Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

It might've been a tasteless joke.

Maybe he literally meant it though.

Libya and North Africa generally is also destabilised by the general malaise in the Arab/Muslim world which is a reaction in part (I emphasize, IN PART) to US foreign policy. Though the lion's share of the blame lies with those countries themselves, US and in the case of Algeria, France, share some degree of responsibility.

I don't expect this point to be taken well, but it stands.

MrDwhitey: If you have xenophobic attitudes, support xenophobic policies, aren't you a xenophobe? Xenophobia is common in the UK right. There's much worse insults than xenophobe in my opinion - I'm not calling anyone racist for example.

 MrDwhitey wrote:
It might've been a tasteless joke.

Maybe he literally meant it though.

Honestly, with some of the gak that gets stated on this forum, "hurr durr, maybe we should just glass the middle east, hurr durr", you can never truly tell. Poe's Law and all that.

I actually haven't really supported anything recently.

I'm of the opinion that refugees should be carefully screened, and should be deported the instant they commit a serious crime.

Not that refugees should just be blocked.

I would not vote for UKIP, but am disillusioned by the current parties.

My snarky reply was actually aimed at placing the responsibility for the state of the region partially at the door of the UK and the US for their failed interventions in the region.

Neither the US nor the UK have attacked Syria. Thats like blaming Brazil for Syria. Quit blaming the West for problems others make.

 MrDwhitey wrote:
I actually haven't really supported anything recently.

I'm of the opinion that refugees should be carefully screened, and should be deported the instant they commit a serious crime.

Not that refugees should just be blocked.

I would not vote for UKIP, but am disillusioned by the current parties.

So I would not consider you xenophobic.

Fraz: Of course, because the situation in Syria is nothing to do with the invasion of Iraq.

 Frazzled wrote:

My snarky reply was actually aimed at placing the responsibility for the state of the region partially at the door of the UK and the US for their failed interventions in the region.

Neither the US nor the UK have attacked Syria. Thats like blaming Brazil for Syria. Quit blaming the West for problems others make.

You may have missed the whole furor over the British Parliament voting to bomb Syria. I'm fairly sure that qualifies as attacking them

 Frazzled wrote:

My snarky reply was actually aimed at placing the responsibility for the state of the region partially at the door of the UK and the US for their failed interventions in the region.

Neither the US nor the UK have attacked Syria. Thats like blaming Brazil for Syria. Quit blaming the West for problems others make.

Geography 101: Syria is to the west of what country (and no, Iran is not the country I'm after, nor is Jordan)?

 Goliath wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:
It might've been a tasteless joke.

Maybe he literally meant it though.

Honestly, with some of the gak that gets stated on this forum, "hurr durr, maybe we should just glass the middle east, hurr durr", you can never truly tell. Poe's Law and all that.

This is true, I generally give the benefit of the doubt if there's a smiley. Unless whembly posted it of course, that guys crazy.

 Da Boss wrote:


So I would not consider you xenophobic.

I also definitely think some cultures are worse than others. As a friend just said, cultures that hang toilet paper over the back instead of to the front are clearly inferior.

The reason I personally would dislike the idea of being called a xenophobe is because I see it as disliking people of other cultures for no rational reason, they're just "different" and therefore "wrong", and then from that starting point looking at things from an unfair standpoint to confirm their bias.

For example, if a culture has as part of it the dehumanisation of women, then I would say that that aspect of that culture is completely wrong and inferior. If people following it were to come to the UK for example, I would fully expect them to drop that part of it. Drop their entire culture and just became 100% fried breakfast eating Brits? No. Just get rid of the parts that go against human rights.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Yeah, on page 1.

Wonderful people ITT.

Doubt Merkel is going anywhere - there's no one who is a real threat to her leadership of the CDU. It's definitely going to be used against her by the xenophobes in her party though.

Xenophobes?

You really don't see a fething connection between out of control mass immigration of brutalized refugees from cultures that are deeply misogynistic, fleeing active warzones... and a gigantic mob rampaging through a European city raping women en masse?

If there was ever an argument for controlling a country's borders and being very selective and careful about who is permitted to enter...this is it.

Welcome to the US.

I think we can all sleep soundly knowing that this thread, like so many others, seems to be headed straight down the quagmire of realism vs. post-colonial theory vs. critical theory.

A country can easily secure its frontier: I mean look at Hungary, or just remember the Iron curtain.
USA has nothing to do with north African, in deed. Even if the mob wasn't composed by Syrian refugees, the fact it is composed by immigrants / sons of immigrants should make us stop to let those "refugees" in.
Firstly, Europe can't save all the poor in the world
Then, they don't integrate
And finally they are attacking us.
Seriously, just let them drowning in the Aegean, and they will stop coming.
I don't want my children to grow up in the islamic Republic of France, near to new turkey Germany. It shouldn't be that way.

