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.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:


You're missing the point. Other SJW's with a different set of priorities will call you racist for calling Arab Muslims scumbags.

Pretty sure I was clear about using that term as a derogatory thing and applying it to a whole side of an argument that isn't even present in this thread. Last warning.

That goes for the thread as a whole. There's a lot of things being said in here that are bordering on rude, so cut it. Now.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:


You are arguing from a Eurocentric, liberal perspective. The bastards responsible for this have very different ideas about what they should and should not do.

Unfortunately indeed so. Though, I like to think that 'don't commit mass violence' is a fairly baseline 'should not do' thing, and that their religions and cultures that say otherwise are simply deceiving.

Educating immigrants (multilingual posters in public transports, schools, etc., are allegedly surprisingly effective in Sweden) and making clear to those who bring violence with them that they have overstayed their welcome is the way forward.

That said, racism is a big issue as well and can make criminals seem worse than they really are, and can even push immigrants to crime. Here in Sweden, an organisation made a test where they let one of their Swedish members and one of their immigrant members separately make job applications with identical qualifications, and the job that was turned down for the immigrants due to, for example, 'no more available places', was often open to the Swede calling a minute later.

The problem we see in the OP is a symptom of a serious cobweb of issues and it's certainly not monodirectional.

 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.

We disagree on a lot, but I think we would be diving into that mob shoulder to shoulder.

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.

 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.

You might surprise yourself, but it would definitely be good to call the cops so we could at least be scaled off the ground in good time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DutchWinsAll wrote:

Relapse wrote:

DutchWinsAll wrote:

Relapse 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 know you've got the sarcasm light on, but friends and myself have jumped into something like that before a few times with the idea of taking as many to ER with us as we could. One thing I cannot stand seeing is someone being mobbed, and I can't understand someone standing there and watching it without doing something.

That's because while your personal religion has had some "hiccups" with women's rights, they grew up decades ago and stopped. Another major belief, not so much. Those men stood there and watched because they didn't really think it was a big deal. Just like that case in FL awhile ago where it was filmed while a group of men gangraped a woman. Or the almost teeth-pulling length of time its taken for women in India to get equal rights in rape cases for women.

But hey, women in KSA, UAE, Iraq, Syria, Algeria, Iran, Libya, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Tunisia, etc. at least have equal rights in the court of law.

Wait, what? They don't? I'm shocked. Wonder what the connection between such disparate ethnic groups across thousands of miles could be. I've got no idea. Anyone else?

This doesn't just have to do with my religion, though. When I lived in PA, the Germans and Italians I knew there were always ready to jump in and stop that kind of crap.

Oh it has nothing to at all to do with your religion, what you describe is what I feel and have seen. I just wanted to highlight the fact religious adherents can and have changed their views, ie Mormons. It's not at all "unpossible" for Muslim nations to start treating women like, ya know, people. Its just not, ya know, happening.

OT Relapse I probably come down too hard on the Mormon's and I do apologize for that. I've seen the crossing at Lee's Ferry finally last month, which the old school settlers had to cross just to get married, and it blew me away kinda. Couple that with the fact that Mormon's really do seem to be good, honest, and again just overall good people that mean no ill will. I've let my personal beliefs (grew up outside Hill Cumorah) prejudice my thoughts.

I feel like I should be seeing similarities here between the faiths, but I don't. Mormonism has actively tried to renounce it's transgressions against women, other races, and now even gays. Islam seems to be heading the other direction sadly.

EDIT to your edit Relapse, I don't think there were too many native Germans around when this type of gak was happening. Its a crowd so Im sure some were, but doesn't look like the majority.

No problems. I once did a handcart trek with some youth that retraced the path of a company that got caught in a winter storm and stranded in Wyoming. It was in June and it was still colder than hell. They had several people die and had to leave them to the wolves just over a hill from their camp. It was serious faith and belief in what they were a part of that kept them going until help arrived from Salt Lake.

 motyak wrote:
Pretty sure I was clear about using that term as a derogatory thing and applying it to a whole side of an argument that isn't even present in this thread. Last warning.

That goes for the thread as a whole. There's a lot of things being said in here that are bordering on rude, so cut it. Now.

