Over 150 confirmed dead in attack on Paris, France

People worldwide are reeling. I've heard UKIP and Britain First are both beginning to make rumbles about their own immigration problem, as the immigrants of France are the most likely suspects. Germans are protesting in the streets, demanding Chancellor Merkel do something about their own lack of border security. France is in a national curfew and has shut down the borders.

Worse yet, several hours after the allegedly Syrian insurgents attacked, there was a report that an immigrant camp that housed over 6,000 people was set on fire. This looks like the tipping point.

This was bound to happen the moment Europe opened its borders to those illegal immigrants. It is naive not to have expected this the moment EU's incompetence bowed down to the refugee crisis.

Pity so many innocent lives had to be lost for the errors of some government officials that neglect the interests of their own citizens in favour of political correctness.

Hopefully this will wake up Europe and maybe allow them to adopt policies similar to that of Hungary's in relation to the refugee crisis. It is simply not sensible to allow your country swarmed by illegal immigrants (many of whom could be infiltrated terrorists), who present extremist behaviour, and total irreverence and defiance towards the law and culture of the country they have the pretentiousness to be accepted by.

Think this was the tipping point? I just hope Europe will act lest terrorist attacks such as these will intensify and continue.

While the plight of the refugees is pitiable and of course the EU has no small part in the unrest in Syria, I have to agree. The ones suffering are the ordinary citizens of the EU's various nations and the immigrants weren't exactly known for their graciousness to their new hosts. The people were getting more and more disenfranchised by the governments they elected to look out for their interests and became more and more bitter towards the people who were coming over the borders in droves. Now there's a catastrophe and all that pent up racism has a solid leg to stand on.

However, the individuals responsible are just that, the individuals responsible. The refugees are not to blame, those people are. The French are going to take this out on the refugees however and it's not going to be pretty.

I guess, from what I know, the number of people fleeing conflict in the Middle East and Africa is staggering. Reading personal stories, you hear about them trying to live normal lives while the world is falling apart around them: going to work on a bus that gets hit every few minutes by stray gunfire, businesses and schools getting flattened by explosions, facilities and infrastructure getting erased with no one around to rebuild, constant threat of kidnapping or murder or maiming. It gets to the point where people will spend their entire life savings to get the hell out.

So the flood of people is clearly a humanitarian crisis, which from what I understand is why e.g. Germany and Sweden and other nations kept their borders more or less open, why people would wait outside train stations with bags of food and bottles of water for the refugees. So now, there's this attack that ISIS is claiming credit for, and France closes its borders. Assuming more European nations close their borders as well, the question becomes, where do all these people go? You start to see a situation like this: people flee their home countries, Europe kindly lets them in out of the rain, some of them take advantage of this to attack and kill people on foreign soil (assuming that is actually what happened, and that this isn't the responsibility of an ISIS cell already present in France), bringing the war with them, and so Europe closes its borders and starts pushing refugees out. The people fleeing war are suddenly seen as plague-bearers, who are followed by war wherever they go, in which case none of them can have a place to call home.

But at the same time, a lot of people in France were just murdered.

I find it hard, then, to comment on this, given that I live in a country that currently has borders open so narrowly they might as well be shut tight, so none of us here are experiencing what most countries in Europe are. The problem seems intractable: after all, you can't just evacuate half of Africa and nearly all of the Middle East without serious repercussions (for the refugees and for everyone else). But the other option is to somehow bring peace to all of these various war-torn nations, and when you hear stories about African warlords committing the most heinous acts imaginable in order to attract more foreign aid to their countries, you start to get a sense of how insane a problem that really is to solve.


I guess the one thing that is clear is, my heart goes out to all the victims in Paris, their families, and their friends.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frank LeRenard

... and when you hear stories about African warlords committing the most heinous acts imaginable in order to attract more foreign aid...

---

Tell me... why would we give aid to "African warlords" when we should rightfully be burying them six feet underground for their "heinous" acts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roose Hurro

Tell me... why would we give aid to "African warlords" when we should rightfully be burying them six feet underground for their "heinous" acts?

---

As I understand it, a number of people in Africa (and probably elsewhere) discovered that the more heinous the acts they commit, the more support they bring in from neutral aid organizations like Doctors Without Borders. Such organizations of course do not take political sides, and are only there to give relief to those wounded in combat or sick from disease, or whatever else, hence they can be taken advantage of in this way. The justification from the "warlords" (if that's the right word) is basically the same as it was for that old Vietnam quote, "We had to destroy the village to save it."

The last part, which you failed to quote for some reason, was important: "to their countries". In any case, I'm using this as an example demonstrating why it's hard to predict what's going to happen when you start to meddle in the affairs of other nations. People are very clever.

You'd be surprised what peace can be maintained when large groups of prime fighting age men are kept content by simply having their stomachs full and their balls empty.

Quote:

---

The problem seems intractable: after all, you can't just evacuate half of Africa and nearly all of the Middle East without serious repercussions (for the refugees and for everyone else). But the other option is to somehow bring peace to all of these various war-torn nations, and when you hear stories about African warlords committing the most heinous acts imaginable in order to attract more foreign aid to their countries, you start to get a sense of how insane a problem that really is to solve.

---

Which is why I take the 3rd option. To quote a punk band, "I can't see the rationality, the world's not my responsibility."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeenageAngst

Which is why I take the 3rd option. To quote a punk band, "I can't see the rationality, the world's not my responsibility."

---

If the world's not your responsibility, then whose responsibility is it?