I don't see how constantly labelling people as xenophobic is any less rude than calling people SJW.

 godardc wrote:
A country can easily secure its frontier: I mean look at Hungary, or just remember the Iron curtain.

This one's new. I've not seen anyone argue in favour of the Iron Curtain before.

 godardc wrote:

USA has nothing to do with north African, in deed. Even if the mob wasn't composed by Syrian refugees, the fact it is composed by immigrants / sons of immigrants should make us stop to let those "refugees" in.

Is there a reason you put "refugees" in quotation marks? Did you miss the little genocidal conflict in Syria?

 godardc wrote:

Firstly, Europe can't save all the poor in the world

We're not taking 5 %. Most of Europe isn't even trying. Considering our standard of living is partially dependent on the rest of the world being out of luck, it'd rather cowardly to just throw our hands in the air and give up.

 godardc wrote:
Then, they don't integrate

Who are "they", and why are "they" not integrating?

 godardc wrote:

And finally they are attacking us.

Again, who are "they"? Why are they attacking us?

 godardc wrote:

Seriously, just let them drowning in the Aegean, and they will stop coming.

You're despicable.

 godardc wrote:
I don't want my children to grow up in the islamic Republic of France, near to new turkey Germany. It shouldn't be that way.

Funny you should say that, because I'd rather not see the Fourth Reich rise. Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious, and with the anti-intellectualistic streak a lot of the right-wing parties in Europe have now there's a fair chance that we're going to feth up royally.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I don't see how constantly labelling people as xenophobic is any less rude than calling people SJW.

Because painting Syrian refugees as all being violent murder-rapists because of something apparently done by people from or descendant from North Africa IS xenophobia.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 stanman wrote:

Relapse wrote:
In all of this, where the hell were the men to defend the women? I think most posters here would be in the middle of that punching, elbowing and kicking any man or group they saw abusing women in such an outrageous fashion.
I know if it happened here where I live, these guys would have gotten a severe beat down by the local populace.

That's a totally sexist stance at least according to all the SJWs. No woman needs a man to step in and do anything for her and by suggesting that a man should fight on her behalf it's clearly a sign that you're a dusty relic from cave man times.

I definitely think you and Edithae would call me an SJW without a shadow of doubt if you saw my activism, but I think this is quite easy - if someone is in trouble like this, bystanders should do their best to overcome the bystander mentality and do something about it.

The gender, race, ethnicity, age, orientation or whatever of all involved on both sides is irrelevant in the above.

Because that is socially just.

Thats also mind numbingly stupid. Is "socially just" going to pay your medical bills when they curb stomp you? Is "Socially just" gong to take care of your family? Is "socially just" going to compensate you for the permanent injuries you suffer? I've done that, and paid for it, permanently. Never again. Never again. You're on your on your own.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bromsy wrote:
The Germans have spent the last 70 years in a cycle of self hatred enforced from without and within, to the point of people being looked down on for being proud of being German by other Germans. Many of them have internalized shame to the point where it has become self destructive and there is almost no drive to stand up for their values and/or identity. I imagine the average German, upon seeing a group of non-white males assaulting a german girl would be more worried about being perceived as being a racist for doing anything about it than anything else.

Out of the twelve or so barfights I was involved in while I was in Germany, roughly one hundred percent of them were against Turkish men who thought we were making time with their ladies, and roughly zero percent of them were against German men; while this is wholly anecdotal it should help illustrate the relative belligerence of parties involved.

Well I'm sure you probably were actually, but the important thing is, did you win? To quote the Bard that is Burt Reynolds" " Gimme somebody!"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Da Boss wrote:
Libya and North Africa generally is also destabilised by the general malaise in the Arab/Muslim world which is a reaction in part (I emphasize, IN PART) to US foreign policy. Though the lion's share of the blame lies with those countries themselves, US and in the case of Algeria, France, share some degree of responsibility.

I don't expect this point to be taken well, but it stands.

MrDwhitey: If you have xenophobic attitudes, support xenophobic policies, aren't you a xenophobe? Xenophobia is common in the UK right. There's much worse insults than xenophobe in my opinion - I'm not calling anyone racist for example.

Libya was Europe's baby, not ours. The US hasn't been involved in North Africa since that Desert Fox thing.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Da Boss wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:
I actually haven't really supported anything recently.