I have not addressed anyone here as SJW, save when d-usa put himself in the abstract role of "SJW" to rebutt my argument and I responded in kind with an abstract reply. And I was trying to make the point that there are conflicting issues in this debate - sexism vs racism. For years, people who warned of this were dismissed as racists. Now its happened. If you want me to knock it off because its Off-Topic, I will. But I reject any accusation that I'm using it as an insult against people here.

Unfortunately indeed so. Though, I like to think that 'don't commit mass violence' is a fairly baseline 'should not do' thing, and that their religions and cultures that say otherwise are simply deceiving.

I agree. Human beings are not born inherently 'evil', save for people born with mental illness or chemical imbalances or w.e. (e.g. psychopaths). And they can usually be treated anyway. But all too often, certain religious and cultural values can turn them 'evil'.

Educating immigrants (multilingual posters in public transports, schools, etc., are allegedly surprisingly effective in Sweden) and making clear to those who bring violence with them that they have overstayed their welcome is the way forward.

I'd prefer this was carried before they came here, as a pre-requisite to entry. Our Government's first priority should be to protect our own citizens. This should be carried out in refugee centres in Turkey and elsewhere as part of the immigration process.

That said, racism is a big issue as well and can make criminals seem worse than they really are, and can even push immigrants to crime. Here in Sweden, an organisation made a test where they let one of their Swedish members and one of their immigrant members separately make job applications with identical qualifications, and the job that was turned down for the immigrants due to, for example, 'no more available places', was often open to the Swede calling a minute later.

To best way to deal with people's prejudices are to deal with the root causes of those prejudices. Very often, people aren't truly racist, they're just distrustful and fearful of a certain group (.e.g. Muslims) because of a negative perception of the whole group caused by a minority fringe behaving badly. Crack down on that fringe, and hard, to stop it giving the rest of them a bad name.

The problem we see in the OP is a symptom of a serious cobweb of issues and it's certainly not monodirectional.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I'd prefer this was carried before they came here, as a pre-requisite to entry. Our Government's first priority should be to protect our own citizens. This should be carried out in refugee centres in Turkey and elsewhere as part of the immigration process.

How do you do this in practice, though? If we put in a questionnaire for new immigrants regarding their thoughts on these subjects, they are certainly going to realise that not being as nice as possible will make us shut them out, and so they'll just lie instead.

 nels1031 wrote:
Man, just yesterday I watched that video of the fat German kid on rollerblades get beat up and laughed at by what seemed to be a few Turk/Arab kids and thought "It'll probably get worse". Then this drops.

As for that..Wow. In the course of looking for that video, I found another similar one.


The kid with roller blades you refer to.



And another kid who is set upon by a gang of kids who follow him down a street (though not as violent as the other video).




I was that kid in school. Self defense should be a voluntary part of school curriculums. I recently joined a Karate club after being threatened with violence at work (which very nearly came to blows). I wish I'd done it as a kid.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I'd prefer this was carried before they came here, as a pre-requisite to entry. Our Government's first priority should be to protect our own citizens. This should be carried out in refugee centres in Turkey and elsewhere as part of the immigration process.

How do you do this in practice, though? If we put in a questionnaire for new immigrants regarding their thoughts on these subjects, they are certainly going to realise that not being as nice as possible will make us shut them out, and so they'll just lie instead.

I don't know, it isn't my job to figure out how to do it in practice. Its just something I think needs to be done for the sake of social cohesion in Europe and to protect European citizens.

A questionnaire obviously wouldn't work. People would have to be monitored and their interactions with others (women, other ethnic groups etc) observed. Maybe have them interviewed by psychologists, like a psychiatric assessment to identify warning signs.

That would be hella expensive though.

Psychologist interviews? Have you any idea of what those vampires cost?

 Ashiraya wrote:
Psychologist interviews? Have you any idea of what those vampires cost?

We could divert some of India's space program subsidies to fund it.

Its kind of hard to regulate it, as it is not even that much of a race issue. They might have different customs and views, and that is probably where the problem stems from, that or most of these people are serial rapists. Which I doubt.

I do think it is pretty interesitng this happened.

No SJW things, but there are idiots or radicals who are defending the idiots who performed the rape, and assualts on twitter.

Which is probably why I stopped using twitter in the first place.

