Hussein, provided some aid, and training, and security to the newly freed people, they held elections, we provided modern arms to their people, and they dropped their weapons and ran. Now ISIS is using those weapons. At least we gave them a chance but they may have been better of with their dictatorship as they're not capable of governing themselves.

    It sounds cruel to say it, but, for the most part, the only countries that have succeeded in getting rid of dictators are the ones whose people decided they would rather go down fighting than live like animals under an evil government. Most of them had to have some help, but help is more likely to come if the rebels are competent and courageous.
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,797 Senior Member
    It appears that our token liberal is the only one that doesn't get it. But then, he's likely just trolling again.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • Diver43Diver43 Senior Member Posts: 9,073 Senior Member
    There are some very wealthy people with very large homes in Arlington, Va. and the surrounding area. If each family would take in one immigrant family and take care of them until they are self supporting and on their own. Problem solved.

    First to volunteer?
    Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,781 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Even when he trolls, he does make people think. Makes folks come up with an answer other than
    "Because libtards!".

    Yep. The political forum wouldn't be the same without him. It's that yin and yang thing, not to be confused with a ying-yang. :tooth:
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,797 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    I wasn't trolling with my statement. I really don't care. Apathy is awesome!


    I believe in helping people help themselves, not doing things for them. If somebody doesn't want to help themselves, then I could care less about their fate.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    Diver43 wrote: »
    First to volunteer to get your throat cut in the middle of the night by a jihadist posing as a "refugee"?

    Fixed it!
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • CHIRO1989CHIRO1989 Senior Member Posts: 11,294 Senior Member
    Did you even bother to look at what the UN was already doing before you posted your rant? They're spending almost $8B in Syria and surrounding counties. Like 4 million refugees are being housed in the adjacent and nearby countries including Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, and Iraq for those complaining about their neighbors not helping.

    http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/syria-emergency.html

    They sure are helpful when someone else is paying the bill and they are the ones submitting the bill that needs to be paid.
    I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn away from their ways and live. Eze 33:11
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,947 Senior Member
    Fisheadgib wrote: »
    Are you sure that there are no other options? Think back about what has happened in the past, you know, something on the lines of fight the bad guys off, have a temporary government in place while legitimate elections are held, then they govern themselves. If they're not capable of doing this, then they have to accept whatever happens to them. We as a country simply cannot afford to rescue every stray in the world. We helped oust Saddam Hussein, provided some aid, and training, and security to the newly freed people, they held elections, we provided modern arms to their people, and they dropped their weapons and ran. Now ISIS is using those weapons. At least we gave them a chance but they may have been better of with their dictatorship as they're not capable of governing themselves.
    Again, which side should they fight on? Should they go home and join Assad's army? Should they join the rebels which are lead primarily by ISIS? Should they just start a two front war against two well armed and well trained enemies with minimal weapons or training? The latter was Obama's plan botched plan. Lightly arm the "good" rebel groups fighting Assad who weren't ISIS or al qaeda. That turned out super!

    No the smartest idea for most people would be to GTFO, let the evil dictator battle the evil terrorists and then deal with hopefully getting some help to clean up the mess once one side wins.

    From an American perspective if I were Trump I'd work with Putin and give him free reign to do whatever it takes to support Assad and wipe out ISIS in Syria as long as Putin would promise to pressure Assad to step down once the conflict was over.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 8,947 Senior Member
    Diver43 wrote: »
    There are some very wealthy people with very large homes in Arlington, Va. and the surrounding area. If each family would take in one immigrant family and take care of them until they are self supporting and on their own. Problem solved.

    First to volunteer?
    Honestly if there was such a program I might seriously consider it. Unfortunately unlike Canada there doesn't appear to be any legal mechanisms for me to do so as a US citizen.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/syrian-americans-push-to-privately-host-refugees-in-the-us_us_563b7967e4b0b24aee4920ad
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 15,369 Senior Member
    It mostly just makes us look selfish and goes against our national identity as a great nation that used to help those in need around the world.

    Unfortunately things have changed....originally people were coming here for the opportunity to make a better life. They got nothing from the government apart from the chance to make that better life. How many of these immigrants/potential immigrants have anything of worth to contribute to our society? So many of them become a burden on society the minute they set foot in the country. How many of them truly want to assimiate into our society rather than turn it into a less war-torn replica of the third world S&%$ hole they came from? The biggest issue we face with many of these "new breed" of immigrants is that they are coming from theocracies...the religion IS the government and it's really hard for a great number of them to grasp the fact that it doesn't work that way here.
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,628 Senior Member
    I am sick and tired of hearing about how few "refugees" the USA has taken in. I read Alphasigmookie's post that we only accepted a fraction of 1%. Well, excuse the hell out of my country, but we've also taken in and resettled somewhere between 11 and 20 million "refugees" from Mexico, Central America, Asia, Africa, and God knows where else in the solar system. And unlike the Europeans, we've actually found real jobs for most of them-and they make enough money not only to live on but send billions and billions and billions back to their folks still in the old country. And we educate their kids, and they get free medical care in our hospitals, and in our courts of law, they're presumed innocent, they get fair trials, they're treated as our equals. They're even counted in our Census as if they were real people.

    Regarding "refugees," nobody has ever done more, for more, for longer than the good ol' US of A. We, not the Turks, Jordanians, or Europeans, are the biggest suckers. We owe no apologies to anyone.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    Yep, we take in more LEGAL immigrants than any other nation.

    Ha, ACLU already whining about Trump's new rewritten policy ..............'Due Process'......................
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • centermass556centermass556 Senior Member Posts: 3,509 Senior Member
    1. The UN is useless. It didn't stop the French recolonization of Indochina, didn't stop the soviets from going into Afghanistan, didn't do anything about the Serbs, and could keep Saddam from having al Samood missles..

    2. Yes, let's applaud the UNfor sending refugees into another war zone, Iraq, with other nations money.

    3. What proof do we have that Assad was an evil dictator? Until he cracked down on the Syrian Arab spring.. and he should have, the US and EU were huge fans.

    4. The UN again. In Bosnia I watched how they handled refugees and refugees "returns". They would pack all the refugees from a a village onto a bus. Take them to their village and make them stay the night. The next day they would return them to the refugee camp and count them as "rehomed refugees"



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    "To have really lived, you must have almost died. To those who have fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
  • therewolftherewolf Member Posts: 90 Member
    I'm hearing a lot of concepts like "refugees", and "our heritage as a great nation to help others around the world".

    These two are GREAT examples.

    First "refugees"- which would MAKE YOU THINK women and children, right? BUT, NO, most of these

    "refugees" are full grown men of military age, who are ruffians running a game. They emigrate, then run

    around like hoodlums, speaking Farsi, or another unfamiliar language, "no spikka english", and just keep on

    with the brigandage, until gang-tackled, manacled, and jailed.

    Second- "Our great nation, expected to help the world." Right now, if we want to save somebody, we need to SAVE

    OURSELVES. Once we are no longer drowning, we can consider throwing out a lifeline to others.



    I could go on and on, but I don't have all night.
  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 15,517 Senior Member
    therewolf wrote: »
    Right now, if we want to save somebody, we need to SAVE

    OURSELVES. Once we are no longer drowning, we can consider throwing out a lifeline to others.
    I am in Flint, Michigan daily and was in Detroit earlier today. This is very true.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.