I'm of the opinion that refugees should be carefully screened, and should be deported the instant they commit a serious crime.

Not that refugees should just be blocked.

I would not vote for UKIP, but am disillusioned by the current parties.

So I would not consider you xenophobic.

Fraz: Of course, because the situation in Syria is nothing to do with the invasion of Iraq.

It doesn't actually. Please review recent history more gooder.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Goliath wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

My snarky reply was actually aimed at placing the responsibility for the state of the region partially at the door of the UK and the US for their failed interventions in the region.

Neither the US nor the UK have attacked Syria. Thats like blaming Brazil for Syria. Quit blaming the West for problems others make.

You may have missed the whole furor over the British Parliament voting to bomb Syria. I'm fairly sure that qualifies as attacking them

BUT THEY DIDN'T. They may be in fact targetting ISIL, but thats much later.

What's wrong with fighting for justice?

 godardc wrote:
Seriously, just let them drowning in the Aegean, and they will stop coming.

Oh hey, Poe is back.

Though of course, seeing as you're serious, my actual reaction is less flippancy and more horror at the fact that people like you actually exist.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
What's wrong with fighting for justice?

Er...hey Mod, another Mod said Ixnay on the Social Justicey...

And since we're on the subject, bacon wrapped sausage isn't nearly as good as you might think it is.

 Frazzled wrote:
[
And since we're on the subject, bacon wrapped sausage isn't nearly as good as you might think it is.

Those small sausages covered in honey though, those are golden.

 Frazzled wrote:
This is what happens when you import hundreds of thousands of men of fighting age into a completely different country. How's that working out for you Germany?

I mean you don't want to say "We told you so!"... but... we told you so!

 Frazzled wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
What's wrong with fighting for justice?

Er...hey Mod, another Mod said Ixnay on the Social Justicey...

Another mod said no using the term SJW to dismiss a whole side of the argument/set up strawmen/etc. When I just read ITT someone advocating for just letting people drown, the term xenophobe seems like it fits right in.

Wouldn't fighting for justice make one a social justice warrior? (asked the father of one)

I don't get the negative connotation, but thats for another thread.

As for letting people drown, I am not sure about Australia, but there is no common law duty to aid. I am not offering that as a policy (I thought I was hardcore) merely that there is no duty, legally, or on behalf of a country.

 Frazzled wrote:


Thats also mind numbingly stupid. Is "socially just" going to pay your medical bills when they curb stomp you? Is "Socially just" gong to take care of your family? Is "socially just" going to compensate you for the permanent injuries you suffer? I've done that, and paid for it, permanently. Never again. Never again. You're on your on your own.

Retreating around the corner and calling the police is not going to cause you permanent injuries.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:


Thats also mind numbingly stupid. Is "socially just" going to pay your medical bills when they curb stomp you? Is "Socially just" gong to take care of your family? Is "socially just" going to compensate you for the permanent injuries you suffer? I've done that, and paid for it, permanently. Never again. Never again. You're on your on your own.

Retreating around the corner and calling the police is not going to cause you permanent injuries.

I mentioned it before in this thread, but the cops were alerted in several of these incidents. It didn't do much good.

Agreed, but when I replied you had not stated that yet.

If you call the cops and alert them, and they fail to act on your alarm, they can get in serious trouble.

In Sweden anyway. I can't imagine it's much different in Germany.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
Agreed, but when I replied you had not stated that yet.

4th post on page 4, Frazz.

 Ashiraya wrote:
If you call the cops and alert them, and they fail to act on your alarm, they can get in serious trouble.

In Sweden anyway. I can't imagine it's much different in Germany.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
Agreed, but when I replied you had not stated that yet.

Spoiler:

 Ashiraya wrote:
I am not sure if I'd dare. I am not very strong, and even if I was I would probably just incite the mob into greater heights of violence, which is hardly a good thing.

What I would do is to get to a safe distance (ie around a corner) and call the police.

I would only intervene if the victim would actually die if I didn't. Otherwise I my attempt wouldn't be very helpful. The police is also equipped and trained to deal with such situations, whereas I am a 19 year old student who can barely best my maths book, much less an angry mob.

4th post on page 4, Frazz.

THe fact your getting help is a big thing, one person can only do so much, but getting the alert out means you have far more support on the way and ploice often are well trained to deal with trouble. better than average person

I replied to page 3.

The ancient laws and customs of the sea compel mariners to offer aid to vessels in distress.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The ancient laws and customs of the sea compel mariners to offer aid to vessels in distress.

Do you have a cite for that in maritime law? This is not a criticism but a question.

EDIT: I'm not asking for a cite or anything, just a reference.