But offtopic.....

The problem I think is that people aren't willing to talk about the issue which is how would we prevent this from happening? do we give women self defense training and make it mandatory for high school students or women in general? Or do we approach and have tighter restrictions or a bit of both?

I mean its not blaming the victim if I say "there needs to be a better defense for this, more officers, and more security to prevent this from happening."

Or you know making an example out of the people who committed the crime and deporting them permanently, would be pretty severe.

Germany may be shocked, but plenty of Americans saw this coming. Good job on the cultural Seppuku, Merkel!

Its kind of hard to regulate it, as it is not even that much of a race issue. They might have different customs and views, and that is probably where the problem stems from, that or most of these people are serial rapists. Which I doubt.

Of course it has nothing to do with race. The only link to race is statistical probability. People of certain religious or cultural groups are statistically more likely to be of a particular race due to geographic distribution.

No SJW things, but there are idiots or radicals who are defending the idiots who performed the rape, and assualts on twitter.

Which is the point I was making earlier. What takes priority, when social justice issues come into conflict?

Groping and raping a woman is self evidently (to us anyway) wrong and misogynist.
When its an ethnic minority responsible...it often gets hand waived away as racism.

The problem I think is that people aren't willing to talk about the issue which is how would we prevent this from happening? do we give women self defense training and make it mandatory for high school students or women in general? Or do we approach and have tighter restrictions or a bit of both?

I mean its not blaming the victim if I say "there needs to be a better defense for this, more officers, and more security to prevent this from happening."

Or you know making an example out of the people who committed the crime and deporting them permanently, would be pretty severe.

Its not victim blaming to advocate self defense. But it is a realistic acknowledgement that all too often nobody gives a gak about you and the only person you can truly rely on to keep you safe is yourself. Self defense should be considered as one of those life skills like driving that, whilst not essential for absolutely everyone, should be encouraged. People who are subjected to bullying certainly should be encouraged to try it.

As I mentioned earlier, I was attacked at work when someone threatened to "kick my fething teeth out" and grabbed me, and very nearly lost it completely. My employer wasn't interested and just went through the motions. (I no longer work there). I've since resolved to join a Karate club (had 3 lessons so far and it was surprisingly fun) because that incident was an eye opener for me and I've lost faith in others and grown more cynical.

I actually did Taekwondo for a couple months as a kid but stopped (had an ingrowing toenail severe enough to require surgery- it was gross and embarrassing and so I left). I wish I'd stuck with it, or resumed afterwards. My childhood would have been so much difference if I had the ability to defend myself and the self confidence that comes with that. We'll see how long I stick it out this time. I'm an adult now and somewhat more outgoing and less sheltered than back then, so maybe.

(I no longer have the toenail. ).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Germany may be shocked, but plenty of Americans saw this coming. Good job on the cultural Seppuku, Merkel!

I'd prefer she engaged in the literal kind to be honest.

I agree with the Koeln mayor strict dress code next new year's party!

It will be a hoot!

 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.

From what I've read, police were not unaware of the incidents, including as they happened, they just didn't do anything. I'd always thought that while Germany's military declined into hilariously underfunded obsolescence and irrelevance that the police were actually still pretty good, but I guess grabbing one's ankles has become the preferred German response to aggression at both the macro and micro levels.

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.

 Redcruisair wrote:
The crowd was composed of up to 1,000 heavily intoxicated men ... gathered expressly for the purpose of debasing women by sexually assaulting them

So, the same as every other Friday night in a city then...

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:


By scrapping or at least temporarily suspending the Schengen Agreement and re-establishing national border controls. Border control wasn't fantasy before the Schengen Area was established, and its not a fantasy for the UK and other countries today that are not signatories to the Schengen Agreement.

A).
If these people are refugees, not economic migrants, then they should be treated as should. They should be obligated to claim asylum and remain in the first stable country they arrive in. For the vast majority of Syrians, this is probably Turkey. For Africans - Tunisia or perhaps Egypt depending on how the security situations in those countries develop with the recent attack(s) by ISIS.

