Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Why not option D: Strong borders, severe punishments up to and including summary expulsion of any illegals?

Because that is included within Option C? It falls for the fallacy of an all powerful state, which we simply do not have. Let's put aside popularity for a moment. For whatever reason, the government is united behind this plan. No immigration from a list of countries that "do not have their shit together" and immediate expulsion into I don't know, Belgium, for any illegal immigrants who get caught.

Well, some of them are not going to try and come. Some of them are going to try and get caught. Some of them are going to succeed in making it there and eventually get caught.

But if the harshest pariah states on Earth, using even more extreme measures, cannot establish a strong border, can you? I ask this question seriously. I don't see any way in which both history and knowledge of the human race doesn't make that an extremely low probability. It's one thing to say it. Another to declare it in law. Another to enforce it meaningfully. And another still to be effective even with the most fanatical enforcement.
 
I'm an American. Illegal immigration and the response to it isn't just a theoretical issue to me, it's a reality I experience pretty regularly. And I'm in goddamn North Carolina, far from our borders. The response of the government at the top level is one thing, but what do you think all the governors of Texas say when they get elected? It's something along the lines of "damn what the globalists in Washington think, we're gonna stop those criminal louts and take back our country this time!".

"This time" finds a way of not working out. Donald Trump gets elected in the biggest political upset...uh...ever on the promise of THE WALL. Front and center. Issue numero uno. He's President of the world's most powerful nation right now with his party in government, so it should be child's play for him to finally stop the immigrant horaannnddd into the budget committee it goes. It's easy to say "stop immigration", it's not so easy to do it.

I will grant that it is not a violation of any of the laws of physics to stop immigrants.

What I'm telling you here, more than anything else, is that the universe doesn't owe you a stance that means there's no terrorism in your country. There is a very real possibility that all options involve terrorist attacks. And there is also a very real possibility that if you say "fuck that, I'll do anything to protect the innocent" that you will cause more terrorist attacks than if you had stuck to option B.

The real option D, if there is one, is to abandon all group separatism and greed to build a utopia on Earth so that nobody wants to be a terrorist....about as likely as option A.

It's a denial of reality to not accept, whether you believe it or not, the possibility that you aren't being given an exit option no matter how "soft" or "hard" you choose to be in responding.

[Pwnzerfaust]

Alright, given all that, I'll go with option C.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

And why is that? What advantage do you expect to gain from C that is not present in B? I'd remind you of the words of the article you yourself posted, which said that contacts within the Muslim community were critical for identifying potential terrorists. That doesn't exist in C because the government is dangerous to all immigrants.

That's not even getting into all the citizens of Britain who could choose to become terrorists, which is what this guy was. Past doesn't matter in this context. There's only a future for how that goes.

Hell, contacts within communities have even drastically cut down not terrorism but full-blown sectarian warfare, as seen in Tal Afar.

[smjjames]

If his parents hadn't been allowed into the UK, it would not have happened.

No, it would just have been someone else, then you'd say if THAT persons parents hadn't been allowed into the UK, it wouldn't have happened.

I swear that type of argument is actually a type of fallacy, not sure which one though.

[hector13]

Perhaps we should be screening immigrants for the potential of their children committing crimes.

[ChairmanPoo]

Perhaps we should be screening immigrants for the potential of their children committing crimes.

Even better, screen potential parents as well!

[Neonivek]

Well if you know the Demographics of the UK, they were relatively close to a 50/50 split on whether or not to outright ban Muslims (In fact they are more Anti-Muslim then the US is, interestingly).

So, yeah I would say there would be a genuine chance it will cause a muslim ban and increased immigration control. Not to mention other cases.

No, it would just have been someone else, then you'd say if THAT persons parents hadn't been allowed into the UK, it wouldn't have happened.

They could do what immigration often does and institute thought crimes. For example US immigration, for a short period of time, made one of the requirements to enter the US to openly admit to liking Donald Trump.

Of course I don't believe they should do that. Yet, I will not be surprised if the UK immigration does something similar (again >_>)

---

In otherwords expect some changes. Especially given the other changes that were in the making at the time.

[Neonivek]

If his parents hadn't been allowed into the UK, it would not have happened.

Great, should've come up with that... what, 30, 40 years ago?

Well knowing UK narrative... What school did he go to? Public/private or Muslim school?

That might be an angle they will go with. That the isolationist / Anti-assimilation attitude of the Muslim community fosters extremism.

Edit: OHH DEAR GAWD!!! Too many Jew Parallels... Ok so maybe they won't go that far given it is yeah... a direct mirror of the same discrimination pitted against the Jewish community. Yeah so I am probably definitely wrong about this one.

[Neonivek]

Something else that you're 10 to 20 years too late to fix.

EDIT: Any institutional attempt to "fix" the problem of extremism at home will take at least a decade to make a difference, if not more.

I've little knowledge or experience with that.

What do countries typically do to handle it directly? As a filter I mean first world non-totalitarian governments... as I don't want to hear about genocide or thought crime laws.

[Lagslayer]

The real solution to the """immigration""" crisis is painfully obvious. But even after all else has failed, repeatedly, does anyone here have the nerve to say it?

[Baffler]

The real solution to the """immigration""" crisis is painfully obvious. But even after all else has failed, repeatedly, does anyone here have the nerve to say it?

Lots of people want to make them all leave, if that's what you mean, hence the vandalism of Muslim-owned businesses that's happened over the course of the day. Not as a portion of the population, maybe, but in absolute terms you could fill a lot of rooms with people who do.

[redwallzyl]

Or we could ya know fix the source that we made in the first place.

[Baffler]

What do you suggest? Because "there won't be Islamic terrorism in Britain if there aren't any Muslims in Britain" isn't a very difficult logical leap to make and if this kind of thing keeps happening, in the absence of a clear alternative, the idea of just kicking them all out will definitely start catching on.

[TheDarkStar]

Or we could ya know fix the source that he made in the first place.

but that involves caring about other people

and long-term planning

and not putting money (mostly from oil) above everything else

and not supporting proxy wars

and not supporting dictatorships just to spite another unrelated country

how will politicians stay elected if they do that

[ChairmanPoo]

What do you suggest? Because "there won't be Islamic terrorism in Britain if there aren't any Muslims in Britain" isn't a very difficult logical leap to make and if this kind of thing keeps happening, in the absence of a clear alternative, the idea of just kicking them all out will definitely start catching on.

Its  pretty shoddy logic