B).
We should be throwing all our resources behind these countries designated as refugee holding centres to support them. We should be funding the construction of a whole network of refugee centres along the Turkish border to make sure these refugees can be provided for and housed in a safe environment. International Aid budgets should be redirected to Turkey and these other designated countries. India is rich enough to afford a space program. Why are we enabling the neglect of their own poor and indirectly subsidizing their space program?

C).
Refugees who wish to immigrate into European countries should apply for entry visas and/or citizenship at these refugee centres and go through a proper asylum process. Refugees should be screened to the best of our Intelligence Services' abilities (I accept that this will be a difficult almost impossible task, but we should still try) to weed out ISIS and other radical Jihadiist groups. Refugees should also be screened to identify those people who are unlikely to integrate well into European societies and will pose a danger to European citizens. As we've seen in Cologne with young, Arab men treating women like sex toys. These people should be quarantined and barred from entering Europe until such time as they can be safely returned to their home country or, dare I say it, 're-educated' and acclimatized to European cultures and values (such as a Woman's right not to be groped. ).

Positive Discrimination (or Racial Profiling) should be employed to fast track the asylum applications of people who pose the least statistical risk. The greatest current terror risk is from the radical fringes of Islam. ISIS are Muslim, semantics aside. You can argue that they aren't good Muslims, or that they follow a twisted and perverted form of Islam, but they are Muslims. Yazidi Christians on the other hand, aren't carrying out terror attacks as far as I'm aware, so they can be prioritized for asylum.

I can't believe I'm going to say this...but David Cameron deserves praise for his wise decision to only take in refugees directly from the refugee centres in Turkey and other Middle East countries, not the hordes of people who have illegally forced their way into Europe and are camping out at the channel tunnel. (Or not - has he actually put that policy into effect or did he chicken out?)

D).
Asylum seekers who's immigration applications are approved should be distributed across Europe according to the ability of each nation to accommodate and house them. Britain is a small island nation a fraction the size of Germany or France, and we have a housing shortage - we can barely provide enough housing for our own citizens, never mind hundreds of thousands of refugees. Therefore we cannot accommodate the same number of refugees as Germany or France. Whilst each refugee's circumstances should be taken into account (e.g. what languages they speak, whether they already have family in a particular European country), they should not be given any say in this. There should be no sympathy and tolerance of migrants who cross the entire European continent, bypassing one safe and stable country after another (Turkey, Greece, Macedonia, Hungary, Italy, France, Belgium), trying to reach the richest countries with the most generous welfare systems.

E).
Illegal immigrants who force their way into European countries should be deported, period. We need to take a hard line on this and crack down on it, otherwise its never going to stop if people know the risk is worth it. The rule of law is being undermined, our immigration laws are not being enforced. Our current policy of open door immigration for anyone and everyone whether they're genuine refugees or not is not sustainable. Sweden proved that when they were forced to close their border...after making a blanket invitation (ditto for Germany).

F).
Countries all over the world should be contributing to the response to this refugee crisis, if they aren't already. How many refugees are America and Canada taking? And crucially, how many of the rich(ish) and stable Muslim nations are taking in refugees? Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Iran, Qatar? The vast majority of these refugees are Muslim, and would best integrate into other Muslim countries. Its an extreme culture shock for conservative Muslims to suddenly find themselves in the socially and sexually liberal nations of Europe.[/spoiler]


To be clear - I don't hold the refugees responsible for this crisis. I lay the blame at the feet of our contemptible and incompetent leaders. We need to stop all this emotive bs like "doing the right thing" and "we have a moral obligation". Wise, sustainable policy decision are never made when Government policy is dictated by emotion and hysterics. Sweden proved that.


If thats too long for you to digest and rebut, feel free to dismiss it out of hand and call me a xenophobe. I expect nothing less.

I still think you are a xenophobe, but I'm going to answer this anyway. Not dismissing what you are saying out of hand, I just think you are being very unrealistic.

Point A: You say scrapping Schlengen, and that might have to happen. But you probably absolutely do not get how important Schlengen is for average Europeans who work across the boarder in a neighbouring country. There are millions of commuters across Europe who use the freedom of movement granted by Schlengen to get to work every day. The effects of the shut down on commuters between Denmark and Sweden is already impacting workers in both countries who commute across the boarder to work. It's hard for someone living on an island to understand, but imagine if you had to have boarder controls with scotland and wales, and the inconvenience it would cause.

That said, I recognise that something might need to be done, but it would have to be more careful and graduated than "scrapping" Schlengen.

Point B: The india point is a non-sequitor. But Turkey, Jordan and the other neighbouring states have taken 95% of all refugees. If you think the numbers we are dealing with are difficult, think about that for a minute. Tiny Jordan, with an economy an order of magnitude the size of any European nation, is taking on many times more refugees than any of us plan to. There are simple spatial and infastructural problems that are not solvable in a humane timeframe even if we redirected much more money into the camps. Said money would also be difficult to oversee and control in a foreign country and much of it would be lost to corruption. That said, yes, we should ALSO redirect money to the camps, but if we did, that would do little to prevent migration from North Africa, where large refugee camps do not exist, and the dissolution of states is what we are dealing with. (Cheers for that, Britain and France!)

Point C: Well, of course people should go through the correct channels. The current crisis is a combination of a sustained lack of funding for refugee services in European countries (much more is invested in pointless "defenses" that don't work than in centres to deal with actual refugees. Your screening point reads nicely, but in practical terms without more resources it is pretty impossible given the size of the current migration, which is unprecedented in the last 70 years. If you send the asylum claimants back to Syria, it will not prevent them coming again, as their lives are legitimately at risk there. Why else are they making the dangerous journey in the first place? They will come back but this time they will try to avoid going through the correct channels which will create bigger problems in the long term. Criminals should be arrested and deported, but I disagree with your idea of "fast track" discrimination against muslims because it is not realistic nor will it achieve the outcome you want.

Point D: It's convenient for you to say that refugees should not cross Europe, as you are on the extreme periphary of Europe compared to the refugee source countries. Probably why the UK is so cavalier about intervening as it knows it will not have to deal with the consequences. The UK is a rich country and can deal with as many refugees as france or Germany. It's the South East that is overpopulated, plenty of places in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales have the opposite problem. Other countries have similar housing issues to the UK, you are not special despite what your press tells you. Apart from that I generally agree that refugees should be distributed according to ability to cope with them and that this needs to be hashed out between countries. In essence, this is where the EU solidarity has fallen down. The border countries, which tend to be less rich than the others, have been dealing with much bigger numbers of refugees than everyone else due to the Dublin Regulation, and frankly, they urgently need our support.

Point E: This is a silly point - blanket open door immigration does not exist. Germany welcomed Syrian refugees, others will be deported, but this is a long process. I don't understand what is meant by "illegal immigrants who force" - do you mean Syrians, and Libyans who have legitimate asylum claims? Etrians who also do? Who exactly do you mean? Because I'm willing to bet they are a tiny proportion of the actual migrants, and I agree - if they are economic migrants coming from a stable country (not an overstretched refugee camp) then yeah, they shouldn't get asylum or a visa without going through the proper channels. That's obvious, and I don't see anyone arguing for anything else?

Point F: Your allies the Saudis and their various client states in the rich Gulf areas have taken zero refugees right now, which is of course disgusting. But Saudi Arabia being disgusting, who's shocked.

I still think you are missing my point when I say you are unrealistic. How can we stop this human wave? It is coming, and it was coming well before Merkel said anything. People are dying in huge numbers fleeing a war, and they were doing that with or without our rescue operations. Do you want a higher death toll to put people off? It won't, and history will remember you as a callous bastard. Do you want boarders to be covered in fences and troops? This is unrealistic for most of Europe and the people would continue to come ANYWAY. We don't have enough troops to man the entire boarder, and in any case, what are we going to do, shoot large groups of unarmed refugees including large numbers of women and children? Again, this is unrealistic and unethical. We have to deal with this problem, big as it is, and difficult as it is. I hate this phrase, but there is no alternative.

 Smacks wrote:

 Redcruisair wrote:
The crowd was composed of up to 1,000 heavily intoxicated men ... gathered expressly for the purpose of debasing women by sexually assaulting them

So, the same as every other Friday night in a city then...

My thoughts too. Drunk people molesting people is hardly unique for immigrants. The scale here is bigger than "usual", to be sure, but there's plenty of low-life scum who would do similar things if they thought they could get away with it.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Germany may be shocked, but plenty of Americans saw this coming. Good job on the cultural Seppuku, Merkel!

Here's a thought: don't blame other nations for trying to clean up your mistakes. Or did Germany bomb Iraq to rubble all of a sudden, causing the problems in the Middle-East in the first place.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Here's a thought: don't blame other nations for trying to clean up your mistakes. Or did Germany bomb Iraq to rubble all of a sudden, causing the problems in the Middle-East in the first place.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to blame the US for the attitude towards women on display in most Middle Eastern countries.

Good, because that's not what he said.

 MrDwhitey wrote:
Good, because that's not what he said.

The US invasion of Iraq has nothing at all to do with North African economic refugees' treatment of women in Germany. There's certainly a culprit, but it isn't Uncle Sam.

Seaward wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:
Good, because that's not what he said.

The US invasion of Iraq has nothing at all to do with North African economic refugees' treatment of women in Germany. There's certainly a culprit, but it isn't Uncle Sam.

Great, can we stop blaming this on the refugee crisis then? Y'know, seeing as Syria isn't in North Africa?

Seaward wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:
Good, because that's not what he said.

The US invasion of Iraq has nothing at all to do with North African economic refugees' treatment of women in Germany. There's certainly a culprit, but it isn't Uncle Sam.

Come on now, all the Turks and Algerians acting out in Germany were clearly victims of the US invasion of Iraq in some way. AlmightyWalrus could not possibly be using his dislike of US foreign policy to excuse/explain their behavior for any other reason, would he?

I would probably be called a xenophobe by some here if I stated how I felt on this.

Edit: You edited to make it clear it wasn't me, thanks. Edited my post to remove most it it, hah.

 CptJake wrote:

Seaward wrote:

 MrDwhitey wrote:
Good, because that's not what he said.

The US invasion of Iraq has nothing at all to do with North African economic refugees' treatment of women in Germany. There's certainly a culprit, but it isn't Uncle Sam.

Come on now, all the Turks and Algerians acting out in Germany were clearly victims of the US invasion of Iraq in some way. AlmightyWalrus could not possibly be using his dislike of US foreign policy to excuse/explain their behavior for any other reason, would he?

Where am I excusing or explaining their behaviour using the US invasion of Iraq? The point I was making was that we're facing the biggest wave of refugees since WWII because the US, the UK and a bunch of other countries who are now trying to bail out of the consequences bombed Iraq. Strawman harder next time.

 jhe90 wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
There are many stories of Western women being mobbed and molested/raped by crowds in Middle Eastern countries. Reporter Lara Logan was set upon by a crowd of 200 in Egypt who together stripped and assaulted her like a pack of animals. There's simply not the same value placed on women's rights. Some of these countries accuse rape victims of adultery after all, there's no consideration of women being a human victim. You bring a swarm of that culture/people into one place, say a thousand for new year celebration, in a western country and the exact same could happen.

This I believe is the problem with mass immigration. Moderate Arab culture is still well behind western culture. We keep being told that there will be very few extremists and that most are 'moderate', so it's racist to be concerned. But I imagine this crowd are to be considered 'moderates', but still this culture is still very jarring in our culture. It means hundreds of these supposed moderate minded people are actually willing to violate women en masse and many more will not come forward to point the finger and give evidence against others in their community. There must be loads of witnesses to these attacks. Where are they? That's why no one will be prosecuted and why women are being given advice instead to give them a wide berth.

European women should not have to hide in fear, cross a road to avoid them. They are guests in our countries and if they do not obey laws and cultural standards they should be dealt with and told what is expected, laws and such on arrival in Germany etc.

We are told to respect other nations when we visit or live in them. No difference. If you act like that, you are not welcome in our nations.

Send a strong message, others may simply fall into line.

Its been several days correct? That means nothing will be done.

Th actions here were not the fault of the biggest wave of refugees since WW2.

 CptJake wrote:
Th actions here were not the fault of the biggest wave of refugees since WW2.

You're right. Lots of people in this thread couldn't wait to jump on that train though.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Germany may be shocked, but plenty of Americans saw this coming. Good job on the cultural Seppuku, Merkel!

I'd prefer she engaged in the literal kind to be honest.

Because hey, advocating that someone kill themselves is a sensible, balanced reaction to this situation.